|
Post by Zoom Waffles on Dec 21, 2008 3:35:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by The Hockey Hitman on Dec 21, 2008 18:16:47 GMT -5
Nicely done, Zoom. You bring up some very good points, some of which I hadn't thought of before I read your article. As much as I hate to admit it, your probably right! I say that in good nature of course...I am one of the guys who wants to see the Winnipegs of the past return to the NHL. The Hartford Whalers? What a great name for a hockey team! Seriously. I miss'em. I am one of the guys who doesn't care about the Florida Panthers or Columbus Blue Jackets. Those two teams are the least valuable to the NHL IMO, and should be the first two to move or be contracted if it ever come down to it.
Say what you want about Atlanta, but that city deserves a hockey team. The people their love there sports team with a passion, if Atlanta hadn't been so poorly mismanaged over the past almost decade, I think hockey there would be a lot more successful. I went to the only two playoff games the Thrashers have ever had, a couple seasons ago against the Rangers. Game 1 and Game 2. You couldn't find an empty seat anywhere in that arena. The place was so loud and so crazy that you couldn't hear the person talking sitting right next to you. Sure, Atlanta lost both those games, but Atlanta fans showed up and showed up big time and its quite clear to me that town deserves an NHL team. Now if they could only get some people who knew what they are doing running the team, they'd be set!
|
|
|
Post by Zoom Waffles on Dec 21, 2008 18:33:52 GMT -5
I've noticed a lot out here in LA that the smaller the fan base, the more fanatical they are. There may only be 50,000 hockey fans in LA, but they're insanely proud and downright obsessed with the Kings. It kind of goes back to the whole minority mentality - being one of few makes the bond to the others stronger than if you're one of many.
|
|
|
Post by Shredded Red on Dec 24, 2008 1:57:58 GMT -5
As a hockey fan I agree and I disagree with the last statement of this article. I do agree that introducing teams to non-hockey markets does grab new hockey fans in some ways, but with the way the internet is and the fact that space has been shrunk do to communications technology also makes that type of fan grabbing un-necessary. The fact that we can watch any team from anywhere makes it easy for someone in Washington state to be a fan of the Tampa Bay Lightning.
I think minor league teams have more to gain in non-hockey markets because they're cheaper to run and typically more fun to attend (because of all the fanfare, games and such). Moving NHL teams around kind of cheapens the league, makes hockey a fad and while it may grab some new fans, they do, as you mentioned become rather cultish. The die hard fans are in places where teams stay put.....and Canada.
I think the league could do just as well to make new fans by placing solid competitive teams in solid markets because the game itself would become a better product. I enjoy watching the Predators, the Lightning, and the Blue Jackets, but for a non-hockey fan watching those teams is fairly boring compared to watching something like Montreal and Toronto duke it out, or even Pittsburgh and Philly. The Blue Jackets vs. the Wings doesn't exactly get my attention either, but the teams that sell out even the expansion markets are teams like the Wings, the Leafs, and the Rangers. I think even non-hockey fans appreciate solid hockey teams and their heritage.
When teams move around you get a diluted league, and I diluted product. One that is harder to market because on one side you have the tradition of the game, and on the other you have what essentially is a hollow product full of flash and dash (the skill and youth marketing angle). You're article is spot on Zoom, and it's kind of sad that this is the approach that Bettman has taken with the league, and that like most things in America capitalism and marketing is destroying a great game by turning it into a product.
|
|
Tomcat
Second Liner
Posts: 465
|
Post by Tomcat on Dec 26, 2008 14:14:16 GMT -5
I think Betman is a jack ass and a disaster. What a stellar plan--nothing like starting off by telling all your already loyal fans to go f**kj themselves. I'm sure most sucessful business operate that way. I may be oversimplifying it, but it still....
If your not into a sport, I don't care what promotion, what supposed star they've imported from Mars, or who that Martian star is screwing, or whatever BS angle they're selling--If I'm not a fan-- I'm not buying! It's not even on my radar. I hate, for example, soccer, and I played on a team as a kid...Yet, I'll NEVER watch that sh*t, no matter what stunt they pull to gain my attention. And it seems to me they have tried to push that boring garbage on America--and they don't want it. It hasn't caught on, and it won't catch on. It's not part of our culture.
Why should hockey, a sport nobody outside of Michigan and Minnesota, and maybe a few spots in the North Eastern States play, be appealing or of remote interest to someone born and raised in the sun belt. Betman makes no sense. Back to the soccer example...I mean, It's way easier to play soccer than hockey, and that hasn't, and it won't catch on in the US. What makes Betman think hockey, an expensive, time consuming sport, will ever catch on with American youth. Betman is a FOOL. I hate the guy. Expansion isn't totally a bad idea, but he went too far and went too fast with it all. And now Betman can't face the fact that his plans are a botched mess--that's a fool. Betman sucks.
|
|
|
Post by Shredded Red on Dec 27, 2008 15:27:06 GMT -5
Tomcat, while I agree with you on your opinion of your soccer. You're wrong when it comes to soccer finding a home in America. I think soccer has overtaken hockey in popularity by quite a bit all over the country because it has been promoted so well. Especially in places where they're lacking in major sports franchises like the south. In Kentucky I'd say soccer is #2 to Basketball, followed by Football. You can't find hockey stuff in a sports store. They simply don't sell it, but they've got isles and isles of soccer equipment. They've got 2 ice rinks that I know of between Lexington and Louisville Kentucky, but there are 4 indoor soccer arenas in Lexington alone.....and this doesn't include all the state of the art outdoor venues.
Hitman may be able to tell you better than me, but I remember soccer being pretty big in Florida too, definitely bigger than hockey. I think the NHL did need to expand into the south, because had it not expanded into markets like San Jose, Atlanta, Dallas, Carolina and Tampa the league would be in real trouble right now because the expansions have provided financial balance, and as Zoom stated it has spread the popularity of the sport across the country instead of concentrating it in the north.
I think the biggest obstacle the hockey faces is that it's not an accessible sport to play. if you think about it hockey was pretty popular when rollerblades were popular. The popularity of the sport has declined dramatically since the strike, but it has corresponded with the decline in the popularity of rollerblades. Even in Michigan I don't see kids on rollerblades anymore. Rollerblades made it easier, and more fun for kids to play hockey outdoors on an everyday basis. They didn't have to wait for winter, or pay ridiculous ice time fee's. It was just like any other pick up sport for awhile....you get enough people and the equipment and you could play it in any parking lot, just like basketball, baseball or football.
I think rollerblades got to specialized, and got too expensive. Trick skates and overly expensive hockey skates are pretty much all thats available now, which makes street hockey less accessible. Rollerblades aren't too blame for the decline in the leagues popularity, but they play an interesting role in the decline of the sports popularity.
Here's the interesting connection between all of this and soccer. Soccer is one of the most accessible sports to play, and I would argue that it's a more popular sport than hockey in this country....yet the MLS isn't nearly as popular as the NHL. So in a way the NHL does a better job at promoting and spreading the popularity of a sport that is much more difficult to market.
|
|
|
Post by Zoom Waffles on Dec 28, 2008 10:55:33 GMT -5
I think the trick here is how we define the popularity of a sport. Number of spectators? Number of players? Revenue of the professional league?
Soccer probably has the most players nationwide of any youth sport. But for people over 18, I think it's close. Are there really that many more adults playing soccer than hockey? I don't think so. As far as the professional level, hockey is still, thankfully, more popular than soccer in the U.S. MLS teams are failing to draw crowds, even with Mr. Beckham in LA. Of course, that's not always the best gauge. I think we should look at the popularity of the international game. What draws more fans in the US, the World Cup or hockey at the Olympics. It's a no-brainer.
But it's not necessarily that soccer is promoted so well. I think you hit the nail on the head when you talk about the accessibility of soccer. It's cheap and the rules are simple. Hockey can't claim either of those things. And maybe that's the problem.
|
|
|
Post by Zipper14 on Dec 31, 2008 1:54:40 GMT -5
Love the article Zoom. Sorry for the late reply, I was out of town for the holidays.... and I also got Fallout 3 for X-mas.... so I have no life now.
I never really thought of the NHL as a separate entity from the individual teams, but when you do some of the stuff Bettman does makes a lot more sense. However, even though I now I see where he's coming I still don't think he's running the league properly.
His expansion has created multiple unstable teams that are a joke to the world of sports. I mean who doesn't laugh at the thought of hockey in Phoenix? Like Shredded said, "even non-hockey fans appreciate solid hockey teams and their heritage." My dad, who pays minimal attention to the NFL, thinks the league is a joke because he can't keep track of which teams play where (last week he asked me why the Houston team wasn't called the Oilers), but that's because he's a fringe fan. If my dad can't figure out who plays where in the biggest league in North America, how can a fringe fan in Georgia or Nashville be expected to keep track of NHL teams?
To have a successful league you must have strong franchises, but because of these ventures into non-traditional markets there are several very unstable teams in the NHL. Sure the league made money off of merchandise, and that has helped the league, but it has created many teams that may need to be bailed out in the coming years. Sure Bettman could move Nashville to KC, but where does he expect to move Atlanta or Phoenix when they decide they need to move? Not to mention the fact that Bettman has turned his back on many die hard NHL fans.
And to the soccer/hockey argument. More kids play soccer than hockey up here in Western Canada, and sure soccer is gaining in popularity, but hockey's 'general popularity' can't be beat up here.
|
|
|
Post by Zoom Waffles on Dec 31, 2008 10:28:17 GMT -5
Well you know, this all just gets back to one basic principal: Bettman has compromised the integrity of the league to make money.
|
|
Tomcat
Second Liner
Posts: 465
|
Post by Tomcat on Jan 1, 2009 9:02:43 GMT -5
T I think soccer has overtaken hockey in popularity by quite a bit all over the country because it has been promoted so well. I think it's due to immigrants. I heard on a Canadian radio station the other day, that soccer is becoming more popular with the youth in certain parts of Canada. They said it was due to the flood of immigrants, which make sense to me and I'll venture that same is true for America. I don't know any real American sports fans that actually like soccer. I think most Americans think soccer is a joke. Which is odd considering baseball is supposedly the national pass time, which is embarassing. I don't even consider baseball players as being athletes, nor do I consider baseball a sport. Standing out in the hot sun scratching yourself and spitting nasty tobacco from under your rat's nest mustache doesn't count in my book. At least soccer players exert themselves... but soccer still sucks.
|
|
|
Post by Shredded Red on Jan 3, 2009 2:49:48 GMT -5
Sacrificing integrity for profit should be the American economies tagline. It's not just Bettman and the NHL. Perhaps he is a smart business man, considering he's running the NHL fairly similar to how Michael Eisner has run Disney for the past decade or so....and no one can argue with the success of Disney as a company. The problem is it's hard to compare hockey to Mickey Mouse as a business model.
Likewise it's hard to compare soccer to hockey. I agree with Tomcat that immigrants do play a part in bringing soccer to the states, but those immigrants are inspiring Americans and Canadians as well by showing them truer aspects of the sport that we've never gotten on our own. The same needs to be done for hockey. I know plenty of redneck Americans here in Kentucky who are die hard soccer fans, European soccer fans at that. Tell me how the NHL is missing that market? There are people here subscribing to satellite soccer channels, but not even the sports bars down here carry NHL center ice.
In addition to my previous argument about accessibility of the sport I think you also have to look at novelty as well. The NHL has created a novelty sport, something thats kind of gimmicky, but the European soccer leagues have stuck true to their form and even though I can't stand watching soccer there's an intensity in European soccer that's hard to see in the NHL if you're not a die hard fan. And it's because of tradition and rivalry's....something the NHL is starting to severely lack.
|
|
|
Post by Zoom Waffles on Jan 3, 2009 12:41:04 GMT -5
As far as soccer, I think it's popular because youth soccer programs are so popular. I might have said that before, but let me reinforce it. Where I grew up, which was hockey-crazed Glens Falls, NY (former home of the Adirondack Red Wings), everyone played youth soccer. More people played soccer than little league baseball. Hockey was just too expensive to compare to either one of those things.
As for people watching soccer, I think it has to do with a few things. 1) No stoppages - that feeds right into Americans' short attention spans. 2) Slow gameplay - it's not hard to keep up with the ball movement like it is with puck movement. 3) Size of ball - the ball is way easier to see than the puck. That helps, too.
|
|