When Cliff Fletcher Says Exclusive, He Means It For Everybody

I distinctly remember hearing it only two and a half days ago. “We have given the Montreal Canadiens exclusive rights to talk to Mats Sundin,” said Leafs Sort-Of-General Manager Cliff Fletcher to the interviewer at the draft in Ottawa.


I remember he said “exclusive.” He said it plain as day. I heard it and remembered it. “Exclusive.” This means Montreal would be the only one, doesn’t it?


But when I was up at four in the morning getting ready for work, there, on my TV, were the words at the bottom of the screen, “Toronto has given the New York Rangers permission to speak to Mats Sundin.”


So when Cliff Fletcher gave Montreal “exclusive” rights to speak to Sundin, he meant exclusive for two and a half days. Then another team can join the elite group of exclusive teams. I’m pretty sure that’s not being exclusive.


So now I’m not so confident about Sundin joining the Habs. He could very easily pull a Brendan Shanahan, who came within a whisker of joining the Canadiens before he signed with those same Rangers. You know, the ones who are also exclusively talking to the Swede.


Pretty soon the Red Wings, Ottawa, Tampa Bay, Vancouver, and another 20 or so teams will also have exclusive rights to talk to Sundin. Only 29 teams will have exclusive rights to talk to the player. No one else, just 29.


So if I’m Bob Gainey, I’d be slightly taken aback by this new Rangers thing. And if we miss out on Sundin, do we really want Marion Hossa, who obviously plays only for the money and would disrupt the fine chemistry in Montreal right now?


Hossa would probably be the highest paid on the team, and would likely bolt to another club willing to pay, after only one season.


No, we want Mats Sundin. And we want to be exclusive. Am I wrong to think this?


Please note:  From time to time, and with no rhyme or reason to it, my little computer decides to change to a smaller font than normal. This isn’t me adjusting things, it’s just the computer deciding on its own that it would like something different. I don’t know why this, but it’s happened two or three times now. I’m sorry if this story was slightly hard to read. I hope I didn’t damage your eyes.





7 thoughts on “When Cliff Fletcher Says Exclusive, He Means It For Everybody”

  1. DK,

    I haven’t found anything about Fletcher `pimping’ Sundin to any other team, Rangers included ….??? Hehe, IF he has done so then maybe he should be `pimped out’ in an ankle length raccoon coat, a fedora with a feather. lotsa bling and a pink cadillac. And why not? I mean, hey, just because he’s pushing it doesn’t mean he still can’t get it done, eh? Hey, la P, you want `exclusive rights to Mats for a day or two? If so, I’m sure Cliff will be happy to oblige. And, Lawrence, if you really want to `meet’ Trevor, I’m sure Cliff could do something for you. Ahhh, nothing like `exclusivity’ to stir the blood and raise the hopes.

  2. I saw it with my own eyes this morning on Sorts Centre. I nearly choked on my Cheerios. It is curious though, that not more has been mentioned.

  3. I was just reading that the Rangers weren’t given permission to speak, no matter what the media prints. At least, that’s what Cliff Fletcher said in an interview with a New York newspaper.

  4. And that’s fair enough. I first saw that flashed across the bottom of the screen on Sportsnet or whatever, at 4 AM. So I thought about this all day at work and when I got back, I decided to post my thoughts about this. But afterwards, I saw absolutely no other reports regarding the Rangers, so I thought a/ I’m losing my marbles, or b/ Sportsnet’s info was wrong.
    But I really did see it. It wasn’t an acid flashback I’m pretty sure.
    Anyway, thanks Tom.

  5. I saw the same thing. It was rumoured in the media for a while that he did give permission to the Rangers to speak to Sundin.

    So it wasn’t an acid flashback.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *