Around The NHL 2021/22

[TrueBlue4ever]

So if/when Chevy resigns or is let go, how quickly does the story die? He would be the last one in that meeting so from the media and NHL perspective, I would wager that would represent the accountability that is being demanded from many quarters. But how far should this reach? The NHLPA knew about his complaint and offered counselling but took no legal action on his behalf or investigated the complaint. The NHL at first did not want to investigate either until the media made noise. According to Beach his teammates all knew yet none of them are being forced to be kicked out of the league. Beach said comments were made in practice to him by teammates in front of other players, coaches and media. Should that media also be held accountable for not saying anything? And of Steve Lyon wants to go after Heisinger because of his connection to Graham James, then should Joe Sakic be removed from Colorado and have his name removed from the Cup since he was a player on the Broncos when James coached, and he never spoke out about what was an open secret in Swifr Current. And if the answer there is no because as a player Sakic had limited power to do anything, then does Chevy get any benefit of the explanation that he was not the decision-maker in that meeting as merely the cap management guy Chicago, or has the decision already been made to remove him to help the league save face (all while the court case is still ongoing with a private report now being made very public and rendering any fair due process in the courts moot with the media and court of public opinion having already passed judgment)? How far down the rabbit hole will this go?

[SpeedFlex27]

3 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

So if/when Chevy resigns or is let go, how quickly does the story die? He would be the last one in that meeting so from the media and NHL perspective, I would wager that would represent the accountability that is being demanded from many quarters. But how far should this reach? The NHLPA knew about his complaint and offered counselling but took no legal action on his behalf or investigated the complaint. The NHL at first did not want to investigate either until the media made noise. According to Beach his teammates all knew yet none of them are being forced to be kicked out of the league. Beach said comments were made in practice to him by teammates in front of other players, coaches and media. Should that media also be held accountable for not saying anything? And of Steve Lyon wants to go after Heisinger because of his connection to Graham James, then should Joe Sakic be removed from Colorado and have his name removed from the Cup since he was a player on the Broncos when James coached, and he never spoke out about what was an open secret in Swifr Current. And if the answer there is no because as a player Sakic had limited power to do anything, then does Chevy get any benefit of the explanation that he was not the decision-maker in that meeting as merely the cap management guy Chicago, or has the decision already been made to remove him to help the league save face (all while the court case is still ongoing with a private report now being made very public and rendering any fair due process in the courts moot with the media and court of public opinion having already passed judgment)? How far down the rabbit hole will this go?

As far as it needs to go. Whoever else knew & did nothing. These men in the meeting KNEW. They did nothing. They are complicit & should have been fired. Not allowed to resign. 

[JCon]

5 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

And of Steve Lyon wants to go after Heisinger because of his connection to Graham James, then should Joe Sakic be removed from Colorado and have his name removed from the Cup since he was a player on the Broncos when James coached, and he never spoke out about what was an open secret in Swifr Current. And if the answer there is no because as a player Sakic had limited power to do anything, then does Chevy get any benefit of the explanation that he was not the decision-maker in that meeting as merely the cap management guy Chicago, or has the decision already been made to remove him to help the league save face (all while the court case is still ongoing with a private report now being made very public and rendering any fair due process in the courts moot with the media and court of public opinion having already passed judgment)? How far down the rabbit hole will this go?

Sakic was a teenager responsible for playing hockey. Chevy was an adult, high level executive and in a position to do something. There's a big difference in their relative roles and responsibilites. Big difference between the 80s and 2010s in terms of knowledge about sexual assault too. 

[Jesse]

6 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

So if/when Chevy resigns or is let go, how quickly does the story die? He would be the last one in that meeting so from the media and NHL perspective, I would wager that would represent the accountability that is being demanded from many quarters. But how far should this reach? The NHLPA knew about his complaint and offered counselling but took no legal action on his behalf or investigated the complaint. The NHL at first did not want to investigate either until the media made noise. According to Beach his teammates all knew yet none of them are being forced to be kicked out of the league. Beach said comments were made in practice to him by teammates in front of other players, coaches and media. Should that media also be held accountable for not saying anything? And of Steve Lyon wants to go after Heisinger because of his connection to Graham James, then should Joe Sakic be removed from Colorado and have his name removed from the Cup since he was a player on the Broncos when James coached, and he never spoke out about what was an open secret in Swifr Current. And if the answer there is no because as a player Sakic had limited power to do anything, then does Chevy get any benefit of the explanation that he was not the decision-maker in that meeting as merely the cap management guy Chicago, or has the decision already been made to remove him to help the league save face (all while the court case is still ongoing with a private report now being made very public and rendering any fair due process in the courts moot with the media and court of public opinion having already passed judgment)? How far down the rabbit hole will this go?

