Comments on: Why Balsillie went ballistic

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 05:22:46 +0000

In my mind, Jim Balsillie deserves a hockey team. I have just started a petition requesting that the NHL show him the front door at http://welovejim.ca

By: eeeeeerm

eeeeeerm — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 00:35:43 +0000

I don't think it's impatience that makes him drop the deals. I think it's a business strategy.
He gets everyone settled with the sale then pulls out at the last minute. The sellers are supposed to scramble to make concessions to keep their new buyer in the deal. It isn't working though.

By: scott

scott — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:04:06 +0000

Im out! keep pandering to the states and this mag will have a new flag on it.

By: callie

callie — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:15:36 +0000

Agree with repoman, it's about time someone told the truth about Balsillie, though it's obvious his kool-aid drinking minions don't want to hear it.

By: sourstud

sourstud — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 00:15:38 +0000

Great article. Very in-depth, and very well sourced. Good to see some real reporting done on this story.

By: Gaunilon

Gaunilon — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:13:35 +0000

testing 1 2 3

By: hems

hems — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:05:43 +0000

Charlie – thank you for having the courage to lay out the facts – in chronological order, to the Canadian public. Being wrapped in the Flag is like being wrapped in a blanket. Sure, you feel warm and safe and cozy but, the outside world is all just muffled annoyance. Thanks for bringing some facts and reality to the discussion. Would you have written the same article is Jim would have won?

By: wafer

wafer — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:00:26 +0000

Should Balsillie be able to decide where an NHL team should be? No
Would the team be better off in Hamilton? Yes

By: jt$

jt$ — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:00:22 +0000

I agree that Balsillie was impatient, but 3-7 years is too much even for anybody. The other scenarios all transpired within 1-2 years after ownership exchange. I doubt any of them would have been patient enough to own the team for 3-7 years, especially in scenarios where they would be orchestrating financial losses rather than improving on them. Plus, during this period another struggling team would have proped up that might be more easily manuveured.

By: G00se99

G00se99 — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 11:39:08 +0000

One thing people should consider is this. The NHL Board of Governors voted unanimously to not allow Balsillie ownership of the Coyotes. At least consider the fact that Balsillie may be poor ownership material. I certainly agree that a team should be in Hamilton but maybe this guy is not the right owner to get the job done. I've read dozens of articles that paints an ugly picture of Bettman and the NHL as the villain. I find it sad to see that people would react so negatively to an opposing point of view. I for one like to hear both sides as much as possible.

By: BleedBlue42

BleedBlue42 — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 09:49:08 +0000

The difference between Jim Balsillie and "those other con artists" is that they acquired ownership of their teams years before moving them. If Balsillie had bought the Pens in 2006, he'd have already completed three years of the required seven-year no-movement period. He could have planned quietly, driven off the Pittsburgh fan base over the next four years, and debuted the Hamilton Penguins in 2013. Or he could have bought the team, torn up the agreements, and fought the league in court over the narrow issue of relocation rights. But Balsillie has not shown the fortitude and determination necessary to lay long-term plans; and as long as his goal is to move a team immediately on purchase, he'll continue to fail. Gary Bettman isn't Jim Balsillie's biggest enemy; Balsillie's biggest enemy is his own impatience.

By: jt$

jt$ — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 05:41:25 +0000

Balsillie may use dirty tactics, but that is hardly something new in the cold-blooded business of professional sports. When the Vancouver Grizzlies were in a ownership limbo in 2000-01, businessmen Michael Heisley wrapped himself in the Canadian flag to convince fans that he insisted on keeping the Grizzlies in town. Less than a year later, Heisley cited large financial losses for his reason to move the team to Memphis (even when its now known that he spurred efforts by local sponsors to help the team). In Seattle, a similar situation occured where the new owner proposed an outrageous arena plan that required extensive funding from state legislature in order to keep the Seattle Sonics "viable", when in the meantime he was busy texting locals in Oklahoma city that he will be moving them there soon. Difference between Balsillie and these con artists? Balsillie made no secret about his desire to move any team he purchases to Hamilton. I think that it is actually the more honorable strategy, but a poor strategy. At least the fanbase in Phoenix, PIttsburgh, and Nashville knew his intentions from the start, and didn't have their hearts broken when it is found out that the team's new "saviour" was actually a wolf in red hood. I applaud your efforts Jim.

By: HMMR

HMMR — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 04:32:49 +0000

You throw old " Boots" name around. Isn't he the former NHL owner now doing time for fraud. And you expect me to believe anything the NHL owners have to say. Is Mclean's connected to the Ontario teacher's pension fund?

