Source
r/hockey•
ImSoBasic

Have recent events made you reevaluate John Tortorella's vow to bench any player that knelt for the anthem or otherwise protested?

In the past, most folks on r/hockey have defended Tortorella's stance on protests, frequently saying that Tortorella is actually a really great guy, that his son is in the Army Rangers, that he does a lot of work for the community, and that he really loves dogs. Many commenters here have also been hostile to the suggestion that Tortorella's views suggest a problem with hockey culture or could be sending a hostile message to minority players or fans.

So I'm wondering if recent events have actually made anyone here reevaluate their opinion of these kinds of protests and/or Tortorella's view of these kinds of protests. If so, why? If not, why not?

Posted Jun 3, 2020, 1:53 PM UTC

132162
Attano_451:NHL-NJD1: NJD - NHL•

I thought it was dumb of him to say then and it’s only become dumber now.

450
sonicbanana47:NHL-CBJ2: CBJ - NHL•

Exactly. It’s dumb, hypocritical, and completely misses the point of that protest. He does great work in other areas, but I really don’t have much respect for him between that and his treatment of Duclair. I hope he can apologize for what he said/did, point out his mistakes, and what helped him learn, but I seriously doubt that would ever happen.

Edit: Maybe inclusion of Duclair isn’t fair. I don’t know how he views the situation, but I don’t think he was was treated fairly by Torts. I also don’t support the comments he has made about other players who are aren’t black, so he is welcome to offer them apologies as well!

71
JMartini19•

Treatment of duclair? Had nothing to do with race.... he did the same thing to wennberg and milano. I dont think it's fair to include that..

33
Coaxke:NHL-OTT4: OTT - NHL•

To be fair, he didn't state anything about race, simply the way he was treated.

17
sonicbanana47:NHL-CBJ2: CBJ - NHL•

Thanks. Not a he, but appreciate your comment

17
JMartini19•

He didnt but the context of his statement implies it. Otherwise he could just insert " wennberg" or "milano" he chose duclair specifically

-3†
GumbysDonkey:NHL-CBJ2: CBJ - NHL•

He has benched several players that were not performing to their potential. Atkinson, Nutivaara, Nash, Bjorkstrand, and the list goes on, have been healthy scratched.

3
sonicbanana47:NHL-CBJ2: CBJ - NHL•

Okay, updated my comment to note that may not be a fair point. Thanks!

2†
17IsLucky:NWHL-NewYorkRiveters: New York Riveters - NWHL•

I was actually really worried about the Duclair thing at the time, but the Athletic did an article investigating Tort's relationships with his players over time to see if anyone witnessed any abusive conduct similar to Bill Peter's. Across the board of his whole coaching career, even from players who didn't like him, no one did. And Duclair went on the record to say that he really enjoyed Torts as a coach, there was no abuse, and that he thought he was treated well. Torts also had good things to say about him after he was traded, too.

27
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
sweetplantveal:NHLR-ColoradoRockies: Colorado Rockies - NHLR•

Yep it was always hot garbage. The optimist in me wants to think it was about protesting anything in a public way on his team. But I don't even believe me, so...

1
wildwest74:NHL-BOS1: BOS - NHL•

Here's something that many people don't know or don't remember about the whole kneeling thing. Kaepernick originally stayed seated during the Anthem and got vilified for being disrespectful. So he asked some veterans about how he could still show respect while also drawing attention to his intended message. The military veterans were the ones who suggested he take a knee. So...

428
apunkgaming:NCAA-RITTigers: RIT Tigers - NCAA•

Specifically it was Nate Boyer, former long snapper for Texas and a UDFA by Seattle who was a Green Beret in Iraq and Afghanistan.

115
[deleted]•

[deleted]

43
wildwest74:NHL-BOS1: BOS - NHL•

That's who it was, I was grasping for the name. I knew it was a Green Beret.

20
skers999:NHL-NSH7: NSH - NHL•

The issue with this is that some military veterans agreed with Kaepernick's idea and some military veterans disagreed with it. Just because some veterans thought it was a great idea didn't instantaneously make it okay with everyone else. I'm not taking a stance on the issue at its core--I'm just saying that it's silly to justify the move by society's standards simply by getting the opinions of a few.

15
1columbia•

Sure, but it seems in general that no matter how black athletes protest, no matter how peaceful, there is always offense to it. Eventually America gets what they ask for with riots

10
MatrimofRavens:NHL-MIN2: MIN - NHL•

One veterans opinion is not all encompassing. I was in support of the kneeling but don't act like one veteran speaks for the whole demographic.

This is basically the same thing as saying "I have a black friend lmfao.

6
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
OtherThingsILike:NHL-PIT1: PIT - NHL•

No, it was always a shitty thing for him to say.

209
Chigurrh:NHL-PIT3: PIT - NHL•

Here's the original post from when it happened.

It definitely seemed like a lot of morons were on his side. A lot of us weren't though. He was being a bully that imposed his views onto others while intentionally ignoring the whole point of the protest. It also wouldn't have been a distraction if he simply said "I respect the views of my players".

I'll never understand American flag worship culture. Most places in the world are not like this. You shouldn't need a symbol to be patriotic. Also, the whole national anthem thing at the beginning of games is inherently political.

JT Brown's post at the time

127
carl-swagan:NHL-BUF1: BUF - NHL•

I don't even mind the national anthem before games or reverence for the flag, the thing that pisses me off is that at some point our shared national symbol became synonymous with the military for a large portion of the population - and so Kaepernick kneeling was twisted into an insult to veterans, which is utter horse shit.

The flag represents our national ideals and belongs to all of us as Americans. Kneeling before the flag was a statement that as a nation we are falling short of those ideals, it had fuck all to do with the military.

I respect the troops and honoring veterans is great - which is why we have Veteran's Day and Memorial Day. But I absolutely hate the obligatory trotting out of servicemembers for everyone to clap and fawn over at every single sporting event now. It's cheap, exploitative and smacks of state propaganda.

And I say all of this as someone who's worked for a military contractor for most of my career and contributes to the national defense every day.

68
Chigurrh:NHL-PIT3: PIT - NHL•

It's almost as if if you decide a symbol represents something, it represents the whole thing. But these people pick and choose what it represents, as if everything else (good and bad) that happens in the country doesn't matter.

Kaepernick kneeling was twisted into an insult to veterans, which is utter horse shit.

Yes. And while we are at it, can we stop the to blind worship of the military? It's a necessary institution but so are many other things in the government that people are able to criticize. Respecting and honoring veterans is one thing. Acting like them and the institution they were part of are infallible paragons of morality is another.

36
SnickerDoodle75:NHL-VAN5: VAN - NHL•

I'd love the same respect shown to veterans get shown to ER nurses, EMT paramedics and others... but I hear that's unpatriotic.

26
bobwarth:NHL-CHI7: CHI - NHL•

But it’s not even respect that is shown to veterans. They’re just used as a prop. If we really respected military members, we wouldn’t send them to fight just for oil, or topple democratically elected governments, or ignore sexual assualt and it’s prevalence in the military, and we would properly fund the VA and other veterans benefits. Veterans are treated the same way as we’re treating medical professionals and other essential workers. “Hero” is an empty word that is used to pretend we care.

39
[deleted]•

[deleted]

2
TopTittyBardown:NHL-VAN5: VAN - NHL•

They take what the flag/anthem means to them personally and project it onto everyone else assuming they all get that same warm fuzzy feeling they do when somebody hears the anthem or sees the flag, and that any sort of protest like Kaepernick’s is disrespecting their feelings. They just can’t seem to understand that people who have been oppressed for so long in the country that flag/anthem represents don’t share that same feeling as them when they see the flag or hear the anthem, and that to them it can be a reminder of all the hardships they and their people have suffered

2
aygc271:NHL-CBJ2: CBJ - NHL•

I wouldn't say political so much as military propaganda (which may very well be political I guess) . It first appeared at baseball games during WW1 as a recruitment tool and sign of national pride.

13
Chigurrh:NHL-PIT3: PIT - NHL•

Military propaganda, absolutely. And you are on point with the history of it.

I'd just argue that anything the military does at a given time is decided by politicians and inherently political. Having military at your game while your country is invading some other country is an endorsement of that.

15
SnickerDoodle75:NHL-VAN5: VAN - NHL•

Not only this, the military industrial complex is a very real thing, and many major transnational corporations are heavily tied in to that in one way or another. So they have a vested economic interest to perpetuate the whole mess.

9
juicepouch•

I'm going into the sciences and am trying as hard as I possibly can to not do any work that's funded by the DoD or defense companies but holy shit it's hard. They're everywhere.

7
Chigurrh:NHL-PIT3: PIT - NHL•

It continues to amaze me that so many people don't seem to have caught on to it.

4
WoodenCourage:OUA-LakeheadThunderwolve: Lakehead Thunderwolves - OUA•

Also, the whole national anthem thing at the beginning of games is inherently political.

This is especially true for the NFL. Players weren’t even mandated to be on the field and would generally be in their locker rooms for anthems until 2009. It’s literally not even a tradition that Kap was protesting. The DOD also spends millions of taxpayer dollars on various anthem events like military flyovers, flag unfurling, anthem performances, etc. every year. I don’t know if there any contracts in place with other league like the NFL, but the irony is amazing. The anthem is purely political and is not following an organic religion.

Besides political, I also just think it’s super weird (which is probably because it was forced rather than organic).

11
Chigurrh:NHL-PIT3: PIT - NHL•

On that note, I'm really enjoying the whole internet shitting on Drew Brees today over this topic.

12
17IsLucky:NWHL-NewYorkRiveters: New York Riveters - NWHL•

American patriotism is a religion. A toxic, overzealous, evangelical religion.

Which is ironic, because religion is supposed to have zero influence over the government.

5
JememySW:NHL-VAN3: VAN - NHL•

I like singing my national anthem at a Canucks game.. :(

1
SnickerDoodle75:NHL-VAN5: VAN - NHL•

But mah magic sky cloth!!

9
KaiserPhil:NHL-LAK1: LAK - NHL•

https://old.reddit.com/r/hockey/comments/51gkyy/john_tortorella_on_kaepernick_protest_if_any_of/d7c2isd/

This particular comment was pretty prescient. Good work, u/BenAdaephonDelat.

2
LordCaedus13:NHL-NYR3: NYR - NHL•

I was an absolutely inexcusable thing to say then and only looks worse in hindsight

107
StatGAF:NHL-TOR4: TOR - NHL•

Like most people, Torts is a grey area person. There are some things the does that is great! But he's also an asshole.

Look, for as much BS that Babcock took, Torts took the same BS a few years earlier (Benching Luongo during the Winter Classic was just a garbage move).

Anyways, Torts opinions on the time were awful and still remain awful.

61
LazerMcBlazer:NHL-PIT5: PIT - NHL•

I have such a hard time with Torts. I obviously am supposed to hate him as a Pens fan, and I mostly do because I think he acts like a baby and runs his mouth too much and has made some really questionable coaching choices. But then, I work in dog rescue and I think his history with his own rescue organization and his position on pit bulls is incredibly admirable and it makes me really respect him and look past his hockey persona. But then he came out and said that and made me rethink the respect I was giving him. So confusing!!!

10
WerhmatsWormhat:NHL-WSH4: WSH - NHL•

People aren’t all good or all bad.

24
LazerMcBlazer:NHL-PIT5: PIT - NHL•

Except Caps fans /s

Totally agree with you there.

8
[deleted]•

Pitbulls need to be banned and euthanized. A simple checking of statistics and their context shows how horrific this breed is.

-11
LazerMcBlazer:NHL-PIT5: PIT - NHL•

Lmao k

3
Chigurrh:NHL-PIT3: PIT - NHL•

A simple understanding of causation vs correlation would help.

3
17IsLucky:NWHL-NewYorkRiveters: New York Riveters - NWHL•

I really detest the stance Torts took on this issue, but to be fair to him, he is not on the level of Babcock. The Athletic did an article exploring if he was ever abusive and according to players from the whole span of his coaching career, even some guys who hated him, the answer was no.

4
maddscientist:NHL-PIT1: PIT - NHL•

Isn't it sort of abusive to play for someone under the threat of being punished for exercising a constitutional right in the country you live and work in?

5
17IsLucky:NWHL-NewYorkRiveters: New York Riveters - NWHL•

Yes. At the very least, it's a restrictive pressure on them. But honestly, the vast majority of the people Torts coached while that policy was in the forefront were white male hockey players. Who are all now admitting one by one that they really didn't know about or educate themselves on racial issues until very recently. So they would not have perceived it as such.

Also, Torts doesn't play mind games like Babcock and even the anthem kneeling issue doesn't fall in that category.

0
Clarkson23:NHL-NJD1: NJD - NHL•

If you're going to base opinions on current events, it's better to get a current response from the person in question.

44
mantiseye:NHL-NYR1: NYR - NHL•

it was a terrible thing to say back then... less than four years ago

57
blackb0xes:NHL-TOR1: TOR - NHL•

This is cancel culture at work again. He was a mere boy of 57 when he said those things. How could you possibly want to hold him accountable for his own words?

106
theboootydiaries•

Not gonna lie, ya had me in the first half.

46
mantiseye:NHL-NYR1: NYR - NHL•

I can't believe Torts got canceled. it's too bad we'll never hear from him ever again.