If your question is how far should be look into serial rapists and child molesters, then the answer is that I hope these reporters never stop digging.

Everyone should face these tough questions. The players and coaches on the Chicago teams need to state their case and called out for obvious lies. 

The culture is sick and broken when we are protecting the abusers and not the abused. This is how you try to change it and make people less likely to cover things up next time a pervert sneaks his way into a locker room.

[Wideleft]

6 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

So if/when Chevy resigns or is let go, how quickly does the story die? He would be the last one in that meeting so from the media and NHL perspective, I would wager that would represent the accountability that is being demanded from many quarters. But how far should this reach? The NHLPA knew about his complaint and offered counselling but took no legal action on his behalf or investigated the complaint. The NHL at first did not want to investigate either until the media made noise. According to Beach his teammates all knew yet none of them are being forced to be kicked out of the league. Beach said comments were made in practice to him by teammates in front of other players, coaches and media. Should that media also be held accountable for not saying anything? And of Steve Lyon wants to go after Heisinger because of his connection to Graham James, then should Joe Sakic be removed from Colorado and have his name removed from the Cup since he was a player on the Broncos when James coached, and he never spoke out about what was an open secret in Swifr Current. And if the answer there is no because as a player Sakic had limited power to do anything, then does Chevy get any benefit of the explanation that he was not the decision-maker in that meeting as merely the cap management guy Chicago, or has the decision already been made to remove him to help the league save face (all while the court case is still ongoing with a private report now being made very public and rendering any fair due process in the courts moot with the media and court of public opinion having already passed judgment)? How far down the rabbit hole will this go?

Confusing investigative reporting with "going after someone" is a disservice to the core of journalistic practises.  We need more investigative, long-form journalism - not less.

[Jesse]

Just now, Wideleft said:

Confusing investigative reporting with "going after someone" is a disservice to the core of journalistic practises.  We need more investigative, long-form journalism - not less.

Honestly. Graham James is the poster child for this sickness. And you still can't get some people to say a word against that monster. It's disgusting.

[Goalie]

Online rumors seem to suggest Chevy really wasn't in the know as much as some have suggested by twisting words in prepared statements.  Rumors are Bettman won't be coming down as hard. Possible fine as Chevy was just a rookie non participant really.  It will be up to chipper and Chevy.  Should he lose his Job? I'm not sure because it sounds like he has been telling the truth. The others lied and Q leaving likely has to do with a recommendation later for Aldrich to notre Dame who . Nobody following them will be shocked... they didn't cooperate with the investigation 

Rookie low level ahl gm but only in title as there is no online history showing Chevy as actual gm of Rockford weirdly enough so in title but no real say told about sexual harassment which is different than sexual assault in the legal terms. Was told it would be taken care of.. 3 weeks later... it Is. 

We got a lot of Jesus's online who need to jump off the cross a bit and put themselves in that position. Your a 1st year guy.. you ain't saying **** and likely feel 3 weeks Is sufficient. It's above your head really. 

 

Edited October 29, 2021 by Goalie

[JCon]

4 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Online rumors seem to suggest Chevy really wasn't in the know as much as some have suggested by twisting words in prepared statements.  Rumors are Bettman won't be coming down as hard. Possible fine as Chevy was just a rookie non participant really.  It will be up to chipper and Chevy.  Should he lose his Job? I'm not sure because it sounds like he has been telling the truth. The others lied and Q leaving likely has to do with a recommendation later for Aldrich to notre Dame who . Nobody following them will be shocked... they didn't cooperate with the investigation 

 

Just read the report like everyone else. It's right there. 

[Goalie]

5 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Online rumors seem to suggest Chevy really wasn't in the know as much as some have suggested by twisting words in prepared statements.  Rumors are Bettman won't be coming down as hard. Possible fine as Chevy was just a rookie non participant really.  It will be up to chipper and Chevy.  Should he lose his Job? I'm not sure because it sounds like he has been telling the truth. The others lied and Q leaving likely has to do with a recommendation later for Aldrich to notre Dame who . Nobody following them will be shocked... they didn't cooperate with the investigation 

Rookie low level ahl gm but only in title as there is no online history showing Chevy as actual gm of Rockford weirdly enough so in title but no real say told about sexual harassment which is different than sexual assault in the legal terms. Was told it would be taken care of.. 3 weeks later... it Is. 

We got a lot of Jesus's online who need to jump off the cross a bit and put themselves in that position. Your a 1st year guy.. you ain't saying **** and likely feel 3 weeks Is sufficient. It's above your head really. 

 

Wheeler and others who have spoken of Chevy have raved about him. I just don't think he should be punished for being a bystander if if he truly had no idea of it . 

[TrueBlue4ever]

29 minutes ago, JCon said:

Sakic was a teenager responsible for playing hockey. Chevy was an adult, high level executive and in a position to do something. There's a big difference in their relative roles and responsibilites. Big difference between the 80s and 2010s in terms of knowledge about sexual assault too. 

Agreed. So does it end with Chevy? Because there are a bunch more who knew and said nothing and did not press the matter, and if guilt by association is the standard, then more heads should roll. This is the tricky part with Cheveldayoff, if you take him at his word. He was privy to information about misconduct with a player, Beach acknowledges that he kept the specific details to himself for some time, so how much they knew is a live question. It seems to be common consensus that the decision at that meeting was that the hockey ops people would continue to focus on hockey and the management side (president and Vice President) would address the issue. Aldrich was let go a month later. Could Chevy have reasonably assumed that the matter had been handled after an internal investigation based on the result? And did he have the power as an AGM handling cap space issues to challenge the team President? Was he aware of the positive job review Quenneville wrote? Was he aware of the later hiring of Aldrich to a Michigan high school? Unlike Quenneville, he has not been caught in a lie, and has been cooperative with the investigation, from what we’ve been told. For the record, I think his answers have been non-committal and greasy enough that it is not acceptable to keep him on, but that is my lone opinion. Just raising these questions to determine where the line is drawn between having full knowledge, having partial knowledge, being assigned to deal with it, or being told it was being handled, to actively discouraging any action? If the baseline is “if you know you tell” then there is a long line of coaches, staff, players, apparently media according to Beach, and sadly Beach himself, who never reported it to police because he felt trapped, which allowed the subsequent assault at Michigan to happen. Surely Beach cannot be punished for his inaction given his place in it all, but where does the “you know and YOU had a responsibility to report while this person knew but they don’t” line get drawn. Maybe the simple line of “if you were in that meeting and were management in any capacity that is he line” but it may inculcate some who were there but did not hold true power, and may exculpatory others who knew but deferred to others when they could have spoken up. Not a black and white issue, as much as the NHL would like to fit it into a tidy box. 

[Goalie]

2 minutes ago, JCon said:

Just read the report like everyone else. It's right there. 

It's not. He was at a meeting may 23. 

They were told sexual harassment has taken place. Dealt with 3 weeks later. Get off the cross... 1st year guy.. there's a pecking order  

[JCon]

2 minutes ago, Goalie said:

It's not. He was at a meeting may 23. 

They were told sexual harassment has taken place. Dealt with 3 weeks later. Get off the cross... 1st year guy.. there's a pecking order  

Well, I'm sure the 16 year old who was raped appreciates "pecking order". 

Gross. 

[iHeart]

so how does this work do they just take that strip off the cup scratch out the name and then put it back on?

[Wideleft]

17 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Online rumors seem to suggest Chevy really wasn't in the know as much as some have suggested by twisting words in prepared statements.  Rumors are Bettman won't be coming down as hard. Possible fine as Chevy was just a rookie non participant really.  It will be up to chipper and Chevy.  Should he lose his Job? I'm not sure because it sounds like he has been telling the truth. The others lied and Q leaving likely has to do with a recommendation later for Aldrich to notre Dame who . Nobody following them will be shocked... they didn't cooperate with the investigation 

Rookie low level ahl gm but only in title as there is no online history showing Chevy as actual gm of Rockford weirdly enough so in title but no real say told about sexual harassment which is different than sexual assault in the legal terms. Was told it would be taken care of.. 3 weeks later... it Is. 

We got a lot of Jesus's online who need to jump off the cross a bit and put themselves in that position. Your a 1st year guy.. you ain't saying **** and likely feel 3 weeks Is sufficient. It's above your head really. 

 

Your interpretation of "it was taken care of" is truly disturbing.  You seem to be suggesting that allowing a sexual abuser to resign with a glowing recommendation from the head coach is sufficient for Aldrich's horrible actions.

Is that really what you're suggesting?

[Goalie]

4 minutes ago, JCon said:

Well, I'm sure the 16 year old who was raped appreciates "pecking order". 

Gross. 

You honestly are ridiculous.  You twist words constantly and formed your own wrong opinion by twisting chevys vague comments.  

This isn't about a ******* 16 year old tho.. it's about 2 grown ass men... just keep moving the goalposts here. 

