Quote Originally Posted by Beach_Red View Post
This really seems to be they key. Players get cut, coaches and GMs get fired but the execs roll on, claiming they feel bad about it.
Should the MLSE execs be fired for the failure of the teams on the field of play? Do owners ever fire themselves?

The MLSE execs imperative is to manage the fiduciary health of the company. They hire other executives to manage the success of the sports properties, in terms of wins and losses - just like any private owner does. If MLSE ever starts stagnating or failing financially, guys like Peddie will get fired. When their sports properties are losing on the field of play, it's the coaches and GM's that bear the responsibility.

The real problem came when guys like Peddie were inserting themselves into the chain of command on SPORTS-RELATED decisions, meaning they did bear some direct responsibility for on-field failure. Now they appear to have learned from this (at least in the case of the Raptors and Leafs), and have given proper GM's full control (and hence, full responsibility).

Should Daryl Katz have fired himself as owner based on the Oilers' dismal season last year? Or should he have done what he did, and held the hockey people in charge of on-ice results responsible?

- Scott