Tag Archives: NHL

New/Old Hockey Makes the Grade

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

It was inevitable, of course. The whispers of discontent regarding the new version of hockey are slowly working their way up to a dull roar. But the danger is that we’re not seeing the forest for the trees – and clear-cutting the whole region is not the answer.

You put certain media types together in a confined space and the cynicism comes out. In their hypercritical, hyperbole-friendly manner of existence sports reporters – especially the bad ones – tend to go overboard in their reactions either one way or the other. That’s why it comes as no surprise that a pair of reporters covering a recent London Knights contest were trying to outdo each other in their negativity.

“So much for that crackdown on holding,” says Mr. Cynic.

“Yeah, it was just a matter of time,” replies Mr. Curmudgeon.

“Look at that – that hook would have got you two minutes at the beginning of the season,” opines Mr. Cynic.

“Yep, it’s back to the old hockey,” concurs Mr. Curmudgeon.

Now, let’s rewind to the beginning of the year when the complaints would have been like this:

“Wow, he just tapped him with the stick and it’s a penalty,” Mr. Cynic notes.

“Yep, you can’t even breathe on a guy without getting sent to the box,” Mr. Curmudgeon replies.

“How can you play defence like this? What’s next, looking at a guy’ll get you five?” retorts Mr. Cynic.

“Yep, this new hockey’s basically pond hockey with boards,” concludes Mr. Curmudgeon.

So you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t. But beyond the hypercritical who see every missed hook and every minor hack that gets ignored as evidence of a return to the dark ages, today’s game is better than it was just two years ago (well, for the NHL – last year for everyone else.)

After an early feeling-out period where defenders were overcompensating for the stricter enforcement of obstruction-type penalties, players, refs, and coaches alike appear to have come to terms with the new NHL. Refs may not be so quick with the whistle, but that’s in large part to the better mutual understanding of the game.

What we have is a faster-paced game, with more offence. Defence is still a part of the game, but it has to be based on intelligence and positioning, not just goons getting their big meat hooks into approaching attackers. We have games where fans know that even if their team is two or three goals down in the third period, there’s still the opportunity to come back. We have more end-to-end rushes and more counter-attacks. We have, in essence, the game for which we’ve been asking for the past few years.

So why the complaints? Why the grumbling? Simply put, fear. We’re afraid of letting the game deteriorate to the point that it was two years ago. We let the game deteriorate on our watch, and we’re wary of letting it happen again.

What’s worked? What hasn’t? It seems that listening to fans, players, and general managers paid off for the NHL brass. Shocking that those most directly involved in the game would have the most insight into how to fix it.

Simply put, the NHL has scored on most fronts: the elimination of the centre red line has opened up the flow of the game and eliminated the countless – and pointless – offside calls. The restriction on the size of goalie equipment has not turned all goalies into human sieves, nor has it unnecessarily put their lives at risk. Even the contentious no-goalie zones in the corner of the rink has worked out, reducing, but not banning goaltender involvement in puck control. Best off all, we’re enjoying a faster game without having to impact the size of the ice surface. The game got faster without the rink getting wider, so purists – and money-conscious owners – are happy.

Overall the game is faster, the skill players are showcasing their wares, and fans are being treated to a level of hockey they haven’t seen since the late 80s/early 90s. The old/new NHL is working – but it’s not time to rest on its laurels.

The league must do something about making visors mandatory. Fans pay good money and invest in their heart and souls in these players – the least they could to is protect themselves. As well, something has to be done to encourage hitting. While speed is a big part of the game’s resurgence, the body check should not be phased out as a result. Because of overzealous refs and a lack of understanding about how the rules would be enforced, many players shied away from laying the body. But that has to change.

Hockey at its best is fast-paced, hard-hitting, and intense. We’re part of the way there – it’s not time to stop now. For the first time in year’s the NHL is creating a buzz. Now they just have keep on keeping on, and not ruin the momentum.

But for a league that’s long been known to shoot itself in the foot, will reaching this successful height prove to be too dizzying? Fans everywhere are holding their breath (but not their opponent’s stick!) in anticipation.

2006© 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

NHLers Thinking with the Wrong Head

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

Most of the time, we guys are criticized for thinking too much WITH the little head – but, when it comes to NHL players, they’re obviously more concerned with thinking ABOUT their little head when it comes to safety.

Is there any reason why players would question your sanity if you suggested playing the game without a jock, but don’t see the folly in playing the game without adequate facial protection?

Manhood is a big part of professional sports. It’s the Neanderthalistic backdrop to competition. It’s what prevents most sports from truly being appreciated for their speed, grace, skill, and – yes, even – beauty. The most exciting or dramatic touchdown, dunk, or goal can be marred by gratuitous displays of gloating, preening, and self-importance. It’s gotten to the point where routine plays – the kind you’re expected to make as a high-school athlete – are celebrated with overt (and choreographed) attention-grabbing antics.

Thus, our sporting fields often reek with the remnants of these macho pissing contents. And, like pre-pubescent boys trying to assert their emerging maturity, common sense is often left behind in an attempt to not appear weaker than your competitor.

Which brings us back to the NHL and its players continued stubborn refusal to wear facial protection. Admittedly, it was like pulling teeth to get them to wear helmets just over two decades ago, with some resisting and clinging to grandfather clauses, until the bitter – and better – end.

Yet, the league and its players association make no effort to mandate its players when it comes to facial protection. Adhering to some ancient freedom of choice myth perpetuated by years of negligence, the players are asserting that it’s their divine right to play the fastest game in the world without complete protection.

Normally, I’m all for letting Darwin have his way with these people and letting the laws of natural selection cull those who aren’t smart enough to protect themselves from our general population. But, at the professional level, these players are not just individuals – they’re investments. Team owners literally spend millions on these players and build their product based upon the foundation that these players will be in the lineup. From marketing campaigns to anticipation of playoff revenue, forecasts are made with the idea that your stars are going to be in uniform. And that doesn’t even factor in the countless thousands of dollars that are spent on insurance policies.

The counter argument is that injuries happen and only fate will decide who pops an ACL and who suffers a fractured orbital bone – or worse – the loss of an eye. But the difference is that the former injury is truly a matter of fate, while the latter examples are more or less completely preventable.

Today’s players have come through a minor league system that mandates facial protection. From full cages at the younger and university levels, to the face shields present in junior hockey, today’s athlete spends the majority of his developmental years playing the game with something in front of his eyes. Yet, upon the ascension to the pro ranks, we’re supposed to believe that suddenly one’s vision becomes impaired by the very same thin sheet of plastic which allowed this player to rise through the ranks to become one of only a handful of people in this world with the skill and talent to play professional hockey?

As well, in this new fan-friendly hockey environment, the league and its players need to understand that it’s its principal stakeholders, the fans, who suffer the most when a valued member of their team goes down from an entirely preventable injury. The fans are the ones who purchase the tickets, buy the licensed merchandise, and support the manufacturers who use the players as pitchmen.

Finally, the players themselves need to understand that wearing a face shield is an investment in themselves. With a salary cap system, revenues tied to league earnings, and a precariously short career, to not do everything in your ability to maximize your earning potential and revenue-producing years is simply folly.

It’s time for hockey players to join the rest of us on these higher rungs of the evolutionary ladder. If they can stop dragging their knuckles long enough to grab a stick, then they’re at the developmental point where they can affix a shield to their helmet. Let’s start putting a premium on intelligence when it comes to defining manhood. Let’s take another look at what it means to be tough.

