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

2 hours ago, RU SERIOUS said:

We had town halls ever year until Covid.  Some years they even fed us burgers and free beers and the best year was the year they let us roam the entire stadium hallways trying out any and all food made by each kiosk with free beer!!!.   It's only been on hold since Covid. I know because I've been a STH for well over 20 years.   Most importantly, we always had the Mgmt show up and take any & all questions.  It's just unthinkable to see no one out of the entire front-line mgmt group had the courage to show up!  It's unforgiveable!

My Friend who WAS a long time STH until 3 yrs ago said No management ever showed up ever at seat selection meetings for STH, She said if they are different from Town Hall meetings (she never paid any attention if there was anything called Town Hall},  as she never had time to go to another meeting if there was something different

  • There it is 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ballisticsports. said:

My Friend who WAS a long time STH until 3 yrs ago said No management ever showed up ever at seat selection meetings for STH, She said if they are different from Town Hall meetings (she never paid any attention if there was anything called Town Hall},  as she never had time to go to another meeting if there was something different

So according to your friend’s experience as a STH, it sounds like this thread makes no sense, right? 
The person who should be at these things to answer questions is the owner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Sanj said:

I think you are missing the point here.  Unconditional support is still happening as we are still paying for tickets and going to the games.  What people are trying to get is some accountability.  Why is it that criticism is always looked at as toxic by some.  We as a group want our team to do better and continue to support the team but it is up to management to be held accountable and at least show face.  If I do poorly at my job, I am sure I will hear about it, from both my management and my clients as is their right.  The same applies here. However, right now you've taken a topic about management not showing up to not showing support to players which is a whole different context to what this thread is about. 

 

I disagree, and don't believe I'm missing the point at all. I believe your comment "I'm missing the point" on the subject is exactly what I'm staying. 

 

Just as much as people are saying it's making excuses that they are not doing their job, I think the comment is making excuses to be unsupportive.

 

Someone can say they are supporting while showing negative behaviour, analogous to someone being abusive by belittling another to somehow get them to improve. Or more extreme, beat someone up to make them tougher.

 

Sadly, I'm not even surprised anymore when some describe "support" as just showing up, if not less.

 

Edited by Drive-By Body Pierce
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Alflives said:

So according to your friend’s experience as a STH, it sounds like this thread makes no sense, right? 
The person who should be at these things to answer questions is the owner. 

Well if there was anything like this she never heard of it or disregarded it as unimportant information

You either buy the product or you don't

I googled it sounds like in  2016 they had something called Town Hall (I can see why someone as busy as her would not be interested)

Team is just as crappy in 2023 as 2016 when they were concerned (Talk is cheap and why she is no longer interested at all in Canucks hockey)

She would invest an entire evening to the Canucks (with more than 1 season pass), commute, parking, dinner out each night and arriving home late in the evening and owning and running a big company of her own to realize she had better things to do with her time and lost interest

Edited by Ballisticsports.
  • There it is 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MaxVerstappen33 said:

But they have a lackeys hired just for that job. Why go on After Hours but skip the meeting with fans ? It should have been the other way around

Ask Francesco? Or maybe you'd like to book their schedule?

 

I will admit, it would be interesting to have them release, and be able to see their legit schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dazzle said:

They didn't do a good job so far. What did they do with the freed cap they had after the previous management? They spent all the cap they had. They could've traded Miller and left some room for the cap.

 

But NOOOO.

 

What better options were available with the cap space? ...and with what teams that had cap space to take Canucks players?

 

I do admit, Miller could've, and maybe should've been moved.

 

But for what return? What were the offers? Would the rabid fans be happier with a bag of fringe NHL players that end up being bottom six forwards or bottom pair defence at best?

 

Would they all be bitching about how a 99-point power forward (which doesn't grow on trees) was shipped off for mediocre NHL players?

 

It's easy to look at what might have been the best outcome. But no one seems to acknowledge that some of the best players might have been moved for nothing of impact, putting us in an even worse situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DS4quality said:

By why point out their girls? We had just as many terrible seasons with guys as gm and assistant gm's. There's literally no reason to bring up their gender. It doesn't matter if it's publicity or not. I get you don't like inclusion, but was Benning and the boys better? No one once called out the fact they were all men. Now that there's girls you you like to point out their gender?

technically they are not girls, they are women

so yes calling them girls is derogatory

As my girlfriend would say, "What are they 10?"

 

I do not see how you can say, There's literally no reason to bring up their gender.

and

 It doesn't matter if it's publicity

 

If it is a publicity stunt based on their gender, then there is literally every reason to bring in their gender

 

I have made 2 posts, both in this thread when I mentioned the Chipmunk Girls and from that you infer that "I like to point out there gender" 

nice try

 

Do yo think if either one becomes an NHL GM that they will not be heralded as the ground breaking "First female GMs in NHL history"?

they will

 

this from WIki

She was named one of the 25 most powerful women in hockey by Sportsnet in 2020.[6]

 

I am not anti inclusion, but am anti tokenism

and that was my point to begin with

 

Just as Travis Green, a man as far as I know, failed as an NHL Head Coach, in part because he was too arrogant to take an assistant's job, I wonder why women need to start with jobs in the NHL rather than working their way up through the minor leagues?

