Benning on donnie and dhali

[AV.]

49 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

 

 

This is you on your best day.

 

Revolting, go back to the sickening hole you came from. I don't care where it is, this rubbish is rubbish, you are slimy rubbish. Recede into your hole.

 

I wish the be gone!

 

5 minutes ago, IRR said:

Bingo! Between him and a handful of others, it's too much and it's enough!! Negative and hating on the team 99.9% of the time and that extremely rare time they're not, it comes with a backhanded complement, so really it is. Some of them spend all day every day on here regurgitating the same negative agenda over & over & over. No matter how they try and spin it, a majority of us see through the bulls***!! I've said it a few times, it's not what they're doing, it's how they're doing it. Dislike and / or disagree with things the team does and have constructive criticism, then move on and support the team moving forward.....but no, just a negative / hateful agenda aimed at tearing down everything the team does. 

The ignore function exists for a reason.  If you don't like reading "negativity", you can quite literally block it.  Rather than abusing other posters and potentially crossing a line/hurting feelings, both of you may to want to consider this option.

 

Hope this helps.

[TheRussianRocket1994]

7 minutes ago, Alain Vigneault said:

 

The ignore function exists for a reason.  If you don't like reading "negativity", you can quite literally block it.  Rather than abusing other posters and potentially crossing a line/hurting feelings, both of you may to want to consider this option.

 

Hope this helps.

Maybe you and the few other should get the message / hint re: your mentality / behavior re: this team and that most of us are done with it!!!!! 

 

Hope this helps.

[Curmudgeon]

On 5/29/2021 at 2:21 PM, wallstreetamigo said:

With all due respect, Bennings daughter's supposed right to not have to hear people criticize her dad is not more important than everyone else's right to criticize him. If he doesnt want to be criticized publicly maybe he should not be in a high profile public job.

At no time has Benning said he doesn't want to be criticized. He has said he can deal with it because he's busy trying to do his job, but expressed that his family suffers from the public criticism of him. He made an observation, he did not plead with anyone to stop criticizing him because it was hard on his family. He never stated his daughter has the right to not have people criticize him; that's your conclusion based on your own bias.

 

On 5/29/2021 at 2:21 PM, wallstreetamigo said:

And while I feel bad for his daughter, her individual rights arent more important than anyone else's. 

Again, Benning did not say his daughter's rights were more important than anyone else's. You have again jumped to a conclusion based on your own bias. 

[AV.]

10 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

It's not so much that you criticize Benning. It's more how you deliberately ignore evidence that counters your 'points', and then you re-hash the same thing as where you started.

 

I honestly have zero problems with this post. Everyone is allowed to criticize/compliment whoever they want. The problem is when you start to see the bias slip in. Too many times have I seen your posts be consistently anti-Benning. Do you not have a different dimension to how you observe things?

Lmfao at your post the other day about Podkolzin. You say you're happy about the prospect, but then you HAD to include a shot of Benning in it. LOL. That is a blatant example of bias.

 

 

Not really.  Sometimes, themes and threads just overlap.

 

In any event, what does it matter?  Most of my "shots" just insinuate that he's incompetent or an inferior GM, and arguably, both are true.  Yes, that's not a nice thing to do but that's still an innocuous form of criticism.  People here call rival players and rival executives much worse.

[Gawdzukes]

24 minutes ago, Alain Vigneault said:

Not really.  Sometimes, themes and threads just overlap.

 

In any event, what does it matter?  Most of my "shots" just insinuate that he's incompetent or an inferior GM, and arguably, both are true.  Yes, that's not a nice thing to do but that's still an innocuous form of criticism.  People here call rival players and rival executives much worse.

So Benning sucks? Great conversation. Who else? Green sucks too? So enlightening, tell me more. I'm fascinated. I would ignore you if I could see you, it's just your hate grease I slip on once in a while. 

 

Boooooo for kids on twitter!

 

I will literally ignore you from now on you waste of space. What a xxxx!

