After Wayne Gretzky was forced to quiet unsubstantiated rumours that he was coming to run the Toronto Maple Leafs, Jim Kelley wonders when 'anything goes reporting' became the status quo?
I'm certain that it was not necessary for Wayne Gretzky to "quiet" rumours that he was headed to Toronto to become the next general manager of the Toronto Maple Leafs and for one very good reason:
There was no legitimate reason to even suspect that Gretzky was coming to Toronto.
Now that's not to say there wasn't speculation on what appears to be complete fabrication. In many ways the totally unfounded Gretzky rumour is not unlike the garbage stories that link a totally inexperienced candidate, like Gretzky's old teammate Mark Messier, to general manager jobs, but there was a time in the media industry that a rumour made it into mainstream reporting largely because someone said it could, would or might appear to be happening.
Reporters would then run it down, talk to sources, and seek out information. If it appeared there was some truth to the rumour, then it made its way into a story. But it was clearly identified as a rumour; and the media did its job by letting the public know that there was something going on behind the scenes.
I can guarantee you in no uncertain terms that regarding Gretzky coming to Toronto as president, general manager, coach or even director of totally unfounded rumours, that wasn't the case.
Not only is this becoming a joke, it's becoming a major question as to what we should and shouldn't believe from media in general and sports media in particular. Since when in sports reporting, especially on the topic of the Maple Leafs, did "anything goes" become status quo?
As Gare Joyce, a noted author and my friend and colleague in the sports writing business has said on several occasions, when it comes to hockey, it's a business like no other.
"Rumours are to hockey what statistics are to baseball," Joyce says. Translation: it's not a good thing when the industry is driven by speculation rather than facts.
By way of illustration, take Mark Messier. He once said he would like to be a general manager someday, maybe even take Glen Sather's job in New York. Slightly egotistical perhaps, but an honest expression as to his future hopes. The problem was, the media almost immediately added his name to the candidates list of seemingly every job opening in hockey. Doesn't matter that he hasn't even begun to think about inquiring into what would amount to elementary-school level training for the position.
Doesn't matter that to the best of anyone's knowledge he isn't even on a list of prospective candidates to interview should the hockey world as we know it come to an end (something akin to lightning striking a golf course in Florida during the winter meetings) and the available candidates list is reduced to potato chip salesmen and Stanley Cup party organizers, Messier is a declared candidate so he's automatically on a media watch and rumoured to be on the list for Toronto or any other city with an opening and maybe even a few without.
It should matter that to the best of anyone's knowledge Messier isn't on anyone's short list.
It's not much different for Gretzky who somehow (in Toronto at least) would be expected to quit his job as coach of the Phoenix Coyotes (which by the way happens to be secured by a valid contract), sell his ownership share of the team (as if that was even possible given the dire financial straits of the franchise) and take over a franchise that has spent much of the offseason selling the fact that it is looking for the most experienced person available and might even be willing to wait upwards of a year for that person to come free.
Oh, yeah, Wayne Greztky is at the top of that list so he better issue a statement to "quiet" the rumour.
Enough already!
Who started this rumor? An employee of the Coyotes who needed something interesting to say on one of those endless panel debates? Some guy out in the Maritimes who hasn't been within earshot of an NHL source since the Oilers barnstormed the region to make money on preseason games in the 1980s? A website developer who figured out that by publishing outlandish rumours he could drive traffic to a site that would not only make money but land him radio and television spots that would feature his website which keeps the wheels turning and makes him even more money? A talk show "personality?"
A recent web post stated that several "sources" confirm that Joel Quenneville is a leading candidate to coach the Leafs in light of the fact that Paul Maurice has been dismissed. Really? A team searching for a general manager is going to hire a coach first and they are going to do it after they stated they fired the current coach with a year left on his contract so the new GM coming in would have the opportunity to name his own coach?
That's believable.
And who exactly is Quenneville jumping ahead of, Pat Burns, Craig Hartsburg, Greg Gilbert or perhaps some total unknown whose name gets thrown into a column perhaps to pay off a source or befriend an agent? Isn't that how we learned that Fabian Brunnstrom was intent on signing with the Vancouver Canucks? That, by the way, is news to the Dallas Stars.
And let's not even get started on that hot one from last month that had Jason Spezza going from Ottawa to Vancouver for Roberto Luongo. Look, full disclosure here, I've printed my share of rumours over the years and more than a few of them have turned out wrong.
I've learned that there's a fine line between being out front on a story a day (or now even an hour or five minutes) before it breaks and being with the rest of the pack. There's also a fine line in regards to determining when a rumour is worth chasing or is just something being planted on you by someone who has anything from an agenda to a mean streak, to a desire to "play" the system. But there should be a strong line, maybe even a wall between reporting everything one hears and a rumour that just might have the smell of truth around it.
Reporters, columnists, analysts, bloggers, media personalities, talk show hosts and even ex-players-turned media personalities have a responsibility to acknowledge and respect that line.
Media has changed in the last decade, changed again in the last half decade and in today's hyper fast-paced world seems to be changing by the moment. Rumours have their place, but they need to be clearly identified as such and they should never find their way into the system at the expense of fact and especially at the expense of credibility. Maybe it's time we "quieted" ourselves in regards to these make-believe stories. After all, it's our credibility that's at stake. We'd all be better off to realize how much that should matter.