HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Bill Simmons "The Sports Guy" with his take on the NHL lockout

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-20-2012, 03:23 AM
  #26
The Zetterberg Era
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 17,367
vCash: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Finally, for the other side, you have Fehr. He is characterized by the truculent attitude as well. This leads to falling into the now social norm of sales pitch over reality. The agents of the players consistently use pitch over reality to secure clients and in negotiations with clubs. The players need to learn how to differentiate pitch over reality as is abundantly evident from their tweets.

I liked the call for a fleshed out proposal from the PA by the league. It is moving off the spin towards the reality.
This is a big part of the problem too. In a rush to judge one side as theirs a lot of people overlooked that. If you are willing to point out the flaws in Bettman as a guy that sits across from the table and negatively influences the direction of the sport, the same picture can be thrown on Fehr. He is a man that has already crossed some of these owners, certainly most of the lawyers. As much as Bettman infuriates the players, the owners look at Fehr with probably similar distain and big mistrust.

Now the NHLPA can say they were pushed here and I think that is fair. But the fact remains I don't really want either guy around hockey after this pushes through. They are wildly unpopular with the fans, those that are pro player hate Bettman, those that pro owner hate Fehr. They given a task and they go about it in ways with total disregard for a lot of the damage they do. They do good job of blanketing some of the damage to their employers which is a part of their strength. Fehr and Bettman are evil not the players running a coup d'état or the owners failed ideas on expansion or union breaking.

They are like nuclear deterrence, while in place they provide some false sense of security to their group but leave them wary of what they other one is actually doing. It bothers me and maybe it is utterly unfixable. What we have right now is two guys that didn't show up to talk it out and reason. Heck they didn't even show up for a gun or knife fight, they are standing over buttons to missiles and hoping the wall collapses or a white flag is shown, it is a cold war. The game of chicken needs to stop.

It speaks to the flaws of the business of the NHL. They want to sell the game and somehow don't know how. They elect officials that are supposed to work together and then get directions not to. The writing was on the wall, they watched two sports do it in North America within the last year. Yet, what it seems is that both sides showed up thinking they could take the parts they wanted from other sports and somehow hoodwink the other side.

Really the business end of this should be simple, that is a large part of what Simmons is mocking. How do intelligent people pretend this isn't happening? How can both sides avoid their own failures in this system? It really is remarkable when you think about it in simple terms instead of crunching numbers, pooring over their proposals, and strange PR war.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 03:41 AM
  #27
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
But teams like Philly are a rarity because they can afford to not have to trap because they have a stacked team. But in this day and age, if you don't trap you get eaten alive. That is why Mark Crawford doesn't have a NHL job.

And I don't find hockey to be better now than it was between 95 and 04. Where's the heated rivalry like Avs-Wings?
I basically grew up with 95' to 04' hockey.

There are some tremendous hockey that has been played during that era, you mention one match up but I am sure everyone here who was around then has great memories. And things where definitely better closer ot 95' then closer to 04' also (but I also certainly like enjoyed Calgary during their cup run).

But, if you look at the NHL as a whole, all 24-30 teams, 82 games per season, season in and season out, the game became too defensive. I can certainly enjoy a defensiveminded game. But the time period as a whole, the no energy Decemember games. And so forth, the game changed alot. I also remember the game pre-trap, and the diffrence beween say 93' and 03' is nothing but remarkable. It became a diffrent sport almost. Hence why so drastic changes was made by Bettman after the lockout.

But it just took way to long.

And I am not sure if I am willing to buy any argument about the game not being great nowadays either as an excuse. Its still broken, is that an excuse?

Soccer is an extremely traditional sport (they are still fighting about goal cams). They've made their nets bigger in 82' and 86'. Goalie equipment has grown tremendously. I played "pro" (I am really stretching the term) hockey from 97'-02'. Was a junior during the 90's. I remember the first time I played against a goalie that was 6'4 and had modern equipment and played a butterfly style, everyone was like WTF how on earth can you score on him? He covers the entire net? The only talk I've heard in the NHL was these outspaced ugly looking bent nets. A couple of inches here and there wouldn't in any way have changed the perception of the game, it would if anything only have kept the game from changing. By doing nothing it has indeed changed. And Bettman is ultimately in charge of this.

I would not say that Bettman has done an acceptable job at managing the actual product. He has basically been AWOL.


Last edited by Ola: 11-20-2012 at 03:48 AM.
Ola is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 04:03 AM
  #28
struckbyaparkedcar
Zemgus Da Gawd
 
struckbyaparkedcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Country: Cote DIvoire
Posts: 10,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedWings19405 View Post
Kind of a part of why I posted it. A lot of people especially from the other countries ask what the American opinion is a lot. Now Simmons isn't always with majority but he usually is. I thought this might show it. Sometimes it is apathetic and shows a somewhat basic knowledge of the game. But it does show frustration. I thought it captured in a lot of ways how I feel the American sports fan that is a hockey fan is taking this. Not the die-hards but people the NHL wants to rely on to pump money into the game and who actually do like Simmons. By the way important to note as much as he hates Bettman he sees problems with what the players are thinking. To a larger degree than how he looked at NFLPA and the NBAPA. At least that much I remember from reading him previously.
His NFL lockout coverage was more ripping Goodell for garbage like an 18 game schedule, but I think his position on the NBA/NHL PAs has been pretty consistent with each other. His envisioning a "15-20 superstars then everybody else" payscale meshes pretty well with how he's wanted the NBA to move since their lockout rumors began.

Also, I think it has a lot to do with the NHL's comparative lack of direction. The NBA lockout had a clear goal: move away from the old salary structure because it led to too many bloated mid-level deals. The NFL might not have been as cohesive, but they at least had the consistent talking points about 18 game schedules, player safety and revenue sharing. I just can't do the same with the NHL. It's revenue sharing, HRR, salary rollbacks, contract limits, whether or not you can waive guys, possible amnesties, where the new cap will be, etc.

struckbyaparkedcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 06:47 AM
  #29
saffronleaf
Registered User
 
saffronleaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country:
Posts: 3,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
I basically grew up with 95' to 04' hockey.

There are some tremendous hockey that has been played during that era, you mention one match up but I am sure everyone here who was around then has great memories. And things where definitely better closer ot 95' then closer to 04' also (but I also certainly like enjoyed Calgary during their cup run).

But, if you look at the NHL as a whole, all 24-30 teams, 82 games per season, season in and season out, the game became too defensive. I can certainly enjoy a defensiveminded game. But the time period as a whole, the no energy Decemember games. And so forth, the game changed alot. I also remember the game pre-trap, and the diffrence beween say 93' and 03' is nothing but remarkable. It became a diffrent sport almost. Hence why so drastic changes was made by Bettman after the lockout.

But it just took way to long.

And I am not sure if I am willing to buy any argument about the game not being great nowadays either as an excuse. Its still broken, is that an excuse?

Soccer is an extremely traditional sport (they are still fighting about goal cams). They've made their nets bigger in 82' and 86'. Goalie equipment has grown tremendously. I played "pro" (I am really stretching the term) hockey from 97'-02'. Was a junior during the 90's. I remember the first time I played against a goalie that was 6'4 and had modern equipment and played a butterfly style, everyone was like WTF how on earth can you score on him? He covers the entire net? The only talk I've heard in the NHL was these outspaced ugly looking bent nets. A couple of inches here and there wouldn't in any way have changed the perception of the game, it would if anything only have kept the game from changing. By doing nothing it has indeed changed. And Bettman is ultimately in charge of this.

I would not say that Bettman has done an acceptable job at managing the actual product. He has basically been AWOL.
I think other things can be done before expanding the size of the nets.

The trap should be banned as a defensive strategy, and it doesn't take a whole lot of intelligence to come up with a way to do that. We had some great ideas come out after the whole Philadelphia-Tampa fiasco where Philadelphia refused to play the puck into Tampa's trap.

Goaltender equipment needs to be scaled down drastically. The equipment should be there for safety, not to take away the skill of goaltending and allow anyone to be a goaltender that can have a 2GAA.

That itself would make the game much more entertaining. A talented goaltender with a team that has great hustle and backchecking could still ensure a low scoring game. But such a low score would be borne out of skill and hard work, and there would still be excitement in seeing the low score. Low scoring games can be very entertaining, a la Boston-Tampa Game 7 in 2011. But low scoring shouldn't be the result of goaltending equipment that makes the Michelin man look emaciated, and defensive strategies that pylons could execute.

saffronleaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 06:56 AM
  #30
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,809
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
I liked the call for a fleshed out proposal from the PA by the league. It is moving off the spin towards the reality.
Yep. If a linked 50/50 is inevitable, which it appears to be, then the NHLPA needs to make it crystal clear what it'll cost the NHL in terms of other items up for grabs. This really needs to be spelled out, and soon, if this season is to be saved.

Crease is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 09:54 AM
  #31
The Legend
Stamkos in 2016
 
The Legend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,834
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Were those mulligans when the NFL and NBA had lockouts last season?

Maybe the leaders of their player unions were just smarter than Fehr.
I must have missed when the NBA and NFL had entire seasons cancelled...

The Legend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 09:57 AM
  #32
The Legend
Stamkos in 2016
 
The Legend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,834
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trl3789 View Post
Thank you for such a well written, informative post.

I personally love what he writes, and what he has brought with the introduction of Grantland. It is a different take on sports, one I find refreshing. I also agree that it is a huge deal that he used his lead in to his NFL picks to talk about the lockout. I think he has the potential, by himself, to expand the game and catch the attention of people who may not be fans as is. That may be a bit of a stretch, but he is an extremely influential voice.


Edit: I should add that there are a large number of people who really dislike him as an analyst and a writer. They think he's confusing and flat out bad at what he does. I just find his takes refreshing. I should also add that he is responsible for the extremely successful 30 for 30 films, almost all of which are amazing.
Grantland should win awards based on how convenient/entertaining/non-cluttering it is.

Any popular, unique individual/group will always generate backlash. Look at any musician for instance.

The Legend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 09:58 AM
  #33
wKetch22
Pure Grime
 
wKetch22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vermont
Country: United States
Posts: 10,188
vCash: 50
Just to clarify how little this guy knows about hockey, he thinks (or thought) Marchand's first name is Andrew, and also called Peverley "Patrick Beverley" lmao

wKetch22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 10:01 AM
  #34
The Legend
Stamkos in 2016
 
The Legend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,834
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
You missed my point. I am not comparing the amount of time the players were locked out at all. Both the NFL and the NBA felt that their existing CBAs needed to be revised to give the players a smaller percentage of the revenue. Were those mulligans? Those commissioners felt very strongly that changes needed to be made. Why didn't their crystal balls get it right the time before?

And you are missing the bigger point. The reason that the season was missed 7 years ago was because (apparently) the system was so broken that only a salary cap would guarantee the long-term health of the league. Glad to see the missed season was worth it.

The Legend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 10:06 AM
  #35
IkeaMonkey*
HF Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: derderderderderderde
Country: Sao Tome e Principe
Posts: 12,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wKetch22 View Post
Just to clarify how little this guy knows about hockey, he thinks (or thought) Marchand's first name is Andrew, and also called Peverley "Patrick Beverley" lmao
I honestly don't get why this guy is famous for his sports knowledge. The first time I heard of the guy, was on ESPN radio earlier this year and he got a really famous wide receiver's team wrong. I mean, a current big name wide receiver(whose name escapes me right now...) in the NFL and he asked his guest, "Is he still playing in...?" I think it was Anquan Boldin...in reference to Arizona...

So, if he sucks at his knowledge of the NFL...he sucks at his knowledge of the NHL...I'm assuming he's good at the NBA or MLB or something? Not going to really comment on this article specifically, as I think the dude is a McKenzie level assclown.

IkeaMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 12:53 PM
  #36
Swarez
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DynamoAO View Post
I honestly don't get why this guy is famous for his sports knowledge. The first time I heard of the guy, was on ESPN radio earlier this year and he got a really famous wide receiver's team wrong. I mean, a current big name wide receiver(whose name escapes me right now...) in the NFL and he asked his guest, "Is he still playing in...?" I think it was Anquan Boldin...in reference to Arizona...

So, if he sucks at his knowledge of the NFL...he sucks at his knowledge of the NHL...I'm assuming he's good at the NBA or MLB or something? Not going to really comment on this article specifically, as I think the dude is a McKenzie level assclown.
His NFL knowledge is pretty good usually, I mean he picks against the spread and has weekly podcasts re NFL, talks fantasy etc. He is one of the few guys who picks above .500 against the spread while picking every game. I have heard him talk about Boldin in Baltimore before so not sure what your comment is referring to.

He is terrible with names, they used to have running jokes about how he was bad with names.

People have to remember what he is, he is there for entertainment nothing hard hitting or in depth. I used to listen/read his stuff back when I was in university but now I find his stuff repetitive, the 30 for 30 kinda brought me back, but his usual stuff I just skip. My tastes have matured over years, while Simmons is still doing light sports talk which OK, but gets old at least to me.

He is mainly a basketball guy, has a book on it, big on NFL/MLB talk, and kinda is into hockey, I think he is a Kings season ticket holder, or he was in the past. He probably is a good representation of a hockey fan in the US. Not hardcare, knows enough about the game to watch, spend money but will not really spend time talking about while its gone.

Swarez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 12:59 PM
  #37
IkeaMonkey*
HF Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: derderderderderderde
Country: Sao Tome e Principe
Posts: 12,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swarez99 View Post

He is terrible with names, they used to have running jokes about how he was bad with names.
Definitely not a person I would ever listen to about a sport like hockey then...

IkeaMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 07:02 PM
  #38
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Legend View Post
And you are missing the bigger point. The reason that the season was missed 7 years ago was because (apparently) the system was so broken that only a salary cap would guarantee the long-term health of the league. Glad to see the missed season was worth it.
I don't think I am missing the bigger point. For the owners the missed season 7 years ago was worth it. They were able to institute the concept of a salary cap which was instrumental in improving the finances of the overall league.

Now they have to go back and correct some oversights to allow more than half of the teams a shot at being profitable.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 07:35 PM
  #39
Gobias Industries
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Gobias Industries's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DynamoAO View Post
Definitely not a person I would ever listen to about a sport like hockey then...
He's a great big thinker, the cynicism in this thread is palpable.

Gobias Industries is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 08:25 PM
  #40
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,649
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
I basically grew up with 95' to 04' hockey.

There are some tremendous hockey that has been played during that era, you mention one match up but I am sure everyone here who was around then has great memories. And things where definitely better closer ot 95' then closer to 04' also (but I also certainly like enjoyed Calgary during their cup run).

But, if you look at the NHL as a whole, all 24-30 teams, 82 games per season, season in and season out, the game became too defensive. I can certainly enjoy a defensiveminded game. But the time period as a whole, the no energy Decemember games. And so forth, the game changed alot. I also remember the game pre-trap, and the diffrence beween say 93' and 03' is nothing but remarkable. It became a diffrent sport almost. Hence why so drastic changes was made by Bettman after the lockout.

But it just took way to long.

And I am not sure if I am willing to buy any argument about the game not being great nowadays either as an excuse. Its still broken, is that an excuse?

Soccer is an extremely traditional sport (they are still fighting about goal cams). They've made their nets bigger in 82' and 86'. Goalie equipment has grown tremendously. I played "pro" (I am really stretching the term) hockey from 97'-02'. Was a junior during the 90's. I remember the first time I played against a goalie that was 6'4 and had modern equipment and played a butterfly style, everyone was like WTF how on earth can you score on him? He covers the entire net? The only talk I've heard in the NHL was these outspaced ugly looking bent nets. A couple of inches here and there wouldn't in any way have changed the perception of the game, it would if anything only have kept the game from changing. By doing nothing it has indeed changed. And Bettman is ultimately in charge of this.

I would not say that Bettman has done an acceptable job at managing the actual product. He has basically been AWOL.
I just don't think the change in rules made the hockey better. It made it faster but not more creative. You see games in the 80s and 90s where it traps and hook like crazy but the intensity is at a high level and you get more goals.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 05:17 AM
  #41
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wKetch22 View Post
Just to clarify how little this guy knows about hockey, he thinks (or thought) Marchand's first name is Andrew, and also called Peverley "Patrick Beverley" lmao
There's a difference between "knowing hockey" and "knowing the LEAGUE." There were like 6000 baseball fans who tweeted "Congratulations to Melky Cabrera for winning the Triple Crown" confusing Miguel and Melky Cabrera.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DynamoAO View Post
I honestly don't get why this guy is famous for his sports knowledge. The first time I heard of the guy, was on ESPN radio earlier this year and he got a really famous wide receiver's team wrong. I mean, a current big name wide receiver(whose name escapes me right now...) in the NFL and he asked his guest, "Is he still playing in...?" I think it was Anquan Boldin...in reference to Arizona...

So, if he sucks at his knowledge of the NFL...he sucks at his knowledge of the NHL...I'm assuming he's good at the NBA or MLB or something? Not going to really comment on this article specifically, as I think the dude is a McKenzie level assclown.
There's all kinds of stuff he's been wrong about or didn't know over the years; but he's not famous for research or for his sports knowledge. He's famous for writing about sports from the perspective of the average sports fan and being entertaining and funny.

The average sports fan is fanatical about his team, relatively knowledgeable about the sport in general, but probably can't list the guys on every roster in all the leagues. (I'm a huge baseball fan… but I didn't know Marco Scutaro was on San Francisco until the playoffs; And I work Sundays so there's tons of wide receivers who changed teams in the off-season that I wouldn't know about unless my team got them. Tampa Bay's got a Jackson now, I don't know if that's Dexter, a new guy or if they got Vincent Jackson? I don't have enough time in my life to follow EVERYTHING that close, and the NFL loses to MLB/NHL).

The average sports fan is not like "us" here on a message board, dissecting financials of the teams in the league. The average fan thinks what Simmons wrote: "Why the hell aren't they playing? Bettman must be an idiot."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swarez99 View Post
People have to remember what he is, he is there for entertainment nothing hard hitting or in depth. I used to listen/read his stuff back when I was in university but now I find his stuff repetitive, the 30 for 30 kinda brought me back, but his usual stuff I just skip. My tastes have matured over years, while Simmons is still doing light sports talk which OK, but gets old at least to me.

He is mainly a basketball guy, has a book on it, big on NFL/MLB talk, and kinda is into hockey, I think he is a Kings season ticket holder, or he was in the past. He probably is a good representation of a hockey fan in the US. Not hardcare, knows enough about the game to watch, spend money but will not really spend time talking about while its gone.
He's a HUGE NBA guy and he views everything via the NBA scope. Was it really THAT obvious that a Cap meant you HAD to have a max contract length? I assumed since the NHL hammered the NHLPA, they left the length limit untouched since the players wanted that. Besides, no limits hurts the OWNERS. Other owners say it "circumvents the cap" when someone else JUST signed the guy they wanted; and they're glad they dodged that bullet four years down the road.

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 08:06 AM
  #42
IkeaMonkey*
HF Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: derderderderderderde
Country: Sao Tome e Principe
Posts: 12,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
There's all kinds of stuff he's been wrong about or didn't know over the years; but he's not famous for research or for his sports knowledge. He's famous for writing about sports from the perspective of the average sports fan and being entertaining and funny.
So he's "That Guy". You know the one, the one you HATE talking sports with because he's a wannabe know-it-all and is obnoxious, thinking he's "funny". The kind of guy you talk with, to be polite, but as soon as you are done talking with him, you call him a(n) *hfboard appropriate insult for someone who knows nothing*. It blows my mind that people like him(or The Big E, in hockey circles) can become popular(see: Profitable) when they clearly spew nothing but BS. The fact there is a market to consume this type of media, truly saddens me, not only as someone who takes pride in what is becoming a lost art of journalism, but also a sports fan.

Quote:
The average sports fan is fanatical about his team, relatively knowledgeable about the sport in general, but probably can't list the guys on every roster in all the leagues. (I'm a huge baseball fan… but I didn't know Marco Scutaro was on San Francisco until the playoffs; And I work Sundays so there's tons of wide receivers who changed teams in the off-season that I wouldn't know about unless my team got them. Tampa Bay's got a Jackson now, I don't know if that's Dexter, a new guy or if they got Vincent Jackson? I don't have enough time in my life to follow EVERYTHING that close, and the NFL loses to MLB/NHL).

The average sports fan is not like "us" here on a message board, dissecting financials of the teams in the league. The average fan thinks what Simmons wrote: "Why the hell aren't they playing? Bettman must be an idiot."
You also don't get paid to write/talk about sports. You not knowing about "X" topic, even on a message board, means nothing. You are representing yourself and at most, your community/fellow fans. If you are a member of the Sports media, someone getting paid to either share their opinion or facts to the masses, you should have an idea of what you are talking about. If you have a guest on your show, knowing he's a specialist in "Y" sport, you probably should research before the show about "Y" sport.

His target demographic isn't the "average fan" either, It's the average simpleton who likes sports. The "average fan" doesn't go online to read articles or download podcasts of all things. There's a level of commitment involved to do such things. It seems his main audience is "his type" of sports observer.

Going full circle, for me, the last thing I want to do, is read something from "his type" of sports observer about something like a labor lockout. A labor lockout essentially "hits" the diehard fans harder than the casual fans. The diehard fans are missing "their sport", the casual fans are like, "meh, the NHL is gone? Well, how's Dwight Howard doing anyway?"

Now, don't get me wrong, as a professional, it seems he's a genius. He's found a way to make bank, targeting a less than intelligent demographic. That's where the disconnect is between me and his audience and a reason why I won't consume his work and immediately discount anything he produces about the NHL and Patrick Beverly(it makes me puke as the man claims to be a big time Bruins fan on his own website).

IkeaMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 10:18 AM
  #43
Bobby G
Registered User
 
Bobby G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedWings19405 View Post
Some people seem to think he is one of if not the most powerful voice in the sports media in the US. He literally is so powerful ESPN has allowed him to do whatever he wants. It is the reason he has his own off shoot web-site and he gets to write the exact style he wants. I suggest anyone check out grantland.com it is an interesting take a lot of times on sports and pop culture. In any event to fill you in.

From http://www.businessinsider.com/heres...to-espn-2012-8





Nobody knows what his actual deal is anymore only that Wilbon and Kornheiser now make jokes about his bank account. The feeling is he sky-rocketed past Rick Reilly and has basically no rules to what he does at ESPN anymore. He also has sold two best selling books.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Simmons

He is a heavy weight for people who have run around asking what the American response is, to have a guy like Simmons actually talk and explore the lockout is a big deal. He has a legion of followers and the fact he made the choice to do this on his weekly NFL picks lead in should also not be lost. That is one of his most read columns, he wants people to read this.

Now was everything right? Probably not, I don't know about the star point, I do agree with him on Suter and Parise even as someone that likes to buy tickets to see certain stars, they are not sexy stars that sell as far as they are coming to my town. But I no doubt fit into the loyal no matter what crowd he also eludes to, I just love hockey, I like to go to games. If you pressure me into picking a couple a year then yes stars might factor in, but I am much more interested in the product itself. Which is a large part of what he is getting at. The idea that most stars spend only a third of he time out there is interesting, I mean I know it but I have never really thought of what that means to the casual sports fan.

A lot of us aren't casual hockey fans. But Simmons is the kind of fan the NHL should want and not just because of how powerful he is. The guy literally wrote articles on whatever Olympic sport caught his fancy all summer, he becomes a powerful advocate for anything he starts to like. For example he wrote an article on Handball a sport rarely if ever seen in the US and it trended on twitter pretty much because of him alone. But more importantly he is a window into big sports and he has recently become a season ticket holder to the LA Kings. Even though he is an NBA guy he goes to all the NHL games in his city. He is explaining the things that confuse him and guess what if he is confused chances are this is more in line with how casual fans think.
Great post. Some people are way off on Simmons in this thread.

DynamoAo what are you even talking about? People are idiots for reading a comical sports column?

Simmons is a smart/funny dude, a great sports fan and a huge voice in America

Bobby G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 10:31 AM
  #44
IkeaMonkey*
HF Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: derderderderderderde
Country: Sao Tome e Principe
Posts: 12,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyG View Post
DynamoAo what are you even talking about? People are idiots for reading a comical sports column?
I'm "talking about" sports journalists who put "views" and "ratings" ahead of credibility. If you claim to be a fan of a team and you have wketch's examples occur or the one I heard, as a member of the media...you are a joke. You present the image that you have no idea what you are talking about. The #1 rule in media USED to be(and I'm probably dating myself here!), Fact Check, the money will follow as you earn respect. Now, it's # of clicks or $ of revenue generated.

The fact Simmons is a "voice in America" doesn't shock me at all, to be honest and I sincerely understand how you feel that way. The reason for that however, is for another forum on this website...

I personally can't consume media written by such a dude and think it reflects poorly on our league's fans.

IkeaMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 05:08 PM
  #45
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DynamoAO View Post
So he's "That Guy". You know the one, the one you HATE talking sports with because he's a wannabe know-it-all and is obnoxious, thinking he's "funny". The kind of guy you talk with, to be polite, but as soon as you are done talking with him, you call him a(n) *hfboard appropriate insult for someone who knows nothing*. It blows my mind that people like him(or The Big E, in hockey circles) can become popular(see: Profitable) when they clearly spew nothing but BS. The fact there is a market to consume this type of media, truly saddens me, not only as someone who takes pride in what is becoming a lost art of journalism, but also a sports fan.
Yeah, but the difference is that "that guy" isn't all that funny, or standing in a group with a ton of sportswriters who are all carbon copies of each other. Simmons got famous for being a good blogger, before blogs hit the mainstream.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DynamoAO View Post
Going full circle, for me, the last thing I want to do, is read something from "his type" of sports observer about something like a labor lockout. A labor lockout essentially "hits" the diehard fans harder than the casual fans. The diehard fans are missing "their sport", the casual fans are like, "meh, the NHL is gone? Well, how's Dwight Howard doing anyway?"
Well, yeah. That's why I said earlier in the thread: Whether he's right or wrong doesn't matter. This is how the vast majority of non-diehards view what's going on. That's the majority opinion of "people" "Sports fans" or "potential NHL customers."

Us here on HF, who know what's going on and follow it daily on this site and others are the minority. We're the ones who are going to say "Oh, thank God" when the lockout is over. We're not the fans the NHL has to win back.

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2012, 07:12 AM
  #46
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saffronleaf View Post
I think other things can be done before expanding the size of the nets.

The trap should be banned as a defensive strategy, and it doesn't take a whole lot of intelligence to come up with a way to do that. We had some great ideas come out after the whole Philadelphia-Tampa fiasco where Philadelphia refused to play the puck into Tampa's trap.

Goaltender equipment needs to be scaled down drastically. The equipment should be there for safety, not to take away the skill of goaltending and allow anyone to be a goaltender that can have a 2GAA.

That itself would make the game much more entertaining. A talented goaltender with a team that has great hustle and backchecking could still ensure a low scoring game. But such a low score would be borne out of skill and hard work, and there would still be excitement in seeing the low score. Low scoring games can be very entertaining, a la Boston-Tampa Game 7 in 2011. But low scoring shouldn't be the result of goaltending equipment that makes the Michelin man look emaciated, and defensive strategies that pylons could execute.
Great arguments, but I personally can't see any arguments against making the nets 3 inches widers and 2 inches higher (or something like that). If anything, it seems extremely long overdue to adjust the size of the nets in hockey. People are bigger in general and players in the NHL are much bigger then they were 60 years ago. Not to mention equipment. Still the nets are the same size now as 80 years ago... And its something that to a fairly large extent has a impact on the game. If you make the nets 3x2 inches bigger, of 100 shots, I recon 1 or 2 more will go in. Instead of 5.3 goals per game, we might see 5.5-5.8 instead. Which is much fewer than the close to 8 goals per game we had in the 80s but and improvement over 5.3.

Sure, I get arguments against making the nets 9 inches widers and 6 inches higher or whatever. You change the game. You change the way goalies would play. From one year to the other. Thats a bit clownish to me. The game should be conservative on these topics. But I think that not making any change is the opposite of being conservative, IE you change the game by not changing the rules while the conditions change.

And Bettman is ultimately in charge of this. It took him several years to do something about the concussion problem, and extremely little is done about the product. He handles the business, but fails to take care of the product.

Ola is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2012, 05:49 PM
  #47
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18,277
vCash: 500
He's right. Bettman and Fehr need to go.

thestonedkoala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2012, 07:19 PM
  #48
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
There is no excusing the failure of Bettman. He's the worst thing to ever happen to the NHL.

He's a terrible steward of the NHL and has no understanding that the NHL commissioner needs to also be a steward of the game.

Would firing Bettman get the NHL and PA to agree on something? Hardly matters. Probably not.

But it would still be a good thing for the NHL

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 09:24 PM
  #49
MissingTheSpectrum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 37
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
But teams like Philly are a rarity because they can afford to not have to trap because they have a stacked team. But in this day and age, if you don't trap you get eaten alive. That is why Mark Crawford doesn't have a NHL job.

And I don't find hockey to be better now than it was between 95 and 04. Where's the heated rivalry like Avs-Wings?
Flyers-Penguins isn't quite at that level (Those series were absolute bloodbaths) but it's heated and very entertaining.

MissingTheSpectrum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 10:10 PM
  #50
Conflicted Habs fan
Registered User
 
Conflicted Habs fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Martinique
Posts: 539
vCash: 50
Best quote from the article's author:
"If you want to talk about moratoriums, Gary, here's a better idea — step down and give us a lifetime moratorium. From you"

Conflicted Habs fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:05 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.