10 Ways To Improve The NHL

[ColeJ]

cowlishaw doesn't even represent the city of dallas, let alone all american hockey fans.

it's impossible to read his stars coverage without wanting to run my head through a brick wall.

[Jigga]

You guys are missing the point. At least a "national" voice in the US of A is actually talking about hockey. Listen, your sport is dying on the professional level...embrace the face that it's getting attention from someone.

Go ahead...sling all the arrows you want, but you've got a guy from Dallas freaking Texas talking hockey when only 9, NINE, US of A newspapers even covered the Stanley Cup Finals in the first place.

Whatever...you puckheads have it all figured out anyway.

[CC97]

You guys are missing the point. At least a "national" voice in the US of A is actually talking about hockey. Listen, your sport is dying on the professional level...embrace the face that it's getting attention from someone.

Go ahead...sling all the arrows you want, but you've got a guy from Dallas freaking Texas talking hockey when only 9, NINE, US of A newspapers even covered the Stanley Cup Finals in the first place.

Whatever...you puckheads have it all figured out anyway.

I ain't gonna do a dance because some guy 2,000 miles south of me is writing a terrible article about hockey.

[Eye]

You guys are missing the point. At least a "national" voice in the US of A is actually talking about hockey. Listen, your sport is dying on the professional level...embrace the face that it's getting attention from someone.

Go ahead...sling all the arrows you want, but you've got a guy from Dallas freaking Texas talking hockey when only 9, NINE, US of A newspapers even covered the Stanley Cup Finals in the first place.

Whatever...you puckheads have it all figured out anyway.

I ain't gonna do a dance because some guy 2,000 miles south of me is writing a terrible article about hockey.

Agreed, but I don't hear many (or any) people here in NJ talking about hockey. I am a huge fan of hockey. In fact, I play hockey, but I don't care about watching the sport as much as I used to. I watched basically none of the Stanley Cup Finals, and admittedly didn't watch much of the rest of the playoffs. While I agree with Creamer that I won't be ecstatic because someone wrote a bad article about hockey, I also agree with Jigga that at least someone is recognizing the sport that has somewhat national attention (Cowlishaw on Around the Horn.) Do I agree with the article? For the most part, no. However, hockey and the NHL has to do something. As a hockey player and fan myself, they've lost me. Right now the NHL is dead to me, and it's sad. I loved hockey in the 90's and early 00's. Any recognition for the NHL is good nowadays, even if it is a crappy article.

-E.A.R.

[CC97]

You guys are missing the point. At least a "national" voice in the US of A is actually talking about hockey. Listen, your sport is dying on the professional level...embrace the face that it's getting attention from someone.

Go ahead...sling all the arrows you want, but you've got a guy from Dallas freaking Texas talking hockey when only 9, NINE, US of A newspapers even covered the Stanley Cup Finals in the first place.

Whatever...you puckheads have it all figured out anyway.

I ain't gonna do a dance because some guy 2,000 miles south of me is writing a terrible article about hockey.

Agreed, but I don't hear many (or any) people here in NJ talking about hockey. I am a huge fan of hockey. In fact, I play hockey, but I don't care about watching the sport as much as I used to. I watched basically none of the Stanley Cup Finals, and admittedly didn't watch much of the rest of the playoffs. While I agree with Creamer that I won't be ecstatic because someone wrote a bad article about hockey, I also agree with Jigga that at least someone is recognizing the sport that has somewhat national attention (Cowlishaw on Around the Horn.) Do I agree with the article? For the most part, no. However, hockey and the NHL has to do something. As a hockey player and fan myself, they've lost me. Right now the NHL is dead to me, and it's sad. I loved hockey in the 90's and early 00's. Any recognition for the NHL is good nowadays, even if it is a crappy article.

-E.A.R.

Forgive me then... I come from a place where last night the off-day interviews in Anaheim was the top story on Rogers SportsNet, ahead of the Jays scoring 6 in the 9th to win (and that's on a station that OWNS the jays)... if I was from a place that didn't seem to care about hockey, perhaps my opinion would be different.

[BCBoy]

The best idea out of the bunch is contracting to 26 teams, but that will never happen.

Kissing up to ESPN isn't a bad idea either.

And of course, the reg. season schedule has to change back to the way it was.

[zig]

The best idea out of the bunch is contracting to 26 teams, but that will never happen.

I don't really like that idea. If we did that the last two years we would have lost Philly, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, and St.Louis.

[DEAD!]