Andy Strickland of tsn has been told the league with all the evidence and everything and non vague statements because ongoing investigation and that's how it works legally and all the things they actually know and are not assuming based on twisting words like some fake news online mob.. doesn't view Chevy as a guy who has lied or really had any responsibility in this. 

FFS they have it all.

No assumptions no nothing... online report and what Chevy has been telling the investigating team that we aren't aware of cuz Legit legal investigation so not all Facts are currently public...

We will see what happens soon.  

[bustamente]

It's very simple, if Chevy knew about the assault and went along with the others and kept silent to not do anything and sweep it under the rug he is complicit and should be gone

[Goalie]

10 minutes ago, Wideleft said:

Your interpretation of "it was taken care of" is truly disturbing.  You seem to be suggesting that allowing a sexual abuser to resign with a glowing recommendation from the head coach is sufficient for Aldrich's horrible actions.

Is that really what you're suggesting?

Again... twisting words 

Even Kyle Beach said he wasn't as forthcoming as you think he was. 

This was all hush hush and beach was part of it because maybe he wasn't ready. There is a huge huge difference between harassment and assault legally. Sounds they were told of harassment not assault.  That's the difference and a pretty large one legally 

6 minutes ago, bustamente said:

It's very simple, if Chevy knew about the assault and went along with the others and kept silent to not do anything and sweep it under the rug he is complicit and should be gone

They were told harassment took place. Huge difference.  That's like hitting on someone constantly to the point of harassing.  Assault is literally harming them.  They were told of Harassment.  Legally and just the way normal business operates... harassment Is generally an HR department thing 

3 weeks in 2010 wasn't that long. 

Seems right for internal investigation honestly 

But again if Chevy didn't know an actual assault took place then what can he do even if he wanted to or maybe he did follow up and ask. We don't know all facts 

Edited October 29, 2021 by Goalie
K.

[TrueBlue4ever]

Just now, Wideleft said:

Your interpretation of "it was taken care of" is truly disturbing.  You seem to be suggesting that allowing a sexual abuser to resign with a glowing recommendation from the head coach is sufficient for Aldrich's horrible actions.

Is that really what you're suggesting?

What I am suggesting is that one possibility is that Cheveldayoff was told at the meeting that McDonough would handle it by McDonough himself (Bowman’s account seems to corroborate this), saw that Aldrich was no longer on the team a few weeks later, and was unaware that he had been given the option to resign vs face an investigation, and was also not privy to the positive job review written by Quenneville. I am not saying how it was handled was sufficient, but that Cheveldayoff may have had no idea that it was handled that way. But because he was “in the room” it is being assumed he was part of every decision made. His account is very sparse on facts (not a good look, but maybe truly how he remembers it), his subsequent non-speak to the media may be justified by the fact that there is still an active lawsuit and he doesn’t want it tried in the media ahead of time (which is clearly happening, and as disgusting as the story is, everyone is still entitled to due process in the law and should not be pre-judged online or in the media). It is a bad look from a moral point of view, but if Cheveldayoff was left in the dark (and yes, I have read the report, and beyond being present at the meeting, no one points the finger at him in any way as being part of a cover-up like Quenneville or McDonough wanted, or taking or being directed to take responsibility like Bowman or McDonough did. So is being in the meeting and nothing else enough to get him axed? And if yes, what of everyone else who knew but did not independently act to ensure everything was done that did not get done?

[Wideleft]

2 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Again... twisting words 

Even Kyle Beach said he wasn't as forthcoming as you think he was. 

This was all hush hush and beach was part of it because maybe he wasn't ready. There is a huge huge difference between harassment and assault legally. Sounds they were told of harassment not assault.  That's the difference and a pretty large one legally 

I'm quoting your words.  Own them. 

I'm aware of Beach's statement, but it does not change the fact that he said enough to merit a full investigation by the Hawks, which they refused to do.  Winning the Stanley Cup was more important than ruining one of their player's lives.

2 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

What I am suggesting is that one possibility is that Cheveldayoff was told at the meeting that McDonough would handle it by McDonough himself (Bowman’s account seems to corroborate this), saw that Aldrich was no longer on the team a few weeks later, and was unaware that he had been given the option to resign vs face an investigation, and was also not privy to the positive job review written by Quenneville. I am not saying how it was handled was sufficient, but that Cheveldayoff may have had no idea that it was handled that way. But because he was “in the room” it is being assumed he was part of every decision made. His account is very sparse on facts (not a good look, but maybe truly how he remembers it), his subsequent non-speak to the media may be justified by the fact that there is still an active lawsuit and he doesn’t want it tried in the media ahead of time (which is clearly happening, and as disgusting as the story is, everyone is still entitled to due process in the law and should not be pre-judged online or in the media). It is a bad look from a moral point of view, but if Cheveldayoff was left in the dark (and yes, I have read the report, and beyond being present at the meeting, no one points the finger at him in any way as being part of a cover-up like Quenneville or McDonough wanted, or taking or being directed to take responsibility like Bowman or McDonough did. So is being in the meeting and nothing else enough to get him axed? And if yes, what of everyone else who knew but did not independently act to ensure everything was done that did not get done?

At the very least, Cheveldayoff is part of a conspiracy of silence.  

As I previously stated, the Graham James case made everyone in hockey aware this depravity could happen more than 10 years before this happened and everyone in that room thought the best course of action was to sweep it under the rug and forget about it.

There is no excuse for the ongoing silence.

[Goalie]

5 minutes ago, Wideleft said:

I'm quoting your words.  Own them. 

I'm aware of Beach's statement, but it does not change the fact that he said enough to merit a full investigation by the Hawks, which they refused to do.  Winning the Stanley Cup was more important than ruining one of their player's lives.

He said all this 11 years later dude. 

It took him time. This didn't happen to Kyle Beach 3 weeks ago... he said himself he wasn't ready to go public... and really tried to keep it to himself and just a few people. 

Yup in the Chicago Blackhawks eyes winning the cup is more important but Chevy wasn't the guy making those decisions 

You aren't quoting ****.. you twist **** because again the online mob bullshit.  

I'm talking  Chevy who by the sounds of things in reality not make up own opinion and convict him maybe didn't play any role at all. 

You know who also didn't say anything else at the time? Kyle Beach. I feel for the guy but he kept quiet himself 

Edited October 29, 2021 by Goalie

[Wideleft]

3 minutes ago, Goalie said:

He said all this 11 years later dude. 

It took him time. This didn't happen to Kyle Beach 3 weeks ago... he said himself he wasn't ready to go public... and really tried to keep it to himself and just a few people. 

Yup in the Chicago Blackhawks eyes winning the cup is more important but Chevy wasn't the guy making those decisions 

What are you talking about?  He reported it before the Finals started.  Just because he didn't go public doesn't mean that a full investigation shouldn't have started immediately.

[TrueBlue4ever]

10 minutes ago, bustamente said:

It's very simple, if Chevy knew about the assault and went along with the others and kept silent to not do anything and sweep it under the rug he is complicit and should be gone

Yes it is very simple. But how complicated does it get if Chevy did not knowingly go along with it, had no intention of sweeping it under the rug, and was kept out of the loop from McDonough’s, Bowman’s and Quenneville’s decision-making? And based a wrong assumption on seeing Aldrich removed from the team? 

3 minutes ago, Wideleft said:

I'm quoting your words.  Own them. 

I'm aware of Beach's statement, but it does not change the fact that he said enough to merit a full investigation by the Hawks, which they refused to do.  Winning the Stanley Cup was more important than ruining one of their player's lives.

But who refused to do so? We know McDonough did, and Quenneville wanted it kept quiet. Bowman was privy to more than just that one meeting so he was involved in the follow-up and seemingly took more responsibility to ensure the right things were done or not done. Can anyone say with certainty that Cheveldayoff was active in the cover-up? The report does not go there. So, is being is the room enough to implicate him? A simple question but maybe not a black and white answer. 

[Wideleft]

2 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

Yes it is very simple. But how complicated does it get if Chevy did not knowingly go along with it, had no intention of sweeping it under the rug, and was kept out of the loop from McDonough’s, Bowman’s and Quenneville’s decision-making? And based a wrong assumption on seeing Aldrich removed from the team? 

But who refused to do so? We know McDonough did, and Quenneville wanted it kept quiet. Bowman was privy to more than just that one meeting so he was involved in the follow-up and seemingly took more responsibility to ensure the right things were done or not done. Can anyone say with certainty that Cheveldayoff was active in the cover-up? The report does not go there. So, is being is the room enough to implicate him? A simple question but maybe not a black and white answer. 

Staying silent for 11 years is active enough for me.

[rebusrankin]

51 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Wheeler and others who have spoken of Chevy have raved about him. I just don't think he should be punished for being a bystander if if he truly had no idea of it . 

Kane and Toews raved about Bowman. Not a good argument. Defend him all you want and frankly look like an ass but he was in the room and did nothing.

[Wideleft]

Just now, rebusrankin said:

Kane and Toews raved about Bowman. Not a good argument. Defend him all you want and frankly look like an ass but he was in the room and did nothing.

Lot's of people raved about Graham James too.  Zinger even partnered with him on a WHL team.

I don't expect he's promoted if Chevy goes.