Mike Babcock Resigns as Blue Jackets Coach Amid Investigation Involving Players’ Photos

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

Just now, Keirik said:

My experience is definitely a bit different, but I just look at certain professions, such as a professional athlete as being a gigantic privilege rather than some right. What comes with that is great responsibility. If we are going on the premise that player X was afraid to show his phone because of damning pics then I have a gigantic issue with that. Player X shouldn’t have anything to hide. 
 

as @Pete said, a player could have said no. I’ll leave that judgement up to any new info that comes up. I honestly think this is more of a case of entitled players that were looking for more of a way out of playing for Babcock more than some gigantic case of feeling violated. The fact that their captain downplayed it right away leads me to believe that there might be something to another group of players on the roster that just didn’t want to play for Babcock even before the first practice ever happened. 

I dont think there's anything to suggest that they were looking for damning photos to try and uncover some off-season debauchery. And even in the unlikely event that that is the case, that is something that gets handled higher up than the coach pulling guys into his office and looking through their phones. 

[Phil]

It doesn't matter what they were looking for. The act of asking players to rifle through their phones is the problem. It's unethical, controlling, bullying bullshit from a guy who should have known better. Period. Full stop.

 

I'm listening to the DFO Rundown podcast on this now and they make two great points:

 

1. What if a young player has just begun dating someone and they have explicit photos on there they don't want others seeing?

2. What if a player is gay and doesn't want to be potentially outed by the contents of their phone?

 

Those are just two examples, too. Surely you can think of dozens of others. They don't even need to be "controversial," topic. Whatever the reason is irrelevant. The point is that all of this shit is in no way shape or form the business of anyone other than that individual player. No one should have to be put on the spot like this or potentially run the risk of being ostracized by their coach by saying no in front of the whole team. Again, this is victim-blaming. Here's a better idea: mind your fucking business!

 

Oh, the players are such pussies and went running to someone to help them? Yeah, they probably did. What choice did they have? This assclown of a coach has done shit like this for decades, and he basically forced this entire process to play out the way it did by doing what he did in the first place.  Who else are they supposed to go to in this case, anyway? Their own GM appeared to give zero shits about any of that when he hired Babcock the begin with.

 

I'll die on this hill: there is not, and never was, a single positive benefit to rifling through peoples fucking personal phones that was designed for the betterment of the Blue Jackets as an organization, or for the benefit of the team. The entire thing stinks of a a known power-hungry control freak doing power-hungry control freak things.

[Phil]

24 minutes ago, Keirik said:

My experience is definitely a bit different, but I just look at certain professions, such as a professional athlete as being a gigantic privilege rather than some right. What comes with that is great responsibility. If we are going on the premise that player X was afraid to show his phone because of damning pics then I have a gigantic issue with that. Player X shouldn’t have anything to hide. 
 

as @Pete said, a player could have said no. I’ll leave that judgement up to any new info that comes up. I honestly think this is more of a case of entitled players that were looking for more of a way out of playing for Babcock more than some gigantic case of feeling violated. The fact that their captain downplayed it right away leads me to believe that there might be something to another group of players on the roster that just didn’t want to play for Babcock even before the first practice ever happened. 

 

Can you blame them? Look at the bullshit they're being asked to deal with before the season's even began. And the GM doesn't appear to be much of a lifeline, either. He's the guy who brought Babcock in in the first place. Can you really blame players for using outside outlets to pressure this firing, if that's what you think happened?

[Morphinity 2.0]

 

[RangersIn7]

2 minutes ago, Phil said:

It doesn't matter what they were looking for. The act of asking players to rifle through their phones is the problem. It's unethical, controlling, bullying bullshit from a guy who should have known better. Period. Full stop.

 

I'm listening to the DFO Rundown podcast on this now and they make two great points:

 

1. What if a young player has just begun dating someone and they have explicit photos on there they don't want others seeing?

2. What if a player is gay and doesn't want to be potentially outed by the contents of their phone?

 

Those are just two examples, too. Surely you can think of dozens of others. They don't even need to be "controversial," topic. Whatever the reason is irrelevant. The point is that all of this shit is in no way shape or form the business of anyone other than that individual player. No one should have to be put on the spot like this or potentially run the risk of being ostracized by their coach by saying no in front of the whole team. Again, this is victim-blaming. Here's a better idea: mind your fucking business! Oh, the players went running to someone to help them? Yeah, they probably did, because guess what? This assclown of a coach has done shit like this for decades, and he forces them to, and their own GM appeared to give zero shits about any of that when he hired him in the first place.

 

I'll die on this hill: there is not, and never was, a single positive benefit to rifling through peoples fucking personal phones that was designed for the betterment of the Blue Jackets as an organization, or for the benefit of the team. The entire thing stinks of a a known power-hungry control freak doing power-hungry control freak things.

It was a really dumb idea.

Too many problems and issues can arise from him doing that. 
Doesn’t matter why we might think it’s a dumb idea or how extreme we feel it is… it’s still a dumb idea. 
 

Far too many ways things could go south from doing that.

 

He clearly should’ve known better.

The fact that he couldn’t see that is why he’s out of a job. 

[Keirik]

Just now, Phil said:

 

Can you blame them? Look at the bullshit they're being asked to deal with before the season's even began. And the GM doesn't appear to be much of a lifeline, either. He's the guy who brought Babcock in in the first place. Can you really blame players for using outside outlets to pressure this firing, if that's what you think happened?

Honestly yes. But I agree with the snowflake comment and as I said, I believe the players already have every organization by the balls. I don’t honestly see this as the biggest deal in the world. It’s a stupid thing to ask considering his history but until I see the comment that Babcock said. “Either show me your phone or you’ll ride the bench” I’ll still say that this was a fractured locker room that was looking to get rid of him before this even happened. 

[RangersIn7]

I’ll also say, I personally don’t think it’s that extreme, nor do I see it as some horrible invasion of privacy.

And I wasn’t there, and it’s really a matter of opinion, but I don’t see malicious intent.

 

 

Is it strange?

Yes

Is it something I’d ask for?

No

It’s just a dumb and unnecessary thing that was bound to cause some blowback. 

[RangersIn7]

1 minute ago, Keirik said:

Honestly yes. But I agree with the snowflake comment and as I said, I believe the players already have every organization by the balls. I don’t honestly see this as the biggest deal in the world. It’s a stupid thing to ask considering his history but until I see the comment that Babcock said. “Either show me your phone or you’ll ride the bench” I’ll still say that this was a fractured locker room that was looking to get rid of him before this even happened. 

There are other elements at play here in all likelihood.

[Phil]

4 minutes ago, Keirik said:

Honestly yes. But I agree with the snowflake comment and as I said, I believe the players already have every organization by the balls. I don’t honestly see this as the biggest deal in the world. It’s a stupid thing to ask considering his history but until I see the comment that Babcock said. “Either show me your phone or you’ll ride the bench” I’ll still say that this was a fractured locker room that was looking to get rid of him before this even happened. 

 

Come on, Keith. Be real here. We all know this is not how this shit works. You need a recording of Babcock holding the day's newspaper and a handgun stating "hello, it is me, Mike Babcock of the Columbus Blue Jackets, here to declare that if my players don't show me their personal phones so I can rifle through their shit, they're going to pay for it through these very specific outcomes?" Like, have you ever done a single sexual harassment training for a workplace? Even the impression of impropriety is worthy of investigation.

 

And we wonder why people don't speak up when bad shit happens? Why the hell would they. Look at how these players are being judged despite the total lack of a shred of evidence that they did any of the shit they're being accused of. Meanwhile, the documented bully and serial abuser who has two decades worth of evidence working against the benefit of doubt for him requires ironclad evidence?

 

And all of this routinely sidesteps the central point, which is that his players' phones are not his fucking business in the first place. I'm sorry that you had to surrender yours and had to give up potentially humiliating information about yourself during your process, but why the hell should anyone else have to, too?

[Albatrosss]

since he resigned and didnt get fired, will he still get paid?

[Scott]

Well this guy admitted he made a gigantic mistake.

 

 

[Ozzy]

Poor JD.

 

He deserves better than this...

[Albatrosss]

JD is another dinosaur 

[Phil]

11 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

Poor JD.

 

He deserves better than this...

 

Does he? He green-lit this hire, too. Honestly, if I were CBJ ownership, I'd be awfully close to looking at cleaning house after this.