You guys are missing the point. At least a "national" voice in the US of A is actually talking about hockey. Listen, your sport is dying on the professional level...embrace the face that it's getting attention from someone.

Go ahead...sling all the arrows you want, but you've got a guy from Dallas freaking Texas talking hockey when only 9, NINE, US of A newspapers even covered the Stanley Cup Finals in the first place.

Whatever...you puckheads have it all figured out anyway.

I ain't gonna do a dance because some guy 2,000 miles south of me is writing a terrible article about hockey.

... ok how about 5500 miles south?

[zig]

Bye bye Blackhawks, Islanders and perhaps the Devils!

I'd say bye bye Philly, Boston, Washington, Chicago, Columbus, Edmonton , LA, and Phoenix before I would get to the Isles. I'd also have to say bye bye to about to 22 teams before the Devils.

Don't I sound foolish by saying " I'd also have to say bye bye "?

[Eye]

You guys are missing the point. At least a "national" voice in the US of A is actually talking about hockey. Listen, your sport is dying on the professional level...embrace the face that it's getting attention from someone.

Go ahead...sling all the arrows you want, but you've got a guy from Dallas freaking Texas talking hockey when only 9, NINE, US of A newspapers even covered the Stanley Cup Finals in the first place.

Whatever...you puckheads have it all figured out anyway.

I ain't gonna do a dance because some guy 2,000 miles south of me is writing a terrible article about hockey.

Agreed, but I don't hear many (or any) people here in NJ talking about hockey. I am a huge fan of hockey. In fact, I play hockey, but I don't care about watching the sport as much as I used to. I watched basically none of the Stanley Cup Finals, and admittedly didn't watch much of the rest of the playoffs. While I agree with Creamer that I won't be ecstatic because someone wrote a bad article about hockey, I also agree with Jigga that at least someone is recognizing the sport that has somewhat national attention (Cowlishaw on Around the Horn.) Do I agree with the article? For the most part, no. However, hockey and the NHL has to do something. As a hockey player and fan myself, they've lost me. Right now the NHL is dead to me, and it's sad. I loved hockey in the 90's and early 00's. Any recognition for the NHL is good nowadays, even if it is a crappy article.

-E.A.R.

Forgive me then... I come from a place where last night the off-day interviews in Anaheim was the top story on Rogers SportsNet, ahead of the Jays scoring 6 in the 9th to win (and that's on a station that OWNS the jays)... if I was from a place that didn't seem to care about hockey, perhaps my opinion would be different.

Forgive you? I'm on your side. I am a fan, but I haven't watched the playoffs all that much because I don't have the same interest in the game as I used to have. Whether that is because of Bettman or whatever, I can become interested in the sport as much as I used to be as long as it has the correct guidance. With the correct guidance, hockey can be as popular as it was around here in 94-95 (when the Rangers and Devils won the Cup.) Like you, I won't get excited over a bad article about hockey, but the fact that someone is talking about hockey is somewhat fresh (probably not up in Canada, but in the States it is.)

-E.A.R.

[-kj]

5) Bring back ties

This is the only one with any merit, really. The rest, uh...

[gojetsgo]

You guys are missing the point. At least a "national" voice in the US of A is actually talking about hockey. Listen, your sport is dying on the professional level...embrace the face that it's getting attention from someone.

Go ahead...sling all the arrows you want, but you've got a guy from Dallas freaking Texas talking hockey when only 9, NINE, US of A newspapers even covered the Stanley Cup Finals in the first place.

Whatever...you puckheads have it all figured out anyway.

I ain't gonna do a dance because some guy 2,000 miles south of me is writing a terrible article about hockey.

Agreed, but I don't hear many (or any) people here in NJ talking about hockey. I am a huge fan of hockey. In fact, I play hockey, but I don't care about watching the sport as much as I used to. I watched basically none of the Stanley Cup Finals, and admittedly didn't watch much of the rest of the playoffs. While I agree with Creamer that I won't be ecstatic because someone wrote a bad article about hockey, I also agree with Jigga that at least someone is recognizing the sport that has somewhat national attention (Cowlishaw on Around the Horn.) Do I agree with the article? For the most part, no. However, hockey and the NHL has to do something. As a hockey player and fan myself, they've lost me. Right now the NHL is dead to me, and it's sad. I loved hockey in the 90's and early 00's. Any recognition for the NHL is good nowadays, even if it is a crappy article.

-E.A.R.

Forgive me then... I come from a place where last night the off-day interviews in Anaheim was the top story on Rogers SportsNet, ahead of the Jays scoring 6 in the 9th to win (and that's on a station that OWNS the jays)... if I was from a place that didn't seem to care about hockey, perhaps my opinion would be different.

Forgive you? I'm on your side. I am a fan, but I haven't watched the playoffs all that much because I don't have the same interest in the game as I used to have. Whether that is because of Bettman or whatever, I can become interested in the sport as much as I used to be as long as it has the correct guidance. With the correct guidance, hockey can be as popular as it was around here in 94-95 (when the Rangers and Devils won the Cup.) Like you, I won't get excited over a bad article about hockey, but the fact that someone is talking about hockey is somewhat fresh (probably not up in Canada, but in the States it is.)

-E.A.R.

The fact that a guy, who obviously knows almost nothing about the game, wrote a bad article about hockey isn't even remotely fresh. There are hundreds of sports writers writing several articles every day. The fact that we find it even interesting that a guy in Dallas (a city that HAS an NHL team) wrote this article just demonstrates how low this sport has sunk down in the US.

[-Helix-]

The best idea out of the bunch is contracting to 26 teams, but that will never happen.

Kissing up to ESPN isn't a bad idea either.

And of course, the reg. season schedule has to change back to the way it was.

Yes, because when the league is hurting for attention and fans the best thing to do is to GET RID OF TEAMS and therefore lose more fans/cities that would care. Makes perfect sense.

"Hey, I heard we were losing our NHL team."

"COOL! I'm gonna start watching now."

The league would benefit from MORE teams, not less.

My suggestion is to ignore it. The NHL never has had and never will have good ratings. I've lived this long knowing that. I can go on.

NBC might want to actually market the playoffs next time though. Can't hurt. I didn't see a single commercial for the playoffs this year. Yet I get NBA playoff commercials shoved down my throat every two seconds. And the fact that NBA ratings blew the Stanley Cup out of the water surprises anyone?

But then again you can't blame them for not wanting to market a Canadian team and a small market American team that nobody cares about. What the league needs is a Rangers - Kings final.

[CC97]

The best idea out of the bunch is contracting to 26 teams, but that will never happen.

Kissing up to ESPN isn't a bad idea either.

And of course, the reg. season schedule has to change back to the way it was.

Yes, because when the league is hurting for attention and fans the best thing to do is to GET RID OF TEAMS and therefore lose more fans/cities that would care. Makes perfect sense.

"Hey, I heard we were losing our NHL team."

"COOL! I'm gonna start watching now."

Worked for the Twins

[Lee.]

I am not a hockey fan, but I do love the sport. Things that should happen to make me respect it:

1) Remove teams from:

Florida

Atlanta

Nashville

Anaheim

North Carolina

San Jose

Take away my Sharks and I'll smash your face in.

There's still hope; he took away 6 teams, but only returned 5. San Jose is still in the running to be a hockey market.

[Discrim]

NBC might want to actually market the playoffs next time though. Can't hurt. I didn't see a single commercial for the playoffs this year. Yet I get NBA playoff commercials shoved down my throat every two seconds. And the fact that NBA ratings blew the Stanley Cup out of the water surprises anyone?

no kidding...I've seen more Arena league commercials this year than any hockey commercials.

[Jigga]

You guys are missing the point. At least a "national" voice in the US of A is actually talking about hockey. Listen, your sport is dying on the professional level...embrace the face that it's getting attention from someone.

Go ahead...sling all the arrows you want, but you've got a guy from Dallas freaking Texas talking hockey when only 9, NINE, US of A newspapers even covered the Stanley Cup Finals in the first place.

Whatever...you puckheads have it all figured out anyway.

I ain't gonna do a dance because some guy 2,000 miles south of me is writing a terrible article about hockey.

Agreed, but I don't hear many (or any) people here in NJ talking about hockey. I am a huge fan of hockey. In fact, I play hockey, but I don't care about watching the sport as much as I used to. I watched basically none of the Stanley Cup Finals, and admittedly didn't watch much of the rest of the playoffs. While I agree with Creamer that I won't be ecstatic because someone wrote a bad article about hockey, I also agree with Jigga that at least someone is recognizing the sport that has somewhat national attention (Cowlishaw on Around the Horn.) Do I agree with the article? For the most part, no. However, hockey and the NHL has to do something. As a hockey player and fan myself, they've lost me. Right now the NHL is dead to me, and it's sad. I loved hockey in the 90's and early 00's. Any recognition for the NHL is good nowadays, even if it is a crappy article.

-E.A.R.

