They inducted Ziegler in 87, still running the league at that time. Johnny not much more than a lightweight loafer wearing lothario. Frat Boy. Drinking buddy of Eagleson's, the Wirtz & formerly Norris Clans. Bet your Bippy Bettman goes in the same year he retires if not sooner.
but is being influential the same thing as being a meaningful builder? eagleson was undoubtedly influential. he even did a few good things (summit series, e.g.), but he did an awful lot of damage. likewise, bettman.
And Eagleson was in the HOF until it came out that he did outright illegal things to his clients... so the "influence" precedent is already established.
Last edited by tarheelhockey: 12-10-2012 at 06:37 PM.
After reading through this thread, I think that Bettman will almost certainly get in, but that it'll probably be a few years after he retires as Commissioner.
If it's the year he retires (or sooner)... I almost pity the players that go in the same year as him.
Maybe he shouldn't but if previous owners who are in hall are more dirty and corrupt than he is then of course also the salaries have gone up considerable amount.The pice of franchise has gone up.But the myth that there are more kids playing the game is the biggest lie on this site
Maybe he shouldn't but if previous owners who are in hall are more dirty and corrupt than he is then of course also the salaries have gone up considerable amount.The pice of franchise has gone up.But the myth that there are more kids playing the game is the biggest lie on this site
Write a letter to Minor Hockey Canada ask if there's records from membership lists from 1950-1980 and compare it too today.There is a crisis in youth hockey in canada.IN quebec mebership has dropped 35 percent from 1985.Do your homework.Football in Quebec has more members than hockey.Reasons are costs and single parents can't afford costs.I'v volunteered for years in hockey so I can tell you kids are not playing the game at the percentage it was once and the numbers are staggering.
He shouldn't..........but he will. Clarence Campbell is in there. Ziegler is in there. Bettman will get in only by default. Three lockouts under his watch. 4 teams relocating (so far) under his watch. Placing hockey in non-traditional markets and keeping them there long after they've failed (Phoenix). The growth of the game was going to roll anyway. Gretzky's influence is what made this what it was and Bettman arrived at the perfect time in 1993.
While there is no doubt the game grew under his watch we can also point to the fact that it also should have grown much more by now. In 1994 we witnessed a wonderful playoff season. Bure was in the Cup final and the Rangers won a thrilling series. This was a perfect time to capitalize on hockey, but then they had a lockout. Then the same thing in Tampa in 2004. Then L.A. in 2012. Every time a team wins the Cup that would generate more interest the league folds. Not to mention silly things like the crease rule, the dead puck era, obstruction, etc. The overall way the hockey world loathes the man. I don't know, I wouldn't put him in there. But everyone at that position will get in. Not to mention the NHLPA guys. Eagleson got booted out but he was in there. Goodenow as much as I hate to admit it, drove salaries through the roof. I don't think he did much for the game but rather the players. But when you have this position, no matter how poor you are at it you end up in the Hall of Fame if you withstand the test of time.
Phil Housley in the Hall doesn't look so bad now does it?
Another valid point Big Phil that Wayne's influence in teams in sun belt and San Jose and Anaheim is almost solely his doing.Bettmen will get in but those teams are because of Gretzy's time in LA.
I think growth of the game was inevitable and primarily driven by technological advancements in broadcasting and media. HD tv, online streaming, etc. Frankly I don't think his resume is that great, though the numbers are there. Since the beginning of Bettman's tenure, has the NHL grown at a higher rate than MLB, NBA, or NFL? I'd be interested in a side-by-side comparison.
I think growth of the game was inevitable and primarily driven by technological advancements in broadcasting and media. HD tv, online streaming, etc. Frankly I don't think his resume is that great, though the numbers are there. Since the beginning of Bettman's tenure, has the NHL grown at a higher rate than MLB, NBA, or NFL? I'd be interested in a side-by-side comparison.
Write a letter to Minor Hockey Canada ask if there's records from membership lists from 1950-1980 and compare it too today.There is a crisis in youth hockey in canada.IN quebec mebership has dropped 35 percent from 1985.Do your homework.Football in Quebec has more members than hockey.Reasons are costs and single parents can't afford costs.I'v volunteered for years in hockey so I can tell you kids are not playing the game at the percentage it was once and the numbers are staggering.
That's the last 10 years right there. For Quebec to have dropped 35% since 1985 means that there would have had to have been a massive drop between 1985-2000, followed by this large growth pattern.
Now, I'm not really certain why it is that we should draw a line between the United States and Canada as it pertains to youth hockey. The cost of equipment and the cost of ice are something that everyone has to deal with, and yet is most likely a bigger issue for American kids. I'll give two reasons.
1) Cost of ice. Substantially fewer sheets of ice, and they also carry much higher costs to operate (basically running air conditioning nonstop, compared to being able to throttle back in colder climates). Fewer sheets of ice means more less competition, and less incentive to provide a price break. In addition, the distance traveled to actually get to a rink is much greater.
2) Equipment. In emerging markets, finding decently-priced equipment is much more difficult. Stand-alone gear shops aren't common, so if there's anything available, it's crammed into a back corner of a place like Sports Authority, where you can find a greater selection of batting gloves than hockey equipment. Same issue as above; less competition, higher prices.
I fail to see how energy and equipment costs have anything to do with Bettman's legacy.
Write a letter to Minor Hockey Canada ask if there's records from membership lists from 1950-1980 and compare it too today.There is a crisis in youth hockey in canada.IN quebec mebership has dropped 35 percent from 1985.Do your homework.Football in Quebec has more members than hockey.Reasons are costs and single parents can't afford costs.I'v volunteered for years in hockey so I can tell you kids are not playing the game at the percentage it was once and the numbers are staggering.
With all due respect, do YOUR homework. You're the one suggesting that the claim is flawed.
That's a tough sell for me. He leads the universe in most games lost to labor dispute of any comissioner in any professional sports league in North America. ...
Agreed. If I knew 1 person who cares about the NHL coming back, I might say yes, but I don't know anyone who cares if NHL hockey is ever played again, so I say no he should not get in.
as a fan: no
if you're rational: yes. He's done a lot of good things to the NHL. Many new teams, a lot of growth in the US. Financially, he's brung a lot.
That being said he will be voted in but really 3 lockouts, expansion to bad markets, ownership issues and the denial behind everything seals the deal, he was worse than selig, something that seemed impossible at one point.
They inducted Ziegler in 87, still running the league at that time. Johnny not much more than a lightweight loafer wearing lothario. Frat Boy. Drinking buddy of Eagleson's, the Wirtz & formerly Norris Clans. Bet your Bippy Bettman goes in the same year he retires if not sooner.
They should make the voting public, not sure as many would vote him in then.
