Don Cherry has to go. 

"You people... love our way of life, love our milk and honey. (...) At least you could pay a couple of bucks for poppies, or something like that" Don Cherry said, on national television, about immigrants, while Ron MacLean nodded along and gave a thumbs-up. 

This wasn't a speech given at an alt-right political rally. This was yet another senseless, bigotted rambling by Don Cherry on CBC's, now Sportsnet's, Coach's Corner, his segment on HNIC (Hockey Night In Canada).

What does this have to do with hockey? And why do we continue to allow this person to utilize a sports platform to advance his own agenda? Why have we accepted this for for over 30 years? Maybe in the 80's it made sense to deal with this type of broadcast, but not anymore. Not when projects like "You Can Play" and "Hockey Is For Everyone" exist. If hockey's to be for everyone (even immigrants, with or without poppies), why do we allow Don Cherry to insist otherwise? His words have a bigger impact than 300 rainbow themed nights and events on inclusion. As long as Sportsnet, Rogers Media and its main sponsors allow him to be a mouthpiece for the sport, the culture will not change. And the culture needs to change.

Besides, commentary-wise, Don Cherry contributes with nothing. His view of hockey isn't worth a platform of this size anymore. When Ottawa Senators' forward Scott Sabourin fell unconscious after a life-threatening hit, all Cherry had to add was an off-handed comment on how he "just got out of minors, too bad" and then snicker when MacLean mentioned Sabourin was responsive and "moving all extremities". (The joke here was "moving all extremities". Don Cherry is 85 years old.) That's it. Nothing else. Nothing of interest. Don Cherry hasn't added anything of interest to hockey commentary other than worthless controversy in a very long time. 

Don Cherry perpetuates hockey's underlying homophobic​, xenophobic​, sexist culture. He's persisted on using outdated language to describe what he considers to be "soft players", making derrogatory comments about women, and discriminating against players from outside of North America, or even within, if they don't act or look like "good Canadian boys". In 2013, as over 200 players filled a lawsuit against the NHL for failing to properly disclose the risk of the sport's violence while profiting from it, Don Cherry again used Coach's Corner to insult these men (ironically, the same enforcers he claims to "respect") and their on-going neurological issues, by calling the suit a "ridiculous money grab". This matters. The NHL's own comissioner has publicly dismissed the proven link between CTE and blows to the head. Cherry's comments only serve to complicate the league's already awful relationship with player safety. Cherry never improves the discourse, or brings up new points of view that could push the conversation forward. Coach's Corner has stopped being about explaining the game and offering interesting insight on specific moments/occasions, to become Cherry's personal pulpit where he employs 4th grade vocabulary to spew about his conservative nonsense. It's an embarrassment for the NHL (and hockey in general) to still point to this man as someone worthwhile in sports' commentary. 

What huge credibility does Cherry have, after all, that's warranted him a permanent blank check after so many racist, sexist and overall bigotted comments? He played 20 years in the minor leagues and a single NHL game. His career as a Coach was mostly a failure when compared to other contemporaries. Is there no one better to speak on Coach's Corner? We argue that there is, and it's about time we admit it. 

However iconic Don Cherry is in Canadian culture, whatever he's been awarded, he's long past deserving the crediblity or influence of Coach's Corner. However big his "loyal audience" is, they do not follow him for valuable hockey insight, they follow him for his controversy, and his funny suits, and they can find that somewhere other than one of hockey's biggest platforms.

Canada deserves better. Hockey deserves better. We demand accountability for someone who has evaded it for too long, and we demand it now. Actions speak louder than empty PR statements. Zero-consequence policies set dangerous precedents and tell your audience you are okay with his words, regardless of what else you try to say. It's meaningless to argue that your values are not his when he's the face of your program. 

We ask that media outlets have the backbone and the vision to consider 1) Don Cherry's active role in denigrating their own image and hockey's. 2) His tireless contributions to a lingering, toxic culture that only serves to harm the sport we all love and set it back for years.