So, you've solved it. Now what?

 So, you've solved it. Now what?

It's been a long journey, hasn't it?

That's what I said to myself as I pondered this blog.

I never really pondered what I would do if and when I solved it. As well, I know its been a long journey, but it just seemed like it was the right path to follow and however long it took, it took. 

But certainly, it has been a very long journey. More than 40 years in fact. More than 2/3rds of my entire life. All of my adult life.

It's been a very long journey, and if you choose to read this blog, it's going to be a very long blog. More like a story or a chapter in a book. 

Last week I watched a TV Series called The Missing. It's from 2014, but I'd never seen or heard of it before and that's probably because it's a BBC production. It tells the story of a couple and their missing child. That abduction, sort of -more about that later-happened by blind bad luck, but the rest is a journey of how it affects both the couple and everyone around them, including all the police and outsiders who enter their lives because of that one event. A lot of twists and turns, and so far, I have only watched 6 of the 8 episodes, so there is more to come and I dont know how it will end. By the end of writing this blog, I'd seen it all. More about that later too.

Back to my journey. I remember dates, times, incidents. Just like The Missing, I go back and forth between current day and then have flashbacks to those incidents along the journey. I am still in the middle of that journey and of course I dont know how that will end either. It's the nature of journeys. You know where you want to end up, the path you intend to take, but it rarely works like that. Some days it does, many days it does not. Just like The Missing, I am near the end of the journey, but there is still more to come. It has changed me for sure, as it did the couple, but mostly, I have changed along the way. In many ways I never thought my life would play out this way, and I do still look back with wonder at how it has changed me over many years. 

Like I said, things never turn out the way you planned. Growing up happens in a heartbeat. One day you're in diapers; the next day you're gone. But the memories of childhood stay with you for the long haul. I remember a place...a town...a house like a lot of other houses... A yard like a lot of other yards...on a street like a lot of other streets. And the thing is...after all these years, I still look back...with wonder.

-final scene from the final episode of The Wonder Years.

In The Missing, the entire chain of events starts with a very random event. The couple, on their way for a vacation with their son, stop by the side of the road. When the father goes to start the car again, it wont start. It turns out the battery died. That leads them to a repair shop in a town they didn't intend on stopping at, and while they wait for the car to be repaired, their son is abducted. If the battery doesnt die, their lives dont change. Not that day anyway. 

That is just how life goes though sometimes. A random, seemingly meaningless event can change your life. Your entire journey. Maybe it's not actually so random. But that is a topic for another blog.

When I was 18, I went out for dinner with my friend, a very good friend also named Mark. It was his birthday. I remember we went to dinner at Golden Star, a place many of us in high school often went. In fact, a few of us cut school and used to go there before we did other things we weren't supposed to. Mark wasn't one of those delinquents like us, but he also liked to eat at Golden Star. We all did. 

After dinner, Mark insisted he wanted to go downtown to the horse races. Which is something he had not told me about ahead of time. He wanted to go to Greenwood Racetrack. I was very insistent that I wasn't going to do that. I just didn't want to go for some reason. Perhaps it was just bad memories. 

I grew up in Montreal until I was about 12, and just about every day my mother would drive my sister and I to my grandmother's house from the suburbs to the heart of the city. The reason for doing that is that at that point, life was not going well and my mother couldn't deal with life. In fact, she cried continuously just about every night. On that journey to my grandmothers, we would always pass the racetrack, BlueBonnets Racetrack, and the neon flashing sign. In all my years in the horse racing game now, I can say I never once visited that track, although I have visited many over the years, and never once bet on a single race from that track, although I have probably bet on a race from almost all of the rest of the tracks. There was just something about that track that spooked me. Perhaps it was seeing it every day and never going inside the grounds. I dont know. But by the time I was out with my friend Mark on that August 1983 summer night, I was still of the mindset that I was never going to any track. I just didn't want to.

As a side note, I do have one memory of Bluebonnets. I was at my grandmothers, it was kind of late, and we were watching the 11 oclock news. The sports portion came on. I always paid attention to the sports part, as that was my life at that stage. Especially baseball and hockey. Near the end of the sportscast, they showed the stretch drive of a race at Bluebonnets. The only thing I remember about that that sticks out is that the announcer called the race in both French and English, and ended it with the phrase, "et voici, here dey are." He always did that as I understand. Montreal was a very special city. Half French, half English. Lots of things around then mixed the language. But, I digress. 

Mark kept pushing. And pushing. Finally, I relented. It was his birthday, and he was driving, so I went along. And off we went to Greenwood.

I dont know if I can describe it properly, but I remember just feeling a sense like I was home as soon as we were there. Like I belonged there and it felt good somehow. Maybe that is wishful exuberant thinking hindsight, but that is how the flashback comes to me now.

We arrived late for the races. The 3rd race was just about ready to come to the track, and of course, I knew zero about horse racing, horses, and betting on them. So, I did what anyone that knows nothing does when they first come to the track. I picked names. There was a horse in that race called Mark Of Smog, and while he had a bad post and a short price, he was the one I wanted. We were Marks, and certainly, that time of the year, and that area of town, there was major smog. Not that I knew anything about odds or post positions anyway. So, I bet my 2 bucks on him to win. And he won. From my memory, that horse had not won a race in probably more than 20 starts that year, and while he won that night, he was a very infrequent winner his entire life and going forward to the next few years. I must have been his lucky charm that night, or he was my destiny to get me hooked on this game I never wanted to be involved with in the first place. Once I got smart enough to know better, which really meant that I knew enough to start to lose money, I would have never bet a horse like that. But on that night, it worked out for me. Many years later, when he was about to retire, he was still racing at the smaller tracks, and one night I stumbled onto him. I think he had not won in 2 years, and he won that night as well. I was too smart at that stage and didn't bet him of course. 

As the night went on, it turned out I was naturally good at picking winners. I think I picked 5 winners out of 8 races. I came home with a nice profit, and I was somewhat hooked. It was fun and it just seemed so easy for me.

It didn't take long for word to get around at school. My friend Ian, who was a regular racetrack goer, and who I had spent a lot of time with over the years but never knew about his hobby, got wind of that and wanted me to go with him a couple of weeks later. As it also turns out, my friend Mark almost never went to the races and over the years, I can't remember him going more than 10 times in his entire life. That night, he wanted to go. With Ian, he wanted to go every week and we did that for years. We actually owned one horse together, and we went on a double date to the track to watch that horse race. Except that the horse didn't end up racing that night or ever again for us. That was a disaster and that is also a story for another day and blog. 

When I went a couple of weeks later with Ian, the amazing Cam Fella was racing, and won a big race in a year where he finished off winning his last 28 races in a row. I knew nothing of him before that night, but had many direct and indirect encounters with him or his connections in the years to come. Also too long a story for this already very long blog. 

On the night I first went with Ian, we both did very well. Again, I picked a lot of winners, and in fact, I learned that you could also bet combinations, like Exactors and Triactors. I hit an exactor cold, meaning I picked the first two horses in order without using any other combos, and made good money on that. So, I took some of that profit, and bet the last race Triactor, in which you had to pick the first 3 horses in a row, in a 4 horse box, and I won that bet as well. I came home with 200 bucks more than I started with, and for a kid working at the A&P  for $25 on a Saturday, that was a million bucks to me. If I wasn't completely hooked the first time, I was now. 

Of course, I was also learning more about what was actually going on, and how to read the program. As it turns out, that didn't help me as much as it hurt me over time. Like anything, sometimes the less you know the better off you are. I alluded to that above.

By now, it's the dead of winter, and a third friend at school, Neil, although not as close a friend as Ian or Mark, was in on the game. Neil, as it turns out, was a degenerate gambler-even then-although he was a good guy otherwise. Sometimes he came with Ian and I to the track, but more times he just went by himself, or the other degenerate guys he had hooked up with. In any event, our lunchroom activities now consisted of all of us reading the racing program and debating who the winners were going to be. At that point, none of us were any good at it. I was a novice, with ideas about what was there that were not, Ian was just one of those guys who was lucky in spite of his stupid bets, he would win. Neil was the typical addicted, degenerate gambler. He was looking to lose and was excellent at that part. None of us were what I wanted to be.

For me, very quickly, it became more about figuring out the whole thing and solving puzzles than the actual betting. I never really lost that much money, or made that much money, but was fascinated with solving the whole thing. I would spend hours the night before trying to figure things out. Like anything I do, that is the fun part for me. The gambling and money part held no allure for me and still doesnt. There have been many times over the years that I went to the track and stayed the entire night, and never made a bet. These days, I can go entire weeks without making one bet. 

The journey had begun and there was no turning back. From turning away from that road at all costs, I was now on autopilot to always head in that direction. The whole thing from the night out with Mark until I was going every week, sometimes both Friday and Saturday, took about a year and a half. By then, I had graduated high school, but did not apply for University. I had a better idea in my head.

During my final year in high school, a few friends and I drove to Florida for a spring vacation. We were crazy in those days. We did it in one night, which took about 22 hours, which meant we were driving fast and not stopping. We stayed in a hotel once we arrived, but one of the guys, Ronnie, had a girlfriend at the time named Marla, and Marla's parents were very well off. In fact, we were able to play the golf course at the club in the gated community that they lived in. Very posh and secluded. On top of that, we also went to Jai Alai with Marla and her mother. As it turns out, I won at that too the one time I went. That stuck in my head. More about that shortly. 

Just before I got the racing bug, I was into Golf in a major way. It's another thing I just sort of stumbled on to, but once I did, I was about as obsessive and consumed by it as I was racing. That has been my life history. I can't just do something. I have to fall into it on a level that most others never would. Much like Deniro researches or plays a role.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/1987/10/robert-de-niro-life-story

De Niro’s painstaking preparation for roles became legendary. He practiced on a pistol range for Taxi Driver; he got calluses on his thumb learning to play the saxophone for New York, New York; for his Oscar-winning triumph in Raging Bull he spent a year in the ring, until he could box like Jake La Motta, and then he virtually destroyed the sleek, muscly physique he’d built up by gorging on pasta and ice cream until he’d gained fifty-five pounds in order to play the aging fighter more accurately. “I feel I have to earn the right to play a part,” he said.

Liza Minnelli said she would never forget De Niro’s intensive work on the music for New York, New York. “I’d leave the studio around twelve midnight, and I could hear the wail of a saxophone. As a musician he was fabulous. That’s the way he found the character—through the music. That’s the way he put it together.”

“He never breaks character,” says June Guterman, his assistant on Raging Bull, “even when filming stops.” Comedienne Sandra Bernhard, who improvised with him so brilliantly in King of Comedy, added, “He is totally concentrated, totally absorbed in the role.”....De Niro is a number of things all at once. He’s a street person and yet he’s a highly sensitive man. There are a lot of people in him. He finds release and fulfillment in becoming other people. That is his pleasure, his joy. He’s found his solution for living—in work. I’ve never seen a guy who worked as hard. He’s the only actor I’ve ever known to phone me on Friday and say, ‘Let’s work all weekend together.’ ”

I have to be on that level. In many ways, it sucks the enjoyment and fun out of it entirely, although, for me, there is a deep level of satisfaction in doing it this way. It's definitely what keeps me on a journey like this. For a while, anyway. 

At one point in high school, I would skip class and go golfing. Sometimes with my friends, sometimes by myself. I would practice putting in my room for hours in the winter, keeping very detailed statistics on my scores, my putting, all sorts of stats. I would practice my swing outside and watch the reflection off the glass doors leading out to the backyard, and I even made a hole in the backyard and practised my chipping. That is how determined and obsessed I can be. I watched golf every week and I bought all the magazines in order to read about how to get better. Again, it's my way. With anything I stumble onto that appeals to me. 

It's now the summer after high school, and my plan was to drive my car down to Florida, Miami, live there, bet horses and Jai Alai every day and golf the rest of the time. I had no place to stay or really enough money to do anything when I got there. My mother was panicky and guilted me, luckily, into not doing that as I was literally packed up and out the door. If she hadn't done that, who knows what might have ended up happening to me. 

What did end up happening that year? Well, I basically slept in every day, sometimes until early afternoon, stayed up all night most nights, and when I wasn't sleeping or watching TV reruns, I was reading the racing program and going to the track. By this time, I was just smart enough to lose money almost every time. I was also just good enough at it to win it back overall. By the spring, I convinced myself to apply for University and was accepted. 

While at University, I still went to the races, but in moderation. The bug hadn't left me, but I was determined to also do well at school. Those two things are certainly not compatible. I stayed with it on some level and more so in the summers when I would work, but also go as much as I could to the track. I made good money, for a student, in the summer, enough to pay all my tuition for the year, and enough to lose a few bucks every week at the track. Sometimes I did, other times I did well. I was getting better at it, but still, in hindsight, I had no clue what I was doing in comparison to what I know today. One thing I did know. I will always know that I was determined to solve this racing puzzle and that is what drove me. Never the money. It was never about the money. I am not a gambler and I will never be. I like to figure things out and that is what motivates me. At that point, all I had figured out was that I had not figured it out yet. I'm also not a quitter, so I trudged on. 

University came and went, and before I got my first real job, I was working overnight at UPS, which was right across the street from school. I continued on doing that after I graduated, and one night before work, I was at the track and had to leave early to make it to work on time. I liked a horse I was following for weeks, called Cue Light, but couldn't stay for his race. So, I bet in advance and left. I bet 10 to win on him to be exact, which was a fairly large bet on one race for me at that point. Just before I entered UPS for my shift, I heard the result on the radio and I had won. $25 profit. Then I worked my shift, for probably $30 and returned home in the middle of the night.

The next night my Uncle called me, just before I was about to leave for work. I was home that night as there were no races or I hadn't gone for some reason. He said he wanted me to take over managing his factory, which I had worked at during the summers while I was in University. Just a week before, UPS had offered me a similar position, but it was only the night shift, something I was going to accept, but wasn't really keen on. So, I accepted my Uncle's offer and quit UPS. 

By this time, I had met a guy at Greenwood named Vince. A Chinese guy who was probably 20 years older than me. A random meeting, but again, this changed my life in regards to racing for sure. Vince had been around. He had a lot of money, an impressive job as he was a bank manager at a big branch downtown, and also lived just 5 minutes away from my mothers house. He was also a horse owner, and a very big bettor. He could easily bet 1000 bucks on a race and not lose any sleep over it. Sometimes he would send me up to make the bet, and just saying 500 to win on a horse was an experience I had never known. To this day, I have never made a personal bet like that. 

Vince and I met because one night I was at the races, and I picked a lot of winners. I remember I was there with my grandmother that night, and Vince noticed. He also noticed I kept a notebook, with my horse leads and watch list. After that, we became friends and we would go together. I was still in University at the time and living with my mother, but we would go a lot. I'd say 3 times a week, and sometimes twice in the same day. 

I learned a lot from Vince about what isn't on the program. The politics of the game, the people and what goes on, and the owning side of it. Eventually, we owned some horses together. Nothing expensive like what he bought, but it was another step deeper into the game for me. Eventually, that would lead to training myself. 

Anyway, working for my Uncle didn't work out after about 2 or 3 years, and I was broke. But still going to the races when I could. Eventually, now about 10 years from my first time at the track on that August night with my friend Mark, I was tired of it and had drifted heavily into the music scene. I had a job I hated, loathed in fact, but it paid the bills and allowed me to keep living in a place which wasn't my mothers house. As I got more into the music, I was completely detached from the races for a couple of years. I quit the job I hated and was going to write songs for a living. I thought. That didn't last very long as I realized at that stage I was terrible at it. Just like the racing, I am still working on that every now and then. 

So, randomly, a friend offered me a job at the foreign exchange firm he worked at, and since I was good at that, they eventually offered me very good money to stay. Which I did for about 7 years. 

Since I was now making very good money and saving it, I drifted back into the racing. But now I was both a bettor and an owner. In the back of my mind though, it always nagged at me that I had never solved the betting thing. I knew I could. I just knew. But I hadn't. I was so busy at work though, that there just wasn't enough time or energy to do it at that stage. I was much farther along though. I had my experience with Vince, my owning with him and on my own, and just generally I had been at it more than 15 years, off and on.

And then one day the trainer I had, a guy I knew well from many years at the track, Terry, called me and told me he could not train my horses anymore, as he had too many of his own. Thus, after a week of thinking what to do about that, I found a farm reasonably close to where I lived, and began training them myself. This was in addition to still working my day job. I would go in the morning before work, then after work. Almost every day. After about 2 years of doing that, I quit my day job and went full time training horses.

That went on for about 8 years, and it was both the best experience and the worst experience all at the same time. Being on the inside training horses can really sour you on the game. And it did for me. It's such hard work, very long hours and late nights, a lot of travelling and a lot of bad nights. And some good nights too. On the flipside, I loved working on and with the horses, and that part never got old for me. Just another thing to try and master. I was very good at training the horses and getting performance out of them. At the same time, I was terrible at the business part of it. I just like animals too much to treat it as a business. After 8 years, in 2006, I just got out of it. In all that time, I rarely bet on horses. I had moved on from that part. 

After I stopped training, I was basically broke, so I went back into the working world. That lasted for another 3 years, and there were some terrible places I worked until that finally ended. Luckily, by then, some investments I made came through and I never needed to work again. And havent for 15 years now. I was still pretty much out of the horses in 2012 when I was on Facebook and hooked up with a few people as things were happening in the racing game. That got me interested again. By this time, they had online accounts and you didn't even have to leave your house to make bets. And with that, I was back in it again. Now 30 years into it, off and on. 

This time though, I was determined to focus on the betting and finish what I started. I was going to solve this thing, once and for all. I got back to work. Now though, I had a lot more knowledge to work with, and the tools to get it done. So, I thought.

But, quickly, it still turned out that while I am very good at it, I wasn't good enough. I didn't know enough, and I had personality flaws which surfaced repeatedly to undermine my success. I am not alone in that. Most that want to do well at the races and know enough to do well, their personality flaws beat them. I was one of those at that stage, and until very recently. 

Several times in the last 10 years, I was almost there, then lost it all, or lost what I had gained very fast. I even quit for good a couple of times, only to get right back to it very fast. 

Then, in the last two years, I got my personal act together and also figured out what it takes to win, steady and often. But still, something wasn't right. It's more than 40 years now since I started, and even though I was doing well, very well, it wasn't going well. I didn't have much motivation to work, or continue. Or, do the work as it needs to be done. So, one night, a couple of weeks ago, I just decided that's it. It's enough. I have achieved my goal. I can make steady money and not lose, and it's not about just the money, so I will stop. Cold.

And then a few days later, I realized something. Just like in The Missing, it wasn't about the actual event. It was about me. What if I just played when I felt like it, because I actually liked it. Kind of like when I first started. But now, I know so much, and won't lose. So, I have that security. Become more of a casual player, with professional player skills. 

And so, I've solved it. I've done it. I will go to my grave knowing I achieved that. But, that doesnt mean it ends there. It means it begins there. Begins again there. It's now part of my life. A small part. Along with the other things I want to do. Write more blogs. Write music. Write scripts. Do more serious investing. Lots of things. But I'm mindful of my Deniro-like tendencies, and I will attempt not to get consumed by the task and goal. 

Why, of all nights, did I choose to watch a TV series produced 10 years ago when I had never even heard about it before. It's just another random, not so meaningless event on my journey. A continuation if you will. 

At one point in Episode 7, which I have now watched, the wife, 8 years later, remarks that "it's like the world conspired against us"

These days, I try to avoid extremes. But it's hard. Effing hard to avoid extreme thoughts and actions. Thoughts like, I have to do this on the highest level I can. Or, I can't do it if I dont do that. But what if I can just do it, sometimes, and not be so serious about it? That extreme thought thing and obsessiveness, it turns out, was one of the personality flaws that held me back all this time. Its not like the world conspired against me, its like I keep conspiring against myself.

