hockey

[NJTank]

Bettman has made many many blunders in his tenure as Comish.

[DEAD!]

I say Bettman should go for the sake of change and put someone in with a fresh outlook. Not everything that is wrong with the NHL is Bettman's fault, (how coaches play the trap for example) But, as head of the league he should have had a final say on most of the issues, financial, rules etc. In the end, I appreciate all of Bettman's efforts over the past decade plus. It's a tough job trying to please every fan, player and owner at the same time.

Want ot blame someone for trap? The Swedes! (Really)

[ROCHitman]

Betteman is ruining the sport, that is why.

He should not be in charge of the NHL. Maybe the Wendy's on Rt. 611, but not the NHL.

Ref's and Linesmen are ruining the game. Rules were meant to be enforced not reinterpreted from period to period and month to month.. The trap defense is ruining the game. Whoever determines goalie pad regulations is ruining the game. Owners with out financial restraint are ruining the game

All Bettman has done is try to grow the game.

Ref's and Linesmen are ruining the game.

Oh no you didn't!!!!

[Brian in Boston]

How can the game accuratly promote the game when the commissioner is precieved to know nothing about the game, and doesn't care? When he is precieved to be a mole from the NBA?

Ah... now we get to the REAL root of Bettman's so-called "problems": the PERCEPTION that he's an outsider... "a mole from the NBA".

I've got news for you gang: perception is in the eyes of those who are doing the perceiving. "Old school", "die-hard" NHL fans were miffed when an "outsider" commissioner was brought in by the league's owners, so "old school", "die-hard" fans have chosen to PERCEIVE Bettman as an "outsider" from the day he was hired. Nothing this guy could have done would ever have been good enough... because he was "a mole from the NBA".

Bettman's failure as NHL commissioner in the hearts and minds of "old-guard" fans was a fait accompli... worse: a self-fulfilling prophecy in the eyes of the fans who thought, "He came over from the NBA, so he is bad for hockey."

Nothing more... nothing less.

[Gary]

AVALANCHE!

no further need for discussion.

That's all that needs to be said

Btw Avalanche v Redwings has become one of the best rivalries out there.

[JQK]

How can you defend him?

He has shown through his leadership (or lack thereof), that he can not run this league...

...and The Trap is a thing of beauty. Then again, i like defense.

It keeps the convo going. As the point man he gets all the blame. His job is to sell the game on Wall Street, Madison Avenue, and get a TV deal.

And has he accomplished ANY of these goals?

[NJTank]

Hey I gave Bettman a chance I didnt care where he came from, but he has done a terrible job this latest fiasco has to be the last straw for teh good of the sports future and moving on.

[JamesCraven]

One name for a new commisioner: Wayne Gretzky.

[NJTank]

Hed be good i think

[Phil]

How can the game accuratly promote the game when the commissioner is precieved to know nothing about the game, and doesn't care? When he is precieved to be a mole from the NBA?

Ah... now we get to the REAL root of Bettman's so-called "problems": the PERCEPTION that he's an outsider... "a mole from the NBA".

I've got news for you gang: perception is in the eyes of those who are doing the perceiving. "Old school", "die-hard" NHL fans were miffed when an "outsider" commissioner was brought in by the league's owners, so "old school", "die-hard" fans have chosen to PERCEIVE Bettman as an "outsider" from the day he was hired. Nothing this guy could have done would ever have been good enough... because he was "a mole from the NBA".

Bettman's failure as NHL commissioner in the hearts and minds of "old-guard" fans was a fait accompli... worse: a self-fulfilling prophecy in the eyes of the fans who thought, "He came over from the NBA, so he is bad for hockey."

Nothing more... nothing less.

While I see what you are saying BiB, I disagree.

There was a point back in the early-to-mid '90s when the NHL was the fourth major sport. Maybe not in the deep south, but more or less in the major part of North America. Gretzky had been sold to the Kings and the Rangers had beaten the Canucks in a heated 7-game series.

Today, hockey languishes in the back pages of the average American newspaper. The state of Florida has had two Stanley Cup finalists and one Champ in the past decade, and hockey still struggles to rise about ten-pin bowling.

Something happened. It might not have been Bettman's fault, but in the end, as the head of the league, he is the one ultimately held responsible. His league failed, and thus he failed. There is no matter of perception here.

There are some success stories. San Jose, one of the early non-traditional markets, has found its niche in the Bay Area market. The Sharks don't necessarily compete with Bonds for headines, but they bring in the crowds, and have developed a loyal fanbase.

The Colorado Avalanche have through significant financial investment assisted in bring upon the current financial woes of the league, but have also become the only team to move from a traditional hockey market to become more successful in their current locale. Neither Hartford/Carolina nor Winnipeg/Phoenix can say that.

However the failures have outnumbered the successes... the lack of a significant TV deal (although the networks are somewhat at fault for not promoting the game, you learn early on in marketing that you promote your winning products, not your struggling ones)... the problems in Tampa Bay, Miami, Carolina, Phoenix, Anaheim, Nashville... the current CBA situation to top it off.

The league has failed, and as the one ultimately responsible for the league, the commissioner has failed. Whether it was at its root his fault is irrelevant.

[IronChefShark]

thankfully, this forum no longer has Notorious AP to add his unwarranted opinions to this matter

[CC97]

The Colorado Avalanche ... become the only team to move from a traditional hockey market to become more successful in their current locale. Neither Hartford/Carolina nor Winnipeg/Phoenix can say that.

The Stars can also lay claim to this. But otherwise well written

[Brian in Boston]

And has he accomplished ANY of these goals?

1) The NHL is only going to be in a position to be sold to Wall Street, Madison Avenue and the networks if Wall Street, Madison Avenue and the networks feel that the league has a presence in markets throughout the United States.

2) The only way to establish this presence throughout the United States is through expansion and/or relocation into new markets.

3) The only way that new franchises in so-called "non-traditional" markets throughout the United States are going to have the time to establish and build-up their fan bases is if the NHL's financial house is in order.

4) The most important step in getting the NHL's financial house in order is the establishment of a salary cap that will enable all franchises, regardless of market size, to compete on equal economic footing.

5) The NHLPA was not accepting of a salary cap provision, in either theory or practice, until such time as Gary Bettman was willing to play hardball on shutting down the league for a season.

The NHLPA's insistence that its membership would not accept a salary cap is the primary reason that the NHL has not enjoyed the type of financial certainty and stability necessary for the game to grow and prosper in any but the largest markets. Before pointing the finger at Gary Bettman for his "failure" to "accomplish any of his goals", let's see what the league accomplishes with all member franchises operating under a significant measure of financial stability.

If, after a salary cap is implemented and given time to impact the sport's finances, the NHL still cannot survive in anything but larger Northern-tier cities... if this failure on the part of new/non-traditional markets causes Wall Street, Madison Avenue and the broadcast networks to stay away... then we can either say that Gary Bettman "failed", or that ice hockey was too much of a niche sport to appeal to either the masses or Wall Street/Madison Avenue/the networks.

Not until then, however.

As for SyPhi's contention that it is "irrelevant" whether the league's failure was - at its root - the commissioner's fault... no, it isn't it. Bettman was either responsible for the league's failure or he wasn't. Sure, because he holds the title of commissioner, he's ultimately going to be the "fall guy". However, the single greatest challenge facing this league has been an economic one. The best manner in which to at least attempt to rectify that challenge is through the implementation of a salary cap. The PLAYERS have not been willing to allow that step to be taken... period.

[JQK]

It keeps the convo going. As the point man he gets all the blame. His job is to sell the game on Wall Street, Madison Avenue, and get a TV deal.

And has he accomplished ANY of these goals?

1) The NHL is only going to be in a position to be sold to Wall Street, Madison Avenue and the networks if Wall Street, Madison Avenue and the networks feel that the league has a presence in markets throughout the United States.

2) The only way to establish this presence throughout the United States is through expansion and/or relocation into new markets.

3) The only way that new franchises in so-called "non-traditional" markets throughout the United States are going to have the time to establish and build-up their fan bases is if the NHL's financial house is in order.

4) The most important step in getting the NHL's financial house in order is the establishment of a salary cap that will enable all franchises, regardless of market size, to compete on equal economic footing.

5) The NHLPA was not accepting of a salary cap provision, in either theory or practice, until such time as Gary Bettman was willing to play hardball on shutting down the league for a season.

The NHLPA's insistence that its membership would not accept a salary cap is the primary reason that the NHL has not enjoyed the type of financial certainty and stability necessary for the game to grow and prosper in any but the largest markets. Before pointing the finger at Gary Bettman for his "failure" to "accomplish any of his goals", let's see what the league accomplishes with all member franchises operating under a significant measure of financial stability.

If, after a salary cap is implemented and given time to impact the sport's finances, the NHL still cannot survive in anything but larger Northern-tier cities... if this failure on the part of new/non-traditional markets causes Wall Street, Madison Avenue and the broadcast networks to stay away... then we can either say that Gary Bettman "failed", or that ice hockey was too much of a niche sport to appeal to either the masses or Wall Street/Madison Avenue/the networks.

Not until then, however.

The sport has already failed. It went from a firm, positive position in the American Sports Landscape, to a sport considered on-par with indoor lacrosse and bowling. And it has all happened since Gary Bettman took office. Some may see that as a coincidence, but i do not. When he changed the names of the divisions and conferences, when he becan approving rule changes and expantions, he headed down a road that the NHL was ill-prepared for. Bettman tried to instantly make hockey as big as the NBA or MLB, when it has been shown time and time again that doing that to a sport will only make it fail. A sport must be allowed to grow, slowly, and find it's niche in the sportsworld. Hockey was doing that in the late 80's/early 90's. Then Gary drove the league 200mph over a cliff.

Gary needs to go. I've been saying this since i was 13 in 1995. The guy must go.

[CC97]

Looks like the new talks went nowhere -- great -- cue the backstreet boys

[wheateater]

WHAT THE fluff WAS THE POINT OF THAT?!?!?!? Yesterday, a report (albeit apparently a very false one) had everyone believing there would be a conclusion to this debacle. Now, they've talked for 6 1/2 hours and got NOWHERE?!? What's up with that? I don't understand what the meeting was for if there was "no progress." Wasn't the meeting held because everyone felt bad for actually letting the season be cancelled? Now what?

Just kill this thing, once and for all, already. Quit pulling my leg and gimme a break! I know Bill Daly said the focus is now on saving next season, but I don't know who to believe anymore.

[CaolinaJoe]

Now it is to the point where both sides are just toying with use. Neither wants to look like they actually let it get this far. Nothing will happen.

Like I said...

[Stampman]

Looks like the new talks went nowhere -- great -- cue the backstreet boys

NEVER EVER cue the BAckstreet Boys--at least not until I have a cchance to leave the room first--or put in ear plugs!

Thanks You!

[NJTank]

They actually wanted to step on more hearst and cuase more bad feelings I trully think the people who run this sport and its union are teh dumbest people on the face fo the earth.

[Brian in Boston]

It went from a firm, positive position in the American Sports Landscape, to a sport considered on-par with indoor lacrosse and bowling. And it has all happened since Gary Bettman took office. Some may see that as a coincidence, but i do not. When he changed the names of the divisions and conferences, when he becan approving rule changes and expantions, he headed down a road that the NHL was ill-prepared for. Bettman tried to instantly make hockey as big as the NBA or MLB, when it has been shown time and time again that doing that to a sport will only make it fail. A sport must be allowed to grow, slowly, and find it's niche in the sportsworld. Hockey was doing that in the late 80's/early 90's. Then Gary drove the league 200mph over a cliff.

You are so far off-base it's not even funny.

A "firm, positive position in the American Sports Landscape"? For the better part of the past 40 years the NHL has been firmly and positively positioned in fourth-place amongst the so-called "Big Four" sports. Allow hockey to "grow, slowly and find it's niche in the sportsworld"? The league's been around for 88 years; how much more time does it need to find its niche?

The NHL pre-dates all of the "Big Four" sports organizations except Major League Baseball. It had ample time between its launch in 1917 and the late-1980s/early-1990s to establish itself. You can snow yourself into thinking that everything was just going gangbusters in the late-1980s and early-1990s, but the fact remains that the league was in fourth-place in the hearts and minds of the majority of North American pro sports fans at that time... just as it was by the 1960s, when both the NFL and NBA had eclipsed it in popularity. It's not like even during the "go-go" 1980s/1990s the NHL was on par with the NFL, MLB and NBA. That's simply not the case.

Here is the simple truth: professional ice hockey may well never be anything more than a niche sport that appeals to a core group of fans in Canada and the Northern tier of the United States. But an equally simple truth is that the NHL's owners don't want to hear that, because admitting such a thing hits them right in their wallets. They want the NHL to be regarded on the same level as the NFL and MLB and the NBA. They want the profits generated by big-money corporate partnerships, lucrative national broadcast contracts and tons of merchandising revenues. So they went out and hired a guy they rightfully thought could help them achieve that goal... a guy who had worked for one of the "Big Three"... a guy named Gary Bettman.

And Gary suggested doing the things that would bring the NHL more in line with the NFL, MLB and the NBA. He advocated expansion so as to try and please the corporate partners and broadcasters with an expanded "footprint" in the United States (the expansion fees didn't anger the NHL's owners, either). He changed the names of divisions and conferences to make the NHL's alignment more reflective of those in place in the NFL, MLB and the NBA, and by extension more understandable to the many new fans in new markets that the league's owners anticipated following the sport. He advocated rules changes aimed at making the sport more exciting. Most importantly, as the architect of the NBA's salary cap, he advocated the adoption of a salary cap in the NHL, as well. He felt that it would put the NHL's financial house in order. In short, Gary took all the steps necessary to accomplish what the NHL's owners wanted him to do... indeed, charged him with doing.

Today, the NHL finds itself losing ground on the North American pro sports landscape. A primary reason for this is that the league's finances are horrendous. The salary cap that would staunch much of the league's financial "bleeding" has been fought tooth-and-nail by the NHLPA. Is that Gary Bettman's fault? Hardly. Ultimately, the players and Bob Goodenow have to step up and admit that they have steadfastly refused to even consider allowing the NHL to adopt the type of system that could stabilize the league.

Further, maybe the NHL's owners have been wrong all along. Maybe the NHL is nothing more than a niche sport that primarily appeals to Canadians and Northern-tier Americans. Perhaps, even with the salary cap in place, major professional ice hockey won't be able to keep pace with the NFL, MLB and the NBA. And let's say that the NHL's core group of fans are okay with that... meaning that they don't mind the fact that the league isn't going to have a national broadcast contract of any real merit, isn't going to have corporate sponsors lined up that are willing to help the sport grow and prosper, isn't going to garner much in the way of national media coverage. Even if all of this is true, Gary Bettman was hired by owners who wanted him to prove otherwise. He was paid to, at the very least, attempt to grow the sport and the NHL. He hasn't been allowed - at least to this point - by the NHLPA to implement what he feels is the cornerstone of turning the league's fortunes around: a hard salary cap in the lower $40-million range.

So, claim that the NHL's present state is a case of Gary Bettman "driving" the league over a cliff, but the league's history as a glorified regional entity doesn't bear your theory out. The NHL's position in the American sports landscape was on precarious ground before Bettman took over; it may well be there long after his term as NHL commissioner ends. Bottom line? He is a scapegoat for the NHL's inherent problems. Nothing more and nothing less.