25
juicepouch•

May God have mercy on his soul

4
The740:NHL-CBJ2: CBJ - NHL•

Tell you what. Pick up a copy of The Fiery Trial by Eric Foner, which won a Pulitzer Prize (among many others).

The book is about Abraham Lincoln’s changing views on race and the meaning of freedom within the time period of 1858-1865. Lincoln was 49 at the beginning of that time period.

It’s no exaggeration to say that Lincoln’s views on slavery - and the possibility of what a post-slavery America could and should look like - in 1861 bore little resemblance to what his views were in 1858. His views in 1863 were different from 1861, and in 1865 different from 1863.

It’s so damned lazy and dishonest to treat people, and their opinions, as if they’re static and permanent. We saw Kendall Coyne say less than 24 hours ago that she didn’t fully understand the kneeling protest four years ago, and that her views have changed very quickly. Should we go back and “hold her accountable” for what she said then, despite how things may have changed since then?

I don’t know the exact reason why Tortorella said what he did four years ago. Maybe he had been asked it multiple times and got tired of being asked. Maybe it was because he was coaching Team USA and the question would have been about what he’d do if someone wearing a USA on their jersey took a knee.

But to just assume his motive, to assume that nothing has changed, and to “hold him accountable” today based off of assumptions is garbage.

11
chopkins92:NHL-VAN6: VAN - NHL•

Okay, once Torts comes out and contradicts what he said 4 years ago, then we can applaud him for changing his perspective. Until then it is fair to take him at his most recent word.

24
shotmeorishotyou•

I think their point is that if we are asking how we may have revaluated the statements, it is only fair to consider that Torts himself may also have revaluated the statements/his position.

3†
mantiseye:NHL-NYR1: NYR - NHL•

I mean my point is still that it was terrible back then but if Torts comes out and expresses remorse for it and apologizes then that's absolutely great and I applaud that ability to have self reflection. It doesn't change what I said though! And you're still accountable for what you said in the past, even if you apologize for it later.

9
SnickerDoodle75:NHL-VAN5: VAN - NHL•

If he has, now would be a great time to make a statement clarifying as such. Otherwise, all we've got to go on are his... words and actions?

8
ImSoBasicOP•

I'm not basing my opinion of Torts on current events, and it's not like his opinions came from 50 years ago or from an era when there wasn't healthy discussion about peacefully protesting via kneeling.

I think it would be great if someone asked Torts if he has changed his opinion, though.

17
LazerMcBlazer:NHL-PIT5: PIT - NHL•

Oh, they will.

4
ImSoBasicOP•

If Torts was smart and/or has really changed his position, he would do well to get ahead of this and proactively release a statement along the lines Kendall Coyne Schofield talking about how his views have evolved. Plenty of folks are taking the opportunity to talk about the issue without being prompted, after all, and if Tortorella just waits until someone asks him specifically about this, many will question his sincerity (if indeed he ends up saying his views have changed).

5
blackb0xes:NHL-TOR1: TOR - NHL•

Moronic then, moronic now.

Edit: It's still mind-blowing to me that anyone would throw a hissyfit over what other people do during the anthem. Have none of them ever gone to school with Jehovah's?

22
Penny4TheGuy:NHL-NYR2: NYR - NHL•

My personal opinion from everything I've heard from players about him, is that he said that to protect his players from criticism. I think he just didn't want his players being asked about it or criticized for not doing it, so he stepped up to be the "bad guy" and said what he said.

13†
[deleted]•

[deleted]

17
camel_victory:NHL-BUF4: BUF - NHL•

Torts was such a dick about that. Was happy to see Duclair tear it up this year just for that.

3
haseks_adductor:NHL-OTT5: OTT - NHL•

imo the best moment of the season for us this year was our 1st game vs columbus when duclair got the OT winner to complete the hat trick, man the look on torts face haha

2
Phokasi•

I think he was proud. Torts spent a lot of time working with Duc and everything he says about a player is meant to light a fire under them. It seems to have worked, Duc has become a much better all around player.

2
andydwyersband•

You're welcome to that opinion, but I'm going to take him at his word and assume he meant what he said exactly how he said it. If Torts didn't want the media to criticize his players, he could have given some bs statement about how he didn't want to make hockey political and that probably would have curbed the discussion. IIRC that's what a lot of players and clubs did 4 years ago and the issue never really took off in the NHL (so it was never a "distraction"). In the past he's done a lot of stuff that's far more distracting and destructive and shitty for players (breaking into the opposing team's locker room, for example).

16
Penny4TheGuy:NHL-NYR2: NYR - NHL•

Breaking into the opposing teams locker room is a great example of Torts doing something that made him look bad to protect his players. You can disagree with the stance he took, and I do, but I think that there is more to it than Torts being a star-spangled bigot.

-3
WerhmatsWormhat:NHL-WSH4: WSH - NHL•

And that’s good for the hockey team and bad for the country and social justice for a whole. He made his priorities clear.

5
BackdoorSauce40:NHL-ARI5: ARI - NHL•

That's what gets lost with him here. He was not threatening because he did not believe in what they were doing or because of respect or what BS about the flag. This is Torts, he rules is bench. Torts is there to coach hockey, everything else is a distraction from the teams goal to win.

-3†
bobwarth:NHL-CHI7: CHI - NHL•

Yeah Torts would never do anything that distracts from winning, like go over to the other teams locker room and try to fight them.

21
BackdoorSauce40:NHL-ARI5: ARI - NHL•

That's one way to motivate your players

-2
bobwarth:NHL-CHI7: CHI - NHL•

Torts is there to coach hockey, everything else is a distraction from the teams goal to win.

I’ve never been to coaching school, but last I checked attacking the other team is not part of coaching hockey.

6
Penny4TheGuy:NHL-NYR2: NYR - NHL•

You're kind of proving the point though. He made himself the distraction to protect his players. He has a long history of making things about him to take the spotlight off the players he's responsible for.

-3
ImSoBasicOP•

Good thing none of the Canucks had to talk (or think) about Luongo not starting the outdoor game. Torts really took a bullet for them!

7
MetropolisPt31:NHL-SJS4: SJS - NHL•

No. I disagreed with him back then and still do so now.

9
PurifiedVenom:NHL-STL1: STL - NHL•

Well I wasn’t aware he made that statement but now that I am I’ve lost a ton of respect for him.

6
Slizzard_73:NHL-STL1: STL - NHL•

Hitler loved dogs, doesn’t mean shit. Don’t hide behind petty shit and actually defend your beliefs if you have a backbone.

6
[deleted]•

[deleted]

4
Crede777:NHL-CBJ1: CBJ - NHL•

Tortorella's comments were made as the head coach of Team USA ahead of an international tournament and he was only speaking about players on Team USA.

That, to me, is an important distinction.

"I know these are hockey games…but I do look at it like it's for my country," Tortorella said, per Aaron Portzline of the Columbus Dispatch. "What [his son] Nick is doing by far dwarfs what we do. We're entertainers; we're playing a sport.

"But with my son over there—this might sound selfish—I want to team up with him and help my country. I get pretty caught up in representing my country. There's nothing like it."

4†
ImSoBasicOP•

Tortorella's comments were made as the head coach of Team USA ahead of an international tournament and he was only speaking about players on Team USA.

It's funny, because from a constitutional perspective, that's where it became worse: Torts, arguably acting as a government representative, was threatening to punish players for asserting their free speech rights.

10
17IsLucky:NWHL-NewYorkRiveters: New York Riveters - NWHL•

Exactly.

5
Crede777:NHL-CBJ1: CBJ - NHL•

He was acting as a representative of the country, not the government...

1†
ImSoBasicOP•

Technically the requirement is that somebody be a "state actor" who is representing the state, as opposed to a private individual. You seem to be suggesting he was representing the state in his role as coach of Team USA.

5
Crede777:NHL-CBJ1: CBJ - NHL•

Torts wasn't a state actor as he was not appointed by the federal government.

1
Jerry_from_Japan:IIHF-Japan: Japan - IIHF•

It should have been condemned fucking immediately by everyone, it should not have taken what's happened for people to think "Hmmm you know, maybe John just needs to fucking go away". It was just as toxic and wrong then as it is now if he were to say it.

3
godfadda006:NHL-COL2: COL - NHL•

Fuck John Torotorella, now and always.

3
Bahamas_is_relevant:NHL-VGK: VGK - NHL•

Legitimately TIL, and there goes the vast majority of the respect I had for him.

3
ddottay:NHL-CBJ1: CBJ - NHL•

He was wrong to say that then, and he’s still wrong now.

3
Euskalkoroa:NHL-TOR1: TOR - NHL•

Very dumb of him to say. But that’s typical Torts

2†
jakovichontwitch:NHL-MTL1: MTL - NHL•

I think he should be forgiven if he goes back on his statement and changes his mind. The whole point of this thing isn’t to shame, but to teach

2†