Bill Peters - 17th Flames Coach

[The_People1]

41 minutes ago, CalgarySTL said:

C'mon peeps... That's not fair to Ryan. How do you know what his knowledge on the situation is? Or singling him out from the other 2 that came from Carolina.

 

Well my point was, they shouldn't ask the players.  Leave them out of it.

[phoenix66]

3 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

The problem here is that this wasn't an isolated event for Peters, more and more examples of corroborated events are coming out. It seems to me this guy struggles to treat his players with respect. The fact that the Flames have gotten off to this horrible start and the news that is coming out, things are starting to line up as to why the effort level isn't there for this team.

 

I really don't feel sorry for Peters at all. You have to be held accountable for your actions past, present and future. That's the bottom line. Just because the event happened in the past doesn't make them any less inexcusable.

100% yes..  to be honest I'm more disturbed and convinced to put the nail in his coffin due to the Carolina incident than the Aliu incident 

Coupled with the Lack incident that was damaged controlled in his presser here ..

 

It's just such a dangerous slope.. there is nobody alive who can't look back and regret some words or actions which, if done today would have consequences

 

Pardon my wording before I say it but if this were isolated to the Aliu incident, I'd be more agreeable to move on from it... But the player abuse to me is way more damning and disturbing

[CalgarySTL]

28 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Well my point was, they shouldn't ask the players.  Leave them out of it.

I completely agree with you on that.

[redfire11]

Having played upper tier hockey many decades ago coaches did what ever needed to be done for the team to win and the players to be better. You screw up bad or dog it on the ice expect to be yelled at maybe smacked on the helmet and called out in the dressing room. Then go tell your dad or guardian the coach was picking on you and you got 10 or 20 times worse. Did being called out, smacked, called names, make me work harder and a better player YES. The players that took it and dug in and tried harder moved on up the ladder the ones that felt hurt or sorry for them selves ended up in the rec leagues.

I can just see the future of the NHL with coloring books and puppies for the players between periods.

 

[cccsberg]

11 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Disgusting is trying to defend him being a dick. How many black players do you think were on that team? My guess is one. And he got pointed out.

And BP went out of his way to get rid of him. He needs to be fired if that is the kind of authoritarian crap he pulls.

ps He was a 20 yr old kid trying to be a hockey player. BP was 45.

Best case would have been Aliu telling his dad, his dad kicks the Satoshi Nakamoto out of Peters and Peters never sees the NHL regardless.

It is fun watching people contort this thing though, if you're a fan of watching idiocy.

So many people posting supposed “facts” with nothing but hearsay and an unclear post about an incident from a decade ago.  Let the true facts come out then make a decision.  Sure, the attributed incident is wrong, but was it actually reality? ....and, yes, context does matter.  So many people more than ready to be judge, jury and executioner before the full story is revealed is very disturbing.

[JTech780]

8 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

So many people posting supposed “facts” with nothing but hearsay and an unclear post about an incident from a decade ago.  Let the true facts come out then make a decision.  Sure, the attributed incident is wrong, but was it actually reality? ....and, yes, context does matter.  So many people more than ready to be judge, jury and executioner before the full story is revealed is very disturbing.

 

Both the Aliu and Jordan allegations have been corroborated by multiple sources, all of whom have nothing to gain by backing the stories up.

[phoenix66]

I'm gonna adjust my original prediction.he won't be fired today.. why distract even more by firing the coach on game day.. I'm gonna suggest by Monday

 

Francis brought up a good point.. the delay is most likely legal.. and avoiding a lawsuit.

Peters isn't stupid..he likely knows he's never coaching in the NHL again after this

 

Can't fire him for performance after just publicly stating he's not going anywhere

 

Fire him for incidents in the past not even related to the flames , likely a lawsuit

 

He likely has a morals clause but who knows how it's worded 

 

Simply buy him out and he can sue for defamation and loss of future earnings because any kindergarten kid would know this is why he was let go

 

So what's likely really happening is lawyers are involved , studying and advising. And maybe even working out a buyout in return for his not taking any legal action 

 

It's a very sticky situation for sure 

[CalgarySTL]

10 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

So many people posting supposed “facts” with nothing but hearsay and an unclear post about an incident from a decade ago.  Let the true facts come out then make a decision.  Sure, the attributed incident is wrong, but was it actually reality? ....and, yes, context does matter.  So many people more than ready to be judge, jury and executioner before the full story is revealed is very disturbing.

That's what I was saying about people these days being overly sensitive & making something out of nothing / twisting words, etc. to make it look like someone is a piece of crap/bigot.  That's why people deserve due process. 

I also think if he threw around the n-bomb a bunch of times... that was stupid of him & of course it's going to look bad. It just seems like there's a lot of negative things coming to the surface with Bill. And unfortunately SJW's, social media, the mainstream media are on a crusade to crucify anyone that may have done or said anything wrong in their entire lives (or even if they haven't done it, they'll crucify you first and never do a proper retraction).... To find someone that hasn't ever offended another person with their beliefs, words, or actions  is nearly impossible... most normal people don't go out of their way to try & ruin someone though.

The damage is done, even if it's BS / taken out of context, it will not be forgotten by the media and it will be a black cloud hanging over the team if he remains head coach. There is no choice but, to get rid of him. His only recourse now is to sue for libel, if he feels he's be unjustly demonized by people on twitter. 

[JTech780]

25 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

Having played upper tier hockey many decades ago coaches did what ever needed to be done for the team to win and the players to be better. You screw up bad or dog it on the ice expect to be yelled at maybe smacked on the helmet and called out in the dressing room. Then go tell your dad or guardian the coach was picking on you and you got 10 or 20 times worse. Did being called out, smacked, called names, make me work harder and a better player YES. The players that took it and dug in and tried harder moved on up the ladder the ones that felt hurt or sorry for them selves ended up in the rec leagues.

I can just see the future of the NHL with coloring books and puppies for the players between periods.

 

 

So just because that's how you got treated in hockey, does that make it right?

 

And just because young players now are standing up and demanding that they be treated with respect, makes them soft somehow?

 

Just because you are a coach doesn't give you carte blanche to treat players how ever you want, and if they don't like it, well then they need toughen up. That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

 

If you want to coach now, you can still be hard on players and you can still push the players to be better, but you have to treat the players with respect, and you have to explain to the players why you want them to what you are asking. Because I said so, doesn't fly anymore.

[travel_dude]

19 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

Both the Aliu and Jordan allegations have been corroborated by multiple sources, all of whom have nothing to gain by backing the stories up.

 

Facts and those things told to a reporter and then reported are two different things.

I tend to believe what they say is true.

Does the fact that a man's career depends on those being proven make a difference at the level of scrutiny?

 

[CalgarySTL]

52 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

Having played upper tier hockey many decades ago coaches did what ever needed to be done for the team to win and the players to be better. You screw up bad or dog it on the ice expect to be yelled at maybe smacked on the helmet and called out in the dressing room. Then go tell your dad or guardian the coach was picking on you and you got 10 or 20 times worse. Did being called out, smacked, called names, make me work harder and a better player YES. The players that took it and dug in and tried harder moved on up the ladder the ones that felt hurt or sorry for them selves ended up in the rec leagues.

I can just see the future of the NHL with coloring books and puppies for the players between periods.

 

I didn't play hockey but, baseball... in university hazing was banned (mid-west US). Our coach was a real hard Hash Rate but, never used any "racial" words to insult anyone or physically hit anyone (maybe smashed a chair or two on the side of the dugout)... just yelled at us, made us run until we puked. I never had a motivation issue because, I wasn't lazy & always gave 100% but, some others not the case. If someone was caught drinking, was doing poorly in courses, or was being lazy, he would punish the entire team with grueling practices/running... that was enough to get the point across. I don't think anyone would be a sissy for standing up to any of that hockey hazing garbage & if you think hazing/coach abuse is totally cool... well, you're kind of an Hash Rate.

[travel_dude]

14 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Facts and those things told to a reporter and then reported are two different things.

I tend to believe what they say is true.

Does the fact that a man's career depends on those being proven make a difference at the level of scrutiny?

 

 

To add to this, what I am saying is that firing someone over these allegations is very risky.

If they ask him and he denies it, then what does it prove?

It proves that multiple people are claiming he did something and he claims otherwise.

Sounds like a potential lawsuit.

 

If he says it's true, then they have two options; ask him to resign, fire him for previous conduct.

Option 2 still has a potential lawsuit attached to it.

[rickross]

End of the day this has now become an untenable situation. The Calgary Flames and Bill Peters are likely divorcing, time to move on. The real story will be how this team responds! Is Peters to blame for the slow start or do still have deeper issues running through this team? 

[JTech780]

2 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

To add to this, what I am saying is that firing someone over these allegations is very risky.

If they ask him and he denies it, then what does it prove?

It proves that multiple people are claiming he did something and he claims otherwise.

Sounds like a potential lawsuit.

 

If he says it's true, then they have two options; ask him to resign, fire him for previous conduct.

Option 2 still has a potential lawsuit attached to it.

 

Oh I have no doubt that Treliving and the ownership group have to handle this situation with care and make sure every t is crossed and every I is dotted.

 

I am just saying that with the information I have available, it is pretty damning for Peters and that I zero reason to question those who are coming forward against Peters.

 

We make judgments about people every day. 

 

I mean the moment anyone here brings up the idea of bringing in Evander Kane there are a bunch of people who right away say we don't need him and his antics here. It's all based on heresay and media reports. I am not saying they are wrong just saying that it's an interesting double standard.

[redfire11]

27 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

So just because that's how you got treated in hockey, does that make it right?

 

And just because young players now are standing up and demanding that they be treated with respect, makes them soft somehow?

 

Just because you are a coach doesn't give you carte blanche to treat players how ever you want, and if they don't like it, well then they need toughen up. That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

 

If you want to coach now, you can still be hard on players and you can still push the players to be better, but you have to treat the players with respect, and you have to explain to the players why you want them to what you are asking. Because I said so, doesn't fly anymore.

Do you really think the Crosby's Gretzy's, Ovechkin's were given a hug after they screwed up by their coach. Come on!!! they took the criticism (however it was given) and learned from it; and it was probably worse than anyone else got. You hear them complaining NO they most likely contribute a large portion of their success to their coaches. So why is it the players that complain about strict coaches are the ones that didn't succeed in the game. People are always looking for an excuse why they didn't succeed in life or sport without ever looking in the mirror or their own level of compete.

[Horsman1]

11 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

Oh I have no doubt that Treliving and the ownership group have to handle this situation with care and make sure every t is crossed and every I is dotted.

 

I am just saying that with the information I have available, it is pretty damning for Peters and that I zero reason to question those who are coming forward against Peters.

 

We make judgments about people every day. 

 

I mean the moment anyone here brings up the idea of bringing in Evander Kane there are a bunch of people who right away say we don't need him and his antics here. It's all based on heresay and media reports. I am not saying they are wrong just saying that it's an interesting double standard.

there sure are a hell of a lot of hockey fan lawyers on this site

[phoenix66]

8 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

Do you really think the Crosby's Gretzy's, Ovechkin's were given a hug after they screwed up by their coach. Come on!!! they took the criticism (however it was given) and learned from it; and it was probably worse than anyone else got. You hear them complaining NO they most likely contribute a large portion of their success to their coaches. So why is it the players that complain about strict coaches are the ones that didn't succeed in the game. People are always looking for an excuse why they didn't succeed in life or sport without ever looking in the mirror or their own level of compete

just to throw a bit of a wrench wrinkle in this ... its a very real scenario that players do believe that opening their mouth can derail their careers 

Theo Fleury kept his mouth shut until basically his career was over.. this was a player who was never handed anything and was always expected to fail.. opening his mouth could have most definitely derailed his career ...coaches essentially hold the power of career life or death over a player ...  one coach says "bad attitude" and then no team touches them .. bury them on the 4th line so their stats suffer 

To this day their is an "unnamed player" in the Graham James incidents .. my gut has always believed it was Joe Sakic ..

point being ,  they speak out after when it can no longer do them any harm 

[ABC923]

8 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

Do you really think the Crosby's Gretzy's, Ovechkin's were given a hug after they screwed up by their coach. Come on!!! they took the criticism (however it was given) and learned from it; and it was probably worse than anyone else got. You hear them complaining NO they most likely contribute a large portion of their success to their coaches. So why is it the players that complain about strict coaches are the ones that didn't succeed in the game. People are always looking for an excuse why they didn't succeed in life or sport without ever looking in the mirror or their own level of compete.

You can be hard coach without punching your players in the back of the head, or without kicking them.  You can be a hard coach without using racial language or insults.  No one is saying a coach can't call you a lazy Hash Rate, bench you, yell at you to work harder, or ask what is wrong with you.  Do you think if you asked Crosby/Malkin/Ovetchkin/etc how important being punched in the back of the helmet was to their success that they would say 'oh yeah, made me the player I am today'?

Besides, the Aliu incident wasn't a coach criticizing a player's play.  It was choice of music.  And in that case, the coach doesn't have any more leeway to say things like that than any other boss in any other workplace.

[conundrumed]

Here's a legal Q&A link if you haven't seen.

Interesting Rockford Captain confronted Peters over the issue.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericmacramalla/2019/11/27/legal-qa-flames-head-coach-bill-peters-and-his-alleged-uttering-of-the-n-word/#5580f9d8781e

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, redfire11 said:

Having played upper tier hockey many decades ago coaches did what ever needed to be done for the team to win and the players to be better. You screw up bad or dog it on the ice expect to be yelled at maybe smacked on the helmet and called out in the dressing room. Then go tell your dad or guardian the coach was picking on you and you got 10 or 20 times worse. Did being called out, smacked, called names, make me work harder and a better player YES. The players that took it and dug in and tried harder moved on up the ladder the ones that felt hurt or sorry for them selves ended up in the rec leagues.

I can just see the future of the NHL with coloring books and puppies for the players between periods.

 

We shouldn't be surprised that players come forward decades later.  Outside of hockey, we continue to see Catholic Priest sexual abuse scandals unfold and the public is left wondering why they didn't speak out earlier.  Well, it's because there's so many social factors to consider that keeping quiet helps to keep social order and unity.  These are real life problems.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, JTech780 said:

 

Oh I have no doubt that Treliving and the ownership group have to handle this situation with care and make sure every t is crossed and every I is dotted.

 

I am just saying that with the information I have available, it is pretty damning for Peters and that I zero reason to question those who are coming forward against Peters.

 

We make judgments about people every day. 

 

I mean the moment anyone here brings up the idea of bringing in Evander Kane there are a bunch of people who right away say we don't need him and his antics here. It's all based on heresay and media reports. I am not saying they are wrong just saying that it's an interesting double standard.

 

41 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Here's a legal Q&A link if you haven't seen.

Interesting Rockford Captain confronted Peters over the issue.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericmacramalla/2019/11/27/legal-qa-flames-head-coach-bill-peters-and-his-alleged-uttering-of-the-n-word/#5580f9d8781e

 

I would say they are making general statements about a contract they have not seen.

And we can make judgement calls every day, but that is not the same as making the decision to fire them.

Or, making statement to a potential employer about a former employee.

 

The best thing they can do is ask him to resign, admit nothing, and pay him to shut up.

Anything else opens the door to scrutiny by a number of groups, agencies and vocal tweeters.

The Flames do not need this publicity.

[phoenix66]

34 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

 

I would say they are making general statements about a contract they have not seen.

And we can make judgement calls every day, but that is not the same as making the decision to fire them.

Or, making statement to a potential employer about a former employee.

 

The best thing they can do is ask him to resign, admit nothing, and pay him to shut up.

Anything else opens the door to scrutiny by a number of groups, agencies and vocal tweeters.

The Flames do not need this publicity.

This is definitely a different beast

 

Most times when a coach gets fired, due process has already been done .. coach has been told we aren't happy , shape up or else 

It's never a surprise to the 2 parties involved 

 

This was a blindside tweet in the middle of a game ..   allegations better be proveable in a courtroom..  you better have a clear morals clause that includes past infractions .. be able to prove damage to the flames brand 

 

BT publicly stating that he was not firing the coach takes away the performance argument ..

 

Just fire him is not as easy as it sounds 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, redfire11 said:

Do you really think the Crosby's Gretzy's, Ovechkin's were given a hug after they screwed up by their coach. Come on!!! they took the criticism (however it was given) and learned from it; and it was probably worse than anyone else got. You hear them complaining NO they most likely contribute a large portion of their success to their coaches. So why is it the players that complain about strict coaches are the ones that didn't succeed in the game. People are always looking for an excuse why they didn't succeed in life or sport without ever looking in the mirror or their own level of compete.

 

or you know maybe, just maybe, people respond to stimulus in different ways because we are all different?

Feel like a big point is getting missed. giving criticism or being tough does not have to equal being an Hash Rate or a jerk, or belittling someone. You don't need to break everyone down and build them back up again. Maybe some respond really well to that, but other's don't and that doesn't make them weak, soft or that they need to look at their own compete level. 

 

My favorite story about this is Vince Lombradi and Bart Starr. In case you don't know Bart Starr was the QB of the Packers while Lombardi was the head coach and together they won 5 championships. One of their first practices together Starr makes a mistake and Lombardi starts to just shred him, yelling up and down criticizing him. Starr asked to speak with him after practice and told him that while he can handle the criticism doing it in front of everyone undermines his ability as a leader and he asked him to not do it again. 

 

Lombardi never did it to him again, ever. 

[conundrumed]

Also bare in mind not everyone is going public....from my link above:

"Seravalli’s report does mention that, according to Aliu, Rockford team captain Jack Dowell confronted Peters afterward. Dowell has not offered comment but did indicate that he would cooperate with the Flames if asked".

[jjgallow]

 

A younger me would have said stand up for the coach and don't get caught up in the past.

 

Then, we saw the Graham James allegations, which became very advanced, as he continued to coach.

 

That....was one of the most horribly handled situations I've ever seen in sports.

 

Flames are doing the right thing now.   Remove him from the situation, investigate, invest in a good decision based on the best information available.

 

We know one thing:  He's probably not a monster.   Nobody's talking about jail time here.   But is he the best candidate to be leading a diverse group of professional athletes and representing our beautiful city?    If the allegations hold up, it's a flat no.