This is what I think we should do to Wang for the way he's run the Isles regardless of any lockout....
No money went from my pocket to Charles B Wang since the 2001-2 season. I've stub Hub'd several games away from NVMC, and Chuckypoops shares some of that, yes, but I haven't bought any tickets that weren't already paid for.
And I see no reason to get upset if someone wants to show non-support of this third labor fiasco over money, especially when tickets and salaries are rapidly becoming absurdly priced. That's both parties in this debate.
But people, as Dan-O says, will continue to go to games, like people continue to shop at WalMarts and kill their own businesses, etc.
The vast majority of people who go to games (in any sport) are going to go for additional reasons besides being a fan of the sport,
The family who buy tickets to take the kids to for a night out
The "got tickets from work" crowd
The my "cool girlfriend/wife" likes hockey and it beats going to a chick flick
The my friend had an extra ticket fan
The bottom line is that if there is a game being played people are going to go and there are simply not enough hard core fans who can stay away long enough to make a "statement"
I wonder how much the media and public/fan sentiment matters to these guys behind closed doors.
I know the NHL hired some ex-repblican media expert to help them win the PR battle and in public negotiations (or public products/services like pro sports) winning the PR battle seems to be important.
But does it really matter if the public sides with one side or the other? I have no idea in this case. I tend to think they do care about public support but not at the cost of giving up a dollar, on both sides.
Related is the impact to the NHL brand. While hard core fans will always come back, the fringe fans may not. I'd guess it's the same for sponsors. Some will always come back and some may not. Sponsorship, advertising is a function of eyeballs and demographics/psycographics/share of wallet - I don't think it's any more complex than that.
Certainly losing the Kraft Hockeyville relationship (unclear whether it's permanent) is bad news, been around for 20 years, but I'm not sure Bettmen/Fehr really care that much.
Bettman's public rant was pretty cool to watch. Seemed sincere but I wonder how much of it was posturing.
Hockey or no hockey, it would be pretty amazing being in the room for some of these meetings, that's for sure. Maybe that's what 24/7 should do this year, starting NOW. Film it all, release it in a few years as a cool documentary, maybe teach a course around it, labour relations. Great case study.
I wonder how much the media and public/fan sentiment matters to these guys behind closed doors.
I would say almost nothing. They blew up an entire year last time and fans came back and the product sold better than ever, increasing over a billion bucks a year since then. Their considerations are financial and driven by sponsors probably. They know the fans will come back.
To the extent the owners care about media / public opinion is only in terms of bargaining pressure on the players and players wives / families (i.e., so those that are impacted but not directly involved put pressure on the union leaders and player reps based on media reports). Whether that works for the owners is dubious.
I would say almost nothing. They blew up an entire year last time and fans came back and the product sold better than ever, increasing over a billion bucks a year since then. Their considerations are financial and driven by sponsors probably. They know the fans will come back.
To the extent the owners care about media / public opinion is only in terms of bargaining pressure on the players and players wives / families (i.e., so those that are impacted but not directly involved put pressure on the union leaders and player reps based on media reports). Whether that works for the owners is dubious.
Yeah, you know there is no way we could not watch when it comes back on. Then if we say something like, "Oh, Okposo is looking better this year" and another poster says, "What are you talking about he's been awful. How many games have you watched" and you have to say, "Oh, none I'm taking the pledge"...bam...goodbye. Everyone here will be watching....
Yeah, you know there is no way we could not watch when it comes back on. Then if we say something like, "Oh, Okposo is looking better this year" and another poster says, "What are you talking about he's been awful. How many games have you watched" and you have to say, "Oh, none I'm taking the pledge"...bam...goodbye. Everyone here will be watching....
not for nothing, i'm not watching this year regardless. and you can say 'well, you are here, arent you?'. Sure, i am here, but watching just how absolute pathetic both sides are and, more importantly, just how stupid the players are acting is why i keep coming back. I may watch next year but i just could not give one **** about hockey right now. I'm ALMOST hoping they are stupid enough to lose the season over such petty ******** but i know that is the death knell of the NHL should they do that.
It's fine if individuals want to take some pledge. That's fine. So long as they don't get in other people's grill about it, I don't care.
Of course, this pledge is real easy to make... Until your team starts out 7-2-1, and you've got 24 games to go in your pledge.
Cheers,
Dan-o
First, some folks like myself don't live and die by what happens in the NHL. If it evaporated tomorrow my love for hockey would continue without it. If you asked me to rank where the NHL is in my life vs. say my family, friends, my job, and other interests I will let you tell me where you think it sits in my life. Not watching another ten games when the babies couldn't agree to start the season by parting their billions somewhat fairly in August will be a cakewalk for me, and I suppose it will be an equal cakewalk for many others as well.
Second, I don't see anyone getting on you or anyone else for not doing something similar so I don't know why you even throw that out there. It is an individual thing, and I support it just like I would never hold it against anyone for jumping right back on the bandwagon from the first game out. If anything as I glance through this thread it would seem like the other camp is more likely to "get in someone's face" about their views.
I simply support what these guys are doing. It is a mature response, not hysterical or angry, just a deadpan response to what is lockout #3 when there really didn't have to be one.
Oh, I almost forgot. You mention a team going 7-2-1 with 24 more games to boycott. Well, the suggested system by these guys in the link for not watching games or buying merchandise is one game or day for every day past 12/21/12 that they continue the lockout. Under your scenario that would be 34 game days. If we go 34 game days for a club past 12/21 in lockout alone I think you can pretty much kiss the season goodbye so the point would be moot. I haven't seen a drop dead date for the season surviving, but it can't be much past the third week of January. Someone had better blink, and soon.
Last edited by A Pointed Stick: 12-11-2012 at 10:02 PM.
Second, I don't see anyone getting on you or anyone else for not doing something similar so I don't know why you even throw that out there. It is an individual thing, and I support it just like I would never hold it against anyone for jumping right back on the bandwagon from the first game out. If anything as I glance through this thread it would seem like the other camp is more likely to "get in someone's face" about their views.
That's fine. If it's what you'd like to do to give you peace of mind, it doesn't effect me a bit. If it's an attempt to send a message individually, it's pointless, but if you want to delude yourself into thinking otherwise, that's fine too.
Boycotts, on the other hand, are a kind of political action that require discipline, canvassing, cajoling, protesting, and all sorts of similar stuff. It's like applying the worst-case scenario tactics of organized labor to consumers. It's effective, but it certainly involves getting in people's grills. Which is why it should be saved for very important issues. Heck, I think there's going to come a time where boycotting will become necessary to effect some real change on issues that we as a country are continuously failing to confront. I won't say what that is, because we don't need to get into politics. But hockey ain't it.
If I'm getting in people's grills for boycotting, it's because I know something about boycotts and what has to be done to make them effective. It turns sidewalks in front of Bob Evans into a picket line because they donate to Planned Parenthood. It turns sidewalks in front of Denny's into a picket line because they plan to charge an 'Obamacare Surcharge'. People shouldn't have to go through that before they eat such a crappy breakfast.
When there's a group that makes a slick video product selling the idea of a hockey-abstinence (as opposed to a boycott), one has got to wonder what's up. I believe that anyone sophisticated enough to produce a message like that has to know that individual hockey-abstinence, itself, is a pointless tactic. So, I think it much more likely that the video message itself (as opposed to people actually promising to abstain from hockey) is intended to put pressure on the league, the players, and the sponsors. My guess is that they're particularly aiming for sponsors.
And so, the more I think about it, I'm actually kind of happy that something like this is out there. Not because I take hockey abstinence seriously, but because I take the skill in messaging seriously, and so may the NHL's sponsors. And that may help to get a deal done.
Hey! Are two of those guys from the movie Miracle? The actors who play Mark Johnson and Mike Eruzione?
THANK YOU. I was bugging out attempting to figure out where I recognized them from..
Both side meeting again right now in a secret location. No owners at this meeting just Bettman/Daly and lawyers going against the Fehr's/lawyers and there was talk of a few players showing up, there are also federal mediators again that will sit there and just shake their head at both sides.
THANK YOU. I was bugging out attempting to figure out where I recognized them from..
Both side meeting again right now in a secret location. No owners at this meeting just Bettman/Daly and lawyers going against the Fehr's/lawyers and there was talk of a few players showing up, there are also federal mediators again that will sit there and just shake their head at both sides.
@JohnLuTSNMtl: #NHL and #NHLPA met separately for roughly 6 hours today. The two sides were not in the same room at any time.
@JohnLuTSNMtl: #NHL Bill Daly says #NHLPA is going to talk to mediator again tonight and details will be forwarded to NHL. No progress made, no conclusion.
@JohnLuTSNMtl: #NHLPA internal meeting going on. PA representative will provide a brief update once they wrap up.
That's fine. If it's what you'd like to do to give you peace of mind, it doesn't effect me a bit. If it's an attempt to send a message individually, it's pointless, but if you want to delude yourself into thinking otherwise, that's fine too.
Boycotts, on the other hand, are a kind of political action that require discipline, canvassing, cajoling, protesting, and all sorts of similar stuff. It's like applying the worst-case scenario tactics of organized labor to consumers. It's effective, but it certainly involves getting in people's grills. Which is why it should be saved for very important issues. Heck, I think there's going to come a time where boycotting will become necessary to effect some real change on issues that we as a country are continuously failing to confront. I won't say what that is, because we don't need to get into politics. But hockey ain't it.
If I'm getting in people's grills for boycotting, it's because I know something about boycotts and what has to be done to make them effective. It turns sidewalks in front of Bob Evans into a picket line because they donate to Planned Parenthood. It turns sidewalks in front of Denny's into a picket line because they plan to charge an 'Obamacare Surcharge'. People shouldn't have to go through that before they eat such a crappy breakfast.
When there's a group that makes a slick video product selling the idea of a hockey-abstinence (as opposed to a boycott), one has got to wonder what's up. I believe that anyone sophisticated enough to produce a message like that has to know that individual hockey-abstinence, itself, is a pointless tactic. So, I think it much more likely that the video message itself (as opposed to people actually promising to abstain from hockey) is intended to put pressure on the league, the players, and the sponsors. My guess is that they're particularly aiming for sponsors.
And so, the more I think about it, I'm actually kind of happy that something like this is out there. Not because I take hockey abstinence seriously, but because I take the skill in messaging seriously, and so may the NHL's sponsors. And that may help to get a deal done.
Cheers,
Dan-o
I see your point about the term being applied loosely or incorrectly, but like many terms in the union and or legal realm which I have had to party in for a while there is the legal definition, and the webster dictionary definition. In this case, I think all parties are going with the last one. In the end I agree that this won't do much, in parallel with the way all of the bluster and storm from the Islander message boards did little to nothing to impact the Islander's lease, relocation, etc. It is better than crickets though, because silence sends the worst message of all. Three lockouts, and this one really was just a massive ego trip for both sides. We all deserve better.
I work at a gas station and I just met Chris Higgins mom. She was a nice lady and she told me he is looking at playing in Italy AFTER CHRISTMAS, I guess he doesn't think this is going to end soon? I'm not sure I told her to tell him to sign with isles next year
I work at a gas station and I just met Chris Higgins mom. She was a nice lady and she told me he is looking at playing in Italy AFTER CHRISTMAS, I guess he doesn't think this is going to end soon? I'm not sure I told her to tell him to sign with isles next year
Yeah, I think we are getting coal this year instead of a Christmas gift. I really think they cancel the season on January 1st or 2nd. I think they give the PA a drop dead date of Xmas.
not for nothing, i'm not watching this year regardless. and you can say 'well, you are here, arent you?'. Sure, i am here, but watching just how absolute pathetic both sides are and, more importantly, just how stupid the players are acting is why i keep coming back. I may watch next year but i just could not give one **** about hockey right now. I'm ALMOST hoping they are stupid enough to lose the season over such petty ******** but i know that is the death knell of the NHL should they do that.
To me you are angry and stuck in rant mode. Nothing to see here...move along.
Being a fan is like religion. Will people stop being religious if the world goes to ****? Of course not.
To me you are angry and stuck in rant mode. Nothing to see here...move along.
Being a fan is like religion. Will people stop being religious if the world goes to ****? Of course not.
Did i say I'm never coming back? I said I'm done for this year regardless. I am here because this is moderately interesting. It's interesting that they ate fighting over dollar amounts the players will never make back and the gains the league itself had made. I couldn't care less if they make a deal today or in march, the absolute seething hatred is essentially cutting off their nose to spite their face. That part is interesting to me about this whole joke.
I find it unbelievable how they can have so many "unproductive" meetings. One would think with so many meetings they would be getting something done, at least getting closer to a deal.
Maybe its a play on the media, but its ****ing annoying for sure. I'm really sick of checking the news and reading about yet another unproductive meeting.
I find it unbelievable how they can have so many "unproductive" meetings. One would think with so many meetings they would be getting something done, at least getting closer to a deal.
Maybe its a play on the media, but its ****ing annoying for sure. I'm really sick of checking the news and reading about yet another unproductive meeting.
Meetings which are unproductive in the respect we care about, are yet billable hours for attorneys.
