Category Archives: Sports (MC Archive)

Sports columns that appeared on Jason Menard’s previous Web site, Menard Communications.

Jealousy Colours Our Perception of Athletes

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

At a time in our history when it’s often more and more difficult to call oneself a sports fan, there are stories like Robert Edwards’ to help you keep the faith. But instead of celebrating our triumphs, we prefer to shove them aside and focus on the negative. And the reason behind this? Jealousy.

For every Terrell Owens in this world there are a thousand more quality players out there who are fulfilling their contractual obligation. For every story of a player beating his wife, committing a crime, or getting busted with drugs, there are countless other stories of players that are good family men, dedicated to their community, and going the extra mile to help those in need.

Instead of focusing on the good in the game, we hungrily devour the most salacious news reports involving players, which then send the truly pompous among us to their respective pulpits to admonish the sins of excess that modern sport has bred. Yet while we’re so ready at hand for a ritual stoning, why do we not have an equal passion for lauding those who merit it?

Percentage-wise, the number of people who commit crimes while playing professional sports is no different than that of the society as a whole. However, due to their high-profile nature, athletes will find themselves in the newspapers much more than the local pharmacist or salesman who commits the same crime. Yet, while people are willing to chastise athletes as a group as lawless thugs, where are those same generic cries against lawyers, doctors, garbage men, or any other profession? The number of miscreants is the same for all groups – a small percentage – but those few bad apples seem to spoil the whole bunch a lot easier when the increased exposure is factored in.

Edwards offers a feel-good story. Injured in a freak accident in a National Football League Beach Bowl during the 1999 Pro Bowl in Hawaii, he has come back from suffering severe nerve damage that had the potential to cause him to lose his leg. After being told that he’d never play football again and would be forced to walk with a cane for the rest of his life, Edwards chose to persevere. Since that proclamation of a career death sentence, he enjoyed brief stints back in the NFL before coming to the Canadian Football League. Becoming the Montreal Alouettes’ starting tailback six games into the season, Edwards enjoyed a season that saw him rush for one yard shy of 1,200. And now he’s on the cusp of playing in a game that could see his team earn a trip to the Grey Cup.

Yet all we hear about is the continued exploits of Terrell Owens. An inspirational story like Edwards doesn’t get the time of day, but the petulant, puerile demands and antics of the Philadelphia Eagles’ wide receiver dominate sports talk radio, publications, Web sites, and newspapers.

But far be it for us to blame the media. Too often the press is the made scapegoat for delivering us exactly what we want. If bad news didn’t sell and we weren’t so hungry for negativity, then the press would reflect that in their reporting. Simply put we’ve created a culture where if it bleeds it leads, and we have no one to blame but ourselves.

We want to admire our athletes from afar. We are awed by their displays of athleticism and ease of ability in performing feats the likes of which we can only dream. Yet, tempering that awe is a sense of jealousy. We are incensed by the sheer volume of money that these athletes pull in for playing a game. As we plug along, trying to make ends meet, we find it hard to relate to athletes who wear jewellery that costs more than our car.

So instead of congratulating them on their good fortune and accepting the fact that they’re better than us athletically, we need to regain our moral or intellectual superiority. We know we can’t compete on the field of play, but in the fabric of society we can assume our elevated mantle. Like politicians or, more appropriately, the entertainers that they are, athletes are subjected to inflated expectations of being above-average in all aspects of life.

We don’t ask the same from any other segment of our society. We don’t care what our doctors do once they’re out of their practice – all we care about is how they treat us when we’re on the operating table. Yet we expect our athletes to be the same paragons of society as they are of sport. And it’s an unfair expectation.

As a society, we need to treat our athletes just the same way we treat each other. We need to recognize our extraordinary gifts as just that – a gift. We must look at a hockey player’s prowess on the ice with the same reverence as an artist’s skill on the canvas. And, just as we don’t begrudge an artist’s ability to create neither should we begrudge our athletes’ ability to perform. Jealousy of another’s gifts is a deficiency in ourselves.

Celebrating the good in everyone would be a nice place to start – which is why we need to know more about Edwards and less about T.O. The world, sporting or otherwise, would be a better place.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

Hockey’s Game of What If

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

What if?

That’s the question we have to ask ourselves now that we hockey fans have been exposed to the new brand of hockey – complete with its free-flowing action, unimpeded displays of skill, and – for the first time in years – excitement from the drop of the puck to the final buzzer.

And it’s the question we have to ask ourselves now that some of the greats of our game have moved on to less-frozen pastures. Just this year we’ve seen The Golden Brett and now the Russian Rocket hang up their skates. Rugged stalwarts like Scott Stevens and Mark Messier have succumbed to a mounting injury toll and the effects of Father Time respectively.

But the what ifs will remain.

The fact that we’re seeing the grace, speed, and beauty of the game the way it’s meant to be played, akin to the glory years of the late 70s and 1980s when the Flying Frenchmen gave way to the New York Islanders and Edmonton Oilers – all franchises that combined dazzling speed, superlative talent, and enough toughness to keep people honest. But what did we lose during those intervening years?

We lost enough that we have to strive as fans to make sure it never goes back that way again – which means that we have to be as vigilant about the referees as they’ve been in calling the game to date.

Despite the greatness that these four players – and others who plied their trade during the same epoch of hockey – displayed, the fact remains that many more goals, many more highlights, and many more memories were prevented from ever appearing because of the NHL’s willingness to tolerate hooking, holding, and interference.

Too often the blame falls on the New Jersey Devils or, more specifically, their coach Jacques Lemaire who now toils behind the Minnesota Wild’s bench. But Lemaire refined a system that worked. He, along with Scotty Bowman, Dave Lewis, and the bunch in Detroit, determined that the left-wing lock, the neutral-zone trap, and whatever other obstructionist tactic, were the best way to maximize your talent and minimize the effect of your opponent’s gifted players.

It wasn’t illegal, it wasn’t immoral. It was intelligent. While the Lock and the Trap weren’t 100 per cent effective on their own, the fact that they were augmented by clutching and grabbing simply made those practices more effective, and more appealing, to other teams in the league.

And so the league devolved into one where defense ruled with an iron – and closed – fist. And the officials looked away, ironically to not disturb the flow of play — despite the fact that there was no flow of which to speak.

But now we’re here. We’re seeing the best of the best ply their trade on a clean and unimpeded surface. Defensemen need to refine their technique, not their tackling. Teams need to develop puck control strategies, zone defences, and positioning to prevent the puck from entering the net. And speed is at a premium.

We, the fans are winners, even if we can never know what we lost. But imagine players like Brett Hull and Pavel Bure being allowed to display their full range of talents, without a stick digging into their stomach or a hand grabbing their jersey. Think of how many more scoring chances would have been created, how many more potential goals could have been scored, and how many more moments of breathless anticipation the fans would have enjoyed. How unstoppable would Messier and Stevens have been if they were truly allowed to display their combination of speed, size, and skill?

And, most importantly for the league, how many more fans would have been drawn to the game? That’s the biggest What If of all. As the league hemorrhaged fans across North America, as teams struggled to find their footing in shaky markets, and vacated formerly strong ones, how would the NHL landscape look if the game was played then as it is now?

So now, as some of the old guard starts to bluster about the state of the game and the difficulties teams have defensively, the league needs to remember that the fans, overwhelmingly, love it. They don’t want to see coaches and systems rule the game. They have their place, but the games should be decided on the ice, not the chalkboard.

The only reason we want fans’ butts out of their seats is because of an exciting rush or a spectacular save – not because they didn’t bother to show up because they’re bored of the game. As such, the league must ensure its referees are more vigilant, not less, as the season progresses.

Because the question now is what if the next generation of Hulls, Messiers, Bures, and Stevens are allowed to fully shine on the NHL stage? That’s a question each and every hockey fan wants to see answered.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

Stunting Our Juniors’ Development

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

As fans and supporters of the game of hockey, we’re all interested in protecting the game at all levels. But are we doing so at the expense of the players? And is it now time to recognize special players as such – and not hold back their development?

Currently, players with junior eligibility who don’t stick on a National Hockey League roster must be returned to their junior-level hockey club, as opposed to being sent down to a team’s minor-league affiliate. But is this really the best option for all of these players – and is it finally time for one of hockey’s sacred cows to be put on ice?

By sending a player back to junior, an NHL club is able to avoid having a year count against the player’s rookie contract. And, in consideration of the new collective bargaining agreement which sees players eligible for unrestricted free agency far sooner than before, that extra year can mean one more year that a player will suit up for the squad in the prime of his career. Essentially, they get a year’s development on a junior team that essentially provides them an extra roster spot for their minor league franchise. Think of it as the hockey equivalent of a tax shelter – you get all the benefits of the player’s development, without the necessity of losing a contract year.

For the junior squad, it’s a no-brainer. Generally, the players that are on the NHL bubble are the ones who will find their way on to the team’s top lines, turning what may be a moribund franchise into a Memorial Cup contender. The fans benefit by seeing their elite athletes and favourite skaters back in their local uniforms, up close and personal.

But what about the players themselves? Once all the business and financial interests have been met, where does the player’s development fit in? And who’s to say that sending a player down to the junior level isn’t simply wasting a year of development in a sport that offers notoriously short careers. Is it not time to admit that age ain’t nothin’ but a number when it comes to certain special hockey players and a one-size-fits-all approach to eligibility may, in fact, be hindering these players’ development?

At the end of this year’s NHL’s training camp, we’ve seen two players come agonizingly close to sticking with the big club, only to be among the very final cuts back to junior: Edmonton Oilers’ prospect Rob Schremp who was returned to the London Knights, and Montreal Canadiens’ highly-touted rookie Guillaume Latendresse who was sent down to the Drummondville Voltigeurs – both despite having outstanding training camps that almost found them on an NHL roster.

In the end, for both players, the numbers game had much to do with their demotion – unfortunately, it wasn’t the numbers they were putting up on the ice, it was the numbers on theirs and other players’ contracts. Whether there were other players on the cusp with guaranteed contracts, one-way deals, or simply the realization that these players would benefit from more ice time than what they would get on an NHL roster, both players found themselves back in the junior ranks — back in familiar haunts with markedly different results.

Latendresse, visibly disheartened by his demotion, struggled a bit at first but has picked up the pace to record nine goals and eight assists in 11 games. Conversely, Schremp has been toying with the opposition, registering 14 goals and 41 total points in his 10 games back in the green and gold. Which begs the question that if these players are either bored or dominating in the junior ranks, is their respective development being best served by playing with other 17-20 year olds? Will the Colorado Avalanche’s Wojtek Wolski progress as rapidly in Brampton following an impressive NHL stint that saw him rack up two goals and four assists in just nine games?

Or should these players be allowed to ply their trade in the American Hockey League – the NHL’s primary development league – against older and more talented players? Should they receive the benefit of developing their skills against a consistently higher level of competition, comprised primarily of other NHL wannabes and used-to-bes?

Yes, the fans in London, Drummondville, Brampton, and other junior cities would lose out on seeing some of these special players for another year. But junior hockey will survive. The loss of Rick Nash, despite remaining eligibility, didn’t hurt the Knights’ chances during last year’s Memorial Cup run – organizational depth, solid coaching, and astute management were as important to the team’s victories as any particular player.

The fans support the logo on the front of the jersey, not the name on the back. Junior hockey fans, who are remarkably devoted to these players who spend three years – maybe four tops – with their club, should want the best for these young players. And the best isn’t always a return to junior.

Obviously, we don’t want NHL clubs decimating the junior ranks, populating the professional leagues with junior-aged players, but perhaps it’s time to offer clubs a special designation that can be applied to one prospect a year – should they so choose. This designation would allow NHL clubs to apply the tag to one borderline player and have him play in the AHL (or whatever minor-league affiliate).

That way, the truly special players who have learned all they can from junior, will be able to progress against more skill-appropriate competition. The junior ranks wouldn’t be devoid of all talent – and even the NHL teams may not choose to use the designation each year.

In the end, the NHL teams that have drafted these players have only one interest – to make sure that the player maximizes his development to become a functioning member of the NHL squad. They’re not going to take a kid who’s not ready for prime time and put him in a league where he’s over his head – but they should also be allowed to move him to a level where he’s not skating rings around the competition.

And that’s truly in the players’ best interests.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

Being Gay in Sports Tougher on Men

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

Sheryl Swoopes, arguably the greatest female basketball player on the planet, has come out of the closet. But what must have been a trying and gut-wrenching decision for her to go public with her sexuality gets met with a collective yawn from the sporting public.

So why is it that female athletes can come out and be greeted with a “been-there-done-that” reaction from the world at large, yet the male sporting world remains suspiciously devoid of prominent gay athletes? It’s a combination of the public’s double-standard of sexuality for men and women, and the stone-age throwback macho mentality that permeates sports.

Swoopes, like others female athletes in the past like Amelie Mauresmo and Martina Navratalova, will continue her dominance of the sport. She’ll be lauded for her bravery and then relegated to the back pages of the sports section from whence she came. All the while, the clock continues to tick as anxious sports writers keep an eye on the closet door for that first high-profile male to peek his head around the corner.

Forget sports, homosexuality in male team sports is truly the final frontier. But why is it different? Why is it acceptable to the public for a woman to be gay and not for a man? It’s hard to say, but much of it has to go to public perception.

Lesbianism is almost chic these days. Modern media is rife with Sapphic sensuality. The male-dominated marketplace swallows up this imagery as titillation – despite the obvious fact that there are just two more girls who aren’t interested in them! Is it a penetration thing? Is the idea of women being with women more visually appealing to most than the thought of two men copulating – despite the acts being inherently the same at their root?

Or is it because we’re accustomed to displays of affection between women? Whether it’s holding hands walking down the street, dancing together, or calling each other “girlfriend,” women have been far more liberal in their ability to express affection. Now try picturing a man referring to his drinking buddy as his “boyfriend” or comforting each other after a sad movie – it doesn’t happen.

It’s why Ellen Degeneres can host a wonderful talk show that millions enjoy without her sexuality mattering, as it should be. But where are all those gay male hosts and actors? Why is it so much of a challenge to come out?

In a sporting environment it’s even worse. Locker rooms are rife with “fag” and “homo” jokes and comments, there are strict protocols of where your eyes can linger in the shower (keep ‘em above the waist), and overt displays of masculinity bordering on the puerilistic are considered essential for team-building — so much so that for many players, the idea of having a gay teammate is anathema.

It’s sad to think that the next person who comes out while playing professional sports like football, hockey, or baseball, will be considered a trail-blazer. It’s a poor commentary on our society that in 2005 we’re still not comfortable with the concept of love that we’ve yet to come to a time when a gay athlete can feel comfortable coming out of the closet, not because of the public perception – but rather because of the perception amongst the very people he’s gone to war with on the playing field.

Being gay or straight doesn’t affect your ability to play a sport any more than being black or white does. And in a sporting environment wherein even a comment that may or may not be misconstrued as being racist is met with swift and decisive action, rampant homophobia and borderline gay-bashing can run unchecked and be used as a source of humour.

We need to stop thinking that gay males are sexual deviants looking to ravage unsuspecting heterosexuals at the next available opportunity. The gay athlete that hasn’t taken any interest in his straight teammate is certainly not going to turn into a molesting deviant preying on his teammates once he comes out of the closet. He’ll just be like everyone else – a person looking for love.

And even if your teammate finds you attractive, what’s really wrong with that? Most of us aren’t running the risk of finding ourselves on the cover of GQ anytime soon, so we should be kneeling down and thanking whatever deity or spiritual force we believe in that someone – anyone – thinks we’re not half-bad looking. Hell, I thank my lucky stars that my beautiful wife thinks I’m attractive – anything else is just gravy! The fact is we’re all human, gay or straight, and we have the choice to say yes or no to suitors of either sex. It doesn’t diminish our sexuality in one iota – so where’s the problem?

There’s a double-standard of gayness in our society and it’s something that has to end. Male-male, female-female, either way we should accept the fact that two people have found happiness with each other, regardless of what they’ve got below the belt. The women have figured it out. Now it’s the men’s – and the rest of society’s — turn.

