You guys are Fkn incredible, every day someone else is responsible for the poop show that is the Canucks. Last week it was JB, this week everyone was ready to sacrifice WD at the alter, and today its FA.

This is a multi-million dollar business. They employ a huge staff and the on-ice product is ONE FACET OF A MULTI MILLION DOLLAR BUSINESS. If you think you can do better, how come no one is reaching out to you and your infinite wisdom?

The whining and the blame is becoming intolerable. You all should be sent to the comets message board until you've matured and can deliver post after post, consistantly
- Max.Betts

It's not that bad

I blame the Sedins
Dragon blames WD
Kaptaan blames Tanev
Thunda blames Edler
Lefty blames Benning
ASL blames Aquillini
Booner blames Bloated
Nuck4u blamed the universe.

See just a couple of us

That is one of the core mandates of his position as chairman of the board.
- Max.Betts

True, but let's look at the hockey things he helped implement, the instigator rule which arguably is oenofnthenmost polarizing rules in hockey still today.

His position on hockey hits and concussions which I believe is aracanian.

that seems half way positive so i'm going to assume that it's sarcasm.
- RealityChecker

They're pretty big bounces.

True, but let's look at the hockey things he helped implement, the instigator rule which arguably is oenofnthenmost polarizing rules in hockey still today.

His position on hockey hits and concussions which I believe is aracanian.
- allsports

i despise bettman but i place blame on hits/concussions/rules/discipline on the GMs not the president.

i despise bettman but i place blame on hits/concussions/rules/discipline on the GMs not the president.
- RealityChecker

I think they're both to blame here, the GM's rule committee proposes changes to rules while the league governors vote on them? But Bettman leads the charge on decisions for the owners as their advisor.

I think they're both to blame here, the GM's rule committee proposes changes to rules while the league governors vote on them? But Bettman leads the charge on decisions for the owners as their advisor.
- allsports

NHLPA votes on them as well don't they?

Also, some good rule changes such as hybrid icing and elimination of red line among others.

I think they're both to blame here, the GM's rule committee proposes changes to rules while the league governors vote on them? But Bettman leads the charge on decisions for the owners as their advisor.
- allsports

i get the sense (and it's all conjecture on all of our parts) that bettman leaves the on ice stuff to the "hockey guys."

his PR defense of the league vis-a-vis concussions is sickening but he's the mouthpiece of the league. the hockey guys don't really want to change things and bettman has to sell that in the media (while protecting the league legally).

at the end of the day, we're really not far apart. i would want a hockey guy in that position but..... in all reality, it's a money/financial position not a hockey position. sigh.

Nylander Marner and/or Benn available for the right deal in the Pool

NHLPA votes on them as well don't they?

Also, some good rule changes such as hybrid icing and elimination of red line among others.
- golfingsince

Yes the players form part of that committee as well and I'm not saying they're not also to blame but it's not the players who came up with the instigator rule and it's not the players who are saying to the US Congress that head hits and concussions are not related, it's Bettman.

i get the sense (and it's all conjecture on all of our parts) that bettman leaves the on ice stuff to the "hockey guys."

his PR defense of the league vis-a-vis concussions is sickening but he's the mouthpiece of the league. the hockey guys don't really want to change things and bettman has to sell that in the media (while protecting the league legally).

at the end of the day, we're really not far apart. i would want a hockey guy in that position but..... in all reality, it's a money/financial position not a hockey position. sigh.
- RealityChecker

I agree with you but we criticize Linbenning for the team woes I think it's fair that Bettman takes his share of the blame for his aracanian views on some of the stuff I think he comes up with and not necessarily the hockey ops team.

Yes a hockey guy would be better but I recognize it's not an easy job either, sigh

I agree with you but we criticize Linbenning for the team woes I think it's fair that Bettman takes his share of the blame for his aracanian views on some of the stuff I think he comes up with and not necessarily the hockey ops team.

Yes a hockey guy would be better but I recognize it's not an easy job either, sigh
- allsports

i agree to a point. to be honest, i don't think he believes a lot of the sh!t he says. he just has to protect the league and present a PR argument that protects the league liability wise.

he's the type of corporate weasel that i (and i suspect most of us) despise.

it's bottom line over almost everything else and lie, lie, lie to cover your corporate a$$.

but you are right in the sense that he has tremendous sway over the owners. he could lead the owners (who direct their hockey ops guys) into making the necessary changes especially with respect to concussions if he truly wanted to.

Jerry Jones, Mark Cuban, Murray Pezim, George Steinbrenner and so on and so on
- allsports

Yeah we could get another home grown invested owner .... would he be hands off...? Is Jimmy Patterson still relevant enough to be a good one ...?

i agree to a point. to be honest, i don't think he believes a lot of the sh!t he says. he just has to protect the league and present a PR argument that protects the league liability wise.

he's the type of corporate weasel that i (and i suspect most of us) despise.

it's bottom line over almost everything else and lie, lie, lie to cover your corporate a$$.

but you are right in the sense that he has tremendous sway over the owners. he could lead the owners (who direct their hockey ops guys) into making the necessary changes especially with respect to concussions if he truly wanted to.
- RealityChecker

Yeah we could get another home grown invested owner .... would he be hands off...? Is Jimmy Patterson still relevant enough to be a good one ...?
- Nuck4U

Pattison, is hands off with his companies but we're talking about a company Forbes had valued at around $745m so not sure if he's hands off for companies that expensive.

Here's the link how Forbes comes up with the value.

http://www.forbes.com/teams/vancouver-canucks/

You guys are Fkn incredible, every day someone else is responsible for the poop show that is the Canucks. Last week it was JB, this week everyone was ready to sacrifice WD at the alter, and today its FA.

This is a multi-million dollar business. They employ a huge staff and the on-ice product is ONE FACET OF A MULTI MILLION DOLLAR BUSINESS. If you think you can do better, how come no one is reaching out to you and your infinite wisdom?

The whining and the blame is becoming intolerable. You all should be sent to the comets message board until you've matured and can deliver post after post, consistantly
- Max.Betts

I blame the PP, if we can get that going we will see some wins.

(beauty day out there.)

No it's not.

Again, the Islanders moved with NYC not to a different country. It's still more likely the Bills move to Toronto than it is the Canucks move to Seattle, and that's not bloody likely either.
- golfingsince

Look if you want to say impossible that's fine. Point is about uncertainty that could lead to this becoming an option to be looked at. If you read the whole post it says not likely. If you take the whole thing in then you would see this is not happening. There are just too many factors against it from ever happening.

However, if you remember years ago in some dark days of poor attendance and low Canadian dollar with struggling team and ownership change with Canucks there was talk of it. Recently there was talk about Oilers to Seattle before rink approval.

When there is uncertainty possibilities arise that seemed unthinkable and if the trajectory finds this team in the gutter for years this may arise with ownership change. The discussion at least which puts it all in the realm of possibility. Not actuality which we are in agreement.

Again is a move ever likely ... no... and a lot must go completely wrong. Plus earlier point that Booner also brought up later too that league probably would want expansion money from Seattle over allowing a move.

i agree to a point. to be honest, i don't think he believes a lot of the sh!t he says. he just has to protect the league and present a PR argument that protects the league liability wise.

he's the type of corporate weasel that i (and i suspect most of us) despise.

it's bottom line over almost everything else and lie, lie, lie to cover your corporate a$$.

but you are right in the sense that he has tremendous sway over the owners. he could lead the owners (who direct their hockey ops guys) into making the necessary changes especially with respect to concussions if he truly wanted to.
- RealityChecker

He's a lawyer, they're all Richards

Pattison, is hands off with his companies but we're talking about a company Forbes had valued at around $745m so not sure if he's hands off for companies that expensive.

Here's the link how Forbes comes up with the value.

http://www.forbes.com/teams/vancouver-canucks/
- allsports

He is almost 90 years old. I doubt he is interested in something like that.

Maybe a hockey lover like Jim Treliving or TSN or Lebatts but not Jim Pattison

It's not that bad

I blame the Sedins
Dragon blames WD
Kaptaan blames Tanev
Thunda blames Edler
Lefty blames Benning
ASL blames Aquillini
Booner blames Bloated
Nuck4u blamed the universe.

See just a couple of us
- VANTEL

The universe is one with all and has no blame. The Canucks have a lot of issues that falls on them. We are just fans that want to see the team succeed. HB is our venting forum. All is good. All is welcome. Our thoughts and posts just whispers that fly around in the abyss.

He is almost 90 years old. I doubt he is interested in something like that.

Maybe a hockey lover like Jim Treliving or TSN or Lebatts but not Jim Pattison
- VANTEL

isn't he 80+?

how about chip wilson? imagine the new uniforms. the team would still suck but their butts would look amazing on the ice.

isn't he 80+?

how about chip wilson? imagine the new uniforms. the team would still suck but their butts would look amazing on the ice.
- RealityChecker

75 yrs


I think an Asian billionaire will step in.

Who knows maybe even Taj and Tambir pool their money then they can fix everything

I blame the PP, if we can get that going we will see some wins.

(beauty day out there.)
- hillbillydeluxe

Carol and others bring that up. It's a big issue for a defensive first team. Hank says they need more chances on PP. How do you get that if so defensive oriented ... got to balance that out more and press some offense.

75 yrs


I think an Asian billionaire will step in.

Who knows maybe even Taj and Tambir pool their money then they can fix everything
- VANTEL

Didn't they like the rest of us spend it all on years of Canuck fandom following for a Cup

He is almost 90 years old. I doubt he is interested in something like that.

Maybe a hockey lover like Jim Treliving or TSN or Lebatts but not Jim Pattison
- VANTEL

Who owns tsn again Bell? Don't they own the Canadians? Treating isn't as rich as Ryan Beedie, another real estate guy in town but someone like Gaglardi would be great.

isn't he 80+?

how about chip wilson? imagine the new uniforms. the team would still suck but their butts would look amazing on the ice.
- RealityChecker

You mean like the ice cleaners do right now?