Who Cares ??

[Ice Man]

Probably the posters here are the majority .

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news?slug=ap-s...ov=ap&type=lgns

NHL won't be widely missed

By STEVE WILSTEIN, AP Sports Columnist

September 18, 2004

The essential question facing NHL owners and locked-out players is: Who cares?

If they think there will be a groundswell of support for either side, fans camping out and begging them to return, a stream of stories in newspapers or on television lamenting their absence, they're living in a fantasy.

Hard core hockey fans, especially in Canada and longtime bastions of the game in the United States, may be saddened by the lockout. But they've seen this stubborn and foolish clash of wills before and will wait it out without much grief.

They'll get their fix with minor league or European games, and watch the NHL again next year or the year after or whenever the two sides decide they've inflicted so much unnecessary pain on each other that it's time to settle.

Casual hockey fans, the ones the NHL needs in order to grow, will blithely drift away to other sports and activities.

To the majority of American sports fans, for whom hockey was largely irrelevant anyway, the NHL will be unmissed and fade in memory.

The NHL probably is not in danger of dying away, but every labor-management train wreck in sports derails leagues for a long time. Baseball, which has a far greater fan base than hockey, didn't feel a recovery from the 1994-95 labor war until Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa went on home run tears in 1998. The NHL won't be getting back its alienated casual fans anytime soon.

NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman and the owners are acutely aware of the damage that hockey could sustain with a prolonged lockout. Still, they've decided that whatever that damage may be, there's worse damage to be incurred by continuing the current labor arrangement. For many owners, there's more money to be lost in playing than in not playing.

``The players have seriously overestimated the value of hockey here in the United States,'' said media consultant and former CBS Sports president Neal Pilson. ``The players have to come to realize that we're not Canada. We don't have the level of interest in hockey that the Canadian players are used to experiencing when they live in Canada. When they go to the supermarket here, nobody knows them. They're making a serious miscalculation about whether there will be media and public pressure on the league to settle.''

Pilson counts himself as one of those hard-core fans who will miss the NHL and watch it again when it resumes. He's been going to hockey games since he was a child, recalling trips to see the New York Rovers of the Eastern Hockey League in 1946.

``I love the game,'' he said. ``It has a level of intensity and required commitment from athletes that is unlike any other game. But the American sports consumer has a lot of choices and I'm afraid hockey is going to be severely damaged by the lockout.''

Pilson is hardly the only observer who thinks that way.

``The public response is going to be apathy -- Who cares?,'' said Nye Lavalle, president of the Sports Marketing Group. ``There aren't that many people interested in hockey. They're practically not going to know it's gone.

``The people who do like to watch hockey will watch it wherever it is. The minor leagues are growing because they don't charge $75 or $150 a game. They're affordable and fun.''

Those who follow hockey understand the dilemma facing owners who are trying to contain their costs and players who refuse to accept a salary cap.

``The issue is as simple as this: There is no additional base of income for hockey,'' Pilson said. ``There's no pot of gold out there that some new leadership or new direction is going to develop.

``Hockey has tapped out on attendance. They're at more than 90 percent league-wide. They've tapped out on sponsor dollars. They've tapped out on regional sports television. And they have obviously tapped out on network television, which is going backward with no rights fees.''

At the heart of hockey's TV problems in the United States, Pilson said, is the fact that most Americans have never played hockey.

``Hockey suffers from more of a disconnect between viewers and players than any other major sport,'' he said. ``A lot of Americans have thrown and caught a football, maybe played touch football. They've played baseball or softball. They've played basketball. There's an appreciation for golf. There's very little understanding or appreciation of hockey if you've never played it.''

The players and owners have gotten themselves stuck in a quagmire. Blame the players for being greedy. Blame the owners for creating the mess by bidding up salaries. There's plenty of blame to go around.

If the question is who cares, the answer must come from those very same players and owners. They have to care enough about the game and the league to find a way to live together before they take each other down.

Steve Wilstein is a national sports columnist for The Associated Press. Write to him at swilstein(at)ap.org

[Elias Sports Bureau]

Wilstein is also a national columnist based in Florida... so while a lot of his points are obvious and true, I think it's a bit more blatant down when he's seeing it in Sunrise.

I love how in large we are largely discounted. Yeah we're not gonna miss it at all. Bull f'n s!

[lgmamazin]

Great article, a lot of common sense in it....hockey is going to take a beating when and if it comes back

[Sarge18]

Wilstein is also a national columnist based in Florida... so while a lot of his points are obvious and true, I think it's a bit more blatant down when he's seeing it in Sunrise.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

True considering i lived through the under 18 leagues in South FL, and how few players there really are. We only have 4 reasonable rinks from Palm Beach South. And most people that Go to Panthers games are Northeast transplants and their families/friends. They just havent done a thing to try to convert people. But south FL is football territory think and thin. Thats a hard crowd to break into.

[lgmamazin]

Wilstein is also a national columnist based in Florida... so while a lot of his points are obvious and true, I think it's a bit more blatant down when he's seeing it in Sunrise.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

True considering i lived through the under 18 leagues in South FL, and how few players there really are. We only have 4 reasonable rinks from Palm Beach South. And most people that Go to Panthers games are Northeast transplants and their families/friends. They just havent done a thing to try to convert people. But south FL is football territory think and thin. Thats a hard crowd to break into.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is a very hard crowd, also look how much the florida marlins and tampa bay devil rays are trying to draw crowds, and dont blame joe robbie stadium either, it is just hard to get into that market, espically during college football and NFL season

[Sarge18]

Wilstein is also a national columnist based in Florida... so while a lot of his points are obvious and true, I think it's a bit more blatant down when he's seeing it in Sunrise.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

True considering i lived through the under 18 leagues in South FL, and how few players there really are. We only have 4 reasonable rinks from Palm Beach South. And most people that Go to Panthers games are Northeast transplants and their families/friends. They just havent done a thing to try to convert people. But south FL is football territory think and thin. Thats a hard crowd to break into.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is a very hard crowd, also look how much the florida marlins and tampa bay devil rays are trying to draw crowds, and dont blame joe robbie stadium either, it is just hard to get into that market, espically during college football and NFL season

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its just a crappy sprots market for a losing team. As the Dolphinfs fase this year, their attendance will start to fade as well. TO succeed in FL a team needs to win consistantly. That means playoffs.

[NJD Jester]

Casual hockey fans, the ones the NHL needs in order to grow, will blithely drift away to other sports and activities.

Then they aren't hockey fans.

Seriously, can we just stop with the myth of the casual fan? You're either a hockey fan or you're not a hockey fan. There isn't this pool of millions upon millions of fans on the fence that are saying, "Well, I'd watch hockey...if only the games were all 7-5 and there was an overtime shootout."

The NHL -- and this may come as a shock to anyone not paying attention -- doesn't need to grow. It just needs to get back to basics and create more passion in the fans it already has. There are enough hockey fans to sustain a league with 26-28 teams around North America. And spare me the ratings argument -- the WNBA and MLS have cable television contracts. The NHL will never be off cable television.

Imagine a world where hockey can just be hockey, and not constantly compared to other team sports with completely different economic and cultural advantages?

<JESTER>

[MantaRay]

Odin be praised Jester, your exactly right.

If you've felt the passion or played the game of hockey, no other sport can compare. NHL will be fine when it comes back.

[rbdf]

Jester, you can't compare MLS and WNBA - their salaries are peanuts compared to NHL - and so are the leagues revenues, ticket prices, etc. etc. - the only thing they compare on the same level is the cost of hotdogs, sodas and beers at their games. Otherwise, night and day (do people pay $125 to $150 for the best seat in the house at 41 home WNBA or MLS games? how many of their players make even a six figure salary, let alone seven or eight?)

The writer hit things square on the head with this quote:

``The public response is going to be apathy -- Who cares?,'' said Nye Lavalle, president of the Sports Marketing Group. ``There aren't that many people interested in hockey. They're practically not going to know it's gone.

``The people who do like to watch hockey will watch it wherever it is. The minor leagues are growing because they don't charge $75 or $150 a game. They're affordable and fun.''

Those who follow hockey understand the dilemma facing owners who are trying to contain their costs and players who refuse to accept a salary cap.

``The issue is as simple as this: There is no additional base of income for hockey,'' Pilson said. ``There's no pot of gold out there that some new leadership or new direction is going to develop.

``Hockey has tapped out on attendance. They're at more than 90 percent league-wide. They've tapped out on sponsor dollars. They've tapped out on regional sports television. And they have obviously tapped out on network television, which is going backward with no rights fees.''

The last paragraph there is what it's all about - Hockey has tapped out their real FAN base - and tapped us good - season tickets are far from affordable any more. But with constantly rising costs (player salaries are the bulk of it, but what about all the other salaries, you know, front office, scouting etc, - everyone looks for a raise just like you and i do every year, not to mention health insurance, rents etc etc.), and if you don't start draggin in the casual fan, you've got nothing to grow revenue with to keep pace with rising costs. It's simple math. Yes, hard core fans will come back, you won't see 90% average attendance, maybe 70% at first, growing to 75%, that other 20% or so was the casual fan that hockey has been growing with for a couple years now, and minus a season, it will take years to get them back in the fold, let alone increase their numbers and start converting them to hard core fans.

I may be in the minority here, but I think if these two sides don't get their crap together soon and salvage the season, I'll move on to the minor leagues, paying less money to get my hockey fix, going to rinks where the teams do everything they can to attract and keep fans and make the game an enjoyable experience - the same way I moved away from MLB and started going to minor league games in Montclair, Newark, Lakewood and Somerset. F the elitist rich boys and their overpriced product, I'd rather go watch hungry players who are just happier than a pig in the mud that they're able to play the game they love.

Edited September 20, 2004 by rbdf

[Pepperkorn]

I don't INTEND on moving permanently to the AHL or College but if this goes on for a while my interest will be captured by the other markets. I mean - hockey is hockey. Right now I like the NHL best and don't really give smaller markets a chance - now with the strike I am forced into giving them a chance and I know I'll find things I like about the different level of play.

Right now I get easily frustrated at poor choices and lack of skill (I don't quite grasp how difficult hockey is when I've got the NHL to compare these poor kids to) But I think I'll channel that more into enjoying seeing the room for improvement - not getting all furious

As with football, I may end up liking the players heart more. I mean in College ball the players really are connected - they are totally invested in the game. In pro ball they just aren't, they have other priorities and the level of skill (thus chance of serious injury) is so high they have to pick and choose their chances - injury costs too much for a pro -- they play it too safe and not smart enough usually. The end result is that pro mistakes seem selfish and lazy, collegiate mistakes are just so endearingly devastating - earth shattering yet trivial. I just love the priorities of Collegiate play.

SOooo I guess what I'm saying is I love the NHL and don't WANT to change my hockey taste -- but I might not be able to help it, you know? I love hockey. This will force me to delve even deeper and I'm sure alter my perception of the game - so I am excited about it to be frank.

Edited September 20, 2004 by Pepperkorn

[NJD Jester]

Jester, you can't compare MLS and WNBA - their salaries are peanuts compared to NHL - and so are the leagues revenues, ticket prices, etc. etc. - the only thing they compare on the same level is the cost of hotdogs, sodas and beers at their games.  Otherwise, night and day  (do people pay $125 to $150 for the best seat in the house at 41 home WNBA or MLS games?  how many of their players make even a six figure salary, let alone seven or eight?)

I'm not drawing tht kind of comparison. I'm saying that those sports, and please correct me if I'm wrong, aren't exactly pulling down American Idol numbers as far as ratings. So while hockey's numbers get dissected and slammed and ridiculed, other professional leagues are given a pass because they don't have the history of the NHL.

The point is that there will always be hockey on cable television in some way, shape or form.

The last paragraph there is what it's all about - Hockey has tapped out their real FAN base - and tapped us good - season tickets are far from affordable any more.  But with constantly rising costs (player salaries are the bulk of it, but what about all the other salaries, you know, front office, scouting etc, - everyone looks for a raise just like you and i do every year, not to mention health insurance, rents etc etc.), and if you don't start draggin in the casual fan, you've got nothing to grow revenue with to keep pace with rising costs.

Two points:

1. I think the fans, by and large, understand why this whole thing is happening. That's why you don't have the outrage you did back in 1995 or in baseball's labor stoppages. The fans understand the league doesn't have the TV or ad revenue to sustain these salaries. It's the owners' fault and the player agents' fault. So the fans are willing to sit back and get this system fixed, because we know that the media isn't going to bang the drums to get the players back on the ice because it hates the sport. It's a correction.

2. As far as "tapping out" the fan base, give me a break. There are more than 15,000 Devils fans. There are more than 13,000 Islanders fan. The notion that hockey has attracted its maximum number of fans (which the article argued) is assinine when you consider how the sport has been mismarketed and how a few technological advancements could transform the sport on television.

I mean, call me naive, but am I alone in thinking that the NHL circa 1985 wouldn't have attracted all those little tykes drawn to the violence of the WWF in the 1990s? I guess we'll never know, since Bettman decided to dumb down the sport to attract basketball fans.

The bottom line is that there are millions of hockey fans who aren't going to the games and who don't turn on the television to watch games that don't include their favorite teams. Getting hockey fans watching hockey should be more important than trying to get a baseball fan to watch hockey. But Bettman and the NHL have sold us out for a bunch of mythical fans who wouldn't watch our game to begin with.

<JESTER>

[rbdf]

those hockey fans that don't watch hockey are basically the 'casual" fans everyone keeps talking about - people like you and me who watch, play, spend money and rant all day on forums like this, we're hard core, they know we're coming back - it's the guy who goes to 4 or 5 games a year and watches the playoffs and finals if it's a team he knows a few players on that they'll lose now.

[NJD Jester]

those hockey fans that don't watch hockey are basically the 'casual" fans everyone keeps talking about - people like you and me who watch, play, spend money and rant all day on forums like this, we're hard core, they know we're coming back - it's the guy who goes to 4 or 5 games a year and watches the playoffs and finals if it's a team he knows a few players on that they'll lose now.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Anyone who goes to five games a year and watches the playoffs is a hockey fan, nothing casual about it.

The casual fans you keeo hearing about are the ones that will jump on and off the bandwagon for any sport depending on what's happening in said sport. The TV fans. The guys and gals who watch the baseball playoffs, but not the regular season. Who will tune in for the Lakers, but not the Nets.

What Bettman's attempted to do is to reach out to the people who might watch hockey but aren't. It's been a decade of expansion, dumbing things down and tinkering with the rules to decrease the violence and increase scoring (to no avail). Now, I'm willing to cut just about anyone a break under the right circumstances. But Bettman's NHL has actually LOST market share while increasing its geography, which is a pretty hard fvcking thing to do if you think about it.

<JESTER>

[Triumph]

But the casual fans do exist, in other sports. That's just it. Hockey is just too esoteric to attract them, unfortunately.

Comparing WWF and NHL is a false analogy. You know what you're getting with the WWF. Bench clearing brawls weren't happening every NHL game. Maybe Bettman should've told the league that there had to be one, then the NHL would be doing better.