Edited May 31, 2021 by Gawdzukes

[TheRussianRocket1994]

21 minutes ago, Alain Vigneault said:

Not really.  Sometimes, themes and threads just overlap.

 

In any event, what does it matter?  Most of my "shots" just insinuate that he's incompetent or an inferior GM, and arguably, both are true.  Yes, that's not a nice thing to do but that's still an innocuous form of criticism.  People here call rival players and rival executives much worse.

You get called out yet again with proof and instead of admitting your wrong (the normal thing to do), you spin things yet again! It must be getting dizzying! 

[AV.]

6 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

So Benning sucks? Great conversation. Who else? Green sucks too? So enlightening, tell me more. I'm fascinated. I would ignore you if I could see you, it's just your hate grease I slip on once in a while. 

 

Boooooo for kids on twitter!

 

I will literally ignore you from now on you waste of space. What a xxxx!

 

2 minutes ago, IRR said:

You get called out yet again with proof and instead of admitting your wrong (the normal thing to do), you spin things yet again! It must be getting dizzying! 

Ok

[180sret]

The negativity on CDC and in the Vancouver media are related. I'm positive that those who pollute each and every thread with the same crap over and over again probably blog for horse sh%t media such as Canucks Way, or any of the other "media". Remember Guardian, and how how he disappeared after Botch (RIP) died? These guys only gets hits because they feed crap onto the forum then blog about the "problems" and suddenly they're relevant. 

Kinda explains why they can't discuss, just regurgitate.

 

 

[spur1]

3 hours ago, Alain Vigneault said:

 

The ignore function exists for a reason.  If you don't like reading "negativity", you can quite literally block it.  Rather than abusing other posters and potentially crossing a line/hurting feelings, both of you may to want to consider this option.

 

Hope this helps.

So... you are suggesting to just stick our head in the sand ...these characters are posting hatred and slander against JB, Green, etc. who are people just like every poster here, but we are supposed to be nice and civil to them when they are not?

[spur1]

On 5/29/2021 at 5:44 PM, Chris12345 said:

If there is no prez public speaking is critical.

 

Can a poor public speaker make great trades? Absolutely but if there's no prez someone has to kiss babies.

 

Is it a fireable? No just hire a prez but Benning sucks for pr. And yes, in 2021 pr is critical.

That’s the problem these days...too much bull crap and not enough of just telling the truth. 

[Alflives]

3 hours ago, Alain Vigneault said:

 

The ignore function exists for a reason.  If you don't like reading "negativity", you can quite literally block it.  Rather than abusing other posters and potentially crossing a line/hurting feelings, both of you may to want to consider this option.

 

Hope this helps.

Yes, on this site (which obviously no Canuck reads) we can choose to ignore idiocy.  However, in the real world, families of those who are being attacked (in word) cannot simply ignore idiocy.  Like the Banner or the protest (ha ha ha) calling to fire Benning.  That kind of public behaviour isn’t so easily ignored, especially by children.  That’s when normally thinking adults use common sense, and don’t behave in such ways.  And especially now when we understand so much more about the effects of bullying on mental health.  Did these banner flying protestors even think about how their actions would effect Benning’s kids?  Did they even make any effort to see if Benning had children, and how old they are, or if they lived here?  It’s common decency to consider these kinds of things before we act, isn’t it?  

[spook007]

8 hours ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

Cheers Doc. 

[AV.]

1 hour ago, spur1 said:

So... you are suggesting to just stick our head in the sand ...these characters are posting hatred and slander against JB, Green, etc. who are people just like every poster here, but we are supposed to be nice and civil to them when they are not?

