NHL Coaches’ Association criticizes Vegas for blocking Bruce Cassidy's talks with other clubs
The NHL Coaches’ Association has publicly reacted to the Vegas Golden Knights' treatment of former coach Bruce Cassidy, after reports emerged in North America that the club is not allowing other teams to interview him for open coaching positions. According to a Sportsnet report, the coaches' association assessed that coaches who are still under contract, but no longer work for the club that pays them, should not be prevented from seeking a new job. In the same statement, the NHLCA said that, if multiple clubs do not receive permission to speak with Cassidy, such a case would be unprecedented at the NHL head coach level. The dispute is additionally sensitive because it is happening in the middle of the playoffs, at a moment when the Golden Knights are continuing their fight for the Stanley Cup, while several other clubs are looking for a new man behind the bench.
Cassidy is in an unusual professional situation: Vegas relieved him of his duties at the end of March 2026, but, according to available reports, he remains tied to the club by contract for one more season. Such status gives the Golden Knights formal control over whether he may talk with other NHL organizations, but the case has opened the question of the limits of club rights after a coach has already been dismissed. According to Sportsnet, the Edmonton Oilers requested permission to interview Cassidy, and interest has meanwhile also been linked with other clubs looking for a solution for the coaching position. Vegas, according to general manager Kelly McCrimmon, currently maintains that the organization's focus is on the continuation of the playoffs.
Why the case became bigger than a usual coaching change
In the NHL, it is not unusual for a coach who has been dismissed to remain under contract with his former club, especially if his contract is still running and if the club continues to pay his salary. What attracted attention in this case is the fact that Cassidy has already been relieved of his duties, while according to available information his former club is still invoking contractual rights in order to delay or prevent talks with other employers. Sportsnet reported that Edmonton requested permission to speak with Cassidy as early as May 12, during a period when the Oilers were considering changes after an early playoff exit. The Edmonton club soon officially confirmed that head coach Kris Knoblauch and assistant coach Mark Stuart had been relieved of their duties.
In its reaction, the NHLCA did not challenge league rules or contractual mechanisms, but it clearly emphasized a broader principle: a coach who no longer performs work for a club should not be closed off from other professional opportunities. Such wording shows that the association does not see the case only as a dispute between Vegas and potentially interested clubs, but also as a question of the working position of coaches in the league. If a club can dismiss a coach, continue paying out his contract and at the same time prevent him from holding talks with other organizations, it opens space for debate over whether the contract becomes a tool of business protection or an obstacle to professional mobility. The association therefore stressed that its priority is protecting the interests of its members in such circumstances.
Cassidy's status: dismissed, but still under the control of his former club
According to the NHL's official announcement, the Vegas Golden Knights dismissed Cassidy on March 30, 2026, and replaced him with John Tortorella. NHL.com stated at the time that Vegas was third in the Pacific Division, but had a 3-5-2 record in the previous ten games, while since January 19 it had been 8-15-4. General manager Kelly McCrimmon said then that the team had lost energy and that management concluded a different leader was needed for the final stretch of the season. Cassidy was dismissed despite having led the Golden Knights in 2023 to the first Stanley Cup in franchise history, which further strengthens the contrast between his recent reputation and current uncertainty.
After the dismissal, NHL.com reported that Cassidy had recorded a 178-99-43 record in almost four seasons in Vegas. The same report states that in 12 NHL seasons as a head coach, including periods with the Washington Capitals, Boston Bruins and Vegas Golden Knights, he had an overall record of 470-254-96 with nine ties from the league's earlier period. In the playoffs, according to the same data, he coached 119 games and recorded a 62-57 record. Those numbers explain why Cassidy quickly became one of the most sought-after coaching candidates after his dismissal, but also why Vegas might be cautious about the possibility of him immediately joining a direct competitor.
Cassidy, in an interview with NHL Network, as reported by OilersNation, confirmed that he had not spoken with other clubs because Vegas must give permission. He said he understands that the Golden Knights have other obligations while they are playing in the playoffs, but added that he hopes the club will at some point allow him to hold talks because he is a coach and wants to continue working. That statement is important because it shows that Cassidy himself is not publicly escalating the dispute with his former club, but at the same time he is clearly making it known that returning behind the bench is his professional goal. It is precisely between formal correctness and an obvious desire for a new job that the tension arises which prompted the coaches' association's reaction.
Vegas invokes the playoffs, NHLCA warns of a precedent
Kelly McCrimmon on May 20, 2026, according to Sportsnet's report from Denver, confirmed that multiple clubs had requested permission to speak with Cassidy. McCrimmon said the Golden Knights have been consistent in their position that the organization's current focus is on the Stanley Cup playoffs and that interested clubs have respected that. He also added that he had spoken with Cassidy and that the former coach understands the situation. With that, Vegas attempted to present the decision as a question of timing and organizational focus, and not as a permanent ban or punishment for the dismissed coach.
The NHLCA, however, sees a broader problem in the same situation. According to the statement carried by Sportsnet, the association respects league rules and processes, but believes that coaches who are under contract and no longer work for the club should not be prevented from seeking other opportunities. The statement particularly emphasizes that it would be unprecedented at the head coach level if multiple teams were refused or prevented in an attempt to speak with Cassidy. Such a choice of words is important because the NHLCA is not speaking only about one request from Edmonton, but about a possible pattern that could be repeated in future coaching changes.
In practice, the case lies in a gray area between contractual law, sporting competition and professional ethics. If Vegas truly continues to pay Cassidy's contract, the club has an interest in retaining a certain amount of control over his next engagement. On the other hand, if the coach has already been dismissed and is not participating in the team's daily work, it is difficult to ignore the argument that he should be enabled to compete for open positions.
Edmonton, Los Angeles, Toronto and Vancouver in the background of the coaching market
Interest in Cassidy cannot be viewed separately from the broader movement on the NHL coaching market. Sportsnet reported that Edmonton, Los Angeles, Toronto and Vancouver were mentioned in discussions around available benches, while McCrimmon confirmed that multiple clubs had requested permission to speak with the former Vegas coach. Edmonton most concretely entered public focus because soon after reports of interest in Cassidy it officially relieved Kris Knoblauch and Mark Stuart of their duties. According to the Oilers' announcement, general manager Stan Bowman said the changes were needed after a thorough assessment of the past season.
For Edmonton, the coaching question is especially important because the team has high expectations and a core that in recent years had been built for a title challenge. NHL.com reported that Knoblauch in three seasons behind the Oilers' bench had a 135-77-21 record and 31-22 in the playoffs, and led the team to consecutive appearances in the Stanley Cup Final before this season's first-round exit. In such a context, Cassidy, a coach with a Stanley Cup won and experience leading teams with great expectations, naturally appears as an attractive option. But as long as Vegas does not issue permission, interested clubs cannot conduct a normal selection process with him.
Los Angeles, Toronto and Vancouver are also mentioned in reports about the coaching market, but available information about their contacts with Cassidy is not equally firm. That is precisely why it is important to distinguish confirmed facts from market assessments and media speculation. It has been confirmed that Cassidy was dismissed, that he is under contract, that multiple clubs requested permission to speak with him and that the NHLCA is monitoring the situation. It has not, however, been officially confirmed that Vegas permanently rejected all requests, nor has it been confirmed that the decision was made exclusively to prevent the strengthening of a division rival.
A second controversy further increased the pressure on the Golden Knights
The Cassidy case is not the only topic because of which the Golden Knights have been under public scrutiny in recent days. The NHL announced on May 15 that Vegas would lose a second-round pick in the 2026 draft, while head coach John Tortorella was fined 100,000 dollars because of, as the league stated, serious violations of the rules for media obligations in the playoffs. According to the NHL statement, the violation happened after Game 6 of the second round against the Anaheim Ducks on May 14, when Tortorella was not available to the media and the Golden Knights' locker room was not opened to journalists. Sportsnet later reported that Vegas's appeal had been rejected and that the penalty remained in force.
McCrimmon on May 20 in Denver, according to Sportsnet, read a prepared statement in which he admitted that the club made a mistake in that case. He said Vegas missed an opportunity to connect with fans after winning the series and that responsibility lies with Tortorella, but also with him as general manager. At the same time, he refused to continue answering questions about the penalty, considering that the league had already decided on that matter. Still, the fact that the discussion about Cassidy is unfolding in the same week in which the club is losing a high draft pick because of media violations further strengthened the impression that questions of management, communication and attitudes toward league rules are piling up around the Golden Knights.