 

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

2 hours ago, Drive-By Body Pierce said:

 

What better options were available with the cap space? ...and with what teams that had cap space to take Canucks players?

 

I do admit, Miller could've, and maybe should've been moved.

 

But for what return? What were the offers? Would the rabid fans be happier with a bag of fringe NHL players that end up being bottom six forwards or bottom pair defence at best?

 

Would they all be bitching about how a 99-point power forward (which doesn't grow on trees) was shipped off for mediocre NHL players?

 

It's easy to look at what might have been the best outcome. But no one seems to acknowledge that some of the best players might have been moved for nothing of impact, putting us in an even worse situation.

well, lets see, Huberdeau was traded and so was Matt TKchuck

Miller was just entering the last year of a really good contract

 

Basically if you are not a good poker player, you probably won't be a good GM

GMs have to make decisions about the future

they can't wait til the player has peaked to trade for or away

 

a decision needed to be made, Mik or Boeser.

Allvin chose "BOTH"

a decision needed to be made, trade Miller or sign, or wait til the deadline

Allvin chose sign

was that the correct decision?

Time will tell, but not looking so good right now

  • There it is 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, lmm said:

well, lets see, Huberdeau was traded and so was Matt TKchuck

Miller was just entering the last year of a really good contract

 

Basically if you are not a good poker player, you probably won't be a good GM

GMs have to make decisions about the future

they can't wait til the player has peaked to trade for or away

 

a decision needed to be made, Mik or Boeser.

Allvin chose "BOTH"

a decision needed to be made, trade Miller or sign, or wait til the deadline

Allvin chose sign

was that the correct decision?

Time will tell, but not looking so good right now

 

You seem to be trying to drop two big names separately, but happened in the same, if not only, single blockbuster trade of the (off)season at a point when the Flames were not even possibly losing, but definitely losing their two top players with the season over...

 

And perhaps the "poker player" analogy is reasonable...but that makes a minimum of 30 other teams a failure as well? Because they didn't make a blockbuster trade in a cap-strapped era while not losing their top two scorers?

Edited by Drive-By Body Pierce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, lmm said:

well, this might just be my opinion

but I always thought the Chipmunk girls were just a publicity stunt right from the get go

I have no idea why they signed Derek Clancy

but the chipmunk girls seem to be there because new Jimmer went on an "inclusiveness rampage" when he took over

It reminds me of that Disney movie I saw over at my grandkid's with the 3 legged dog, bi-racial couple with a gay kid and a wheelchair bound neighb, first nations possible dyke mayor, ancient Asian woman and some convoluted ecco theme

come to think of it, maybe new Jimmer should look to Disney for help making the Canucks MORE DiVERSE and inclusive

lets debut the Rainbow skate jersey

so, if they are a publicity stunt, the least they could do is a few public stunts, like balance a pencil on their nose

If they are here for their hockey acumen, the least they could have done was swat that pen out of Allvinies hand before he signed Brock and JT this summer

 

colour me , not sold

Thank you for the laugh.. I’m in tears 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Alflives said:

Then don’t renew.   Plus, it’s the owner who is getting the money, so it’s him who fans should expect at these meetings.  If someone has been a season ticket owner for 20 years then they’ve seen Nonis, Gillis, Benning, and this new group.  But the owner is the same.  Direct questions to him, because these other people are his to hire and fire, which he’s done often.  

I didn't. I had enough B.S. after last year and surrendered my seats for good.:towel: So glad I did and should have done it sooner!

Edited by RU SERIOUS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ballisticsports. said:

My Friend who WAS a long time STH until 3 yrs ago said No management ever showed up ever at seat selection meetings for STH, She said if they are different from Town Hall meetings (she never paid any attention if there was anything called Town Hall},  as she never had time to go to another meeting if there was something different

That is 100% correct. Seat selections are only you and the account reps.    Town hall STH/Member meetings were Mgmt and STH's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Alflives said:

The person who should be at these things to answer questions is the owner. 

Come on, Alfie. If Francesco stays away, then he's a jerk for not caring enough to face the paying customers, but if he does show up, then he's a jerk for being a meddling owner. On Melmac, it seems that both things can be true, no? 

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

18 hours ago, singing chef said:

Was there actually a meeting scheduled or were Donnie & Dhali just speculating ?  Heard on this board from one STH that he/she didn't receive any notification of such a meeting, how about hearing from other STH.  Was there a meeting and were they there ?  Would like to know real facts before forming an opinion.

yeah, that's why I asked if anyone has the wording of the official invite.

 

Maybe a STH member can post a screenshot of the email here.  

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
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...