Halford & Brough in the Morning - The Best Of Halford And Brough 1/29/25

Episode Date: January 29, 2025

Mike & Jason look back at the previous day in sports, they talk with Globe & Mail's Gary Mason about his bombshell interview with Jim Rutherford yesterday where he confirms the rift between Pettersson & Miller, plus the boys tell us what they learned.  This podcast is produced by Andy Cole and Greg Balloch. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

You're listening to the best of Halford and Brough. Da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da Good morning Vancouver, 6 o'clock on a Wednesday. Happy Wednesday everybody, it's Halford and his Brough, it is Sportsnet 650. We are coming to you live from the Kintec Studios in beautiful Fairview slopes in Vancouver. Jason, good morning. Good morning. Intern Ryan, good morning to you. Good morning. And Adog, good morning to you as well.

Good morning. Ladi will be with us momentarily. For now, we press on. Halford & Brougham of the Morning is brought to you by Vancouver Honda, Vancouver's premier destination for Honda customers. They have a friendly, knowledgeable staff that can help with anything you're looking for, sales, financing, service, or parts. We are in hour one of the program. Hour one is brought to you by North Star Metal Recycling, Vancouver's premier metal recycler. While they pay the highest prices on scrap metal, North Star Metal Recycling, they recycle, you get paid.

Visit them at 1170 Powell Street in Vancouver. We are coming to you live from the Kintec studio. Kintec footwear and orthotics working together with you in step. Wow, we have such a big show today that we didn't even have time for an intro. Not even time for an intro. Also, Ladi slept in.

That was the other part of this. But we do have a big show. It's a five guest or classic Albro five guest or. Going to begin at six thirty this morning, David Amber Hockey Night Canada Sportsnet NHL host is going to join us. It is Scotiabank Wednesday night hockey across the Sportsnet network. Leafs and Wild will kick things off. Canucks and Preds six o'clock from Nashville.

Then a nightcap, the pens and Sidney Crosby go to Utah. We'll talk to David about that. We will also, of course, discuss another wild and crazy day in Canuckland with David. We'll do all that at 6.30. Seven o'clock, Adam Vingen is gonna join us, writer for Sportsnet, host at 102.5 The Game. That's their sports radio station down there.

102.5 The Game. Where's their sports radio station down there. 102.5 The Game. Where's down there? Nashville. Okay. Yeah. Well, you didn't say it, so. Adam Vingen's gonna join us to preview tonight's game. I knew.

Preview tonight's game from the Nashville side of things. Canucks, Preds, six o'clock from Nashville tonight. We'll talk to Adam about a team that is not very good, quite frankly. They're down there in the standings. They have very little chance of the playoffs, but they have owned the Vancouver Canucks this year. So hopefully the Canucks can turn that around.

730 Manny Viveros is going to join us, head coach of the Vancouver Giants. Giants are in action this weekend at the Langley Event Center. Saturday they host Kamloops. That's a 7 p.m. puck drop. Sunday they host Spokane. That's a 4 p.m. puck drop Sunday. They host Spokane. That's a 4 p.m. Puck drop We'll talk to Manny at 6 there are 730 740 Randy Jan is gonna join the program Real quick our programming for the Canucks game tonight

Canucks Central goes from 4 to 5 pregame show from 5 to 6 Randy even batch will pick up the call at 6 o'clock and then The postgame show and the postgame show replay all the way through till 11 p.m. So this is truly your home of the Canucks Sportsnet 650 today at 8 o'clock. Gary Mason is going to join the program. Globe and Mail columnist has been a very busy guy lately making the media rounds in the wake of his interview with Canucks president of hockey ops, Jim Rutherford. You may have heard about that interview yesterday We think we were the first ones to get it live on the air because it kind of quote-unquote broke While we were just ending the show Gary did a couple media hits yesterday

We'll meet with us today at 8 o'clock to talk about what he discussed with Jim Rutherford a reminder We are giving away a pair of tickets and a $50 gift card to the Clayton Public House for the big football game. Sunday, February the 9th, we are hosting it, Sportsnet 650. If you want to go, be caller number 9 at 815 this morning. Phone number 604-280-0650. That number again, 604-280-0650. Call at 815-815 this morning for a pair of tickets and a $50 gift card to the Clayton Public House. That is what's happening on the program today.

Adog, let's try this and let's tell everybody what happened. Hey, did you guys see the game last night? No. What happened? I missed all the action because I was... We know how busy your life can be. What happened? You missed that?

What happened? What happened is brought to you? You missed it? What happened? What happened is brought to you by the BC Construction Safety Alliance. Making safety simpler by giving construction companies the best tools, resources, and safety training. Visit them online at bccsa.ca. So the biggest story yesterday from the Vancouver Canucks, of course, was the recall of Atu Ratu from the AH.H.L.'s Abbotsford Canucks after a scintillating performance which earned him, I'll stop right there, obviously the follow-up from the Jim Rutherford interview was the primary and really only talking point yesterday for everyone that is even

remotely interested in this hockey team. Jim Rutherford's remarks rang loud, they rang clear, and based on what I saw, they rang well outside of Vancouver as the entire national hockey media picked up on that story yesterday. Who did you see most people upset with the most? Jim Rutherford. Really? Yeah.

Well, also JT Miller and Elias Pedersen. Oh, those two as well. Yeah. I, but I actually, I, I led with Rutherford because he was the protagonist of, you know, this piece. But I, I was almost saw like a surprising amount of vitriol for Jim Rutherford because I didn't necessarily put him like feet to the fire on this one. Like he owns a share of the responsibility. No question.

What about, what about coming out and, and, and saying it and quote unquote, you know, tanking the trade value of these guys? I didn't see it that way. One, everyone knows that this was going on. Most specifically the 31 other general managers of the national hockey league. And two, I think Jim Rutherford's been around the game and negotiations and other executive groups

to know that he's not going to do some sort of like wild and crazy shoot from the hip. So maybe it was a little too candid for some people's liking, but I don't think that everyone woke up yesterday, read the Globe and Mail was like, wow, there goes his negotiating power out the window. Yeah. You know, the one thing I want to know after all of this, and the one thing that we still don't know is what specifically did the Canucks do to try and figure this thing out? Like if you've got issues with people at work,

especially if they're as important to your workplace as JT Miller and Elias Pedersen are to the Vancouver Canucks, you work on that relationship. And maybe we can talk to Gary about this. I don't know if he asked any follow up questions with Jim Rutherford about like, so, you know, you've got an issue with these two guys. You know what the problem is.

What did you do about it? Now there was a reference in the global mail article to, you know, they worked on it. Yes. What does that, what does work on it mean? Like what? It was very vague, sort of benign statement, like, well, we worked on it and they worked on it

and we got them to work on it, but no one understands truly what that is. Did you bring in a third party? Maybe some sort of HR specialist. Do you remember that report from Elliot Freeman from a few months ago when he was talking about how they want PD to toughen up essentially. Yeah. So that was.

And they didn't want to deal with, they didn't, like the management and the coaching staff didn't want to be the ones to deal with it. They thought it should come from the leadership group and then not too long after that, there was the little fracas in practice where JT Miller cross-checked Petey and by some accounts called him a baby. Mm-hmm. So the quote-

Right? Yeah, the quote was from an October report, I believe it was in 32 Thoughts from Elliot Friedman. I've got it here if you want me to- Okay. Yeah, go for it. ... reference it. And then Fried said, I'll paraphrase some of this, I won't read it verbatim. Fried said, what I believe is that they didn't want the Pettersson poking and prodding and motivation to be up to Rutherford or Alveen or talk it.

They really believe in their leadership group. I think they said, you guys are the ones that are gonna have to do it. JT Miller's obviously taking that very literally. And I think Quinn Hughes is involved too. Now, maybe you could put that at the feet of the executive that you guys, while fully cognizant of the rift between the two players. Knowingly or unknowingly, almost pitted them against one another

and furthered the gap, right? It's like, if you know that these two have problems, maybe it's not the greatest solution or strategy to have one try to motivate the other or one try and kickstart the other. But that was a risk that they took. Clearly, they didn't do it not knowing that the two didn't get along. Yeah. Maybe they were. Maybe that was their very weird way. Some sort of odd. I wouldn't even call it reverse psychology, but reverse motivation. Maybe the guy you hate the most, pushing and prodding you might be the one to get you out of your funk.

Yeah. And I think they were probably looking for Pedersen to be like, Hey, I'll show you. Sure. And then they realized that not everyone responds that way. Yeah. So I do want to make note of the fact that, you

know, after the interview with Gary Mason, Jim Rutherford then conducted an interview with Sportsnet's very own Ian McIntyre. And that led many to, and they might be possibly right on this one, point out that it's not necessarily a great thing when you conduct a follow-up interview to your initial interview, but that's exactly what Jim Rutherford did. And he did answer some questions that I think a lot of people had in the aftermath of the Globe and Mail piece. One of them was, if you knew about this rift between the two players,

why did you sign both of them to long term contract extensions, specifically. Elias Pettersson, who is not yet 12 months in to that extension. And Rutherford just pointed out that, look, they're top players for us. Quote, if you have the signed players and it doesn't work out, they're signed and you're in a better position to get a return for them. So the idea was their assets, we're going to keep them regardless of how their relationship is, as opposed to making a move in the moment.

At the very least, they are your employees and then you can decide what to do with them. Yeah, maybe. We'll see. We'll see what the return is. Well, that was just his explanation. I know, I know, but I know that was his explanation, but he had to have an explanation for it at some point, right?

Like that might be spin. Is Nils Hoeglinder worth more now, now that he's locked up for three more years? He does have cost certainty. Yeah, there is cost certainty. There's also three goals, right? Now that he's locked up for three more years. He does have cost certainty. Yeah, there is cost certainty. There's also three goals, right? But so that, you know, obviously takes his trade value down. And, you know, the fact that they signed Pedersen and his play has not been

conducive to his contract, let's put it that way, is, you know, teams are going to, like, we, we, we already heard reports that, um, the Rangers wanted the Canucks to retain salary on JT Miller, right? Like, and, and if I'm the Canucks, I'm like, absolutely not. We're not doing that. Like, this is a clean break. Let's, let's do that. But, you know, there might be people that just try and grind the Canucks

because of this situation. Like, oh, on Peddersen 11.6, that's a lot, you know, like, Oh, if it was 10 million, maybe we'd do it. Um, that's spin from the organization. We'll see if it turns out to be true. Um, my whole thing with this is, and again, it's why I want to get back to what exactly was done to fix this situation and were you cognizant enough of what was going on day

to day in the dressing room? And if not, why not? You're the president of Hockey Ops, you're the general manager, you know, the head coach might have a responsibility in this and how they all dealt with this. What did you do? Because if you're the leader of the organization

and Jim Rutherford is, he's the president, then you cannot let a situation get to this point. The Canucks look like they are not running a very tight ship. And that's exactly the opposite of what we were saying about this management group last season. We were like, finally they got some guys that know what they're doing, right?

Like they just, they seem to have everything in place. There's a, remember we talked about alignment between the management and the coach and the players and everything's great. And now we're kind of like, wait a minute, like maybe, like maybe they, maybe they didn't have everything going on because they've let this situation get to the point where it is now.

Yeah, like, so that part of the, when Jim Rutherford is facing a lot of criticism for this, that part of it, I think is absolutely 100% valid and probably needs to be investigated more. Because if your response to a problem between players is, ah, let them figure it out. They're both making a lot of money and they can figure it out themselves.

That's great, that's a great approach until it doesn't work. And then it really blows up in your face. And then it's your fault. It's your problem. You can't just say, deal with it. Yeah, what if it doesn't get dealt with you've got a big mess on your hands in that you've got two guys With I would say fairly onerous contracts and now you're in a corner where you've got a trade out of it I do think that there was some very hardline old-school thinking here about These are highly paid athletes and I have time for this line of thinking that these are highly paid athletes. And I have time for this line of

thinking that these are highly paid athletes, that nothing is so bad to the point where they can't go out and play. And I think the important part is that there was, and Rutherford alluded to this, there was enough times over the past few years where the two of them did play good hockey while as teammates that you thought it would be able to sort itself out. Well, you know where it obviously started going off the rails? It's when Pedersen wasn't playing well. Yes.

Like that's, anyone can have a good relationship when to, when things are going well. Yep. And remember the lotto line was together right before the all star game. And then, um, you know, PD got leaned on to sign a contract and around that same time, his place started to fall off considerably

to the point where, you know, I was like, what, what is going on here? Didn't Kuzmenko get traded around that as well? No, let's not bring Kuzmenko into this. For God's sake. Another wrinkle. For God's sake. Another wrinkle. Um,'s sake. Another wrinkle.

Um, but always get me, just trip me up. So they're playing well together. They went on that Eastern trip, right? And the lot of line was together for a bit. Now I think they did get broken up, but the all-star game coincided with the connects kind of leaning on Pedersen for, to sign a contract. Either sign or we're going to trade you, right?

And then his play falls off and then people think that, oh, well, once he signs a contract, his play will, you know, it's just a distraction of everyone, you know, yelling at PD, you got to sign, you got to sign, you got to sign, including the organization. And, you know, once that gets together, PD will find his game. Well, PD didn't find his game. Well, you know, once the playoffs start, I mean, that's big, then PD's going to find his game. Well, PD didn't find his game in the playoffs either.

That creates a situation where JT Miller and maybe some other Canucks, I don't know, but JT Miller is the guy we're talking about here, could get mad. Yep. He's like, dude, we're trying to win games here and you're not showing up for us. Right. And then maybe Petey says, Hey, you know, like

shut up. And then it, then it kicks off again. Right. That, that is, that is easily what could have happened. In fact, I've heard a few things that, that might have happened. Now, right.

Right. You know? Now, now? Right. Now, the issue here is that unlike other instances of these two clashing, there was always a fix or remedy or they'd get in a spat and they'd get back together. This time it's, the president of hockey opp says it's broken, right?

He said, we've seen this enough. And I think when he says that, he's alluding to past regimes and past coaches as well. Cause we talked about this yesterday, right? Travis Green, Bruce Boudreaux, Jim Benning, everyone who's been here in an authoritarian spot has seen this. And it's they are now making the decision that enough's enough. It's time for a change. The issue is, is that this executive and this management group is the one that invested a ton of money and term into these two players. So it's great looking back and saying hindsight 2020 like, ah, you know, it's not going to work out.

We tried and it failed. But with the amount of financial obligation in a hard cap league, I understand why there's so much criticism right now. I don't have as much as a lot of people in the general public right now, but I understand why a lot of this does fall at the feet of management. So what's your, where's your blame game here? I'm so mad at everyone, man. I'm really like. I'm very disappointed in the two players involved. Disappointed in the two players involved. Because you can, now you can say one is more to blame than the other and that's fine.

You can say that, you know, sometimes everyone's been in a situation where you're just next to someone and it doesn't work out and there's nobody to blame. But this is a team dynamic and a team sport where you have to be able to try and get over certain things. Now, I say this kind of in fear of the unknown, because I don't know the depths of which or the depths of how toxic their relationship got or what transpired or what you know went beyond the pale in terms of behavior. Maybe it's not for some people, maybe it is for other people. I honestly don't know, but when I look at how a team is supposed to operate is if you believe in all the mantras and the crap they throw on the walls and the

motivational stuff it's that you're supposed to try and overcome and you're supposed to try and get past your differences and when adversity hits you The goal is to get through that adversity and be stronger on the other side and I can't help but feel that at a certain point Both parties were like I we're not overcoming this. Whether it's try or whether it's resignment or whatever, it's that we're not going to be able to get over this. JT stopped yelling at people and Petey, hey, man, put some work in.

Yep. Now again, very hesitant with not knowing exactly what went on in an interpersonal relationship and dynamic that could have gotten so poisoned that there was the point of no return. We see it all the time, right? You see it at work, you see it in relationships, you see it in marriages, you see it all the time. And it can be real ugly, right? And you never know what someone's going through. Keith, the water guy texts in, I think you guys are overcomplicating the situation.

There have been many reports of the dressing room being a country club. Do you think JT was part of that country club? Not a chance. Then they had a good year and everything was good. Pedersen signs a big contract, then shows up out of shape to camp this season as reported by the coach.

I can see Miller losing it, that this keeps happening. That's just kind of what I got at Keith. Yeah, you also seem to over complicate it. Well, first of all, I don't think we've been over complicating the situation at all. I think this starts with two things. JT is a real hothead, and some people like that and some people think it's too much and Pedersen is underperformed. If Pedersen's not underperforming, this isn't a problem. And if JT's not a hothead that can be really hard on his teammates, it might not be a problem either. Might be a different response to Pedersen.

Can I also just say that part of the reason that I'm dancing around the personal dynamic and relationship is obviously because one of them took a rather unexplained 10 game leave of absence for personal reasons. That's never been discussed publicly. And when Miller came back, the first thing that he said about it was that he wasn't going to discuss it. Yeah. So that to me is something that's pretty delicate and obviously not for public consumption. Now draw your own conclusions.

Am I right? How does it look that both Miller and Pedersen completely denied the rift publicly and also that Petey got a little like, like you guys are making stuff up. With a swear word in there. I'm like, oh yeah. Are we? Like, and, and, and I think that's, that's what

also turns people off about this situation. When they've addressed it publicly, they've addressed it in a really petulant way. There's nothing thoughtful about it. It's full on defensive mode. It's so defensive. And I've talked about it a few times. This team takes on a real victim mentality

sometimes, and that is a turnoff. You know, everyone's against us. You know? Yep. Well, no, look at when you guys make it to the playoffs, look at the excitement in this city. Everyone around the league was talking about how great Canucks fans are and how badly we want a winner in this city and how awesome the

atmosphere was at Roger's Arena. You know, it was one of the, Nikita Zadorov said his time in Vancouver was the best of his career. Yeah. The best of his career and he didn't want to leave. That's a whole different other story. They were able to attract free agents here in some ways because of that playoff run.

They want to be something, part of something special, a Canadian market that really cares about its team. And then things don't go so well. And you know, two members of your leadership group are not handling it very well. And I think that's what, like it's the victim mentality. It's the siege mentality that this team often has. They hide from things, um, you know, until they really

don't hide from it. And Jim Rutherford does this interview that's like, whoa. No hiding now. Right? Like, but the players, they're not very thoughtful when they talk publicly. And listen, I'm not, I don't want to make this about the media, but that's how they come across.

Sure. That's how they come across. So you kind of, and this is a dangerous thing to do sometimes, but you kind of like, well, if that's how you are publicly, how are you with your teammates? And you can kind of see by their behaviors how something like this could happen because both guys are so defensive about it. You know, like, it's not my fault.

Not my fault. It's someone else's fault. Someone else's fault. No personal accountability, right? None. None. Is it possible they're like that just because they're so embarrassed by the situation? And how out of hand it's gotten? I don't know if the motivation or the reasoning matters. It's the execution. It was on the same

day where Tauke and Hughes openly acknowledged that there was a problem. The two players vehemently denied it. Not just denied it, vehemently denied it. And like in a Leon Dreissel pissy way, especially Petey. Like I, that was a, looking back now and looking at that audio, it's just like, why do you gotta make stuff up? And so all the fans, that just creates more, that creates more turmoil within the fan base because people are blaming each other then and they're blaming the media and it gets really ugly and people start saying, Oh, it's a toxic situation in Vancouver. The Canucks media is toxic, the Canucks fan base is toxic, Canucks social media is toxic. Yeah, because someone was being dishonest. So, you know, and like, and again, I want to come,

the franchise under this current, you know, with this current core has so often just taken on this victim mentality and people don't want to see that out of elite athletes that are getting paid millions and millions of dollars. You're listening to the best of Halford and Brough. You're listening to the best of Halford and Brough. You're listening to the best of Halford and Bruff.

Do you have anyone in your life that really triggers you? Like really triggers you? Like you come up to them and you have a conversation with them and maybe you have, like they're in your life somehow. And you're just like, you're just like, God, just like we're so different and we see life so differently and we have just like, I, you know, like, and you can tell yourself, all right, I have to go see this person today. I'm not going to freak out. And then three minutes into seeing that person, you freak out.

Do you have anyone in your life like that? You don't have to name them. Without identifying the person publicly. Listening to them right now. Yeah. Without identifying the cowork. Without identifying the person publicly. Listen to them right now. Yeah, without identifying the coworker publicly, the person publicly. What? Yes. Yeah, I do.

I think most people do, right? What's the devil's advocate part? The devil's advocate part is what if you had to work with them? Right. I have not had that dynamic in my life. Yeah. I've had annoying coworkers and had, I have not had that dynamic in my life. Yeah. Um, I've had annoying coworkers and had, I have

current tense. Um. But someone that's like your, your kryptonite, you know, and, and listen, there are some people in the Vancouver sports media that, you know, if someone said you got to do a show with them and you gotta, you gotta go to work every day with them and work, you know, do a show with them and you got to go to work every day with them and work intimately with them on a shared goal. I'd be like, I don't know how well I'd respond to that.

Right. That's fair. And that's fair. I might start acting a little petulantly myself, but I just want everyone listening right now. I think most people have someone in their lives. Adog, do you have someone in your life that just like, don't say it's me. Oh, do I everybody? Oh, do I. No, being serious like that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, well, not presently, but I would also say,

and credit to Ryan for making the good point, but I would also say if somebody was paying me $11.6 million to work with that person, I would figure it out. I would figure it out 100%. For sure. It's a valid argument. Find a way to, I mean, for that amount of money, man, if they're saying we're going to give you

this amount of money, $11.6 million to work with that person, I'd be like, I can deal with that. Here's the thing though, you get paid that regardless, if you get traded or if that person, I'd be like, I can deal with that. Here's the thing though, you get paid that regardless. If you get traded or if that person gets traded, you're still getting that money. It's not like that money goes away. Yeah.

Yeah. You know, like you've got that money. They should have put that in PD's contract. This money goes away if you can't work with this guy. I don't know if this EBI covers that. Yeah, I think I know how to do that. It should be though. Seems like a bit of a loophole. Yeah. I don't think I know how to do that. It should be though.

Seems like a bit of a loophole. Yeah. The issue with the, the only issue with the money argument is that people will and rightly counter that no amount of money is worth the strain that I'm going through. And I'm not talking about Pedersen and Mill, I'm just talking in general, right? Because it's the same argument when you throw money at any problem. Is this not the necessary fundamental solution, right? It kind of glosses over or it suggests that we're paying you the amount of money

to deal with the pain and strife and toxicity. And some people are like, well, it's not worth it for me. Like my mental health or my physical health, if it takes a toll, is not worth whatever amount of money you're going to give to me. Some people will say, yes, absolutely. I don't think there's a right or wrong there, but there's always a counter to the money part of it. With this particular instance,

I go back to the fact that there's something inherent in a team sport, in a team sport, where you have to develop at the very least an understanding or agreement that your personal beef isn't going to ruin everybody else. It's going to ruin the fundamental dynamic the whole right. Like, yeah, we got a problem, but there's so many

other guys that are counting on us here. That's the sort of like emotional bond, the band of brothers. So you know what that's called leadership, right? That's the sort of like emotional bond, the band of brothers. You know what that's called? Leadership. Right. That's called leadership. Yeah. You don't sink a room. You don't torpedo 46, 47 games of a regular season. Well, especially after last year, like if you're those two guys

after the season they had last year, how close necessarily. But the light at the end of the tunnel looks like there's progress. It looks like we can be a cup contender. If I was either of those two guys, I'd be like, that's figured out for the good of this team to win a Stanley Cup because we have a team that could do that potentially now, which we've been waiting as fans a decade for this. We finally have a core theoretically that could win a cup. We have all the pieces in place and now all that is holding us back is personal

issues. I would say if I was one of those players, let's try and put this aside so we can at the very least win a Stanley Cup. And hey, after that, go your own way, whatever, but let's win this cup. So I wanted to play devil's advocate there for a second. And I think the conclusion that we all made is like, yeah, some people in life are annoying, but like, this is unacceptable, right? I think it was worthwhile going through that exercise and you're still like, yeah, but you got to find a way to make it happen. I don't know.