Firefighters enter blazing buildings covered head to toe in protective equipment. Does that make them any less a man (or woman in this case)? Or do we appreciate their bravery regardless of a plastic shield in front of their face? Why should the threshold for manhood be different on ice? A generation ago, people were resisting strapping on a seatbelt for many of the same reasons: we’ve never worn one before; they’re an uncomfortable encumbrance; no one’s going to tell me what to do. But look at where we’ve come since then.

The players demand the freedom of choice, so here’s a solution. Facial protection won’t be mandatory – the players can still roam the ice with their bare faces whipping in the wind, asserting their individuality and masculinity. However, if they elect not to wear a face shield, they’re prohibited from wearing a jock. Put on a mask and the cup comes back.

Simple solution. And we’ll see which head they’re truly thinking with – and which one will lead the way.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

NHL’s Thank Yous Ring Hollow

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

For a while last night, I thought it was time to change my contact lenses because I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. Yet, there it was, flickering right on my TV screen. I now know what adding insult to injury actually looks like.

Those of us who watched Thursday’s broadcast of the hockey game between the Montreal Canadiens and New York Rangers were subjected to the sight of the boys from Broadway taking the ice with jerseys bearing the message “Thank You” replacing the customary “New York” lettering.

In an attempt to suck up to fans at all costs, the league has turned it into a dog and pony show – and the sentiments ring hollow.

We know, no matter how much lip service the players pay to being happy to be back, they’re still smarting from the repeated slaps in the face they took during the lockout. “Our boys” found out that our support has its limits and they were genuinely shocked when most fans supported the owners in the labour dispute.

So now these alpha males have come back with their tails firmly between their legs, making the best of a bad situation. And, instead of allowing for a graceful return, the league has decided to rub a little more salt in the still-festering wound. The obviously staged, and eminently hollow, act of wearing “Thank You” jerseys does nothing more than add another side order of shame that the players have to swallow – adding to the already heaping helping of humble pie they’ve been forced to stomach through the negotiation of the new Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Whether it’s “Thank You” emblazoned across the players’ chests, messages expressing the league’s gratitude prominently painted on the ice, or any other displays of affection, we fans aren’t buying it. Aside from a select few naïve people, most hockey fans know that the game we love is actually a business. We know that there are millions upon billions of dollars changing hands. And, although we may not like it, we know that the lockout was just a part of doing business, however unsavoury it may have been.

But it’s becoming more and more apparent that fans are willing to let bygones be bygones. Starting with the circus-like free agency period, to the drama of the entry draft and the Sidney Crosby sweepstakes, to the establishment of new rules (and commitment to enforcing old ones) designed to make the game more entertaining, fans have embraced the excitement of the new season and are eager to get on with our lives.

We’ve accepted the lockout as a necessary evil – an action that the league had to take to maintain the long-term viability of the league and to restore competitive financial balance so that we won’t have to face the loss of another Winnipeg or Quebec City. But we certainly don’t want to be reminded of it on a daily basis.

If the players and the league truly want to show us how much they appreciate our patronage, then they need to do it in the only way that matters – on the ice through effort, intensity, and talent. Thank us by playing hard each and every night. Thank us by displaying the combination of grace, skill, and toughness that makes hockey the most exciting game on Earth.

If they’re really thankful for the fans’ support in returning to the rinks, then take the extra time to get to know your admirers. Sign a few more autographs (without it having to be mandated), make yourself more available to the media for interviews (as this is the only way many fans get to know you), and give the fans the respect they deserve as being the reason behind the lifestyle you live.

And the responsibility to acknowledge the fans isn’t the players’ alone. It’s not enough for the owners to spend a few bucks on new sweaters or a new paint job and call it a day. If they’re truly thankful, as they should be, for fans support, then they need to make a concerted outreach to the fans through spending the money to make attending a game a valued event. Spend the money under the cap to keep teams together and build fan affinity. They need to make more than just a cosmetic display of gratitude.

Nobody likes a suck-up – especially when the motivation for this sycophantic activity appears to be so transparent and false. In large part, the fans are back and the best thank you we as fans can receive would be good, honest effort – both on the ice and off.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

NHL Scores with OLN Deal

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

Just because it’s on the Outdoor Life Network doesn’t mean that the NHL has been put out to pasture. In fact, the NHL can finally revel in the fact that it’s been put on a pedestal and will get the respect that the game deserves.

Getting away from ESPN’s hipper-than-thou style of bluster and bombast can only help put the focus back on the ice, where it needs to be. Instead of focusing on ESPN’s fast-talking, cliché-ridden, telecasts, they’ve moved to a channel that is content in letting the story develop on its own, without all the bells and whistles.

What ESPN – and, unfortunately, its Canadian subsidiary TSN has been moving the same way – sells is watered-down, forced cool to its target demographic of yearning-to-be-hip teenagers and early 20-year-olds. Every highlight recap is rife with attempts at edgy witticisms, strained pop culture references, and puerile puns. Each broadcast is more about selling the sizzle while ignoring the steak.

However, the very nature of the Outdoor Life Network’s programming means that its viewership is accustomed to savouring the meat of the broadcast. After all, this is a channel that features fishing as a significant aspect of its daily programming. With all apologies to all the anglers out there, there’s nothing sexy about fishing. The channel’s viewers appreciate the programming for its own, and instead of being blinded by the pomp and circumstance that ESPN/TSN’s viewers are enamoured of, they’re more tolerant of letting the game speak for itself.

And really, that’s what we love about hockey. It’s a game best served stripped of all the extras that ESPN revels in. It’s as simple as black and white – puck and ice. That’s what’s made the CBC’s Hockey Night in Canada so successful. There is a reverence for the game that comes across with every broadcast as they’ve chosen to focus on the game, not the extras. It’s a concept that the American networks have ignored in the past.

Watch an American football game and it’s hard to see the on-field action for all the crawls, scoreboards, and animations that crowd the screen. But at least the stop-start action of the NFL lends itself to this deluge of information. The fluidity and grace of hockey at its finest needs to be appreciated in its entirety – the simplicity of a black puck on white ice gets overwhelmed by encroaching statistics, graphics, and overlays.

While laudable in its attempts to bring hockey to the masses, Fox swung and missed in its attempt to aid the viewing public. Whether it was the distracting fuzzy blue dot that made it look like our game’s finest were stickhandling a beach ball or the digitally created vapour trail added to every shot and pass, the additions served to distract viewers from the actual game action. Instead of appreciating the game’s speed, grace, and beauty, they were drawn to non-integral artificial additions.

Even watching a game on American TV just doesn’t feel right. The camera angles are too wide or too close. They lack the intuitive feel that the CBC has mastered with its generations of broadcasting history. Most importantly, they lack the reverence and respect for the game that comes through on each and every Hockey Night in Canada broadcast.

So, instead of being an afterthought on ESPN, buried behind other sports that are more ingrained in the U.S. viewers’ psyches – an afterthought on the broadcast schedule, the NHL now becomes the marquee property for a cable channel backed by the financial clout of Comcast.

Instead of being shuffled around the schedule, fit in where time permits, and generally ignored in promotions, the NHL now benefits from a consistency of broadcast – 58 games exclusively shown on the network on Monday and Tuesday nights. Even the additional features have been designed to get people closer to the game – miked players, net cams, and more access to players and coaches both on and off the ice.

Welcome to the Outdoor Life Network NHL. While some Canadians may mock the league as it takes a place alongside bull riding, the Tour de France, and professional yachting, the fact of the matter is that hockey will move to the front of the pack on OLN. Much as Hockey Night in Canada is the CBC’s flagship show, so too will hockey become the dominant property of the Outdoor Life Network.

For American viewers, that means they’ll finally get to see the game treated with the respect it deserves. And maybe now they’ll see why our little game of shinny played on a frozen pond fans the flames of our passion north of the border.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved