Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Canucks Management "NO-SHOW's" at STH/Memebers only meeting.

Rate this topic


RU SERIOUS

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

I mean, that makes him sound like a mobster and at least there's a mystique to mobsters

 

Francesco is just another slumlord billionaire with his fingers in blueberries, real estate and the like 

Fair enough. I'm gonna go get the paper, get the papers.

  • There it is 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AnthonyG said:

Rutherford and Allvin were pretty tight lipped when it came to JT Millers deal. They probably dont want to give away any rumours and possibly piss off players if they are on the block. Likely looking to keep everything under the rug until they can get something done and avoid drama/rumours. However they should have asked commented about rescheduling it instead of straight up avoiding it. 

this is what I think of Allvin as well. Tight lipped unless there is something substantive to talk about.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DrJockitch said:

I thought was unnecessarily sexist.

Really? I mean if the OP had said just "Allvin and the chipmunks" that would have been fine I'm assuming? But stating that the AGM's are "girls" is sexist? Are we not supposed to acknowledge that they are women? Because I'm pretty sure we acknowledge that Allvin is in fact a man. If our AGM's were all men and he said "chipmunk boys" would that be sexist?

 

Also since the "chipmunks" in real life ARE boys, perhaps the OP needed to state that in this joke the chipmunks are girls in order to avoid confusion and make sure the joke lands. AND if you're worried it implies that the "chipmunk girls" are somewhat subordinate to Allvin, i think is the reality both in the joke scenario and as characters. They are AGM's to his GM, just like the character Allvin is the father figure to the chipmunks.

 

I mean I get what you're trying to infer and in todays politically correct world you will have some people seeing it from that angle.. but come on man, don't perpetuate the over exaggerated pendulum swing. I'm sure the AGM's who happen to be women (:ph34r:) are no more offended than Allvin would be if they saw the joke.

 

You have to reach pretty deep in order to find anything sexist about the little comment. But I guess it's easier to just call someone or something sexist without thinking because you know, cancel culture.

 

 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This canucks job really just seems like a side mission for JR.

He clocked out ever since he left Pittsburgh, had his rings, and was enjoying retirement at his home in Carolina but he was intrigued by the offer that Aquilini had to go over to his house to make.

 

PA is his crony so he just follows him along.

Say what you want about the rest of the assistants but I feel like the front office was more concerned appearing woke and making headlines for a day or two rather than if they were actually qualified for the position.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PetterssonOrPeterson said:

This canucks job really just seems like a side mission for JR.

He clocked out ever since he left Pittsburgh, had his rings, and was enjoying retirement at his home in Carolina but he was intrigued by the offer that Aquilini had to go over to his house to make.

 

PA is his crony so he just follows him along.

Say what you want about the rest of the assistants but I feel like the front office was more concerned appearing woke and making headlines for a day or two rather than if they were actually qualified for the position.

Welcome to 2023

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, CoquitlamDave said:

Smyl shouldnt "gtfo" as this is his life long project.  He knows he has been here before the owner and will be here after.  #12 !

Who said Smyl should get the f**k out? He deserves better than being sent out as a patsy for ownership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, VforVasili said:

Doesn't affect me at all but I don't think women should be obliged to defend themselves constantly from put downs and gender based negative comments. 

I sure hope none of you "we can't say anything anymore" folks don't work somewhere with an HR department. I run a company and if I referred even jokingly to female members of senior management as "chipmunk girls" even in jest I can guarantee I would be hearing about it.

This isn’t some ‘woke’ HR persons office. 
His comment wasn’t offensive in the least.
And if someone was offended by it, that is their issue.  
It was a simple crack about Alvin and the chipmunks.   

  • Cheers 4
  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully they do something similar in the offseason and the fans can convince ownership that we will stick around for a rebuild and watch games - it might be the only way forward. Convince the money-grubbers that we'll still sell tickets if we're losing by focussing on the little victories and watching our kids develop and know that even though we're losing, it's towards something. If FA could see and believe this, I think he'd allow a proper rebuild and then it's full steam ahead - any management team we hire or have will surely happily blow up this mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, VforVasili said:

Do you genuinely not understand why using the diminutive “girls” to describe some of the most talented women in hockey who have broken barriers to get where they are, or you just feigning ignorance to get a “zinger” through at liberal values. 
 

You don’t refer to women as “girls”. The context makes it much worse. 

You're way off base here. By calling the women "girls" instead of women, it is making a joke out of their performance as AGM's, which may or may not be warranted.

No different than if the AGM's were boys and he said "chipmunk boys". It implies that these AGM's seem to be along for the ride, towing the line. Which so far I haven't seen evidence of the contrary. Or would you still be on your soapbox if he had said chipmunk boys? me thinks not.

 

So is it more of a double standard? Are you saying It's ok to criticize or make fun of men by making them seem less, but it is considered sexist if you do it towards women? Or is it that you feel a little sorry for them for being criticized and made fun of? If thats the case, then perhaps your sensitivity towards them is not seeing them as the powerful talented women you say they are... in which case it would appear that your view is that they should be treated differently, or put another way, your inability to allow for jokes and criticism of women would make your perception of the situation sexist?

 

Don't overlook the fact that Allvin is also made fun of here. but thats ok right?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JayDangles said:

Really? I mean if the OP had said just "Allvin and the chipmunks" that would have been fine I'm assuming? But stating that the AGM's are "girls" is sexist? Are we not supposed to acknowledge that they are women? Because I'm pretty sure we acknowledge that Allvin is in fact a man. If our AGM's were all men and he said "chipmunk boys" would that be sexist?

 

Also since the "chipmunks" in real life ARE boys, perhaps the OP needed to state that in this joke the chipmunks are girls in order to avoid confusion and make sure the joke lands. AND if you're worried it implies that the "chipmunk girls" are somewhat subordinate to Allvin, i think is the reality both in the joke scenario and as characters. They are AGM's to his GM, just like the character Allvin is the father figure to the chipmunks.

 

I mean I get what you're trying to infer and in todays politically correct world you will have some people seeing it from that angle.. but come on man, don't perpetuate the over exaggerated pendulum swing. I'm sure the AGM's who happen to be women (:ph34r:) are no more offended than Allvin would be if they saw the joke.

 

You have to reach pretty deep in order to find anything sexist about the little comment. But I guess it's easier to just call someone or something sexist without thinking because you know, cancel culture.

 

 

Didn’t have reach deep or look hard or root around for deep meanings. It reads as a clear belittling statement directed towards Allvin and the AGMs.  In this case by using the little girl trope that has so often been used to diminish the contributions of women. The realities of a made up cartoon are hardly a debatable point. The intent was clear to belittle and diminish the group as numerous other people have noted here. 
Now overall I think they have done a terrible job.  But that has nothing to do with gender of the real humans or the made up chipmunks. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised Smyl hasn't quit. 

 

“I talked to Francesco about an identity. What is our identity? Where does it start? It starts with your accountability. It starts with your effort,” said Smyl.

“To get out of it, it’s not just going to be one individual. It’s going to take a team and they’ve got to come back to being a team, and make it hard to play against. That’s the identity I want for this organization, to be hard to play against. If I’m lining up against you, I’m going to make it as miserable as possible. That was my message to Francesco. I talked to the players about that this morning. I think that’s an important area and that’s an area we’ve got to start in.”

 

He was right! And Linden was right! They have their jerseys in the rafters for a reason they know a thing or 2 about what it takes to win. This MGMT group is an embarrassment. Epitome of "living day to day." Can't see beyond their noses.

 

I certainly won't be spending a dime on anything Canucks until their gone. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised this is just now being discussed, I figured it would be blowing up here earlier. 

 

But I am in agreement with most that this is a real bad look. 

I'm sticking to my guns of giving this group until Free Agency 2023 to really put their stamp on the team before I make too many judgements, but you have to be more aware of things like this in a Canadian market and failure to do so shows a lack of caring for the fans and for the history of the team. If they eventually put together a cup contender, who cares, but as it stands now there's not much to absolve them from no-showing here. Some of their moves have been really good (Kuz has been wonderful and if they can move him for a 1st +, that's great asset management; Mikheyev has been really good; Bear has been good for what we paid), but some of their moves have been fairly mind boggling (Stillman; extending JT before Bo). 

 

TLDR, wtf were they thinking... but still too early to judge the overall direction too harshly IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...