Here is what I learned over the entire journey. It's also something that shows up in all other facets of my life. 

I am good at a lot of things. One of those is picking winners. But, 

Picking winners. It just takes too much time and effort. You have to really, really want to do it. The truth is, I just have never wanted it that bad. I have a drive to solve it, but not to actually do it. I am more theoretical than practical. And thus, I am not motivated to do it enough. Enough that I would actually do it when I know I have solved it. The will just isn't there. That isn't a personality flaw persay, but more a personality certainty I have had to face. 

At the end of the day, you dont know in your life when a random thing will happen in your life to change your life, your journey, your course. You just have to let it happen, follow the path that feels right, and let it play out. It's all about trusting the cosmos and yourself. 

At the end of The Missing, and this is a major spoiler, so if you intend to watch that series, do not read further, 

We find out that while many of the people that entered the couple's lives had some bearing on their journey, many and most had little or nothing to do with the disappearance of their son. It turns out, he wandered off on his own, was not taken or kidnapped, got hit by a car by accident, and the driver assumed he was dead. So, he called his brother, who had connections and power, and was taken to a house, and then when he wasn't actually dead, the people called to handle that situation killed him and that was all that happened. But, it totally changed their lives, this one random event. They chased a truth that wasn't the actual fact. And it destroyed them and everyone around them. 

The goal now, and maybe it should have been then, is to enjoy the experience. To make it feel good again. Like the first time I walked into Greenwood Raceway. It was a very long personal road to get back to that point.

My guiding principle now is not is it hard to solve and can I solve it, but is it fun, can I keep it fun and does that motivate me to do it. I seek opportunities based on that and that should drive me forward. What I cannot be is just a random bettor, who shows up, bets every race, however they are presented, and gets something out of that. That simply will never happen with me. That is not who I am. Much like Deniro can't just play ordinary characters in an ordinary way. There is nothing in that for him. Just betting as a pastime holds nothing for me. 

Can it be fun just betting casually when I wish? We will see, and time will tell. I believe it will and that I can just stay on that plane and not get tempted to play at the highest level anymore. I never really achieved that with golf. It was all or nothing, and ended up being nothing. 

Again, I need to avoid the extreme of all or nothing. So, now I've solved betting on horses. Hopefully, I can find the middle ground and just bet and enjoy the actual experience. In some ways, I've also solved a personality flaw, and maybe that was the reason for the journey in the first place. TBC on that. 

So, Now what? One thing I do know is that with anything I do, there will always be a figuring out, solve it, master it component. I will never get away from that. But what I can do is minimize how much of that plays into the part of doing it. It's a part, but it's not only not the only part, but has to be a small part. If it took 40 years plus to figure that out, so be it. Better late than never.

The thirst.

Bang The Drum Slowly is a movie I've always been fond of. Its one of those movies, when I see a clip, I will click on it, and try to watch more. It just is so well written, acted and filmed. The cast is off the charts. Basically, its a movie about two unlikely friends, one an urban, city type, a high end baseball pitcher on the best team in the league, and the other, his friend, a backwoods hick who is a catcher, but barely able to make a major league roster. Because the catcher is sick and his friend takes him to the Mayo clinic, he finds out that his friend is terminally ill and will die in a year or two. He attempts to conceal this from their team, so he can continue to play until he gets too sick to carry on. Its a movie that is set in the backdrop of a baseball team and the inside stories and personalities that go on within that, but there are very few baseball playing scenes, and its not about the game. Its about people. What can be and should be kept private, and who has a right to know those things. 

Back in the day, Jim Bouton wrote a book about what really went on behind the scenes when he was a member of the New York Yankees in the 1960s. There were many big stars in that era, none bigger than Mickey Mantle. Most if not all of the reporters of that era knew exactly what Mantle and others did when the lights went down at the stadium and the game was over. Excessive drinking and sex parties, alcoholism, popping pills, strip clubs. All sorts of deviant behaviors. They reported none of that, and nobody really needed to know. Mantle showed up and played at all times. According to many, it never affected his on the field performance. The point is not that it went on, or that players are still humans/people, and that they do the deviant, and sometimes good things, that humans do. The point is that it has little to nothing to do with the game on the field, or ice, or court, and that I dont need to know about it. If I was a fan. If I was management, I did need to know about it and probably did. Whether or not that mattered probably was more related to the ability to produce than to ethical behavior and practices.

In 1973, I was 8 years old. I had not read Bouton's book, or anything like it. I just watched the games. All the games. It was my life.
As long as I could remember, I was a massive Montreal Expos fan and I lived for the games. I knew nothing about the players' lives other than what they did on the field. Nor did I want to. Or could I have. Nothing was ever reported like what Jim Bouton wrote in his book. I'm sure it went on, and there are now stories out there about those players.
One day, my Aunt took me to a department store because two Montreal Expo players were there and were signing autographs and a baseball if you brought one. It was in the morning, after a night game the previous night. One of the players who I won't name but was a marginal starting pitcher at that stage and another player I dont remember but who was of similar insignificance were sitting at a table. I suppose I remember the pitcher specifically for one reason. He was borderline drunk and reeked of alcohol. You could smell it at least two aisles away. I never forgot that. His eyes were glazed and he was hungover as well. He was unshaven and looked like a bum off the street. In today's world, that would be all over social media and he probably would be released or put on waivers. That was a very different time and nothing like that happened.
Nevertheless, I remained a big fan and did not hold it against him or want more info on the other players. To me, they were just players. Players doing their jobs and that job was to play a game, get paid for it, and provide joy in my life. Which they did.
Isn't that all that should matter? Maybe it should, but today, it does not. More fans are interested in the soap opera than the game. It gives them a chance to gossip and speculate like teenage girls. And what is the result of that sort of thing?

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/corey-perry-chicago-unacceptable-conduct-1.7042523

On Wednesday at my weekly floor hockey game, the rumor was breaking that Corey Perry had slept with Conor Bedard's mother after a function for the team. This had evolved over a week and the snowball effect of social media and rumor spreading had gotten wildly out of control. I hadn't even heard that rumor, as I go out of my way to avoid anything like that. I am basically only interested in the on ice product. The game. Enjoying the game. All the rest is meaningless to me, and frankly, none of my business. I am, for sure, a lone wolf in that respect.
All I knew for sure is that whatever Perry did, it was bad enough that his team and the league had to deal with it. Which they did eventually. What that was is not nor will it ever be my business. In fact, It's none of my business. If I was a fan of that team, I would know he was not playing for my team anymore. That's it. It's a private business and personal matter that didn't happen on the ice or alter a game.

Ryan O'reilly seemed like the perfect fit for the Toronto Maple Leafs. A player--a type of player--they really needed. Strong and responsible defensively, a very good faceoff man, can both kill penalties and fill a role on the powerplay. And most important, he will score goals when you need them, when they are hard to get. It's not a stretch to say that they probably dont win the first round playoff series last year without him. Down in game 3, he scored a big goal to tie the game with less than a minute left in the game. That turned the series for them. That was just one of many moments in that series where his skill set paid off. He was a previous MVP when St. Louis won the Stanley Cup and they needed that type of player to get them over the hump.
On top of that, he was a local boy coming back home. He seemed very eager to be part of the hockey crazy experience that is Canadian hockey, and more specifically, Toronto Maple Leaf hockey. This is a craze that includes reporting on anything and everything. Part of that is who plays with who in practice, where the players go on a daily basis, and little things about those players that nobody really needs to know.
Like this.

https://torontosun.com/sports/hockey/nhl/toronto-maple-leafs/taking-subway-to-work-has-become-habit-for-nylander

If an insignificant low level player is traded, there has to be a full analysis on how that impacts the entire organization. All of this and more feeds the frenzy. There are countless daily talk shows devoted to just what goes on with this team. Some of them are 3 hours long and the fans can't get enough of them.
When it was time for O'Reilly to get a new contract, by all accounts, the Maple Leafs were willing to pay him what he wanted and for the term he wanted. Yet, it was clear right away that he was going to move on. So, what was the problem?

https://thehockeynews.com/nhl/toronto-maple-leafs/news/ryan-oreilly-reveals-spotlight-as-influential-factor-in-maple-leafs-departure

From the article above:

When speaking to the media on July 1, Toronto Maple Leafs GM Brad Treliving dismissed the notion that the veteran forward left because of the culture in the room and instead said that playing in the spotlight of Toronto "isn't for everybody."
O'Reilly was ..... asked .... if the 'spotlight' was a reason he decided to move on from the Maple Leafs.
"It wasn't the ultimate decision there. I think so many things come into play, but yeah I think that is a factor as well," O'Reilly replied. "It is different. It is something I did enjoy for the time there but I just felt it was better to be somewhere else."
"There are so many great things that do come with that though. I think that team is amazing and with the pieces they added this year, they're going to be right there contending for it. It is an amazing place. But like anywhere there are two sides to it."
"It was incredible. I couldn't have gone to a better place. The way the organization is, the Yankees of the NHL, it was an amazing time," O'Reilly said. It was such an amazing experience, being from Ontario and playing for all my friends' favourite teams, it was amazing.


Despite what O'reilly says, he knows, and everyone knows, it's a problem to play in Toronto if you value your privacy. He previously played in St. Louis and Buffalo. Both decent hockey towns, but I doubt he would be recognized everywhere he goes. There is no privacy for a professional hockey player in the Toronto market. Some like that. Very few probably do. In Nashville, where he signed, I'm sure he is virtually invisible outside of the rink. He signed there, with a team he would have to know that has no shot to win the Stanley Cup, and very little chance to even make the playoffs, because it wasn't in a crazy market like Toronto, which has a team with legit aspirations to go all the way.
In this day and age, it isn't just a big market thing. Love of the game for the games sake doesn't seem to be anywhere near enough for most fans. They want more, more, more. There is a thirst out there that goes much further and deeper than just watching and enjoying games. A lot of that has to do with how social media has changed life in every aspect. Sports are no different. There is a sense of entitlement to information and access. A thirst for it that must be quenched. Teams feel an actual obligation to adhere to that.
Players dont just do interviews anymore. They now call those things 'availability', on off days, pre game on game days, and after the game in rooms that are there just for the purpose of trotting out the players and coaches for long question sessions. The thirst is out there and demands that. They even do them on the ice before games as they warm up. Sometimes coaches are miked up and managers in baseball talk to hosts during the game. Those that resist that can get hefty fines for not participating. For not feeding the frenzy and the thirst for it.
This extends to other sports. At this point, you can't just play. You have no choice. You are expected to do it as part of the job.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/sports/naomi-osaka-fined-15k-tennis-officials-after-refusing-press-sake-n1269122

Sportsnet's Elliote Friedman delved into this topic during the recent situation with Corey Perry. According to Friedman, Perry, and all NHL players, and for that matter GM's, coaches and reporters are public figures and all the attention and lack of privacy comes with being a public figure.

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/32-thoughts-so-many-questions-not-enough-answers-around-corey-perry/


From the article above:

"when you become a public figure, you will face open criticism. It can be very legitimate. Maybe your performance is bad or you get something wrong or they reasonably disagree with your opinion.....people are going to say things to you online that a) they wouldn’t have the guts to say to your face and b) that you can’t believe someone would say or think about you......It’s not right, and it shouldn’t happen. But it does, you can’t escape it.....In this case, whether people think it's funny or they want to believe it, it goes absolutely wild. And, one of the worst things about where we’ve gone is the “pile-on,” where more people jump in — and do what they can to pile-drive the target even more into the ground....Anyway, where I’m going with all of this is it's one thing if you’re a public figure. You shouldn’t have to deal with anything anywhere near this extreme, but there’s a knowledge that, unfortunately, it’s baked into the pie. Where I thought there was a real failure is it affected a private person." -Elliote Friedman

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/nhl-corey-perry-chicago-apology-1.7045391

The question is not that Corey Perry did something wrong. He has now admitted that he did, and good for him for doing that. The question is not whether the Chicago Blackhawks and the NHL as an entity had to deal with it. They did. It was a contract violation and a workplace incident. The question is whether this has anything to do with the game and do fans have the right or expectation to know about it. Does it affect the on ice performance and product?
Players like Ryan O'reilly decide they would rather take their game somewhere where the thirst is not there on that level. Sure, they are public figures when they put on that jersey, and they accept that. But, they also value their and their families privacy to the point they will do what they have to to protect that.
In my opinion, Elliot Friedman is wrong. There was no shortage of answers here. There is an abundance of meaningless and pointless questions. The only questions that should matter are when is the game tonight, who is playing and will it be a fun and competitive game? Will I be entertained? Other than that, the rest is just hype and noise.

I love the movie Bang The Drum Slowly. It's a great drama about the backstory of what goes on in sports. I love it because it's a drama. It's not based on a real story, but about life in general. The following clip illustrates that.

Unfortunately, that is the world we live in now, where reality and real life are blurred by the make believe and dramatic world.
But I understand that the movie isn't about the game. It's make believe. If it was a real team, I would only be interested in the games they played. This backstory stuff would be none of my business. I enjoy it because it is art, not because it is sport. It is art with the subject of sports as the main theme. Its very much Ball Four the movie they never made. With made up characters and make believe plot points. As Law and Order states, inspired by real stories. But not actually a true real story.

The real story here is about the thirst. I have a thirst for the game. For the sport. Many have a thirst for the gossip, so they can somehow feel they are participating in it all. That that is their right. Its not. Not in my book. I will never lose my thirst for the game. It would be nice if others who are misguided, in my opinion of course, refocused more on that thirst for the game and less for the drama behind it. 

I have a thirst for a good drama like Bang The Drum Slowly. As long as its understood its drama, not real sport. Real sports is about the game, not the background drama. 

If I'm Bo Horvat

And so, while I started this blog on Sunday morning, before Bruce Boudreau was officially fired, it will be finished and published now that he is actually gone. It's interesting to see what has happened since he was officially gassed, who stepped up and what they have said. It adds to many points I already had made on paper, and re enforces the gist of what I was getting at.And still stand by.

I will summarize quickly where I am at on all of it. Bruce Boudreau is a great person who has lots of class and compassion and is a good read of people. As a hockey coach, he has been relatively successfull, and okay enough, but lacking enough that eventually, once he gets a team to a certain point, you have to, or feel you have to, replace him. That isn't the issue here. The issue is how he was relieved of his duties, the message that sends, and how it just isn't right. None of that has changed in my mind.

This just came across today, Monday. The day after he was fired. It's a good microcosm of what I thought and just wrote above today....and down below before today. https://thehockeynews.com/news/a-personal-letter-to-bruce-boudreau

From the link above.

The time has mercifully come. The long, drawn-out, unnecessary process has come to an end.....When people speak of you, they’ll mention your love for the game, your infectious positivity and your ability to connect with everyone. After the past few months, there is no doubt that everyone will remember what I knew from the moment I met you: your compassion, care and class make you one of a kind.... Bruce Boudreau's teams play entertaining, offensive hockey,...There was never a moment where I felt you didn’t have my back. In the toughest of moments, you were willing to go to bat for me, a new staff member with almost no experience. That says more about you than any forecheck or DZ coverage ever could. I took many lessons from you and the staff, but the most important one was this: No matter how tough it may be, you must stand up for what is right.

Right off the bat, I'm going to state my thoughts on Boudreau as a coach. I think the players love him and try hard for him, and in certain aspects he can get some performance from them. Offensively for sure. Which isn't a surprise. Bruce Boudreau was a scoring machine as a player in junior, in the minor leagues, and he held his own well in the times when he played in the NHL. He wasn't a great passer, shooter, tough, anything special. He was just one of those guys who knew how to help his team score goals. That is a good trait. The basis of a hockey team is who scores more goals than the other team. Helping your team score goals is a big asset.

In spite of that, even though he produced well when he was called up, he would get sent back down just about every year to the minors. Why is that? I would suspect that he didn't or couldn't play much defense, and being smaller, he wasn't tough enough to power his way into stopping a player. As a coach, I see that in his teams. I have watched the Canucks play more than a few games since Boudreau took over the team, and a few in the season just before he took over. They were a brutal defensive team then, and they are even worse now. The argument that a hot and talented goaltender like Thatcher Demko camouflaged many nights of really bad defense is very valid. New goalie Spencer Martin has done the same. If you watch any game of theirs, they are horrific defensively, and especially the actual defenseman. A big part of that is the defense core Boudreau inherited. But, he has done nothing to improve that. At the end of the day, that is the reasoning that the brass wanted him out. It was bad, and in a best case scenario, it hasn't gotten any better. In a possible scenario, it's getting much worse.The general manager and President Jim Rutherford obviously felt and feels that even though they have to vastly improve their defensemen depth and talent, they are currently much better than they are playing and performing. That is why he wanted a change.

Jim Rutherford didn't want to extend Boudreau's contract last summer. That was a clear sign he didn't want him as the coach. Rutherford has mentioned more than once this season, in public, how the team has no structure and no plan to deal with what other teams throw at them. That is what coaches do. They read situations, prepare their team, and react with a plan. Do I agree with Rutherford? Yes I do. I mentioned my reasons above.

Which is why Boudreau should have been terminated before this season started, or allowed to stay around the entire year. Rutherford knew long ago what he had in Boudreau, and he didn't want it. That was his major error, along with the way he treated him since he made the first mistake of keeping him around when he didn't want him.

The issue is not that they should have removed him. It's when they should have done it, and how they ended up doing it. As a coach, he had to go. As a human and a person, there was a right way, and a wrong way to do it. Rutherord clearly chose the wrong way.

Let me say this up front. It took me only a few seconds to remember anything even close to this ever happening before. Coaches get criticized, second guessed, fired, and maligned all the time. It sort of comes with the territory. But only once in the 50 plus years I have been following sports that I can remember has a coach being tortured, abused, and disrespected in this way. And from that person, you expected it. Even for him, it was hard to fathom, but not entirely. Otherwise, you would not expect any kind of professional sports team to act the way Harold Ballard did then, and Jim Rutherford did this year. It's just beyond comprehension.

Unless you didnt care what people thought about you. Harold Ballard didn't. Jim Rutherford should. I will delve into that at the end of the blog.

Tonight there will be a documentary on CBC, directed, narrated, produced and conceived by Jason Priestley. Yes, that Jason Priestley. 90210 Jason Priestley. I'm sure many Americans dont know this, and probably many Canadians. Jason Priestley is Canadian, and has always had interests that reflect that. As such, and his age, 54, which is very close to mine, he would have experienced the Harold Ballard era in real time and remember it well. Even today, it's just a soap opera you wouldnt believe unless you saw it for your own eyes. 

The Fifth Estate did a piece on Ballard in 1980. You can watch that if you want to see what it was really like. Keep in mind, this was before the Sittler incident I delve into below.

There were two main incidents. I will start with the second one.

The worst 4 years of my life. I wouldnt want anyone to experience that. It was a waste of time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_dsYp5hBOU

Darryl Sittler didn't say that. Frank Mahovlich did. About Punch Imlach. And he did that just a couple of years ago, which was almost 60 years later. People and players dont forget treatment like Mahovlich received. Over the years, many players on many different teams eventually refused to play for Punch Imlach. Mike Walton and Jim Schoenfeld were two of the many who couldn't take Imlach's berating and bullying behavior. Eventually, Imlach, who had glory years with the Maple Leafs in the 1960s, and then a lot of success early with the expansion 1970s Buffalo Sabres, was out of work and hired again by Harold Ballard in the late 1970s. This preceded the incident I will describe below but it was after the second one I will mention first.

Darryl Sittler was the longtime star and Captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs. The day he signed his first contract with the Leafs, in 1970, Harold Ballard was sitting at the table right next to him. Ballard was on a weekend pass from jail. He was in jail because he was a convicted fraud. You can see that clip within the Fifth Estate piece.

Fast forward about 8 years later. Sittler was pretty much money in the bank. He would score 40 or more goals a year, get 100 points or more every year, he had class, he was a team guy, and he caused no waves. He showed up and played hard, just about every night, fought when he had to, and made many of his linemates better over the years. But one thing he wasn't was a chump. He didn't accept that if you played for Harold Ballards Maple Leafs, you had to get paid less than the going market rate and that you had to take any mental punishment or disrespect that came your way. If you didn't accept that, and many before him like Frank Mahovlich, Dave Keon, Paul Henderson and other stars didn't, you were either berated, insulted, traded, or worse, not traded and put in purgatory. Sittler became Captain in 1975 after Keon left the Leafs due to a dispute over money and treatment by Ballard. Keon is still bitter to this day about that. Very bitter. He never forgot it. Many consider Keon the greatest Leaf ever, and that is saying something based on the history of the Maple Leafs.

None of that bullying worked with Sittler. When Sittler found out that others in the league of his caliber were making significantly more money than he was, he wanted a raise. Ballard was well known to not be interested in paying for what he had. Since Sittler had a no trade contract, he could not be moved out. So, Ballard did the next best thing. He hired a hard ass, over the hill, old school general manager who had thrived way back in the NHL when the teams had total control over all the players and could get away with anything. Punch Imlach was that man. As soon as he came in, Sittler was basically a dead man skating on thin ice. What they did, Ballard and Imlach, was get Sittler to the point he was mentally depressed. Very much the same situation that happened to Mahovlich 20 years earlier.

Imlach could do very little about Sittler. Directly anyway. He was the team leader and held heavy influence over the entire group of players. In addition, he had an ironclad no trade clause which Imlach could not do anything about. This was not 1967 when he could trade a Frank Mahovlich, or bench a Mike Walton, and or others.

Since Imlach could do nothing basically about Sittler, directly, in that he had to play him and he couldn't trade him, he did the next best thing. He tormented him.

First, Imlach went and traded Sittler's linemates. Lanny McDonald and then Tiger Williams. In fairness to Imlach, he actually made pretty good trades and got back very good players in both deals. But neither of those deals gets made if not for the purpose to show Sittler who is boss. Imlach traded Lanny McDonald because he was Sittler's best friend to show him who was the boss. He got good players back in those trades, but he destroyed the team the Leafs had built for years to do it. They didnt recover for decades.

Eventually, it got so bad that Sittler had to be traded. By that point, the The Leafs had backed themselves into a corner, and got basically nothing for a top shelf All Star still close to the prime of his career. Shortly before that happened, Imlach was gone, and the team was a mess for many years to come. I'm sure much of that will be shown tonight on Priestley's documentary.

The pattern of disrespect was well established by that point. And that's because of what happened just before Imlach arrived back on the scene in July of 1979. Let's be blunt and frank here. I dont know exactly how Ballard will be portrayed tonight, but I have seen clips and sound bites, and since I know a lying, con man, two bit criminal loser type when I see one, I expect that Ballard will be shown for what he was. Not that he wasn't crafty and savvy at times in business....he was.....but he had no class and no morals, and treated others as such. In today's world, the league wouldnt stand for anything like him and he would be removed or told to sell the team.

My next example/story of what he did will flesh that out very vividly. And of course, it relates to what happened this weekend/month in Vancouver. How will the league respond to what just happened in Vancouver?

The first thing you learn about Roger Nielson is that he was the direct opposite of Harold Ballard. Player after player described Nielson this way. He cared for the people around him. As such, he was a lamb to the slaughter of Ballard. I will return to that theme later with the current day situation.

Here is another thing many might not know. Roger Nielson is in the Hockey Hall of Fame, for being a coach. He also received the Order of Canada, the highest honor for lifetime achievement. Frank Mahovlich also received the Order of Canada. Nielson is said to have changed the game entirely with his use of video technology. Today we take it for granted. Back then, nobody did it and very few even knew how to use it. Certainly not a Punch Imlach or his type. Punch Imlach, although he won many Stanley Cups, never received the order of Canada. Nor would he. He was a tyrant and a bully. Here is how Nielson is described by former players and others.

I'm a firm believer that a team has to be prepared to the best of their ability in order to have a chance at winning. And Roger did that. -Darryl Sittler

He was a down to earth human being. He understood, as a player, that you are a person. Not just a hockey player, you're a person -Darryl Sittler

Nielson had been a junior hockey coach for about 10 years, with very good success, when he moved up to professional hockey as the head coach of the Toronto Maple Leafs after one year coaching their minor hockey league affiliate in Dallas. In 1977, despite a mediocre team, Nielson got them to the semi finals by beating the New York Islanders, who were one of the favorites that year for the Stanley Cup, and then losing to the Montreal Canadians in the next round. The Canadians were in the midst of a 4 year run as Stanley Cup champions, and are generally regarded as the greatest team ever assembled. Some could argue that, but nobody would argue that they were one of those teams on a short list of all time great teams. The Islanders went on to win 4 straight Stanley Cups right after Montreal did it and they would also be mentioned as one of the great all time teams. Nielson got them to beat one of those and compete with the other in only his first season as a head coach in the NHL. And what did he get for that achievement?

In his second, and final season coaching the Leafs, they were doing okay, but not great, and he was maligned and berated by the owner. As I said off the top, that happens in the game. What does not happen, except in this one instance, and the one that initiated this blog idea, is what happened next.

In his 2nd season coaching the Leafs, he was fired. Then within 3 days, unfired. But he wasn't just unfired. Ballard wanted Nielson to come out at game time, with a paper bag over his head, then take it off as he entered the bench. Ballard described it as a sort of marketing promotion technique. In reality, Ballard had backed himself into a corner. What he did was fire Nielson, but didn't tell him. Never to his face. Then, he told a reporter, and still didn't actually inform Nielson. Until late the next day. In the meantime, he offered the job to 3 or 4 others, all who turned him down. By then, Ballard had a game coming up on Saturday night, and that morning, had no actual coach to coach the team. Not only did he rescind the firing on Nielson, he insisted that Nielson come out and wear the paper bag. Nielson was going to do it as well, until some people warned him how foolish and demeaning that would be. Otherwise, it would have happened like that.

The Sittler incident came a year or two after that. I'm sure it was on Sittler's mind when he figured out how he was going to play his side of the equation against Ballard and Imlach. Instead of wearing a bag over his head, when Ballard hired Imlach, who then traded players off the team to spite Sittler, he responded by ripping the Captains C off his jersey.

Sittler, unfortunately for Ballard, was not Nielson. He gave better than he got. He had a no trade contract and it was guaranteed. He forced Ballard to have him traded to where he wanted to go and when he wanted to have it happen. Imlach dismantled and ruined the team, then he was fired. The Leafs then traded Sittler, and the Leafs had nothing to show for it. They also lost a coach who only two years later took the Canucks to the finals. Neilson was that coach.

Until this winter, I had not seen another situation like the one above play out in professional sport. It just simply does not happen that way. For good reason. It sends a message to the rest of the world about the way you operate your franchise. Your business.

Darryl Sittler put it best. *It was a circus. Simple as that.* That was the Maple Leafs under Harold Ballards ownership tenure.

Bruce Boudreau played on those Maple Leafs teams of the late 70s, including for Roger Nielson. He understands gaining players respect with how you prepare them and how you treat them. Luke Schenn put it best.

*Defenceman Luke Schenn said that Boudreau, in his 14 months coaching the team, would periodically put player numbers on the whiteboard — an invitation to speak to the coach in his office. It was mostly to ask them about their families and their lives, to check in on his players and make sure they were OK.“It was just real, you know what I mean?” Schenn said. Earlier, he told reporters: “I think at the end of the day coaching. . . it's not as complicated as people may think. Coaching to me is relationships and that's one thing that stood out to me is he's a people person. Being around a long time, he has a great deal of respect not only with guys in this dressing room, but guys who have played prior on teams that he's coached. Lots of lots of people reach out to guys in this dressing room from around the league and they all want to know about Bruce. And they wouldn't do that if he wasn't a good person. So I think that's the biggest takeaway for me.”*

Boudreau was never really a solid NHL player during his playing days. He was a top shelf All Star in the minors. A guy who could score lots of goals and get lots of assists, but in the NHL, he would come up, score some, but then get sent back down. This happened almost every year for many years. When he finally retired as a player, Boudreau went into coaching. If not for his coaching career, he would be long forgotten. I'm sure many fans today who arent old enough dont even remember him as a player. As a coach though, he is well known and has had a lot of success. At the very least, he deserves some respect for that.

Here are some general facts about Boudreaus coaching career. He is one of the winningest coaches percentage wise in the history of the league. He was fired several times, as most coaches are, and hired almost immediately right after by another team. In fact, when Washington fired him, he was hired 2 days later by Anaheim. That's the fastest that has ever happened. As well, Boudreau is well known for taking a team that has not been doing well, immediately improving them, and then getting them to the highest level, but never getting over the hump. At which point, they fall apart and he is terminated.

That is the situation he faced in Vancouver. He was hired after Vancouver had completely underperformed for a few years, but had a lot of young, high potential talent to work with. They had a terrible record when he took over, and then a fantastic record the rest of the season, but just fell short of making the playoffs. That was because of the start they had before Boudreau took over, which wasn't his fault. That is how he ended the first year coaching the Canucks.

Sounds familiar.

In the meantime, Vancouver's owner Frances Aqualini has been well known over the past few years as an owner who interferes with operations to the point it hurts the team and organization. Much like Ballard did. Aqualini hired Jim Rutherford after he hired Boudreau, and that was after both the coach and General manager had been fired with no plan in place to replace them. In that respect, Rutherford signed on without the knowledge that the current coach, Boudreau, also had an option for the next season. Rutherford was basically stuck with a coach he didn't want. It's what he did about that that created the situation that played out.

Rutherford knew he didn't want Boudreau as his coach. He accepted the job with the understanding he could replace him before this season. Since that wasn't the case, he should have insisted the owner pay the coach off and then Rutherford would be free to put in his own coach. That is the right way to go about it. The mature, professional, and classy way. The way you treat people and employees. That is not anything close to what has happened.

The Canucks started this season off terrible, and have never really shown much of a recovery. They needed a coaching change. Most everyone agrees on that. But there is a way to do that, and it's not the way Rutherford has done it. You could say the same about Roger Nielson back in 1979, and it wasn't the right way to do it then either. Nobody does it that way.

To me, Jim Rutherford acted as gutless and classless as Harold Ballard was then. If you want to fire the coach, bring him in, tell him the reasons, fire him, and then report it to the media in a press conference. You dont go on talk shows and downgrade the coach, twice at least, and then admit to trying to find his replacement, all but admitting he is fired but not fired yet, and let him and the team suffer for weeks in the meantime. In my view, he put the bag over Boudreau's head Saturday night, except it wasn't a comical stunt like Ballard pulled. It was much like when terrorists take hostages and send a video to the families or media with bags over the heads of the hostage just as they are about to execute them. It's a punk ass thing to do. Rutherford has been around a long time, both as a player and general manager. He knows better. Why in this case he chose to take this route just has everyone baffled, including myself.

In addition to all of that, the Canucks have a player, Bo Horvat, who is having a career year. And his contract is up at the end of this season. He is due a big raise, one that Rutherford admits is reasonable, but not one the Canucks can afford to give Horvat. Horvat is no run of the mill player. Like Sittler, he has been with the team for years, is loyal, has played very well for them, and is now reaching his prime. He is well respected and liked by the community and his teammates. And for all that, he watches as Rutherford treats the coach the way he has treated him.

If Im Bo Horvat, if I even had a thought about finding a way to make the money situation work in Vancouver, I dont even care about that anymore. I just want out. Just like Sittler did. And like that situation, if Rutherford and that ideology is still there, who is going to come in and replace Horvat? What player who has options is going to want to play in that environment? Just like the Leafs of the 1980s, the Canucks are in for a long stretch of bad teams when good players won't come or stay with them. They have set the tone. A very bad tone.

I would think it's going to have to result in a change of ownership, and removal of all levels of management, starting over like the Leafs did. And that took about 40 years to really take hold. All because of what they just did to Bruce Boudreau.

If I'm Bo Horvat, get me out of that circus atmosphere ASAP, and no amount of money they can offer matters at this point. No amount of money is worth it for that kind of treatment. And if they will treat the coach that way, they will do it to anyone.

On Sunday, when Rutherford announced Rick Tocchet as the new coach, as everyone already knew he would, he apologized for how it went down with Boudreau and the things he wished he had done differently. Good for him. Empty hollow words though. Way too late. He had weeks to right the wrong he had put in place. He didnt when it mattered. It doesnt matter now. Rutherford, and the Canucks, have shown their cards. Just like Ballard and Imlach did way back when. The only difference is.....Ballard was proud and happy to be that way, and would never apologize because he didnt care. Imlach always thought he was right, right to the end, and he would never apologize for being who he was. They can both get credit for at least being that and sticking to it.

The result in both cases is and will be the same. Years of bad teams and losing to come, and gradually, Rutherford and others who are responsible for what has been put in place will fade away, and maybe in a few years, the Canucks move forward and rebuild. But for sure, Bo Horvat wont be around, and likely, most of the players on the current team wont either. They have seen enough of the circus.