It's Hard To Like You

Over the last number of months, it has become increasingly hard for me to justify my enjoyment watching hockey when the game seems to have gone morally corrupt. There are other problems that bother me as well like the valuation of NHL teams and league broadcast rights, the constant need to monetize every facet of its business, and the lack of player safety from the Department of Player Safety, but the last few months have really tested the ol' moral compass when it comes to trying to be a fan of the game.

We hear how the NHL has never been in a better place financially and how all its 32 teams and markets are succeeding, and I'm not here to contest that. After all, I don't have the depth of knowledge about their financials nor their market research to know more than what I can piece together from news articles. Instead, I want to look at the Edmonton Oilers' announcement where they hired Mike Babcock, his response to questions at the press conference, and how this example plus a few others should make the lede image more relevant.

The Edmonton Oilers made it official today when they introduced the nineteenth head coach of the Edmonton Oilers as 63 year-old Mike Babcock. From a hockey perspective, one should have many questions as to why the Oilers would hitch their wagon to a coach who hasn't done a lot of winning over more than a decade, but I want to take hockey out of it for a second to ask about why the Oilers felt they needed this specific man to guide their players to bigger wins.

While I fully get that the NHL and, by proxy, the NHLPA cleared him of wrongdoing during his time in Columbus, there is still a pattern of malignant narcissism, player humiliation, and unpunished bullying Babcock has shown over his years in hockey. From Johan Franzen and Chris Chelios to Frankie Corrado and Jason Spezza to Mike Modano and Mike Commodore, there are corroborated stories from across hockey that should serve as evidence for reasons not to employ Mike Babcock. Yet the Oilers chose to ignore all of these red flags.

Mike Babcock had a chance to say all the right things today at his press conference regarding his resignation in Columbus. When asked about the issues in Columbus, he said, "I hadn't benched anybody, I hadn't talked to anybody, I hadn't sat anybody out, and it was evident that we weren't together as a staff right from the get-go. My wife gave me a call, and she said it's time to get out of there. I've been retired, I was pretty good at it. I got back to being retired."

He said nothing about the allegations that he invaded players' privacy by reviewing private photos on their personal cellphones. He said nothing about learning from that experience and understanding boundaries. He said nothing about his "unorthodox" method of getting to know players. Mike Babcock's answer about his time in Columbus was "it wasn't a good fit". I have no idea how the NHL cleared him of the allegations, but it seems very evident that Mike Babcock feels he did nothing wrong during his 78-day coaching stint in Ohio.

Not only did he make it clear that he did nothing wrong in Columbus, he doubled-down on his ability to "tell the truth" to players as "a good human", saying, "A lot of times being hard on people is confused with telling the truth.... Sometimes the truth is hard. No matter what happens when you coach, when you scratch people, when you sit them, when they're at the end of their career and you don't play them, it's hard for them for sure. You try to do that as respectfully as you can. Why? Because you think you're a good human and that's the right thing to do. Sometimes it's not perceived that way."

This is a man who healthy-scratched newly-acquired Jason Spezza of the Toronto Maple Leafs in the first game of the season against Ottawa with his family and, reportedly, his hospitalized father in attendance. This is a man who healthy-scracthed Mike Modano, who signed with his hometown Red Wings, in the final games of the season, preventing him from hitting 1500 NHL games. This is a man who scratched Chris Chelios in a Winter Classic between Chicago and Detroit. None of those players deserved that kind of treatment.

It's one thing to scratch an underperforming player late in the season when it comes to needing points for playoff spots. It's another to scratch respected veteran players from opening night games, outdoor games, and milestone games. Normally, one would look at those opportunities to make someone's life a little more special and grant those moments. Not Mike Babcock, though. That's "telling the truth".

This is a man who verbally assaulted Red Wings legend John Franzen on a daily basis, according to teammates, to the point where his mental health was affected. This is a man who told Anaheim's Tony Mårtensson that he was scratched before a game against Colorado and made him change out of his hockey gear in the shower. This is a man who made former Maple Leafs forward Daniel Winnik hate hockey. Somehow, the Oilers weren't worried about any of this.

All of this was known, though, so this goes higher than just Stan Bowman making a terrible decision. Daryl Katz, Jeff Jackson, Bill Scott, and Justin Mahe all would have known Mike Babcock was on Bowman's short list to replace Kris Knoblauch, and the players such as Connor McDavid, Leon Draisaitl, Zach Hyman, and Ryan Nugent-Hopkins all apparently gave their sign-offs on this hiring as well. The fact that no one took a stand morally about hiring a known bully tells me that the Oilers put personal gain over their moral consciences.

The Oilers have Connor Ingram penciled in as one of their goalies right now, and he's been a prominent voice and advocate for players' mental health. Ingram's coach is now a guy who plunged Johan Franzen into deeper mental health anguish through his bullying, so did Connor Ingram agree to this hiring? Did anyone even ask him because I'd think his opinion is pretty strong in this subject.

Oilers defenceman Spencer Stastney nearly retired in 2024 after battling "anxiety and depression" that kept him out of Nashville's lineup for most of the 2024-25 season. Again, Mike Babcock bullied Johan Franzen while he was suffering from anxiety and depression, so should we be worried about a Spencer Stastney giveaway ending his career? Does Babcock even know who Spencer Stastney is?

The NHL doesn't seem to care about the behaviours of people off the ice, but this isn't new. We've seen incidents come to light elsewhere, and it doesn't seem to matter to the NHL if it prevents one of its teams from winning hockey games. Winning is all that matters.

The Vegas Golden Knights employed a goaltender this season and beyond that would be radioactive for most other businesses. Having sexual assault and rape allegations would significantly limit one's job possibilities, yet this one person landed in the crease in Las Vegas where he competed for the Stanley Cup. People will say he was acquitted which is true, but would you morally want him working next to you knowing the text messages about what he allegedly did?

Let's not pretend that this hasn't happened before either. NHL teams employed all of Scott Stevens, Dino Ciccarelli, Geoff Courtnall, and Neil Sheehy long after their allegations of sexual assault where the jury voted not to indict them. While none of these four men were found guilty, it sends a strong message to everyone that crimes be damned as long as teams win with these players in their lineups.

The public outcry over the Boston Bruins signing Mitchell Miller gave me hope that we might be turning a corner. Miller was involved "in multiple racial bullying incidents with a special needs student in Sylvania, Ohio" while in high school, resulting in him being charged with assault and a violation of the Ohio Safe Schools Act. Somehow, Bruins GM Don Sweeney thought it was a good idea to sign Miller before they changed their minds seven days later.

At the time of Miller's release, NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman said of Miller, "... what he did as a 14-year-old is reprehensible, unacceptable," so explain to me why is it "reprehensible" and "unacceptable" for a 14 year-old, but not a 63 year-old man?

I guess the bigger question here is "what does it take?" when it comes to finding your morality. If you were calling previous employers about a potential hiring and all of them said he was a bully and a narcissist, would you hire him? What if they said he had been alleged to have been part of a sexual assault or rape? How about a vehicular homicide conviction? How about a guy who organized a murder? Maybe domestic abuse is more to your liking for potential hires?

While Craig MacTavish and Mike Danton served time in prison for their crimes, the rest did not. Don't mistake this as a comparison of which crime was worse - all of them are bad. The fact that Mike Babcock is allowed to coach after showing zero regard and zero remorse for what he did is proof that the NHL is only concerned with "do as I say" rather than leading by example. At some point, there has to be a line drawn when it comes to giving these people a pass just because they're involved with hockey. I may have reached that line today.

If winning hockey games matters more than being a morally good person or team, I'd rather go 0-84 next season. Sports are supposed to be an escape from our daily lives, but they appear to also be an escape from the rules that govern society. What's right isn't always popular, but it was evident that not many people wanted Mike Babcock back in the NHL except the Edmonton Oilers' front office.

It's hard to like the NHL when the people running it suck so much.

Until next time, keep your sticks on the ice!