[Karan]

28 minutes ago, CCCP said:

since he resigned and didnt get fired, will he still get paid?

 

Yeah I suspect that was probably part of the last "24-48 hours of negotiation on his exit strategy" that worked for the NHLPA, team/ownership and Babcock. 

[jsm7302]

2 hours ago, Phil said:

 

No way this guy is getting paid. No chance. Resignation means your done, we are done, no further ties.

[Karan]

16 minutes ago, jsrangers said:

Well this guy admitted he made a gigantic mistake.

 

 

 

It's a good start. At least he's taking ownership rather than trying to sweep it under the rug with excuses or being defensive. Nonetheless, they have a lot of work to do in that locker room to rebuild any sort of team spirit if there's any hope of being competitive this season. 

[phillyb]

 

[Phil]

4 minutes ago, phillyb said:

 

 

Again, way better than Jarmo's "nothing to see here" bullshit. The way this reads, at least to me, Jarmo and JD are basically on notice.

 

"Additional disruptions would be detrimental to our players and coaches as they prepare for the opening of training camp in two days. We will continue to have regulation communications with our hockey leadership..." = "If we hear one more fucking thing, Jarmo and JD will be joining Mike on the unemployment line."

[Phil]

They were.

[Ozzy]

15 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Does he? He green-lit this hire, too. Honestly, if I were CBJ ownership, I'd be awfully close to looking at cleaning house after this.

 

I'm sure they did some in-depth research on him before they hired him, but who'd even expect him to pull off something THIS fucking stupid??  ...especially after his last coaching  stint??

 

I love JD, and hope it doesn't affect his status badly out there.  That's all.

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Morphinity 2.0 said:

 

As a parent, you should know, children are often wrong.

[Keirik]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

Come on, Keith. Be real here. We all know this is not how this shit works. You need a recording of Babcock holding the day's newspaper and a handgun stating "hello, it is me, Mike Babcock of the Columbus Blue Jackets, here to declare that if my players don't show me their personal phones so I can rifle through their shit, they're going to pay for it through these very specific outcomes?" Like, have you ever done a single sexual harassment training for a workplace? Even the impression of impropriety is worthy of investigation.

 

And we wonder why people don't speak up when bad shit happens? Why the hell would they. Look at how these players are being judged despite the total lack of a shred of evidence that they did any of the shit they're being accused of. Meanwhile, the documented bully and serial abuser who has two decades worth of evidence working against the benefit of doubt for him requires ironclad evidence?

 

And all of this routinely sidesteps the central point, which is that his players' phones are not his fucking business in the first place. I'm sorry that you had to surrender yours and had to give up potentially humiliating information about yourself during your process, but why the hell should anyone else have to, too?

He asked to see phones. I’m sorry, that’s a gigantic leap from that to. “Wondering why people don’t speak up when bad shit happens.” 
 

    That’s the crutch of the argument. You think this is a lot bigger than what I think. I’m not sure how much more clear I have to be. If I’m  in the minority, so be it.  Personally, I think this is at a similar level to a coach giving a lmandatory curfew on the road, then checking up on players by getting keys to their rooms, which has happened a ton in sports. 
 

I didn’t think it was a huge deal to give up my phone. I don’t take any dick pics or anything that I’d even remotely be worried about anyone seeing. It was routine at the time. I’m not sure if they do it now but I’m pretty positive there are similar things happening if not the same. Most know to scrub their phones and social media the second they put in an application.  I get the privacy aspect of this whole thing, but I personally just don’t think this as huge as some here think. I stand by my opinion. 
 

 

[Phil]

Just now, Keirik said:

He asked to see phones. I’m sorry, that’s a gigantic leap from that to. “Wondering why people don’t speak up when bad shit happens.”

 

1. He didn't just ask to see players phones/photos. He asked that they share their photo rolls with him before "displaying those photos via AirPlay on a wall in the coach's office."

2. He then claimed in a statement that the Bissonette/Chiclets reporting was "a gross misrepresentation of those meetings and extremely offensive."

3. The NHLPA then investigated further, interviewing multiple CBJ players, in which it was uncovered and reported by Friedman that "Babcock spent "several minutes" away from team facilities looking through a player's phone." It was at this point that "at least some of the Jackets felt uncomfortable, and the players voiced their concern to Bissonnette, who kept their names quiet but made their complaints deafeningly loud.

 

Quote

That’s the crutch of the argument. You think this is a lot bigger than what I think. I’m not sure how much more clear I have to be. If I’m  in the minority, so be it.  Personally, I think this is at a similar level to a coach giving a lmandatory curfew on the road, then checking up on players by getting keys to their rooms, which has happened a ton in sports.

I do think this is bigger than what you think it is, because it put at least one young player in an incredibly uncomfortable position for no justifiable hockey reason at all.

 

I also completely reject your comparison to a curfew. Yes, that's happened often, and players sometimes pay for it in practice after, but a curfew is at the benefit of the team. It's being asked of the players so that sufficient rest can be had before a practice or game. Again, what hockey reason can justify spending "several minutes away from team facilities looking through a player's phone?"

 

Quote

I didn’t think it was a huge deal to give up my phone. I don’t take any dick pics or anything that I’d even remotely be worried about anyone seeing. It was routine at the time. I’m not sure if they do it now but I’m pretty positive there are similar things happening if not the same. Most know to scrub their phones and social media the second they put in an application.  I get the privacy aspect of this whole thing, but I personally just don’t think this as huge as some here think. I stand by my opinion.

Great. You had nothing to hide. You didn't care. Others did. Why does your nonchalance trump their concerns over their privacy being invaded? Just because you don't think it matters, they don't get to think it does and have their concerns be validated and/or taken seriously? I guess the Blue Jackets just de facto fired their head coach for no reason, then. And here, the team president, is calling this a mistake. For what? Much ado about nothing ... right?

 

And again, what if someone did have something to hide? What if the player who's phone he took for "several minutes away from team facilities" was gay? What if that player hadn't come out to anyone but had contents that might have outed them? What if they did have nude photos of partners or themselves? And what hockey purpose did snooping through their personal device serve?

[Keirik]

16 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

1. He didn't just ask to see players phones/photos. He asked that they share their photo rolls with him before "displaying those photos via AirPlay on a wall in the coach's office."

2. He then claimed in a statement that the Bissonette/Chiclets reporting was "a gross misrepresentation of those meetings and extremely offensive."

3. The NHLPA then investigated further, interviewing multiple CBJ players, in which it was uncovered and reported by Friedman that "Babcock spent "several minutes" away from team facilities looking through a player's phone." It was at this point that "at least some of the Jackets felt uncomfortable, and the players voiced their concern to Bissonnette, who kept their names quiet but made their complaints deafeningly loud.

 

I do think this is bigger than what you think it is, because it put at least one young player in an incredibly uncomfortable position for no justifiable hockey reason at all.

 

I also completely reject your comparison to a curfew. Yes, that's happened often, and players sometimes pay for it in practice after, but a curfew is at the benefit of the team. It's being asked of the players so that sufficient rest can be had before a practice or game. Again, what hockey reason can justify spending "several minutes away from team facilities looking through a player's phone?"

 

Great. You had nothing to hide. You didn't care. Others did. Why does your nonchalance trump their concerns over their privacy being invaded? Just because you don't think it matters, they don't get to think it does and have their concerns be validated and/or taken seriously? I guess the Blue Jackets just de facto fired their head coach for no reason, then. And here, the team president, is calling this a mistake. For what? Much ado about nothing ... right?

 

And again, what if someone did have something to hide? What if the player who's phone he took for "several minutes away from team facilities" was gay? What if that player hadn't come out to anyone but had contents that might have outed them? What if they did have nude photos of partners or themselves? And what hockey purpose did snooping through their personal device serve?

No, but I get to have my own damn opinion on the matter, don’t I?  Of course the Blue Jackets didn’t fire “for no reason..”  They fired Babcock because of what happened in a world where there are deeper lines than ever before. 
 

 

what if a coach checked on a guy during curfew  in his hotel room and found him in bed with another guy? We can all play the what if game. It was a stupid thing to do, but he wasn’t hunting for gay pics. I understand what you are saying, but do you think Peter Laviolette gets fired or pressured to resign, or whatever you want to say happened if he does this, or no? 
 

 

do we even know if he confiscated their phones, or just asked them to share their camera roll, which can easily be quickly fixed by any player to hide any inappropriate photos?