Charlie in Charge

It is an opportunity, however, that some feel he either squandered or, worse, was never capable of seizing in the first place. Jacobs certainly had the right name for the job, but plenty of people who work with him say he’s got the wrong personality. One person intimately acquainted with how the organization has operated under Charlie Jacobs describes him as a wallflower, content to sit quietly in meetings for hours on end. “An organization is a reflection of the top slot,” the source says. “When the top slot is filled by someone who is introverted and distant, that message gets carried to the fan base.... He could sit in a three-hour meeting and say five words. He’s not a leader.”

Jacobs seems annoyed by this criticism, bothered to have to even discuss it. He says his management style is to empower his department heads to run their divisions, and then to make decisions—which may or may not happen in full view of his subordinates—based on what they tell him. “I might sit in a meeting about tickets and listen to our director of ticketing or our director of marketing without saying a word,” Jacobs says. “I don’t find that as a fault or a quality of being a shy person. I think that’s more about understanding exactly what’s happening, taking it into account, and, frankly, if it needs direction, or it needs a slight adjustment in one direction or another, then that can happen, but it doesn’t necessarily have to happen in a group of five or 10 people.” In the time since Jacobs has taken over, several longtime executives have left the team. The turnover has led to some hard feelings among both those who remain with the team and those who’ve been let go, which Jacobs’s supporters blame for the negative perceptions of his leadership.

Some of Jacobs’s employees compare his style with that of Kraft, Henry, or Celtics boss Wyc Grousbeck, all of whom, they believe, are superior to Jacobs at community networking and brand enhancement. Those same critics bash him like a piñata for his perceived failings. “There’s a baseball team in the Back Bay,” says someone who’s worked closely with Jacobs. “I’m sure you’ve heard of them. And a football team down in Foxboro. When they’re courting a potentially lucrative sponsor, they’ll have the owner and GM and whoever else is necessary come into that meeting to kiss babies and shake hands and do whatever it takes to secure new partnerships. In the Bruins’ case? There’s almost no support at all. There were a handful of times when [Jacobs] was paraded in front of sponsors to give the high-level, behind-the-scenes report—the state of the union. And he really failed to make any sort of positive impression. After that, we asked for help, but we didn’t necessarily want him front and center.”

This is where it gets sticky, or at least uncomfortable. When you’re talking to Charlie Jacobs about Charlie Jacobs, he puts his guard up, like a kid who’s been hit so much he reflexively flinches, even when there’s no cause for concern. Dealing with the press is something Jacobs would obviously prefer to avoid. “I don’t mind it,” he says, “but PR control, media control, those are oxymorons—there is no control. I know the way it works. It’s the dance they’ve done forever. Regardless of how well you know them, you’re still surprised by what I view as ‘the shot,’ so to speak.”

The media have certainly weighed in on Jacobs’s leadership. Shaughnessy wrote in the Globe that he “underwhelms us,” and the Herald characterized him as unqualified. But these are veritable attaboys when it comes to sports criticism in this town—especially compared with the pounding his father has taken. And yet those around him insist he’s been treated unfairly. “They’re beating him up,” says Chiarelli, whose office adjoins Jacobs’s, adding, “If I was in his shoes, it would bother me. This is his family business. He wants to succeed, and he’s passionate about it. It would be upsetting to me.”

As a result of his unease with the press, Jacobs is more likely than not to have Chiarelli or one of the players field interview requests. He repeatedly tells me he doesn’t think he’s the story. Or maybe, given the family history, he simply doesn’t want to be. Either way, the overall effect has created an image that makes Jacobs look suspicious of the media, which, in turn, has made many in the press suspicious of him.

“It’s not smart,” says Mike Salk, who covers the Bruins for the 890 ESPN radio station. “They need a face of the franchise, and he’s not very good at it.... You don’t really have a player to be the face of the franchise. Zdeno [Chara] is the best player, but he’s not very media-polished. For years, you had [former Bruins captain Ray] Bourque and Neely. Now, you have Charlie. That’s not good.”

The press coverage of Chiarelli’s hiring crystallized Jacobs’s opinion of the media. The way the reporters had it, a guy named Ray Shero was at the top of the Bruins’ list for the GM job, but he ended up taking the same position with the Pittsburgh Penguins. Jacobs says the writers had it all wrong. He claims one reporter saw Shero at the airport, figured that he had to be the number one choice, and ran with the story, creating an avalanche of misguided speculation about whom the Bruins were targeting.

Go on to the next page for more...