Also outed in an article over the summer when it listed not just his age but that he played in germany or austria after leaving. It effectively narrowed it down to 1 person.
- TheTrob

yeah I can think of 2 and I just can't see it for 1 guy in particular based on all the crap we heard as fans over the years. Who knows, who cares. Whats done is done.

The cancel culture has to do with sweeping up everyone in the net regardless of whether they did anything or not. Now, I didn't read all 107 pages of the investigation, but do you know for a fact that Bowman didn't prohibit Aldrich from direct contact with Doe #1 while the allegations were being investigated.

I know in several places where I have been employed cases such as this have taken many months to investigate and determine a course of action. Aldrich was gone shortly after it was reported in comparison.
- TheTrob

OK, you and I have a different definition of cancel culture. I've seen it used pejoratively more frequently to excuse the behavior of one person now being held accountable for past actions, regardless of what he or she did, because "that was so long ago," or "boys will be boys" etc. etc.

I understand how you describe it is a bad thing. The report did say that Aldrich was allowed to continue working, hang around the team, attend functions, and party during the cup celebrations, during which time he made an unwanted sexual advance on a 22-year-old intern.

I miss when you weren't around
- GPHawksfan

Ek needs to pay his GoDaddy or AWS bills

Making up a new rule retroactively is what cancel culture is all about. Stan did the right thing according to employee manuals everywhere - he sent the complaint to his boss. He lost his job anyway. That is cancel culture in my book.
- mohel

“Cancel culture” is a code word propagated by the right to show they are against something without having a good argument.

“Woke” is similar.

It would be nice to eliminate code words altogether, both right AND left and rely on logic and facts to discuss issues, but i guess not now.

“Let’s go Brandon”.

(I put that in for dramatic effect - I don’t support it’s right-wing meaning.)

Interesting that they had the meeting after learning that they are going to the stanley cup finals. Not sure all participants were in the right state of mind to deal with the situation. And who is Aldrich's boss, Coach Q or Stan? And were there any followup meetings? it kind of seems like they all agreed on not rocking the boat until after the playoffs. So basically all were complicit. One can say, we are investigating the situation, but is that sufficient. Step 1, talk to Aldrich and ask him if John Doe was in his condo, bamm, Sorry dude, but you are suspended. Pretty easy in hindsight.

can I ask what you would have done given that the report is out, we know fact from fiction, this isn't a guessing of the events.......I briefly went through it and it reads like a CYA novel.....Good for the HR director for recalling a lot more then McEgo who came across as a coward for ducking the investigation on the 1st pass.

i am curious how YOU would have handled it?
- SteveRain

McD, Isaacson and Gary out. Stan and Q stay. Firing them because the big cheese didn't do his job, is wrong in my book.

“Cancel culture” is a code word propagated by the right to show they are against something without having a good argument.

“Woke” is similar.

It would be nice to eliminate code words altogether, both right AND left and rely on logic and facts to discuss issues, but i guess not now.

“Let’s go Brandon”.

(I put that in for dramatic effect - I don’t support it’s right-wing meaning.)
- StLBravesFan

McD, Isaacson and Gary out. Stan and Q stay. Firing them because the big cheese didn't do his job, is wrong in my book.
- mohel

This is pretty close to how a Fortune 500 company would handle it.

That said, based on size and # of employees, the Blackhawks are a mom & pop company. And they handled it like a mom & pop company. Highly unprofessional at all levels.

The cancel culture didn't exist during the Penn State scandal and a legendary coach was fired. The results would've been the same with CC or not...everyone involved gets what they deserve. I think the Bowman statement is weak and doesn't take ownership and trying to drag Q into this with a phantom statement....what weasel. A coach does not make the final call on this type of situation and bringing it up should have no bearing. That supposed statement by Q can be taken different ways.

Bettman scheduling discussions with Q and Chevy
- pdx2ord

Why doesn't Bergevin’s name ever come up? Wasn’t he still around in 2010?

From the report, an indication of how young players trying to make an impression on an organization can get put in compromising situations by an older person in positions of authority (if not responsibility):

https://twitter.com/benpo.../1453086728227639302?s=21

Well now let's see if we can break the losing streak to start the season. Kane and Toews and others out for covid, GM and upper management step down due to scandal, new acquisitions not gelling as expected...

I say we lose at least 5 more with an angry Leafs team, and back to backs with Carolina and St. Louis.

McD, Isaacson and Gary out. Stan and Q stay. Firing them because the big cheese didn't do his job, is wrong in my book.
- mohel

...or there could be evidence that goes against what Stan said. If anything Stan did the minimum...and in this case the minimum should get you fired.

Why doesn't Bergevin’s name ever come up? Wasn’t he still around in 2010?
- Ogilthorpe2

Probably because he wasn't named as having been in *the* meeting

The sad part is...there are probably more cases like this in many other pro sports leagues. (and more in hockey because young men are sent away from their homes to play minor leagues). You cannot have an eye on everyone at all times.

Well now let's see if we can break the losing streak to start the season. Kane and Toews and others out for covid, GM and upper management step down due to scandal, new acquisitions not gelling as expected...

I say we lose at least 5 more with an angry Leafs team, and back to backs with Carolina and St. Louis.
- Popsghostly

If Kane's not back soon, going to start worrying about his health, too. Automatically worried about Toews after last year.

Kane was really close with Stan and the Bowman family. Sure he is reeling a bit.

From the report, an indication of how young players trying to make an impression on an organization can get put in compromising situations by an older person in positions of authority (if not responsibility):

https://twitter.com/benpo.../1453086728227639302?s=21
- StLBravesFan

Aldrich was highly unprofessional, even before the incidents with John Doe. Any responsible organization would have let him go long before his actions rose to the level they did.

Interesting that they had the meeting after learning that they are going to the stanley cup finals. Not sure all participants were in the right state of mind to deal with the situation. And who is Aldrich's boss, Coach Q or Stan? And were there any followup meetings? it kind of seems like they all agreed on not rocking the boat until after the playoffs. So basically all were complicit. One can say, we are investigating the situation, but is that sufficient. Step 1, talk to Aldrich and ask him if John Doe was in his condo, bamm, Sorry dude, but you are suspended. Pretty easy in hindsight.
- Topshelf2010

John Doe was an adult. No law against him being at Aldrich's apartment. If you read Aldrich's statement, he says it was consensual, Doe's statement says it wasn't.

In hindsight it's pretty clear what should have been done, at the time it's he-said/she-said and unfortunately they never come to quick easy solutions.

The sad part is...there are probably more cases like this in many other pro sports leagues. (and more in hockey because young men are sent away from their homes to play minor leagues). You cannot have an eye on everyone at all times.
- powerenforcer

Of course there are and some barely concealed. We'll see if this becomes a #MeToo type reckoning in the sport, but given that any active players coming forward or former players, now coaching, would be risking their careers, I doubt it will get much traction.

...or there could be evidence that goes against what Stan said. If anything Stan did the minimum...and in this case the minimum should get you fired.
- NamedSources

I don't know all the details, but if Stan notified his superior about the action, he did what most organizations train you to do. It was not Stan's job to judge anyone, just inform his superiors. The court of public opinion (and optics) is stronger than written rules sometimes.
If he did nothing more than notifying McD about this, I feel bad for him that he had to resign for doing the right thing.

Yikes

Been in meetings all day. (Havent read the report but will probably tonight)

Definitely a sad day, but I think the best/right thing happened in Stan stepping aside due to this whole situation.

I didn't mind him much as a GM, to be honest - and I would think he would have handled this differently if he could ( one would hope)

Hopefully they Hawks will be better in their front office roles and responsibilities moving forward, as nothing can be done about the past actions

The cancel culture didn't exist during the Penn State scandal and a legendary coach was fired. The results would've been the same with CC or not...everyone involved gets what they deserve. I think the Bowman statement is weak and doesn't take ownership and trying to drag Q into this with a phantom statement....what weasel. A coach does not make the final call on this type of situation and bringing it up should have no bearing. That supposed statement by Q can be taken different ways.
- NamedSources

A little different. JoePa was more than just the coach, he knew of everything going on and also had a huge say in what the university was doing. Incidents of abuse were reported directly to JoePa and he ignored it. Now, if you say it was reported to the University president and Joe Pa was aware and did nothing when the university didn't respond, it would be similar.

Remove personal Bias from the equation. Q is beloved so he gets a different benefit of the doubt as opposed to the hated McD and Stan? If Q gets to absolve himself because Stan knew, then Stan should get to absolve himself because McD knew

...or there could be evidence that goes against what Stan said. If anything Stan did the minimum...and in this case the minimum should get you fired.
- NamedSources

I don't think that is what minimum means...

You get fired for doing less than the minimum.

McD, Isaacson and Gary out. Stan and Q stay. Firing them because the big cheese didn't do his job, is wrong in my book.
- mohel

I am going to read all 107 pages and draw my own conclusion. From what I read so far I enjoyed mcegos selective memory and the HR head putting him in his place over and over again. Wish we had video on that ass bag slivering one his chair when the investigator came back.

Just glad McDonoigh will never run another sports team or company again. Ever.