A wake up call for the NHL & NHLPA

[Jim Bob 0]

On the ESPN.com homepage there is a poll about how much you will miss the NHL in the event of a long lockout:

55106 votes:

65.8% - Won't miss it at all.

20.3% - Will miss watching it on TV.

8.6% - Can't live without the NHL.

5.0% - Will miss going to games.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/quickie

Two Words For You:

LOCKOUT.  MANIA.

"ZeN-H-L": If a lockout happens in the sports world and no one is paying attention, does it make a sound?

Declining relevancy: People keep saying this lockout will kill the sport; I'm sorry: Did I miss something? It's been wheezing for years.

Little sympathy for either side: How can players decry a salary cap when one works just fine for their NFL counterparts? How can owners deny that major sports have contracted into a "Big Three?"

This lockout is about the bottom line, so here's another one: What happens when both sides realize that no one notices they're gone?

[Chadd 916]

As I've said before the average American sports fan wants more sports like the NFL and NASCAR that only happen once a week and has action so slow you can watch half a dozen replays before anything else happens.

[wristshot19 0]

It's really not a fair time to put up this poll anyways. Most of the people visiting the ESPN site right now probably aren't hockey fans. Put it up during a season and you will probably get a different response b/c more true hockey fans with be frequenting the site.

[Jim Bob 0]

But the NHL doesn't rely merely on "true hockey fans" for revenues. Casual hockey fans that are sports fans make up a big portion of the league's American fanbase and is the group that they need to turn on to the sport to have their TV deal with NBC work.

That that group is getting very turned off by the NHL is not a good thing at all.

Scott Burnside has a good article on the subject of what will happen to the NHL in the US:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/worldcup04/c...tory?id=1881815

[Chadd 916]

The NHL needs to market the sport much more effectively. I hope that the only reason thay have not done so in recent years is their desire to rework teh CBA in their favor. If they have been doing the best job possible to market the sport, it is well and truely screwed. Bear in mind the media likes to kill things off and be the first to promote the next big thing. Most of the articles about hockey in the US press right now are simply piling on.

[Jim Bob 0]

GB/BG and the art of war by Adam Proteau

http://www.thehockeynews.com/en/headlines/...?id=24736&cat=8

It's a really good read.

[Jim Bob 0]

The NHL needs to market the sport much more effectively. I hope that the only reason thay have not done so in recent years is their desire to rework teh CBA in their favor. If they have been doing the best job possible to market the sport, it is well and truely screwed. Bear in mind the media likes to kill things off and be the first to promote the next big thing. Most of the articles about hockey in the US press right now are simply piling on.

Personally, I think the boring style of play, that was even in effect in the WCOH which was supposed to be a showcase of the best the game could offer, is a bigger factor.

It's hard to market stars such as Jarome Iginla when the game itself doesn't allow him to shine.

The NHL needs another Gretzky. And even someone as talented offensively as Sidney Crosby or Ilya Kovalchuk can't even come close because of the defensive mindedness that has infested the game at every level.

That needs to change first and then you will be able to market the stars in the game because fans will want to see them perform.

What casual fan wants to see Gaborik when he plays in Jacques Lemaire's trap?

Or when Kovalchuk goes up against the Preds and you know he'll be clutched and grabbed to death. Unless he can get a one timer off on the PP of course.........

And that's if Ilya hasn't been benched for not being "responsible defensively".

Sorry, but I don't remember Slats ever talking about Gretzky or Kurri or Coffey having to become more defensively responsible.

[2048 0]

Slats also never had to worry about being outscored. Well, almost never. He had at least three fifty goal scorers on his team every year. In today's NHL, how many guys get that? None.

[Chadd 916]

GB/BG and the art of war by Adam Proteau

http://www.thehockeynews.com/en/headlines/...?id=24736&cat=8

It's a really good read.

It's just another writer taking potshots without offering any real insight or solutions. Leep pounding away and they'll prevent people from even considering watching hockey when it starts.

I agree that the style of hockey currently sucks. What should be done about it? Complaining and not offering a solution doesn't really do a damn bit of good. Tampa had a really talented team and played a more open style than anyone else in the playoffs. Meanwhile Calgary didn't have nearly as much talent and trapped them into a 7 game series. unless the NHL finds a way to reward goal scoring more, I don't see a way to stop it.

[mack 44]

Or when Kovalchuk goes up against the Preds and you know he'll be clutched and grabbed to death. Unless he can get a one timer off on the PP of course.........

Hey now, watch some Predator games before you label them as some team that uses the trap as a crutch. They're one of the grittiest teams around, especially when you factor the non-factor they have in size.

[Jim Bob 0]

Or when Kovalchuk goes up against the Preds and you know he'll be clutched and grabbed to death. Unless he can get a one timer off on the PP of course.........

Hey now, watch some Predator games before you label them as some team that uses the trap as a crutch. They're one of the grittiest teams around, especially when you factor the non-factor they have in size.

Isn't gritty a code word for untalented clutch and grab artists?

[Chadd 916]

Or when Kovalchuk goes up against the Preds and you know he'll be clutched and grabbed to death. Unless he can get a one timer off on the PP of course.........

Hey now, watch some Predator games before you label them as some team that uses the trap as a crutch. They're one of the grittiest teams around, especially when you factor the non-factor they have in size.

Isn't gritty a code word for untalented clutch and grab artists?

Not generally. They skate and hit and play a good forecheck game most of the time from what I've seen.

[mack 44]

I don't know where you got that definition from, but gritty to me was always gritty. "Crappy" is teams that rely on the clutch and grab.

[Jim Bob 0]

GB/BG and the art of war by Adam Proteau

http://www.thehockeynews.com/en/headlines/...?id=24736&cat=8

It's a really good read.

It's just another writer taking potshots without offering any real insight or solutions. Leep pounding away and they'll prevent people from even considering watching hockey when it starts.

I agree that the style of hockey currently sucks. What should be done about it? Complaining and not offering a solution doesn't really do a damn bit of good. Tampa had a really talented team and played a more open style than anyone else in the playoffs. Meanwhile Calgary didn't have nearly as much talent and trapped them into a 7 game series. unless the NHL finds a way to reward goal scoring more, I don't see a way to stop it.

I think he offered the suggestion that Goodenow and Bettman should focus less on trying to beat the other and instead work to grow the game so that everyone's piece of the pie is bigger because the pie itself keeps growing at a rapid rate.

[Jim Bob 0]

I don't know where you got that definition from, but gritty to me was always gritty. "Crappy" is teams that rely on the clutch and grab.

Nah, the New Jersey Devils have always been called a "gritty" team and they are the ultimate clutch and trap team.

The problem is that the vast majority of teams have bought into the clutch and trap mentality.

Heck, it even spilled over into the WCOH which was supposed to be a showcase for how great the game can be.

Personally, there was too much of the WCOH that was completely unwatchable because everyone was focuses on "limiting mistakes" and being "defensive responsible".

[Chadd 916]

The problem is that the referees don't punish teams for playing that style. I don't care if it takes 20 powerplays a game to get rid of that crap.

[Jim Bob 0]

The problem is that the referees don't punish teams for playing that style. I don't care if it takes 20 powerplays a game to get rid of that crap.

To me it's a twofold problem:

1) The refs letting things go.

2) Teams and coaches empasizing a defensive system and defensive responsiblity over offensive skill and creativity.

Here is my biggest gripe with the way the game is coached:

Ilya Kovalchuk and Jason Spezza get benched for not being "defensively responsible", yet players that could score for the life of themselves, but are defensively responsible, get loads of ice time.

THN was falling right in line in their latest issue when they said about Kovalchuk something like "Ilya needs to realize it's better to score 30 goals and be a +10 than it is to score 40 goals and be a -10".

Personally, I miss guys that score a ton of goals. And I'd much rather see guys that cherry pick and can dangle than guys playing the left wing lock and never getting deep in the offensive zone and forechecking and cycling down low.

[Chadd 916]

Kovalchuk wasn't even trying to play defense and it hurt his team. I agree with his being benched. I have no problem expecting players to compete at both ends of the ice as long as they are given encouraged to be aggressive offensively and take chances from time to time.

[Jim Bob 0]

Kovalchuk wasn't even trying to play defense and it hurt his team. I agree with his being benched. I have no problem expecting players to compete at both ends of the ice as long as they are given encouraged to be aggressive offensively and take chances from time to time.

The problem in today's game is that a guy who will play defense, but has no skill whatsoever is likely to get more opportunities than a guy that has a ton of offensive skill and is clueless defensively.

I'm sorry, but I'm not entertained by guys that backcheck hard.

It's the whole "win at all costs" mindset that has made the NHL less entertaining.

And that's a problem.

This is an entertainment business. And right now, the game isn't all that entertaining.

Thankfully, I have my Ultimate Gretzky DVD to get me through the lockout. :D

[MDE3 0]

It's interesting that all the opinions from die hard fans so far expressed in here, and those I have seen elsewhere, pretty much reflect the same opinion about the lack of excitement producded by the current style of NHL hockey.....almost to the 100% level. So if it's not the fans that want this....???????

Unfortunately the NHL continues to give "lip service" to the concept of changing the amount of obstruction viewed in the games...but unfortunately this "lip service" seem only to be of the kind intended to satisfy the owners who have built clubs who must depend on this type of system to work...in order to "win".

The moment someone pipes up publically to say the game needs to change to keep the fans attention....they get drowned out by a chorus of morons(inluding some very noticable media personalities) who continue to support the status quo, claiming that only "winning" is what grows the fan base at a local level....well...do the math.

The trick is to be able to attract fans to the game(including the ones at home)....who are NOT in front of the set, or at the game just to watch the home team win, but because they love watching the game itself....something even die hard fans are currently losing (the love of the game itself..as seen in the NHL)

The other issue (hiss boo) is the fighting.....there is a school of thought that claims there are a lot of casual fans who treat hockey as entertainment, not as a sport..simply because they can see some brutality...Unfortunately I think there are a lot more potential fans who lose interest in the sport for the very same reason...starting with the parents of kids who are trying to imbue their kids with a sense of fair play through athletics. When fighting is seen as sanctioned by the organizers of the sport....every parent of the smaller, but possibly skilled athlete, pretty much immediately decides there must be a better athletic venue to host their young charges...They are not interested in their kids looking forward to becoming part of a spin off of the WWF. The words "blood sport" and "goon sport" have recently and again been bandied about in the media since the Bertuzzi incident and others. If the sport itself did not sanction fighting..this incident would have been seen simply as an aberration, instead of a representation of what the sport stands for.

There is a need for change in the sport..in a big way.....but if the sport dissapears from the pro horizon for 12 - 24 months, who will be left to notice the changes if they are made?

[Chadd 916]

Simple enforcement of the rules already on the books is fine, radical changes to the rules aren't necessary. I personally think fighting is overrated and overanalyzed in the sport and will continue to decrease on its own. As I've stated before most of the media writing those "blood sport" articles are people who would never take the time to pay attention to an entire hockey game anyway. Remove fighting and you aren't going to inmcrease viewership or your fan base. It has to happen at the community level and it has to be done by the league and the teams in conjunction with the players.

[MDE3 0]

I agree about the issue of enforcing the rules as they are..no argument there from me..it's just that this has been said for so long and never followed through...first month of the season..and then what?

As for the fighting...I disagree...I think the loss of fans due to fighting is not measureable because it happens so early in the indoctrination of the potential fans to the sport. I have seen it happen..from parents to casual sports fans..who look at hockey as a marginally entertaining sport...in part because so many of the games are so boring for the other reasons stated, in part because they do not really understand the game, and in great part because they feel any sport that sanctions fighting, must be "hokey"..as none of the other "real" sports do it. Fighting compounds the issue of credibility in a sport that cries out to have it's validity confirmed.

It's not existing fans of the sport that you lose with fighting..it's the ones who never become fans of the sport because of the fighting. This coming from someone who let his kid play in a full contact men's "fighting league" from the age of 16...I love the game in spite of the goonery, not because of it.

[Chadd 916]

More often than not it's simply a cop out for people who are too embarrassed to say they don't understand the game or htey don't have the attention span to actually keep up.

[jay 1]

I can tell you that in attending many ECHL games over the last few years that if the fans knew or seriously expected a rough game with a few fights there were without a doubt at least another 1,000 tickets sold. One of the highest attended games last season was one wherein a previous matchup there were lots of fisticuffs. Word spread fast. The ECHL tried to virutally eliminate fighting form the league about 4-5 years ago by adopting a break it up at all costs attitude with the officials. Guys were almost always pulled apart or wrapped up by the linesman before tempers could escalate. Attendance over the following few yearts went from an all time high to what lately has become an all time low for most franchises. Granted some of this can be attributed to the popularity of hockey waning and the glut of new franchises that lost the "new thing" image in their respective towns, but from being at the games (and just about all the games over the last 9 years) the lack of excitement in the stands correlated to the lack of fighting on the ice. For most people, the games simply got boring.

[Chadd 916]

Same leadership on both sides for both of them, can't blame one side without blaming the other as well.