"Us" - who is us?  In any event, if reading the slightest criticisms regarding a GM's performance on a public forum makes individuals personally upset, I really don't know what to say.  It's understandable that any given post that isn't pro-Canucks on a Canucks forum might be misinterpreted as negative, but we're lowing the bar by quite a lot if saying to replace the GM is negativity.  So, no, you don't have stick your head in sand but you can give it a few shakes if this is what you really think/

 

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Yes, on this site (which obviously no Canuck reads) we can choose to ignore idiocy.  However, in the real world, families of those who are being attacked (in word) cannot simply ignore idiocy.  Like the Banner or the protest (ha ha ha) calling to fire Benning.  That kind of public behaviour isn’t so easily ignored, especially by children.  That’s when normally thinking adults use common sense, and don’t behave in such ways.  And especially now when we understand so much more about the effects of bullying on mental health.  Did these banner flying protestors even think about how their actions would effect Benning’s kids?  Did they even make any effort to see if Benning had children, and how old they are, or if they lived here?  It’s common decency to consider these kinds of things before we act, isn’t it?  

You must not have been around for NoNuts chants re Dave Nonis or the Mike Gillis protests and chants.  Or, do those not count since neither of those men are Benning?

[Tom Sestito]

4 hours ago, 180sret said:

The negativity on CDC and in the Vancouver media are related. I'm positive that those who pollute each and every thread with the same crap over and over again probably blog for horse sh%t media such as Canucks Way, or any of the other "media". Remember Guardian, and how how he disappeared after Botch (RIP) died? These guys only gets hits because they feed crap onto the forum then blog about the "problems" and suddenly they're relevant. 

Kinda explains why they can't discuss, just regurgitate.

 

 

that's not a great comment w the insinuations on the botchford thing

 

1. that's not botchford's writing style and isn't close to it

2. the last time that account was accessed was in 2020

[wallstreetamigo]

On 5/30/2021 at 12:31 AM, spook007 said:

I don't know you Wallstreet, but you are really starting to sound like some Nazi protester, that screams freedom of speech when the bill has to be paid for all their garbage... 

Definitely not like a manager in company with lots of employees....

I am not a manager. I am the owner.....;)

 

And what bill has to be paid? Peacefully protesting is LEGAL. Its a right. Same as free speech.

 

You are right. You don't know me. As a word of friendly advice, when you dont know someone or their personal family situation, throwing around the term Nazi at them could end up being more hurtful to them than a banner is to Bennings daughter. Some people lost family in the holocaust. So sure, lets completely make light of that over a &^@#ing banner.

 

Ya you guys are all about keeping the positivity going on cdc, right?

[wallstreetamigo]

16 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

No he's smarter than the world. We're all losers and wsa is the greatest.

This might become my new sig.

[wallstreetamigo]

On 5/30/2021 at 12:40 AM, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Yeah, I’m pretty sure all contracts run for the hockey season, and not calendar year, so team contractual employees, whether players, managers, coaches, scouts, etc, would all have contract years that run from July 1st to June 30th.

 

The main difference is that it’s very unusual for anyone other than players to actually work through almost the entire season, during the final years of their deals, without having an extension in place. This is, of course, completely normal for players, but for coaches/managers/etc, the “lame duck” label gets applied as soon as they enter their final year.

 

It’s usually a signal that the team is unsure about whether or not they’ll be bringing someone back, or that they’ve already mostly decided not to. It’s almost never the case that teams run out the final year on a contract for someone they’re completely happy with and intend to retain. It’s just not how things tend to get done.

 

This season, in addition to the coaching staff, the Canucks also waited until well into the final contract years of many of their scouts, which is highly unusual. Scouts are usually extended much sooner than that. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a scouting staff that’s had to face the uncertainty of waiting that late for their extensions.

 

The coaches, well, they were kind of on the hot seat, and it’s probably fair to say that the owners weren’t really sure whether or not they wanted to bring Green back, and so they kind of were letting him twist in the wind for most of the season.
 

(Possibly this was a negotiating play, as I’m sure Green wanted more than two years, and he probably wanted a significant bump in salary. Apparently he got the salary, or close to what he wanted, but had to give in on the term.)

 

And, at the very least, a “lame duck” coach creates an unnecessary distraction, when it comes to media and fans.
 

It also affects the way the coach works with his team.
 

It’s generally not a good thing to have somebody coaching to keep their job, versus coaching for what’s best for the team, both short and long term. 
 

Same can be said for managers.

 

We know that Benning was allowed to make preliminary offers at the beginning of the season, when it came to coaching extensions, but then something happened, and it would seem that ownership stepped in and forced him to press pause. Jim gave several interviews during the year where he indicated that he wanted to bring back Travis and the staff. But nothing was getting done for most of the season. Pretty much radio silence. Then, the owners had their talks with the advisors, they decided Benning would be brought back (even though he was under contract for two more years, it was apparently still necessary to tell him on May 18th that he was actually returning next season), Francesco decided to loosen the purse strings, empowered his manager to start managing the team again, and very quickly, almost like magic, a Green extension was done, and Jim was allowed to start negotiations with Ian Clark, and consulting with Travis on filling out the rest of the coaching staff.

 

It was weird. 
 

Of course, it’s also been a very weird year.

 

But the way these negotiations and extensions have gone down, whether the head coach, assistants, or the scouting department, has been far from “business as usual” in the NHL.

 

Not even “business as usual” for the Vancouver Canucks.

 

(For example, Gillis and Vigenault were given their extensions in May 2012, while both still had the full 2012-13 season remaining on their multiyear deals.)

 

I know many people on CDC prefer to take an “everything’s fine” and “there’s nothing to see here” approach to the way the team has handled things this season. They would like to think it was just media “fake news” or the anti-Benning crowd on Twitter stirring up trouble. But it’s pretty clear that the owners had all options on the table, even as recently as early May, and that even included firing the GM and his management team, as well as clearing house on the entire coaching staff.

 

It now looks like most, and possibly all, will be coming back.

 

But it would be a mistake to think that any of this was a certainty, or that the way things played out this year was anything close to normal, as far as how NHL teams usually tend to operate (unless a major change in direction was, in fact, being seriously considered by ownership).

This

[wallstreetamigo]

6 hours ago, Curmudgeon said:

At no time has Benning said he doesn't want to be criticized. He has said he can deal with it because he's busy trying to do his job, but expressed that his family suffers from the public criticism of him. He made an observation, he did not plead with anyone to stop criticizing him because it was hard on his family. He never stated his daughter has the right to not have people criticize him; that's your conclusion based on your own bias.

 

Again, Benning did not say his daughter's rights were more important than anyone else's. You have again jumped to a conclusion based on your own bias. 

I know Benning was just honestly answering a question that was posed to him. I didnt get the sense he personally gives a $&!# at all about people criticizing him or flying a banner. Like with any public figure, comments and such bother their families. All Benning did was confirm the obvious. 

 

I have zero issue with Benning about that tbh. 

 

Its people on cdc that are trying to speak for him and saying that criticizing Benning is outside the realm of decency because it bothers his daughter.

 

Guess what? The same thing happens to the families of pretty much every polarizing public figure in a high profile job. Its not unique or any worse for Benning's family.

 

And I highly doubt Benning himself was trying to get anyone here to suggest it is. He really is not that type of person.

 

 

[wallstreetamigo]

7 hours ago, Alain Vigneault said:

 

The ignore function exists for a reason.  If you don't like reading "negativity", you can quite literally block it.  Rather than abusing other posters and potentially crossing a line/hurting feelings, both of you may to want to consider this option.

 

Hope this helps.

I am assuming he was responding to me.

 

One thing I dont do in general is abuse other posters or personally attack them simply for having a different opinion. I keep my comments mostly just to the issues i am talking about, not making it personal. Because its not nor should it be.

 

Like you say, the forum has an ignore function. I dont use it much myself but I also have the adult ability to ignore things I dont care to read or see if they are going to bug me to the level this guy is irritated.

[wallstreetamigo]

3 hours ago, spur1 said:

So... you are suggesting to just stick our head in the sand ...these characters are posting hatred and slander against JB, Green, etc. who are people just like every poster here, but we are supposed to be nice and civil to them when they are not?

Criticism of them in doing their jobs does not equal hatred.

 

Pointing out their mistakes is not slander.

 

Its not about being civil, its about being realistic.