Sports is just a game, but until we live in a world where sexuality is irrelevant to judging a person’s worth on the field or off, then we’re all losers in the game of life.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

Honour on the Field of Play, Not in the Rafters

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

It’s a practice long held sacred in our sporting environments. We honour our greats by retiring their numbers and hoisting commemorative banners. But we’ve come to a time when we need to re-examine this practice and bring about a new way to recognize our past heroes – by celebrating them in the present.

Instead of shining a light on our athletic greats, the process of removing their numbers from circulation only serves to keep today’s fan in the dark about past exploits. Instead of keeping these players at the forefront of our thoughts, retiring their numbers only creates an out-of-sight, out-of-mind scenario.

It’s time to honour our past by embracing it and making it a part of us – not hanging it in a corner only to collect dust. Whether your favourite game is played on ice, grass, turf, or hardwood, embracing its past and learning about its greats enables fans to gain a greater appreciation of the sport. That’s why Halls of Fame are so popular – the past comes to life again, memories are rekindled, and we can celebrate our history in living colour (or black and white, as the case may be.)

Most casual fans – the ones that sporting leagues covet and woo – aren’t steeped in the history of the game. They know what they see and, if their interest is piqued, they’ll go on to learn more about the game. But watching on TV or listening on the radio, you’re not going to be exposed to the uniform numbers that aren’t there. Most fans don’t get to an arena, stadium, or court – their exposure to the game is no closer than their living room – so they don’t get the benefit of seeing the banners or commemorative photos.

That’s why we need to bring these numbers down from the rafters and back to the playing field – with a twist. Teams should allow players to wear honoured numbers, but something should be done to the uniform to make it stand out from the crowd. Whether it’s using gold or silver numbers instead of the team’s normal colour, or the addition of an insignia or border, something should be added to the uniform to draw attention to it.

Really, what greater honour can we give to our retired greats than the gift of relevance for future generations? Is Maurice Richard best served by hanging a dusty piece of cloth from the rafters of the Bell Centre or by a young boy or girl asking their father why that player’s number 9 is different from the rest?

For the players, what greater honour would there be than to don the number of the heroes they emulated growing up. A few years back, Indianapolis quarterback Peyton Manning expressed a desire to don retro footwear to honour Johnny Unitas – but imagine how much more impact it would have been for him to run out of the tunnel wearing Mr. Football’s number 19.

And while many may say that keeping the uniforms in circulation may allow present and future players to tarnish the memories of the past, they’re forgetting that it wasn’t the uniform that made the player great – it was the player who brought honour to the uniform. The number on the back was often a matter of circumstance or luck – but the player who wore it – that’s what was truly special. No dishonour could ever be brought to the players’ names by new competitors bearing their numbers. While the curmudgeons among us will look at a player’s number and say, “Well, he’s no…” what’s lost in the negativity is the simple beauty of that sentiment. For that brief moment, we’re able to remember the past, to see our favourite player in our memory as if they were right in front of us.

It’s a win-win situation all around for players and fans alike. The exploits of retired players will continue to be retold each and every time a new fan asks for the story behind that specially designated number that a modern player is wearing. They’re no longer on the shelf, simply to be overlooked like any other decoration, but rather they get taken down and become a vibrant part of today’s game.

The players get to honour their idols on the field of play. While many of these players have chosen uniform numbers to pay homage to their heroes throughout their lives, now they can do the same on the largest stage possible. And, if their exploits warrant it, they can have the ultimate honour of being recognized alongside their heroes in perpetuity.

For the fans, it gives them a chance to relive their memories, stir up debate, and swap stories with friends and families. And, for the new fans and the kids, it allows them to learn and appreciate the history of their game. It gives generations an opportunity to bond through the sharing of stories about a common love. And, most importantly it gives the gift of memories that will last a lifetime and will be passed down from generation to generation.

Our hearts have long been in the right place when it comes to honouring our athletic greats. But their greatness was exhibited on the field of play and that’s where they would best be honoured – on the very stage that they once owned and in the hearts and minds of the fans that appreciated them.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved