Tag Archives: hockey

Canadian Hockey Vultures Forgot Their Pain

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

Canuck puck-heads need to take a deep breath. After all, circling like vultures isn’t an endearing character trait – especially when the prey is far from dead.

The announcement that Canadian billionaire Jim Balsillie has taken the first steps in purchasing the Nashville Predators has sent numerous Canadian hockey fans into apoplectic fits of joy. Already the debates have started: Hamilton or Kitchener/Waterloo? How soon? Where will they play? Copps Coliseum or a yet-to-be-build hockey palace in the K/W region?

The only problem with that scenario? The Predators are still in Nashville and could be for the foreseeable future.

There are a number of contractual obligations that can continue to bind the Preds to the city of Nashville. The much-ballyhooed out clause that could see the club pack up and move after next season can be negated by the current ownership executing a cure clause in the contract that would compel the city to ensure an average paid attendance of 14,000. That’s hardly an overwhelming burden for the city since the club averaged 13,815 spectators last season.

But therein lies the rub. The Predators have some of the lowest ticket prices in the league and had one of the best clubs during the regular season. With all those factors going for them they were only able to draw less than 14,000 fans. What’s to be expected from the fans who may, rightly or wrongly, feel that the club’s on its way out the door sooner or later? If fans won’t support a winner, how will they react to a franchise that is widely believed to be looking for greener pastures?

Or maybe, just maybe, Balsillie will play the role of responsible owner, cultivate a fan base, and invest in drawing local fans to the rink. After all, he’s a business man, and it’s only good business to see your investment pay off. With an established arena, a small-but-dedicated pocket of fans, and a general lack of competition on the professional sports landscape (the NFL’s Tennessee Titans the noted exception), Balsillie is further ahead than where he would be moving this franchise to Canada.

Unfortunately, Canadian hockey fans have infused their desires into their perceptions of Balsillie’s actions. Many Canadians want Balsillie to bring a franchise north of the border. Many Canadians want hockey to fail in the Sun Belt. And many Canadians want to hearken back to a better time.

Too many hockey fans are stuck in the past and are now engaging in a disgusting display ofschadenfreude. They want hockey to fail – no matter how that will impact fans south of the border.

They forget the pain they, themselves may have experienced. The anger over the loss of franchises in Winnipeg and Quebec City is still felt today and colours their perception of the league. Yet the contradiction here is that the very action that they despised over a decade ago – taking a franchise away from a small, but dedicated hockey fan base – is the very same strategy they’re firmly behind today.

Sure, Nashville may not have the tradition and societal attachment that cities north of the border may have for hockey, but that’s no reason to hope for something to fail. After all, this is our game and what greater pride can we have in it than to see it succeed in non-traditional markets?

We all would love to see NHL hockey returned to places like Winnipeg, Quebec City, and Hamilton (interestingly enough the NHL’s Hamilton Tigers, which ceased to exist in 1925, came into existence as a transfer of the Quebec [City] Bulldogs), but we shouldn’t be frothing at the mouth to wrest the franchises away from areas that we deem unworthy. We Canadians love to get indignant when told that cities like Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver are small markets unworthy of NFL, or in some cases NBA or MLB franchises, but we seemingly have no problem being supercilious and looking down at southern regions unworthy of our beloved sport.

Let’s hope that Balsillie makes a go of it in Nashville and the sport enjoys unprecedented success. Personally, I’d rather see my beloved sport recognized world-wide for its greatness – and that means seeing it succeed south of the 49 th, instead of jealously guarding my game in my own backyard.

If after a couple of years of solid effort, the fans and business interests in Nashville continue to reject the Predators, then by all means Balsillie should be free to move the club wherever he likes. But while Hamilton, Kitchener/Waterloo, Quebec City, and Winnipeg are all out there as options so too are Las Vegas, Portland, Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Kansas City.

We all want more hockey back in Canada, but hovering over a franchise that’s not even in its death throes is a little unseemly. Maybe Canadians should remember the pain that losing their franchises caused before they’re so eager to inflict that same trauma on someone else, just because we deem them unworthy.

2007© Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

A Brighter Future, Not a Sign of the Apocalypse

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

Can we all take our foot off the gas and slow down the ol’ hyperbole machine? Tuesday’s trade deadline deal that saw Ryan Smyth depart the Edmonton Oilers was, plain and simple, a sound business decision.

Of course, rabid Oilers fans and apoplectic pundits are preferring to spin this as a sign of the apocalypse, or at best a condemnation of a flawed CBA that’s failing to deliver on its promises. After all, wasn’t the lockout and the salary cap designed to ensure that teams like Edmonton can remain competitive and keep their marquee players.

Yes, to an extent. It’s designed to put a framework in place that prevents certain teams from overspending – essentially hurting the other clubs through their own largesse. But the trade of Ryan Smyth for a couple of former first-round picks and an upcoming first-round selection wasn’t a fire sale. It was a sound business decision to get some value out of a commodity that was probably going to leave at the end of the season.

So tell me Oilers fans. Do you want to get some value for Smyth, or would you rather see him suit up for a few more games and leave your team with nothing in return.

Sure, Smyth could have re-signed with the Oilers, but several published accounts were suggesting that he was looking for a deal in the $5.5 million per season range. Those are pretty lofty numbers for a 31-year-old who isn’t exactly a superstar. And then when you factor in that Smyth, allegedly, was looking for a five-year deal, then the trade is a no brainer.

While you may be able to justify Smyth’s heart-and-soul contribution for the next couple of years at that inflated price – and you may be able to do it, I can’t – no one in their right mind would suggest that a 36-year-old Smyth would be worth that type of cap charge. So if the Oilers aren’t able to commit to that amount now, why would they want to lock up that amount of money in a player whose returns are almost certain to diminish.

Yes, there’s more to this than just the on-ice performance. Smyth has been the face of the organization for years. But he’s also been an important regular contributor to Team Canada’s World Championship squad. And you know how you get to be on that team so often? By losing. A lot.

Those clubs are made up of players from teams who either didn’t make the playoffs or got bounced out early. The Oilers, save for last year’s outstanding run, haven’t exactly torn up the league with Smyth on the roster. This year, again, they’re looking to be on the outside of the playoff race. So why not get some assets in return for him before he walks.

Fiscal responsibility is supposed to rule the day in the new NHL. And while every team in the league would love to have the grit, effort, and scoring touch that Smyth brings, how many of them are ready to pony up that kind of cash and time commitment? I suppose we’ll find out after the season when he tests free agency.

That’s where the market will be defined. Of course, now working for a maverick like Charles Wang — who signed his goaltender Rick DiPietro to an outrageously long contract despite the fact he’s never proven to be an elite netminder – may work in Smyth’s favour. If anyone’s ready to overpay for talent, it could be Wang. But, if saner minds prevail, Smyth’s value will fall more around the $3.5-4 million per year mark in a three-year deal. If that’s the case, who’s to say the Oilers wouldn’t find themselves back in the bidding?

All we know is that the Oilers balked at the $5 million-plus price tag – and rightfully so. Sure, the club appears to have taken some hits with the loss of Chris Pronger earlier this season and now Ryan Smyth. But don’t go blaming the league or the CBA. This is merely a case of a club thinking with its head and not its heart.

Now, more than ever, the league is based on allocating revenue and resources to those who are performing in the here and now. If your salary structure is out of whack, then you have to get whacked – and that’s what GM Kevin Lowe did.

After all, those same fans who are wringing their hands in grief today would probably be wringing their hands in frustration at paying through the nose for a 35-year-old forward who’s a shell of his former self, yet still has a couple more years at $5.5 million per.

2007© Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

Peddling Naming Rights Wrong Answer

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

And now, ladies and gentlemen, please welcome to the NAPA Auto Parts Centre the Avis Rent-a-Car “We’re Number Two, We Try Harder” second-place team in the Rogers Mobility Division of the Wal-Mart National Hockey League, the Teacher’s Pension Fund of Ontario Toronto Maple Leafs. This pre-team announcement was brought to you by your friends at Canadian Tire.

Sound outrageous? Maybe. Is this day that far off? Probably not – especially in light of the fact that the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League’s Western Division has now been officially named the Telus Division, as part of an agreement with the league’s major sponsor.

Historians please note: this is officially the day that your job just got immeasurably harder.

Remember the hue and cry when, back in 1993, the National Hockey League decided to scrap years of history in an attempt to dumb down the divisional and conference breakdown for our yet-to-be-found American fans? Gary Bettman, newly minted as NHL commissioner, decided to make his new league emulate the league from whence he came – the NBA.

So instead of the more colourful Prince of Wales Conference and the Clarence Campbell Conference, both of which are names dripping with historical significance to a league steeped in tradition, we have the yawn-inducing Eastern and Western Conference. And instead of divisional names that pay the appropriate honour and respect to the league’s founding fathers: (Charles) Adams, (Conn) Smythe, (James) Norris, and (Lester) Patrick, we have divisional names that sort-of let you know where your teams are.

Hockey, along with baseball, are probably the two sports that can best trade on their pasts. These games were built upon solid names – whether they be storied franchises, influential families, or key players, and the old divisional and conference nomenclature was a way of not just playing respect for those that came before, but also enticing newer fans to discover the history of the game.

Now, if the Quebec League’s sponsored nomenclature catches on, the only enticement that conference and divisional names will create is the desire to find out what the latest unlimited minutes plan is.

But what happens if Telus hits a down period in its business? What happens when a company decides that the investment in sponsoring a sporting division is no longer providing an adequate return? Well, it’s going to mean a constant shifting of divisional titles that will make it harder and harder to appreciate a league’s history.

Much in the same way that most fans have given up trying to remember what a team’s stadium or arena is called, so too will they stop caring about the divisional name. And when that happens, doesn’t that mean that the value of the sponsor’s investment has diminished completely?

Take a look at Montreal. The Bell Centre sign shines brightly into the night informing all who purchased the facility’s naming rights. However, how many people still refer to the building as the Molson Centre? Even more, how many people will continue to call the building the Forum, even if it never carries that name? That being said, maybe Telus has made the smart decision in being first in. After all, there’s a good chance that no matter who sponsors the division in 10 years, there will be those who continue to refer to it as the Telus division.

And look at the U.S. college football bowl system. There are so many bowls, with so many ludicrous sponsors (the Chick-a-Fill Bowl anyone?) that corporate oversponsorship has completely robbed the bowls of any cachet that they may have once had.

How ridiculous will it be for people interested in a league’s history 20 years from now to look back at the fortunes of a team and follow its progression spanning a number of different divisional corporate sponsors? Yes, Telus could give way to Rona, which could give way to Saputo, which in turn will pass the rights on to Provigo, who will then pass it on to Bell. And yet the teams remain the same, the composition of the division remains the same, only the sponsor changes.

Everybody’s in search of the quick buck. But there is a coin that carries an immense amount of weight which sport leagues refuse to trade upon – history. Tradition, honour, memories, and an attachment to things past are easier when there’s a common thread holding them together. Stories are only compelling when there’s sufficient context. Instead of peddling off the league’s tradition for a here-and-now cash grab, why not get creative with the marketing of tradition?

Nothing says stability and value for a league than consistency. But by peddling off tradition for a quick marketing buck, sporting leagues are running the risk of diminishing the value of the sport for the most important consumers of all – the fans.

2006© Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

The Fall of the USSR, the Fall of a Rivalry

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

For one day, on an ice rink outside Red Square, the embers of a faded rivalry will be stoked again, and memories of that passionate time will be rekindled.

As a hockey-loving Canadian youth, few things were more intense and more passionate than the Cold War-era U.S.S.R.-Canada hockey rivalry. One could argue that while the world in general may be a better and safer place since the fall of the Soviet Union, hockey itself is poorer for the loss of that rivalry.

So that’s why it is with fond appreciation that I look forward to the Dec. 9 th showdown between Russian hockey greats and retired NHLers. It will be a contest that features the reunification of the KLM line, Vladislav Tretiak in net, and Slava Fetisov and Alexei Kasatonov patrolling the blueline once again.

In general, I avoid old timer’s games like the plague, preferring to remember these greats as they were in their prime, not the lumbering, diminished versions that lace up the skates now. This event may be different. Of course, the memories of that time are different.

Growing up in the latter part of the Cold War, when nuclear proliferation was at its peak, the Soviet Union was an enigmatic country arousing both fear and interest. I was born a few months late for the Canada-Russia Summit Series in 1972, but its ramifications resonated in our family. In fact, to this day I possess an audio cassette recording of that final game, made for me by an uncle (and featuring a great-grandfather – unfamiliar with the concept of replays – getting extremely excited at the 7-0 blowout to start the game, instead of realizing it was just highlights from previous game action.)

I grew up knowing about names like Tretiak and learning about the greatness of Valery Kharlamov. When I was old enough to have memories of my own, the next wave of Soviet greats was dominating international competition: Vladimir Krutov, Igor Larionov, and Sergei Makarov.

It was a different time. Now, the NHL is a veritable melting pot featuring the best from around the world. For my own children, the existence of Russians, Czechs, and Slovaks in the league is the norm. And, as such, international competitions, while exciting, aren’t infused with the same level of passion that those earlier series were.

In the 80s, it was different. We didn’t know the Russians. We weren’t allowed to see them as real people. To us – especially the youth – they were cold, calculating, perfect hockey-playing machines. We knew our own Canadian boys, faults and all. And we bought into the mystique that Canadian grit, heart, determination, and passion could conquer precision, deft passing, and discipline.

Often it did. And when it did, it wasn’t just a victory for a team. It was a victory for a way of life.

As youth, we were convinced that nuclear warheads were pointed at our cities. We engaged in now-bizarre drills that involved us sitting under our tables with our heads between our legs. We read about people who had created fallout shelters. We watched The Day After and Red Dawn (did I just voluntarily admit watching a Patrick Swayze film???). For us, “the button” was very real, and we grew up knowing that the end of the world was an event with the potential of happening in our lifetimes.

Our ignorance and fear of another group of people – fuelled by the fact that we were kids and didn’t take the time to learn any better – added to the mystique of our Soviet counterparts. We suspected them of conducting nefarious scientific experiments to improve performance in their athletes (à la Ivan Drago in Rocky IV). We watched in anger as Soviet Bloc referees showed blatant preferential treatment to the other guys. And we bought into the whole us versus them concept of sporting competitions (also fuelled by various Olympic boycotts.)

In the end, the games were far better simply because of the passion surrounding the game. When was the last time we were truly invested in the outcome of a hockey game like that? Sure, the recent Olympic and World Junior Championship victories have been fun, but they’re hardly memorable. Instead of a celebration of a defeat of an ideological opposite, it’s just a victory of our jocks against their jocks – who we now realize aren’t all that different.

Now 33 years old with a little more worldly knowledge, I know that people are people – and they always have been. I know that, in general, people everywhere want the same things out of life and that they shouldn’t be tainted by the colour of their political system. But back then – back when I was a gullible youth willing to believe what the world around me was telling me – I believed that the Soviets were different, mysterious, and dangerous.

That’s why watching this game will be so enjoyable. It’s a different time. The players will probably laugh and joke, embracing each other and the game they share. And it will be all the more poignant considering how different things were just two decades ago when many of these players were in their prime.

The on-ice camaraderie will show how much better and more tolerant the world is – at least as it relates to Canadian-former Soviet relations. And while we will celebrate a better world, I’ll also pause to remember how much greater the rivalry used to be.

After all, in the case of world relations as they relate to on-ice conflict, ignorance truly was bliss.

2006© Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

NHL Heading in the Wrong Direction

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

Injuries are a part of any sport and at times they can be catastrophic. But the NHL must take steps immediately to minimize any and all possible risks, because the future of their product depends on it.

We’ve all, sadly, been privy to vicious acts that have resulted in severe head injuries. From Todd Bertuzzi’s mauling of Steve Moore, to Marty McSorely’s lumberjack impersonation on Donald Brashear’s head, and Alexander Perezhogin’s similar two-hander to the head of Garrett Stafford in the AHL, we’ve seen extreme examples of head injuries caused by an outside force.

Hell, this is nothing new. Ace Bailey’s career was cut short due to a severe head injury inflicted by Eddie Shore back in 1933. But what is new is how innocuous acts are now having devastating effects on players throughout the league.

Just ask the Montreal Canadiens’ Aaron Downey, who was knocked for roller coaster’s worth of loops by a check by Robin Regehr. A clean check. No elbow, no leaving the feet, just a good solid hit against the boards.

We’re seeing this more and more, and ironically it’s the improvements in the game that has created this detrimental effect. Simply put, the game’s a heck of a lot faster than it used to be as players are able to move faster, without being impeded or slowed by hooks, holds, and interference. Players are bigger, stronger, and wearing high-tech suits of armour on the ice. Combine all these factors and it’s amazing that we’re not seeing even more injuries.

The NHL can’t turn a blind eye on this. Sad to say, Aaron Downey’s not going to get it done. As nice of a guy he is and as much as his teammates love him, he’s a plugger bordering on goon status. But hopefully we won’t need to see an established star – or, perish the thought, the future of the league like Sidney Crosby or Alex Ovechkin, go down for the count before people get up in arms.

Hopefully someone’s career – or worse, their life — doesn’t have to end violently before the league steps in for the good of everyone.

Yet it’s not a promising thought. After all, this is a league that refuses to force its players to don eye protection, when all the benefits far outweigh any perceived negative impact. This is a league that allows players to carry around metal weapons with no give – unlike the old wooden sticks that would snap like a twig. This is a league that caters far too much to the guys with the sloped frontal lobes who think Rock ’em, Sock ’em hockey is the only way to prove one’s manhood.

It won’t work until the suits in the front office start treating the game like a business. Despite all the marketing and promotion efforts they’ve undertaken, they still don’t seem to get that the players are the currency upon which their businesses are traded. If common sense doesn’t work, then maybe corporate economics will.

The players are employees. If the league decides that the dress code includes better, more protective headgear that’s actually strapped on securely, complete with facial protection, that’s their right. If they mandate mouthguards, then no amount of bitching from the boys in the union should matter.

Nor should the union brothers protest too much. Their best-before dates expire rapidly, so anything that can be done to maximize their earning potential should be welcomed with open arms. Unfortunately, they’re too busy grabbing themselves and proving their manhood to embrace the concept of personal safety.

We don’t have to legislate body checking out of the game. What we have to do is legislate better, mandatory protective gear into the game. Teams have to look at their players as investments and do everything they can do to ensure maximum return on that investment.

Just as a construction site mandates proper headgear, so too should the NHL embrace tougher restrictions on what its employees wear. Better helmets, mouthguards, and other protective gear should not just be the norm, they should be legislated into existence.

But instead the league focusses on new designs for its jerseys, so it’s players can look better. Let’s just hope in the future we don’t have to admire how well a player’s looking as he’s thrashing on the ice because we prized style over substance.

2006© Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved