100% This really isn't about old style versus new style coaching. Fifty years ago if a coach asked a player for his wallet to go through snapshots he had in it that would have been just as weird and just as wrong. CBJ is lucky this ended so early. One would think Babcock would have been very careful after being given a second chance. That he wasn't very likely portended that more and worse stuff would have happened. - FoppaForever
Probably the most baffling part to me. Perhaps the Jackets thought they could redeem a damaged product like they did for Torts coming off his escapades in Vancouver. The idea of defending Babcock stemmed from the fact people thought he is no slouch to attempt those type of shenanigans again knowing it's likely his last chance.
Listening to Pascal Vincent's press conference yesterday he had nothing but admiration for how Babcock saw the game, to make an analogy in the arts, it's almost like asking to separate the art from the artist but society doesn't work that way anymore. I'm not being sympathetic to Babcock but rather in wonder what a Mike Babcock team would of looked like.
He makes a good point. When Ghandi was in his 70s he slept naked with his grandniece who was in her teens to test himself to prove that he could abstain from sex. Nobody found anything wrong with that in that time and place. Today it would be abuse. It’s a parallel to Babs. Acceptable decades ago but not now. Also Himmler wouldn’t ask for photos. - Minnyhock
Wait what about Gandhi? Now how do I go about googling this to see if it's true?
This is so ridiculous….. a bunch of talking heads that had no chance of competing in a team sport in any capacity come together to trash a guy that has lead his teams to 3 cups and won it once. Whatever methods he wanted to use to win, build chemistry whatever it takes( besides physical punishment) is his business. An NHL coach is hired to win period . Babs wins (except in Toronto which the organization is a loser for 56 years straight, don’t think that’s on him) . The loser here is the Blue Jackets fans ! I hope little Mitch and his 11 mil salary somehow overcomes the harsh mental brutality that was imposed on him but such a mean beast . LMAO - jsrstl1
So assuming you have a job, I'm guessing if your manager came up to you and said give me your phone, unlock it and let me look through your pictures and personal information not tied to your job whatsover, would be ok with you?
Has nothing to do with "old school coaching" and everything to do with asking players to show their personal, private material. - jmatchett383
Yes, and I think it's getting a bit misleading in saying it's to see pictures of the player's families. I mean IDK what's in Babs' mind, but many players are young and relatively wealthy. Who knows wtf is on their phones. I worked in telecom and people would turn in their old cell phones without deleting content . There was on occasion some CRAZY things on their cell phones. Video's with their girlfriends/wives/whomever and lot of nudity... pictures of people drinking and smoking a bit excessively. Some bong photos.... I'm not judging those things, just saying.
a guy that has lead his teams to 3 cups and won it once. - jsrstl1
This is entirely irrelevant to the issue at hand here
Whatever methods he wanted to use to win, build chemistry whatever it takes( besides physical punishment) is his business - jsrstl1
Objectively not true
Babs wins (except in Toronto which the organization is a loser for 56 years straight, don’t think that’s on him) - jsrstl1
Toronto's history of playoff failure does not absolve him of criticism for the job he did there. They didn't win because the players hated him and he did a bad job. That's his fault and not anybody else's.
Bob Dylan once said times are a changing and you need to change with those times.
Babs did not change with those times.
Take the money the Leafs gave you and live comfortably watching hockey somewhere warm. - dmnted
Good thing he gave you all that playoff sucess in exchange !
Not sure if it is the end of "Old School Coaching". It is the end of career a wienerhead or at least that what he sounds like. He sounds like the type of guy who plays stupid mental warfare games. (frank)ing nonsense if it is all true.
As for the phone thing. If it is my personal device meaning I own it and I pay for the plan, then no (frank)ing way. (frank) you. If it is a company owned device, then yeah they get to look. It's not yours and your personal poop shouldn't be on it.
I know the latter is not the case here but that's the only reason I could see ever handing anything containing data over to an employer.
Not sure if it is the end of "Old School Coaching". It is the end of career a wienerhead or at least that what he sounds like. He sounds like the type of guy who plays stupid mental warfare games. (frank)ing nonsense if it is all true.
As for the phone thing. If it is my personal device meaning I own it and I pay for the plan, then no (frank)ing way. (frank) you. If it is a company owned device, then yeah they get to look. It's not yours and your personal poop shouldn't be on it.
I know the latter is not the case here but that's the only reason I could see ever handing anything containing data over to an employer. - glove_was_stuck
Yeah and I really think most of it lies in the fact that he's older than most of the young player's parents and, in an ultra-competitive professional sports work setting, it really puts the younger guys who are trying to make the team in a tough spot.
You either have to tell the guy who makes a decision on your future "no" or be coerced into doing something that's entirely inappropriate
Not sure if it is the end of "Old School Coaching". It is the end of career a wienerhead or at least that what he sounds like. He sounds like the type of guy who plays stupid mental warfare games. (frank)ing nonsense if it is all true.
As for the phone thing. If it is my personal device meaning I own it and I pay for the plan, then no (frank)ing way. (frank) you. If it is a company owned device, then yeah they get to look. It's not yours and your personal poop shouldn't be on it.
I know the latter is not the case here but that's the only reason I could see ever handing anything containing data over to an employer. - glove_was_stuck
Babs is a dumb guy who thinks he’s really smart. Dangerous combination.
Don't be so sure about that. The other option for Columbus is paying legal fees in a contract dispute. It's extremely unlikely Babcock walked away with nothing. - Zezel
Oh yeah ... he got paid to say exactly what he said. Distraction to the team yada yada ... to go away like that costs money.
Probably the most baffling part to me. Perhaps the Jackets thought they could redeem a damaged product like they did for Torts coming off his escapades in Vancouver. The idea of defending Babcock stemmed from the fact people thought he is no slouch to attempt those type of shenanigans again knowing it's likely his last chance.
Listening to Pascal Vincent's press conference yesterday he had nothing but admiration for how Babcock saw the game, to make an analogy in the arts, it's almost like asking to separate the art from the artist but society doesn't work that way anymore. I'm not being sympathetic to Babcock but rather in wonder what a Mike Babcock team would of looked like. - Alexzanki
Probably out of a complete desperation to win. They weren't supposed to be that bad after signing Johnny Hockey and a big time panic move.
How is hitting a player in the head (in any situation) ok? Safety trumps your enjoyment of seeing players get 'rocked' every single time.
- Nasty_Duck
That's a tough one, but in the end...yes...he could have been more aware of his surroundings and realized that Cooke (a total P.O.S. headhunter etc.) was on the ice...and on his blind side. It's not like it was someone like...say Evander Kane, or Tom Wilson, or Clutterbuck. It was MATT COOKE as the 1 out of 5 players that you can't see where he is.
Make ZERO mistake, Cooke targetted him, Savard didn't have much of a chance, but by definition (as per above), yes, Savard should have kept his head up, not watched his shot, and known where Cooke was.
I agree, targetting the head is never right, but there are still a few guys that do this (and also accidents happen at high speeds)...so yeah, keep your head up, always. That hit that took Savard out was 75% Cooke and 25% Savard not protecting himself. Cooke's a loser, should have been banned for life several times.
That's a tough one, but in the end...yes...he could have been more aware of his surroundings and realized that Cooke (a total P.O.S. headhunter etc.) was on the ice...and on his blind side. It's not like it was someone like...say Evander Kane, or Tom Wilson, or Clutterbuck. It was MATT COOKE as the 1 out of 5 players that you can't see where he is.
Make ZERO mistake, Cooke targetted him, Savard didn't have much of a chance, but by definition (as per above), yes, Savard should have kept his head up, not watched his shot, and known where Cooke was.
I agree, targetting the head is never right, but there are still a few guys that do this (and also accidents happen at high speeds)...so yeah, keep your head up, always. That hit that took Savard out was 75% Cooke and 25% Savard not protecting himself. Cooke's a loser, should have been banned for life several times. - JLO961
Wow.
The guy was taking a shot on net, not admiring a pass.
That's a tough one, but in the end...yes...he could have been more aware of his surroundings and realized that Cooke (a total P.O.S. headhunter etc.) was on the ice...and on his blind side. It's not like it was someone like...say Evander Kane, or Tom Wilson, or Clutterbuck. It was MATT COOKE as the 1 out of 5 players that you can't see where he is.
Make ZERO mistake, Cooke targetted him, Savard didn't have much of a chance, but by definition (as per above), yes, Savard should have kept his head up, not watched his shot, and known where Cooke was.
I agree, targetting the head is never right, but there are still a few guys that do this (and also accidents happen at high speeds)...so yeah, keep your head up, always. That hit that took Savard out was 75% Cooke and 25% Savard not protecting himself. Cooke's a loser, should have been banned for life several times. - JLO961
To a small degree yeah. I think when you're out there and someone is being a piece of poop or is a piece of poop you'd be aware of it. But that wasn't going to stop what happened. Go back and watch it. It happens very quickly. Everyone in the building except Cooke was not aware what was about to happen.
I guess would you say the same in Erik Karlsson's case. Would you be thinking, hey this guy is going to try and slice my Achilles with his skate?
