It doesn’t differ in any way. It is one of the perks of incumbency, as I believed I mentioned.
The AP story says otherwise -
Emphasis added.
Not particularly, no.
Did you happen to read the quote that was cited twice? Thomas’ team said that they did not believe it would affect his relations with the rest of the team.
Your quote is from the team president, not one of the players. I don’t know how often Neely is in the room, and he probably has a pretty good sense of the mood in there, but he isn’t a player or team mate and doesn’t have to work with Thomas every day. Another alleged manager/non-player personnel called Thomas an “[expletive] selfish [expletive].”
So there are two differing opinions from two people within the Bruins organization, which pretty much proves that the issue could lead to a divided room/team/organization on this issue.
Things that lead to division tend to affect team performance. So it’s quite possible that this could lead to disunity on the team and eventually to poorer performance on-ice (which I am so hoping for ;))
Exactly, but more importantly, athletes will almost never go on record trashing a teammate. So even if some of the players openly hate Thomas (or vice-versa), we will likely not hear about it.
I’d say the chances of this affecting how the team plays on the ice are about 0%. I’ve played hockey for 20 years and have been on teams where certain players have pretty much hated each other - to the point of physically fighting off the ice. Yet, in the middle of a game those same players would function just fine on the ice. “I didn’t pass him the puck because he stole my girlfriend, coach!” would never fly. Given these guys are professionals, even the thought of using Thomas’ behavior as the reason for poor performance would be inexcusable. It simply isn’t something going through a player’s head during a game.
Players might be professionals and would never use such a thing as an excuse, but some players earn a reputation of being "toxic’ in the room, and I imagine that arrogance and selfishness are big reasons for those labels being hung on people.
I don’t think Thomas has reached that level, but he kind of seems to have started to move from modest-blue-collar-hard-worker who got into the league the hard way to big-headed-celebritard-make-it-about-me. Get arrogant, hot-headed and/or difficult enough to handle, and you get traded (see Roy, Patrick) or buried in the minors (see (temporarily) Avery, Sean).
Clearly this event isn’t enough to trade or dump Thomas over, but how many more things like this would the team tolerate? These sorts of situations are rather rare, but you never know… he might actually get full enough of himself to fill out those pads of his!
Joke shamelessly stolen from some comments somewhere or other:
Tim Thomas, repeating a Tea Party rant “damn foreigners, coming to our country and stealing all our jobs!”
Shodan, maybe not in Thomas’s case, but it definitely does have an effect.
And yes, it’s a perk of being the president. So what? So is living in the White House. And a visit from the winning team of a particular sport isn’t a partisan thing. If McCain had won, they’d still be visiting. It’s a tradition. It has nothing to do with who’s president. mnemosyne, people say that was also the case with Jaromir Jagr back when he was traded to Washington back in 2000. The Pens were looking to trade someone, and he agreed to be the one. (Of course, that’s just rumor)
Of course, Thomas does have a no-trade clause, but I’m sure if he caused enough problems, it’s not iron-clad.
But come on it really is always about politics. Otherwise no president would bother. And that’s exactly why it’s hockey teams and not porn stars who get invited. I think we should just be honest about these things and stop pretending that any person holding office represents anything broader than that. And really that’s just having self respect. We have out own individual dignity. We shouldn’t crave phantom recognition from a temp. And that’s how we should view every president, as a temp.
They “bother” because it’s a tradition that dates back to 1924. Is the easter egg roll about politics? What about lighting the Christmas tree, or pardoning a turkey? They have nothing to do with politics for reasons explained to you and others several times now. Do you really need it explained to you why porn stars are not invited to meet the president?
A temp who it took billions of dollars to decide on, and who is literally given the ability to unilaterally destroy the world if he sees fit. Temps aren’t executives in control of the biggest and most complex organizations on Earth. They aren’t vetted for years, and voted on by all those who they will be serving. The reason the office and, by extension, the man get a basic modicum of respect is because the office itself is so important and powerful.
Its only improper to disagree and protest a liberal democratic president, if its a conservative republican its your civic duty, it would unAmerican otherwise.
And they bother to adhere to a tradition because it creates political good will.
Yes. Yes. Yes. Presidents do it because they think it makes the public feel good about them and will help them politically. Now, they might also have other reasons to do it, but without understanding the political nature of it, it really is meaningless.
“Explained” to me? I don’t need anything explained to me. I have just as much ability to understand the situation as you do and I disagree with your interpretation.
This one is.
“A basic modicum of respect” doesn’t include accepting invitations you don’t want. It means treating the president like you would any other person, with no deference.
Great, then please point to anyone whose vote was gained or lost by these perfunctory acts? Show me a few people who didn’t want to vote for the president, but were swayed when he met the spelling bee champion. Do you think people were at home going, well I hate that Bush took us to war, but I loved when he met Michael Phelps and Apollo Anton Ono. If this guy is great enough to meet this other guy who swims real fast, he must be a good president. Or do people go, you know, I hate the Obama health care package, but he has to be worth voting for if Reggie Bush met him. I mean Reggie Bush dated a Kardashian, so he’s got to know his stuff.
What do you mean, “understanding the political nature”? Do you contend every act done by any politician is political? Is it political when Obama goes to a restaurant with his wife? What about when a city throws their team a parade for winning? When Terminator 3 came out, Arnold was already the governor. Did that made it a political movie? Was the Expendables a political movie?
Then will acknowledge that your pornstar analogy is ridiculous on its face?
It does when it is expected as a part of your job, and is in keeping with showing deference to a position that has traditionally been held in high esteem. The fact that you keep glossing over this leads me to belief you just don’t get it. It was part of his JOB to go do these things. His boss decided not to be a hard ass about it as to not make a bigger deal of it, but that is part of what he signed on for when he decided to become a professional hockey player. Unfortunately, he hasn’t lived up to the professional part. Regardless of how you feel about the nature of the visit, it was his JOB. Why don’t you think that in and of itself is a not a problem worthy of the criticism he is getting?
Can I ask if you are just one of those people who doesn’t believe in deference at all? Do you not like giving up your seat for old or disabled people, or standing during the national anthem? Do you give cops a hard time, and defy all social norms?
Honestly, I just don’t get why you take so much umbrage when people suggest that an entitled overpaid athlete should accept an invitation to celebrate his TEAMS’S success with the most powerful person in the world, in the most iconic house in the country. Clearly, no one is arguing he should have to go, just that he is being a dick by not going, especially in the way he did it. He lied about why he did it, injected politics into what is typically viewed a non-political event, then did his own cause a disservice by making his hypocrisy and dishonesty the issue instead of Obama’s “mistakes”. I get that you think it’s a political event, but most don’t, and thus, nobody would have accused him of being a fan of Obama’s because he attended. Just as nobody assumes Jeter is a fan of Clinton, Bush, and Obama because he visited the WH with the Yankees during each man’s administration, nobody would assume the same of Thomas. Just your notion that these “poltical” events like the Easter egg roll actually sway people, or provide any political currency to the President is just laughable on it’s face. Do you really think that people are really moved by what is ultimately perfunctory gesture?
You’re pretense to naivete is unseemly. You know full well that these things aren’t empirical, that it all adds up. Politicians are in the business of popularity. That’s why George Bush positioned himself as a regular good-old boy when he was anything but. That’s why politicians dress a certain way; why they go anywhere in public. They’re creating an image, and every public appearance, ceremonial ones included, are part of it. Now, that’s fine; that’s their business. But that doesn’t obligate every citizen to participate in the image-making if they object to it. Indeed, I would say that if someone fundamentally disagrees with a politician, it is his or her civic duty not to participate.
If it’s done in public, it’s political.
I’m sure the potential political impact of the release was considered. They would be crazy not to.
No, it isn’t. He doesn’t fête pornstars because it would be unpopular and would harm him politically. It’s all of the same cloth.
I’m saying deference is wrong and you counter with deference is traditional? I’m sorry, that somehow doesn’t persuade me.
The details of his contractual obligations don’t interest me. That’s between him and his employer. I’m addressing the principle of the matter. And I believe, in principle, it is wrong to show ceremonial deference to an elected official in a democracy. It offends the values of democracy and egalitarianism.
I just don’t care about his job as a hockey player. Viewing him as a member of the American society, I believe what he did was the right thing.
Can I ask if you are just one of those people who doesn’t believe in deference at all? Do you not like giving up your seat for old or disabled people, or standing during the national anthem? Do you give cops a hard time, and defy all social norms?
Because being a good citizen is more important than being a good member of a hockey team, and being a good citizen, in my opinion, demands that you don’t participate in a public relations event with a politician you fundamentally disagree with.
Thomas is only one of two American born players (from what I read) on the Bruins, I highly doubt his political views offend the foreigners on the team!
He is the best goalie in the NHL, I would not care if he was an Onama lover and I hate Obama, if he stops that puck from getting into the net!