Forgive me then... I come from a place where last night the off-day interviews in Anaheim was the top story on Rogers SportsNet, ahead of the Jays scoring 6 in the 9th to win (and that's on a station that OWNS the jays)... if I was from a place that didn't seem to care about hockey, perhaps my opinion would be different.

You are from the only place on this continent that even cares about hockey.

[CC97]

You guys are missing the point. At least a "national" voice in the US of A is actually talking about hockey. Listen, your sport is dying on the professional level...embrace the face that it's getting attention from someone.

Go ahead...sling all the arrows you want, but you've got a guy from Dallas freaking Texas talking hockey when only 9, NINE, US of A newspapers even covered the Stanley Cup Finals in the first place.

Whatever...you puckheads have it all figured out anyway.

I ain't gonna do a dance because some guy 2,000 miles south of me is writing a terrible article about hockey.

Agreed, but I don't hear many (or any) people here in NJ talking about hockey. I am a huge fan of hockey. In fact, I play hockey, but I don't care about watching the sport as much as I used to. I watched basically none of the Stanley Cup Finals, and admittedly didn't watch much of the rest of the playoffs. While I agree with Creamer that I won't be ecstatic because someone wrote a bad article about hockey, I also agree with Jigga that at least someone is recognizing the sport that has somewhat national attention (Cowlishaw on Around the Horn.) Do I agree with the article? For the most part, no. However, hockey and the NHL has to do something. As a hockey player and fan myself, they've lost me. Right now the NHL is dead to me, and it's sad. I loved hockey in the 90's and early 00's. Any recognition for the NHL is good nowadays, even if it is a crappy article.

-E.A.R.

Forgive me then... I come from a place where last night the off-day interviews in Anaheim was the top story on Rogers SportsNet, ahead of the Jays scoring 6 in the 9th to win (and that's on a station that OWNS the jays)... if I was from a place that didn't seem to care about hockey, perhaps my opinion would be different.

You are from the only place on this continent that even cares about hockey.

Now that's not true at all. I'm not from any of the following places on this continent: Detroit, Calgary, Edmonton, Minnesota, Montreal, San Jose, etc.

[BB61]

You guys are missing the point. At least a "national" voice in the US of A is actually talking about hockey. Listen, your sport is dying on the professional level...embrace the face that it's getting attention from someone.

Go ahead...sling all the arrows you want, but you've got a guy from Dallas freaking Texas talking hockey when only 9, NINE, US of A newspapers even covered the Stanley Cup Finals in the first place.

Whatever...you puckheads have it all figured out anyway.

I ain't gonna do a dance because some guy 2,000 miles south of me is writing a terrible article about hockey.

Agreed, but I don't hear many (or any) people here in NJ talking about hockey. I am a huge fan of hockey. In fact, I play hockey, but I don't care about watching the sport as much as I used to. I watched basically none of the Stanley Cup Finals, and admittedly didn't watch much of the rest of the playoffs. While I agree with Creamer that I won't be ecstatic because someone wrote a bad article about hockey, I also agree with Jigga that at least someone is recognizing the sport that has somewhat national attention (Cowlishaw on Around the Horn.) Do I agree with the article? For the most part, no. However, hockey and the NHL has to do something. As a hockey player and fan myself, they've lost me. Right now the NHL is dead to me, and it's sad. I loved hockey in the 90's and early 00's. Any recognition for the NHL is good nowadays, even if it is a crappy article.

-E.A.R.

Forgive me then... I come from a place where last night the off-day interviews in Anaheim was the top story on Rogers SportsNet, ahead of the Jays scoring 6 in the 9th to win (and that's on a station that OWNS the jays)... if I was from a place that didn't seem to care about hockey, perhaps my opinion would be different.

You are from the only place on this continent that even cares about hockey.

Not true. The Flyers were ranked #7 in average overall attendance while being the only team in the top 11 to average below capacity. Not bad for the team with the worst record in the league.

So people here care, they always have. Maybe moreso with the Flyers lately, but still. That means, Ziggy, that the Flyers aren't going "bye-bye", as you say.

[Fred T. Jane]

You guys are missing the point. At least a "national" voice in the US of A is actually talking about hockey. Listen, your sport is dying on the professional level...embrace the face that it's getting attention from someone.

Go ahead...sling all the arrows you want, but you've got a guy from Dallas freaking Texas talking hockey when only 9, NINE, US of A newspapers even covered the Stanley Cup Finals in the first place.

Whatever...you puckheads have it all figured out anyway.

So by your logic Greg, the Todd Betruzzi/Steve Moore incident was the best thing to happen to hockey in the past decade? Interesting.