Now I'm angry though. Yeah, yeah. You feel like it works. I talked about leadership. These are two guys in your leadership group. Yeah, that's a good point. That have torn the team apart. Should take the A's off their jerseys as punishment. No, that should trade them. Well, yeah

Well, I mean some of them might not even see it as punishment, right? Yeah The pokey retic posse one of my favorite texters of all time texted in bro I've successfully tuned out every co-worker boss spouse and child I have ever had it All right. Well, there you go. I love all the people texting and it's like for Jason it's definitely this guy but it's like a different person every time it's like does everyone think that I don't get along with everyone? I have five versions of kryptonite in my life. Okay we gotta go to break. And you didn't even get the right one. ["Sweet Home Alone"]

What is this music? What is going on? We don't know. Setting the tone, Just setting the tone. This sounds like a cross between ABBA and a Clockwork Orange. This is actually what they play in the Grunt's locker room as a form of psychological torture. To try and get the players to play better. The music will not stop until you play better.

If Boney M was a video game. Yeah, it's kind of bony M you're right you aren't listening to the Halferd and Bref show on sportsnet 650 I'm getting clockwork orange it's a sin that a dog isn't of course I've seen that well come on you you always rip on me for not having up-to-date reference well yeah you stopped watching movies in 1986 it's not Beethoven so it can't be clockwork orange it wasn't all Beethoven in there. This is, yeah, it's...

Sorry, Ludwig von. They are Clockwork... Ludwig von? We have a Gaston hold, by the way. Yeah, you guys all done? We done? Not quite. You are listening to the Halferd and Brough show,

which you probably gathered by the insane banter coming back from break. Halferd and Brough of the morning is brought to you by Vancouver Honda, Vancouver's premier destination for Honda customers. They have a friendly, knowledgeable staff that can help with anything you're looking for, sales, financing, service or parts. We are in hour three of the program. Gary Mason from the Globe and Mail is going to join us in just a moment here to kick off

hour three. Hour three is brought to you by Campbell and Pound real estate appraisers. Trust the expertise of Campbell and Pound. Visit them on the internet at Campbell-Pound.com today. We are coming to you live from the Kintex studio. Kintex footwear and orthotics working together with you and Step. To the phone lines we go, Gary Mason from the Globe and Mail joins us now on the Haliford and Brough show on Sportsnet 650.

Good morning, Gary. How are you? Good morning, fellas. Anything interesting happen lately? Yeah, no kidding. Tell us what the response is. It's been a while since you've been in the thick of the Canucks beat. Tell us about the response to the interview that you had with Jim Rutherford.

Yeah, well, I mean, it was crazy. You know, you forget how insane the fan base is here when you're out of the maelstrom a bit, writing about politics and things like that. But I always have to scratch my sports writing itch every now and then. And so I have been following this drama around the Canucks for quite some time. And I wanted to sort of see if I could get a little bit closer to finding out what the hell was going on because really the lack of information coming out of sort of the management ranks and the coaching staff of the Canucks concerning Pedersen and Miller was, you know, was noticeable. So I put in this request to talk to Jim and he was good enough to accept my overture. And we chatted, you know, we

probably spent the first half hour just talking about our roots in Ontario and things like that. And then we got into the interview and he was very, very honest and forthright. I know that some people, I don't mean to ramble here, but I know some people have, there's been conjecture that they reached out to me because they wanted to, you know, deliver this, that this was some sort of contrived and planned exercise and I don't think it was at all. I think it just, it just happened. It was sort of a natural organic phenomenon and it's resulted in what we saw yesterday and continues on today and probably will for the

rest of the week, maybe even the rest of the season. So I actually wanted to get something out on the, on the record here because there, there are people out there that think you have this like constant chatter with Francesco Aquilini, the owner. Yeah.

What is your relationship with the owner? Well, I mean, Francesco and I have known each other for a number of years. I've talked to him recently, but to be honest with you, prior to that, I hadn't talked to Francesco probably in over a year. You know, it's very, it's not like to Francesco probably in over a year. It's very, it's not like buddy-buddy or anything like that.

We have just formed a relationship that is more professional than anything else. And I've just picked his brains on what's happening with the team and around the league occasionally, not even for the purposes of writing about it, but just to sort of, uh, stay abreast of what's going on, try and stay as current as I can. Um, so in the event that I was, you know, asked to write about a situation that I'd have at least sort of, uh, a blue line up to, to sort of a baseline to go from. So that's, you know, that's really been what it's been what it's been all about for a number of

years now. So I don't want to put you on the spot, but have you spoken to him since? No. Or recently? No. Since the article came out? No, I have not.

Which is interesting because I have been kind of waiting for a couple of texts to come in, but that hasn't happened, which I'm quite happy about. I know that Jim has talked to Ian McIntyre since my interview exploded onto the scene, and he doesn't seem to have any regrets about it. So I'm glad to hear that. In a way, it must be some sort of a relief in a way. It's like you're sort of, it wasn't a secret, but it was something that wasn't really being officially acknowledged by the team. And it just seemed silly because everybody in the world knew that there was

problems. These denials, I mean, even, even talk it and, and Quinn Hughes acknowledged it and these denials by the players themselves were just silly. So it's kind of good that it's kind of out in the open now and we'll go from here and see what happens, see what the players say. That's what I'm really interested in. So when you were talking to Jim Rutherford,

did you feel like he had an agenda in his remarks or was it just a conversation that you were having and you were asking questions and he was answering them candidly? I think that that is probably the best description. I think I came in with, you know, my notebook came in with my notebook and I had about 15 questions. I didn't even open it up and I had probably, I had about three questions and then everything else was just based on his answers. I didn't refer to my notes or anything like that. It was just, okay, he says this, well, the natural question is this. And so it was just sort of a back and forth based on his responses. And then there were a couple of occasions where I jumped to specific topics that I wanted to address before the interview concluded.

So I thought it was just an organic, as I say, I've used that word before, but it was, it just was sort of a natural free flowing interview that, uh, wasn't, you know, wasn't scripted in any way. When did it take place? A lot of people want to know that. It took place. Uh, it took place Monday. Okay. Monday morning.

So one of the things that I was left wanting to know is what specifically did the Canucks do to try and mend this riff? You know, in the article you quoted Jim as saying like, you know, there was efforts on both sides to try and make this thing work, but then it would just fester up again. Yeah.

Did you, did you have an opportunity to discuss like what the efforts were? We were joking yesterday as like, did they bring in marriage counselors or someone to try and deal with this? Like, you know, like we had some fun with it, but I am genuinely interested because I'm always, I think this is a fascinating story.

Yeah. No, he didn't really specify what those efforts were other than meetings. He referred to meetings with the players. And I imagine there were dozens and dozens of these meetings over the course of the last few years in which they would have just talked to the players, the two players and, you know, ask them, you know, can't you resolve your differences? I mean, I don't know exactly what happened, but I don't, I don't get the sense. Although I don't know, I don't get the sense that there was any, that there were any third parties brought in to try and mediate

this, this dispute, whatever it is. The other thing that we don't know guys is, you know, what was the nature of this conflict? You know, how did it manifest itself? You know, guys is, you know, what was the nature of this conflict? You know, how did it manifest itself? You know, was it where the, you know, screaming matches in the dressing room? Were there like, you know, horrible insults that were traded? You know, scurrilous barbs? I don't know. I don't know how it manifested itself. And I don't think that you're going to get that information easily from anybody because those are sort of closely guarded moments that happen in the dressing room and people don't normally talk about it. Certainly the players don't because it's seen as a real portrayal of the code that you know whatever happens in the dressing room stays in the dressing

room and so I don't think the gym or Patrick were ever going to violate that code either because then they would lose total respect from the players so I don't know how long it will take if ever before we know the precise nature of you know the dispute itself and and why it's reached this point where it doesn't seem to be something that can be overcome. We're speaking to Gary Mason from the Globe and Mail here on the Haliford and Brough show on Sportsnet 650. So Gary, yesterday on social media you posted what I'd classify as an addendum or a contextualization of some additional quotes that didn't make it into the piece.

Did you want to address those right now? Maybe let some of the listeners know that might not have either seen or heard what exactly you were talking about on Twitter yesterday? Yeah, I you know, it was a What 1400 word piece or something like that when I filed it it was it was overlinked. I had a lot to to address and so I to I there was a part where I said to Jim, you know, well, what if the team sort of gets on a heater? And he said, Well, you know, we're, we're monitoring this situation in kind of real time. And we're always, you know, adjusting our, our, you know, our plans

accordingly. And then he said, you know, but I don't want to, we really don't wanna have to trade either player. And so, I mean, that was kind of the crux of it. And I included that, you know, I paraphrased that and included that in the story. And then I thought, well, you know, I have the opportunity here, you know, thanks to Twitter and this thing was blowing up on Twitter. I thought, okay, well know, I have the opportunity here, you know, thanks to

Twitter and this thing was blowing up on Twitter. I thought, okay, well now I can include some of the quotes around that further sort of expand on what he said. You know, I know that a lot of people kind of made a big deal out of that. Well, first of all, I mean, if I was trying to hide it or keep it out, I know, then I wouldn't have come out later and said, you know, by the way, this is, this is everything he said about it. I mean, obviously I wasn't trying to hide anything or so. I mean, there's that, but also I think at the end of the day, yeah, sure. I mean, that kind of makes sense. I mean, if the team goes on a run, they're not

going to trade two of their best players for less, for inferior, for an inferior return. I mean, that kind of goes without saying. But anyway, I did want to say in the piece that, you know, they really, I mean, it completely makes sense. You know, you don't really want to have to trade either of these guys. This is something I think that really needs to be examined more fully in the post-interview discussion. Like, Rutherford is taking a lot of heat.

Like, why did you allow it to get to this point? You know, why didn't you trade one of the players before now, before now you're now you seem to be over a barrel? But here's the thing, you know, there, he did say that over the course of time, you know, there were periods where everything seemed to be okay. And, and then it would fester again, and then it would fester again and then it would be okay. So I think that they were, they tried to remain hopeful that this was going to eventually resolve itself and things would be okay. And I understand why they would want to think that way because you don't want to have to trade a JT Miller. You don't. I mean, when he's on top of his game,

he's one of the top defense centers in the league. And Elias Pettersson, again, a young, bright, supremely talented player, you don't really want to trade somebody like that. First of all, if you go out and start spreading the word that one or both of these guys are available, you know, without any context, you know, without any word being out there that there's a feud between these guys, GMs are going to be going like, wait a minute here. Like, why would you be, why would you

be putting these, you know, putting these guys on the market? And they would do their due diligence and they would eventually find out that there was a problem. So, I don't know. It just seems to me that it was a bad situation that they were never going to win in terms of trades. And so that's why they tried to make this work for as long as they did. That's my take. That's why I think that they really just tried to, they prayed that this

thing was going to eventually work itself out because you're dealing with two mature adults that you like to think so anyway. Yeah, it's an important and I think pertinent like addendum and contextualization because when you read the article, I think the conclusion most people come to is that the Miller-Peterson relationship is finally untenable and it's reached that point. But then there's also this aspect of it where it's like, well, yeah, it's finally untenable

unless we can't move either of them for what we want, then it's gonna be tenable again. And I appreciate that. Like I understand what Rutherford's saying. He's like, we've reached the breaking point. However, this isn't like a regular workplace where you just fire two people and let them go their own way. They're assets.

It doesn't work that way. So I get exactly what you're talking about there if you wanted to expand on it any further. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I don't know what, what else, you know, what more there is to say. I guess, I guess the question now is what defines, what's the definition of too low of a

return on those assets, right? I think that's exactly it. You know, there's some conjecture about, and there's been some reporting about what the Rangers offered. I mean, we don't know. But we do know and the biggest piece of this whole puzzle is is Queen Hughes and what is his response going to be to any trade and what they get back in return because he's going to be evaluating obviously, what does this, what does this

team look like over the next five years based on the fact that we don't have Miller and or Peterson anymore and we have these assets in return. You know, that, that is a big, big question mark because obviously the Canucks don't want to lose a generational defensement. I mean, that, that's pretty clear. The fan base would, I would say that that would be a point at which the fan base, many of them would just desert the team. So I think that that is, I mean, I can imagine, although Rutherford wouldn't really get into it, like the input that Quinn used has had into this whole thing has had to have been pretty huge. I mean, they rely on him to take the temperature

of that dressing room. They would have relied on him to give his feedback on what he has seen, what he's heard, seen, whatever and whether he felt it was fixable or not. I just can't imagine that his input wouldn't have been greatly valued in this whole discussion. So, but going forward, I think that he's gotta be, his interests, his wishes are gonna have to be respected

and acknowledged by management in terms of any deals that they do, because once he gives up hope on this team, then he's probably out of here. So Gary, you're not normally a sports writer anymore, so I have one final question for you. What's that? What gets a crazier response?

Writing about the Canucks, writing about Justin Trudeau or writing about Donald Trump? The Canucks, writing about Justin Trudeau, or writing about Donald Trump. Oh, God. The Canucks by far. The Canucks by a magnitude of about a thousand. Oh my God. There's nothing like it. You know, I forgot, you know, every once in a while I get to do this and I really forget about how rabid the fan base is.

And it's great. You know, you get obviously hate mail, you get positive stuff, but you love to see a fan base as worked up and crazy as this one. You know, because it's their passion coming through. I mean, a lot of it comes through in kind of a negative way, but you know, at least it's passion and you love to see that. I wasn't quite expecting the response that I got from this, but it's been wonderful in a weird, strange kind of way. That passion is worth, I always say this, that passion is worth

hundreds of millions of dollars in franchise value. hundreds of millions of dollars in franchise value. Wow, 100%. 100%. You know, it's the closest thing we have to, you know, what the NFL has down in the States. I mean, I'm a huge Seahawks fan and season ticket holder. And you go down there and you see the fans are just absolutely, it's religion. Well, the Canucks are the closest thing to a religion that we have in our little city, this little part of the world. So it's great, you know, it's people, you know, live and die by everything that happens to this team. And this is a pretty big deal, this story that has emerged. So it's completely understandable that people would be very upset about it, very impassioned about, you

know, what's happening to the team and what the president of the hockey team has just come out and said. So it's not a surprise, but at the same time, you're always overwhelmed by the response to big stories that concern the hockey team. Gary, great article. It was fantastic, giving us a ton of content both yesterday and today. We really appreciate you taking the time to do this today and it was great talking to you. Okay, fellas. Thank you very much for having me on. I really, really appreciated it. Thank you very much. Thank you. That's Gary Mason from the Globe and Mail here on the Halford and Brough show on Sportsnet 650. You're listening to the best of Halford and Brough.