For Vegas, the sporting context remains extremely important. The Golden Knights reached the Western Conference Final and were scheduled to open the series against the Colorado Avalanche on May 20 in Denver, according to the schedule and reports carried by the NHL and Sportsnet. The club can therefore claim that it does not want to spend organizational focus on issues that are not directly connected with the current series. But that argument has limited reach because the decision on permission to speak with Cassidy concerns a man who no longer leads the team. That is precisely why the NHLCA believes it is necessary to publicly warn of potential consequences for the coaching profession.
What the decision could mean for future coaches in the NHL
The discussion around Cassidy could have long-term consequences for the way dismissed coaches with valid contracts are treated in the NHL. If Vegas continues to withhold permission while the playoffs are ongoing, other clubs could lose precious time in their search for a coach, and Cassidy could remain outside the process for jobs that are now opening. Such an outcome would be especially problematic if it turns out that multiple clubs could not speak with him, because that would confirm the NHLCA's warning about a precedent at the head coach level. On the other hand, if Vegas soon allows talks, the case could be remembered as an unpleasant but temporary delay caused by bad timing.
There is also a financial dimension. According to reports about Cassidy's contract, Vegas should pay him the remaining salary as long as he does not find a new job or until usual offset mechanisms are applied, depending on the specific contractual terms. That means the club could in theory benefit financially if Cassidy were employed elsewhere, because the payment obligation could be reduced. That is exactly why some analysts consider it unusual that permission is not being given quickly, as is often the practice when a dismissed coach receives a new opportunity. But without insight into the full contract and internal talks, it is not possible to state precisely what financial calculations are in the background.
The most important question for the league and the coaches' association remains a matter of principle: can a club after a dismissal retain enough control to close the market to a coach, at least temporarily, and should the NHL set clearer limits. According to available information, the NHL has not yet publicly announced an intervention that would directly force Vegas to issue permission. The NHLCA, however, with its reaction has sent a signal that the case is not being viewed as an ordinary internal decision by one club. If a similar practice spreads, every future coach with remaining years on a contract could find himself in a situation in which he has been dismissed, paid, but professionally blocked.
Golden Knights between the fight for the title and questions of reputation
Since entering the league, the Vegas Golden Knights have built a reputation as one of the most aggressive and successful organizations in the NHL. The franchise reached the Stanley Cup Final already in its debut season, and in 2023 won the title under Cassidy's leadership. The club's management in the past has not hesitated to make big decisions, including coaching changes and roster changes, often with a clear message that the main goal is the immediate result. Such an approach brought sporting success, but the Cassidy case shows that the same determination can also produce reputational risks when it collides with the expectations of the league, the media and professional associations.
It is currently not clear when Vegas will change its position and whether Cassidy will receive permission to speak with the clubs that want to interview him. According to McCrimmon's words, the Golden Knights' focus remains on the playoffs, and according to the NHLCA's position, the situation is still developing. For Cassidy, who publicly says he wants to continue coaching, time is an important factor because clubs usually want to quickly conclude the search for a new coach and prepare for the draft, free agency and the summer development program. For the NHL, the case could become a test of the relationship between clubs' contractual rights and coaches' professional rights. For Vegas, meanwhile, every next decision will be viewed not only through the prism of sporting interest, but also through the question of how far a club may go in controlling a man it has already decided to remove from the bench.
Sources:
- Sportsnet – report on the reaction of the NHL Coaches’ Association, McCrimmon's statements and Bruce Cassidy's status (link)
- NHL.com – official news on Bruce Cassidy's dismissal and the appointment of John Tortorella, as well as data on Cassidy's performance in Vegas (link)
- Sportsnet – report that the Edmonton Oilers requested permission to interview Bruce Cassidy (link)
- NHL.com – official statement on the penalty to the Vegas Golden Knights for violating media rules in the playoffs (link)
- Edmonton Oilers / NHL.com – official announcement on the dismissal of Kris Knoblauch and Mark Stuart from coaching duties (link)
- OilersNation – report of Cassidy's statement to NHL Network that he wants to continue coaching and that Vegas must give permission for talks (link)