By: R. Barthes

R. Barthes — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:45:26 +0000

Regardless of whether Balsillie is a dirty business man or Bettman is the head of a very lucrative old boys club does not change this of piece less than acceptable journalism. “I spent ﬁve years looking for a front door,” he told reporters in May. “I found a side door.” then the author through this genius piece of literature into it "Or is he hell-bent on blowing up the entire building? I'm sorry what? blow up the whole building. Jesus Do you work for Gary Bettman. Thats completely out of left field, just what is it your trying to infer here? what social myths are you using to vilify Mr. Balsillie, VERY VERY WEAK, i will not even read this at the doctors office anymore.

By: frenchie101

frenchie101 — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:32:44 +0000

So he cant have one.Big deal.He cant have one, until Toronto has one.!! :-) He acts like a spoiled child.Get over it Jimmy.

By: frenchie101

frenchie101 — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:32:34 +0000

So he cant have one.Big deal.He cant have one, until Toronto has one.!! :-) He acts like spoiled child.Get over it Jimmy.

By: SJohnson

SJohnson — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:16:35 +0000

I'm embarrassed in general when I see an international media outlet quote this rag as a voice of Canadians. Your coverage of this NHL saga is over the top. I'm ashamed to have once had a subsciption.

By: csmith

csmith — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 00:26:26 +0000

I've followed the case quite closely. I reviewed most of the 1000+ filings in the court docket and the media coverage including correspondence, emails, deposition testimony, declarations, documents and the many legal arguments, etc presented in this case. I also followed the hearings on Twitter. As a Canadian, I came into the case with a positive opinion of Mr Balsillie with his success at RIM and a preference that Hamilton should get a NHL team some way. I leave this case with an opinion that this was not the way Hamilton should get a team though I continue to hope one day they will get one. In my opinion, Balsillie's conduct in this matter since 2003 is at the least very questionable, sleazy, vindictive, shameful and unethical. I'm also left with no respect for Jerry Moyes due to his conduct in this matter. I found your article to be largely accurate. I wouldn't buy a glass of lemonade from Jim Balsillie.

By: Shawn F.

Shawn F. — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 00:16:55 +0000

Finally an article that goes in-depth with respect to Balsillie and the NHL. I have read hundreds of "Jim good, Bettman bad" articles since 2003.

By: Rich Banker

Rich Banker — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:08:28 +0000

Balsillie is a Canadian hero, who will not BEND to American power.
Even when the U.S team is losing $30 million a year, they want to keep it in Glendale
or move it Vegas? Buy American.

By: Mike T

Mike T — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:56:21 +0000

“When there is someone that you have dealt with and that has lied to you continually, that has deceived you—knowing that he was going to deceive you at the end—that is a pretty good reason to dislike him. Yes, it is true. I do dislike the man.”

Hmmm…. Seems like my feelings toward Bettman. Lied to Hockey fans continually, deceived us knowing full well he was going to deceive us in the end. I do dislike the man.

By: Repoman

Repoman — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:08:32 +0000

I see the Balsillie cool aid drinkers are out in full force. I commend Charlie Gillis and Michael Friscolanti for writing an article they knew would be an unpopular. The truth is not always popular and 'Jim Rim' has done a great job wrapping himself in the Canadian flag, giving false hope to hockey fans in Southern Ontario.

The goal does not justify all means. Balsillie and Rodier have employed highly questionable strategies and the fact that most of us feel that another NHL franchise in Canada would be positive does not mean that anything goes. I hope that the NHL prevails in Phoenix and that Balsillie finally gives up on his NHL ownership dream. I don't think a guy like him would make a good owner for the league or for hockey. Blatant disregard for rules, regulation, bylaws and established procedure does not look intriguing to me nor should it to the league and its owners.

By: JIMY

JIMY — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:59:06 +0000

I just wanted to say that I haven't read a macleans article in 4 years, and then I read this one. I can tell you it will be another 4 years ….at least before, I read another. Did Gary Bettman pay for this article, I mean ADspace. Weak, wEAK!!! That's not jouralism, tabloid material i'd say, completely one sided, I consider it an insult, how stupid do you think we are? again did Bettmann pay for that? where is the impartiality? the full story? I can only hope the rest of your magazine isn't like that trash but I wouldn't know I didn't give it the chance this was the headlining story. And the cover is ad, WTF? This is not news but purely entertainment for the sake of commercialism and I'm not buying.

By: Maclean's Blows

Maclean's Blows — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:43:00 +0000

I just followed a link from Google to this article and unless I had read the comments I would have no idea this was supposed to be a Maclean's article. This is one of the most biased, disgusting pieces of 'journalism' (and I use that word extremely lightly) I have read on this subject to date. I have read less biased articles coming from people who support the NHL in this struggle. To sum up everything: Charlie Gillis and Michael Friscolanti, you're both assholes! I've got hard evidence to support this but, similar to your article, I just cannot give any. There, now that's journalism.

By: TroubledinTO

TroubledinTO — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:20:44 +0000

No wonder I'm not a subscriber to Macleans' magazine, reading this article, I'd say they are on the NHL payroll. Absolutely horrendous that this Canadian Magazine would publish such filth…I'm really appalled I see now where your morals lie.

Shameful!

By: peter

peter — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:11:53 +0000

When the billionaires locked out the millionaires who swore they were on strike I quit caring and watching.
I applaud the amazing work by so many volunteers and parents in minor hockey, but unless they are dellusional they are doing it for love… both for their kids and the game they play and the lessons they learn playing it (hard work pays off, practise practise, dont let down your team mates by slacking etc.).

I think the NHL could do itself a favor by looking at an organization like the Saskatchewan Roughriders and how they have become a member of the community, not just carpet baggers with a cash vacuum who parachute in and put on a show.

By: @SchlueterMan

@SchlueterMan — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:47:53 +0000

Jim Balsillie has accomplished more for hockey and Canada then you'll ever know. The REAL question you should ask is why is the NHL allowing teams to lose money while ignoring the 5th largest hockey market and a billionaire owner with money to spare? But maybe provocative is a better magazine seller than REAL reporting, keep it up and you'll become obsolete.

By: @SchlueterMan

@SchlueterMan — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:47:43 +0000

Wow, all that dirt digging and you missed the point of this whole thing. It's amazing how a talented writer can twist the truth to their own means. Let me, a common hockey fan, dumb the facts down for you. You've been convinced by the NHL that Jim has been crazy and underhanded. The fact is the NHL is being crazy and underhanded, Jim has merely shown the fortitude to face them. Never has an owner been blocked trying to move a team. The NHL has now done this 3 times, why?, you know, I know, the world knows even the CCB (oh yeah I've talked directly) knows, it's to protect MLSEs monopoly. So before you write an scathing anti-Canadian article you should research the other side. Maybe visit www.makeiteighteh.com it's funny bloggers seem to have more insight and integrity than you.

By: Mad in the Hammer

Mad in the Hammer — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:13:51 +0000

I think your website should be http://www.macleans.us not .ca
This article is so anti-Canadian you should be linched and fired. In any order.
You don't think Bettman is sneaky, or has never lied or made backdoor deals. You think all the NHL owners are squeeky clean? Please. Give your head a shake.
Balsillie has no choice but to push their buttons. He will never get a team in Hamilton as long as Toronto is around. Now try some real reporting and investigating and see what you can dig up there. Until then please do not attemp to write on this subject anymore. What an embarrassment.

By: Craig Ferguson

Craig Ferguson — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:10:14 +0000

The switcheroo that Gary Bettman tried in the Pittsburgh deal is in keeping with his own "poor character". Once po'ed at Bettman, Balsillie may have decided to take matters into his own hands, but I say so what? The NHL is now getting what is long overdue. The MLSE is getting the same. The CCB (competition bureau) is ready to pounce the moment Balsillie gets teh team against the monopoly of MLSE. Baby, you aint seen nothing yet. The comeuppance has started for the sly of heart at the NHL, and Jim Balsillie is the man to fix the issue! See our site for plenty of coverage.

By: Jay

Jay — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 19:46:37 +0000

I am personally digusted in your story on Jim Balsillie. As a Canadian hailing from S Ontario – a much more interesting article would have been on the hidden "veto" issue and why the NHL would fight so hard to keep a team from a self proclaimed lucrative market and a billionaire hockey fan in favour of hockey in the desert and no owner whatsoever. Where is the story about the lack of fight by Bettman in Winnipeg or Quebec City? I hope you get a lot of subscriptions from south of the border because you just lost mine.

By: Fred - Brandon MB

Fred - Brandon MB — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 19:46:07 +0000

There is enough blame to go around. I don't think it's fair to place all the blame on Balsillie. It is really the NHL's reluctance to place a franchise in Southern Ontario, or Canada at all, that is the root cause of all the troubles.

I don't believe that Balsillie's intentions have every been misrepresented.

By: DianeG

DianeG — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 19:44:49 +0000

There was deviousness on both sides, I think. Balsillie wants a professional hockey team. If he can't have an NHL team he might start another league. Yes, he's obsessed but there's fault of both sides. Bettman is not a white hat either. Balsillie is connected to a lot of very powerful people. Bettman should think about that.