|
|
Post by Bob on Mar 26, 2005 10:21:07 GMT -5
In a recent article, Al Strachan stated that NHL fans come out to the game primarily to watch the star players. It's interesting that he stated this as fact rather than opinion.
As a result, Strachan believes that any re-birth of the league that does not include the handful of true star players that exist today, will be doomed to failure.
But stars come and stars go. There always seems to be someone ready to come in and fill that role. While players like Bobby Orr, Guy Lafleur and Bobby Hull will never be replaced the game has lived on with new stars.
My question is, do you watch hockey simply to see the strars play or do you like to see an exciting game where goals are scored and the outcome is in doubt until the final whistle.
What is your opinion? Are the current star players absolutely critical to the game or is the game itself (assuming it can be fixed) more important?
Personally, I believe some players have tried to make themselves bigger than the game and have tried to sell the public on the absolute necessity of their participation.
I think the game needs to be fixed both financially and on the ice. Once tht is done, the game will be more exciting, existing stars can continue to participate and new stars will emerge.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Mar 26, 2005 11:48:51 GMT -5
Stars are certainly a big draw but they don't guarantee well played games. I want entertaining hockey at any level.
As usual Strachan has taken his own opinion and passed it off as fact.
|
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Mar 26, 2005 18:00:40 GMT -5
I'll always remember the one and only time I saw Mario Lemieux live. He scored on an empty Candiens net from the other end of the ice, behind his own net, on his backhand, with his back to the direction in which he was shooting and without looking. However, I've been to see plenty of games between the 90's Habs and other teams similarly lacking in stars (in fact probably the majority of games I've seen haven't had much star power) and I usually enjoy myself. Naturally I get more excited if I have the chance to see a player like Joe Sakic, but I would rather watch a close game that has playoff implications than a game between a team loaded with stars and one that won't even make the playoffs.
I think the success of the post-lockout NHL will be determined by how exciting the games are to watch. For me at least, excitement comes from close, fast-paced games as opposed to high-scoring ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by IamCanadiens on Mar 26, 2005 18:32:14 GMT -5
Naturally I get more excited if I have the chance to see a player like Joe Sakic, but I would rather watch a close game that has playoff implications than a game between a team loaded with stars and one that won't even make the playoffs. Thats one heck of a powerful (painful) statement considering the lack of success the Habs have had in recent years. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Mar 28, 2005 13:10:03 GMT -5
In a recent article, Al Strachan stated that NHL fans come out to the game primarily to watch the star players. It's interesting that he stated this as fact rather than opinion. As a result, Strachan believes that any re-birth of the league that does not include the handful of true star players that exist today, will be doomed to failure. But stars come and stars go. There always seems to be someone ready to come in and fill that role. While players like Bobby Orr, Guy Lafleur and Bobby Hull will never be replaced the game has lived on with new stars. My question is, do you watch hockey simply to see the strars play or do you like to see an exciting game where goals are scored and the outcome is in doubt until the final whistle. What is your opinion? Are the current star players absolutely critical to the game or is the game itself (assuming it can be fixed) more important? Personally, I believe some players have tried to make themselves bigger than the game and have tried to sell the public on the absolute necessity of their participation. I think the game needs to be fixed both financially and on the ice. Once tht is done, the game will be more exciting, existing stars can continue to participate and new stars will emerge. Who is a star? An ageing veteran who led the league in scoring five years ago? A young prospect who explodes upon the Calder scene? When the public conducts their all-star voting they go more on reputation than ability. Sometimes we look at the scoring leaderboard and say, "Who is this new kid?" After a few weeks we accept that a new star is born. Most people will look at the leaderboard, find a few players (especially if they are wearing the right colors) and accept them as stars. This year, some of us look at the scoring leaders for Djurgdjenkenstromsonden and annoint them with star status if they are ahead of more familiar names. The NHL will come back. The curious (non-AFLCIO) fans will watch and eventually follow. A few NHLers will cross the line and then it will be like a Tijuana border crossing at 4:00am as the players reluctantly give up their jobs in Tzajekastan or at McDonalds or as Neuclear physicists and return to playing the game they love and are good at. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Mar 28, 2005 13:42:30 GMT -5
Personally, I think we can toss the "exciting games first" theory out the window. If that were true, the AHL, or even the Junior Leagues, would outdraw the NHL. Both those groups have done more to open up their games than the NHL has, and at much cheaper prices you would think they would be drawing in tens of thousands per game.
They don't, because while people talk a good game, aside from the real die-hards, most would rather watch Joe Sakic than Corey Perry. And then just hope the game is better.
The real question though, is what is more important - the jersey, or the name on the back? I don't really think you can separate the two, to be honest with you. People say they follow the team, regardless of who is on it, but when the Habs stunk, attendance fell, and people complained that Molson's wasn't doing enough to make it better. Conversely, if the jersey is more important than the players, why have this lockout? People are always saying its so that the small market teams can keep their star players, no? They'll try to couch it with "and stay competitive" but that's an iffy argument at best. See Rangers, New York, or Stanley Cup Final, 2004. Or heck, AK Bars.
No, I think most sports teams, world-wide, recognize that aside from a couple of legendary franchises, like the Yankees, Red Sox, maybe Manchester United, the success of most professional teams revolves around having star players for which fans can cheer for. Marty Brodeur sweaters sell much better than Jay Pandolfo sweaters. Michael Vick, Brett Favre, Curt Schilling, Wayne Gretzky, Jose Theodore, Shaq, Lebron James. Sydney Crosby. We love the players, and then the teams. We just want those players on our teams, that's all.
|
|
|
|
Post by HabbaDasher on Mar 28, 2005 14:08:58 GMT -5
I like watching all the players: stars, plumbers, rookies, defensive specialists, offensive specialists, goons....
|
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Mar 28, 2005 23:25:25 GMT -5
Marty Brodeur sweaters sell much better than Jay Pandolfo sweaters. But Jay Pandolfo sweaters do sell. Personally, I'm a big CFL fan and pay no attention to the NFL at all, even though the NFL has without a doubt a much higher level of talent. I find the style of play in the CFL much more exciting and I find it easier to identify with teams in Montreal or Calgary than with teams in LA or Cincinnati. Most NHL fans are fans of a particular team and (I think) would be likely to continue to support that team, even if the best players stay in Europe. On the other hand, habit plays a big role in these things, so it may depend on how easilty people return to their old habits or form new ones. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Mar 29, 2005 0:31:27 GMT -5
Personally, I think we can toss the "exciting games first" theory out the window. If that were true, the AHL, or even the Junior Leagues, would outdraw the NHL. Both those groups have done more to open up their games than the NHL has, and at much cheaper prices you would think they would be drawing in tens of thousands per game. They don't, because while people talk a good game, aside from the real die-hards, most would rather watch Joe Sakic than Corey Perry. And then just hope the game is better. The real question though, is what is more important - the jersey, or the name on the back? I don't really think you can separate the two, to be honest with you. People say they follow the team, regardless of who is on it, but when the Habs stunk, attendance fell, and people complained that Molson's wasn't doing enough to make it better. Conversely, if the jersey is more important than the players, why have this lockout? People are always saying its so that the small market teams can keep their star players, no? They'll try to couch it with "and stay competitive" but that's an iffy argument at best. See Rangers, New York, or Stanley Cup Final, 2004. Or heck, AK Bars. No, I think most sports teams, world-wide, recognize that aside from a couple of legendary franchises, like the Yankees, Red Sox, maybe Manchester United, the success of most professional teams revolves around having star players for which fans can cheer for. Marty Brodeur sweaters sell much better than Jay Pandolfo sweaters. Michael Vick, Brett Favre, Curt Schilling, Wayne Gretzky, Jose Theodore, Shaq, Lebron James. Sydney Crosby. We love the players, and then the teams. We just want those players on our teams, that's all. The infatuation with stars is misplaced loyalty. The US Olympic Backetball dream team of millionaire stars were beaten first by a bunch of Italians and then a bunch of Argentinians whose names escape me for the moment. It's the name on the front of the jersey that counts. We watch the NHL instead of the AHL the same way we watch the playoffs more than the regular season. How many of us would be glued to the screen to watch the University of Illinois play basketball against North Carolina; but put them in the final four and the Neilsons beat Celebrity Poker and Fat Actress combined? Who watches curling unless it's the Brier. Two minutes is a long time to watch a bunch of horses unless they are running in the Kentuckey Derby. The Florida Derby with the exact same horses, Feh...(apologies to Mr. Bozo) |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Mar 29, 2005 2:14:36 GMT -5
I like watching the Zamboni driver try to avoid leaving white patches. And did I mention the women? Stars...phshaw!
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Mar 29, 2005 5:49:46 GMT -5
I watch José Théodore with intense scrutiny and simmering hope. Youppi just irritates me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Mar 29, 2005 11:29:35 GMT -5
Youppi just irritates me. Bite your tongue. I always liked Youppi when I was a kid and kept waiting for the day when I got older when I would grow tired of his antics and see him as just another cheesy mascot... But that day never came. He was just part of the Big O experience. I think I'm man enough to admit that I will always have a soft spot for Youppi. Sorry for the digression, but I guess that's all we have these days with no NHL. Oh, BTW, if you want to watch some intense hockey, check out the NCAA Frozen Four on Saturday, April 7. It will be an all-Western affair this year with North Dakota vs. Minnesota in one semi-final and Denver vs. Colorado College in the other. The quality of hockey is very good (no red line) and high intensity. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Mar 29, 2005 12:27:13 GMT -5
Bite your tongue. I always liked Youppi when I was a kid and kept waiting for the day when I got older when I would grow tired of his antics and see him as just another cheesy mascot... But that day never came. He was just part of the Big O experience. I think I'm man enough to admit that I will always have a soft spot for Youppi. Sorry for the digression, but I guess that's all we have these days with no NHL. Oh, BTW, if you want to watch some intense hockey, check out the NCAA Frozen Four on Saturday, April 7. It will be an all-Western affair this year with North Dakota vs. Minnesota in one semi-final and Denver vs. Colorado College in the other. The quality of hockey is very good (no red line) and high intensity. I liked Youppi too. He was better than half of the Expos roster. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Mar 29, 2005 13:08:13 GMT -5
Players are the product so of course you like Stars and have favorite players. But that is not to say you would follow these stars everywhere they go or stop watching if they leave. If it was like that, fans would change allegeance as players are traded or stop watching... Players come and go but usually a fan remains a fan of its team.
I tried to watch European leagues but found I had very, very limited interest for it, despite the fact that many stars were playing. They sure won't make a TPS, Blues, or AK BARS or Djugarden fan out of me EVEN if they get ALL of the NHLPA's players.
When the HABS come back I will watch.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Mar 29, 2005 13:35:37 GMT -5
I like watching all the players: stars, plumbers, rookies, defensive specialists, offensive specialists, goons.... Experience has taught me that you absolutely must keep an eye on the plumbers. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Mar 29, 2005 13:49:30 GMT -5
Players are the product so of course you like Stars and have favorite players. But that is not to say you would follow these stars everywhere they go or stop watching if they leave. If it was like that, fans would change allegeance as players are traded or stop watching... Isn't that true, though? What happened to the above mentioned Expos? Isn't one of the biggest cited reasons for their demise "they could never keep their star players?" I don't even know if you can use the "non-competitive" aspect in that case, because as little as two years ago, the Expos were tied for first in the wild card lead, late in the season... And isn't a primary reason for this lockout "the small markets can't keep their star players?" Again, I don't buy the "competition" argument, because its not really a good one, and no league REALLY wants parity anyways. If the NHL were to ever achieve true parity, the Habs would miss the playoffs every second year, and only win the Stanley Cup once every 30 years. Would that be good? |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Mar 29, 2005 19:33:12 GMT -5
Isn't that true, though? What happened to the above mentioned Expos? Isn't one of the biggest cited reasons for their demise "they could never keep their star players?" I don't even know if you can use the "non-competitive" aspect in that case, because as little as two years ago, the Expos were tied for first in the wild card lead, late in the season... And isn't a primary reason for this lockout "the small markets can't keep their star players?" Again, I don't buy the "competition" argument, because its not really a good one, and no league REALLY wants parity anyways. If the NHL were to ever achieve true parity, the Habs would miss the playoffs every second year, and only win the Stanley Cup once every 30 years. Would that be good? I think you extrapolate a little. To answer the question: Would you purposely avoid watching the NHL if the players shown are not NHLPA members, I say NO because frankly I do not feel so strongly for the NHLPA that I wish to join their picket line and I sincerely think many fans feel the same. Replacement players is not the perfect solution but it's become the only option it seems. As for the pupose of this deadlock, well, many arguments have been tossed from both sides but deep down it was all about how the revenue should have been shared between the owners and the players. The NFL eventually put an end to their conflict when both parties sat down and figured out what the pie was and agreed on how it would be split. Here we are now with a cancelled season behind us and nothing ahead of us but more legal battles… Obviously both sides have their good and bad but if they can no longer agree on anything, than I say gimme back hockey and continue your bickering in the courtyards… It’s absolutely horrible that we’ve come down to cancel a season and it’s absolutely horrible that the NHL must now get the show on the road without the NHLPA, it’s sad but it’s unavoidable. To me waiting more means hurting the industry even more. Sacrificing sponsors and network deals. Sacrificing season ticket holders and corporate box holders. It means unemployment checks runing out for the regular Joes that work in the NHL arenas and offices … Enough has been sacrificed for this war. |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Mar 29, 2005 20:03:47 GMT -5
To answer the question: Would you purposely avoid watching the NHL if the players shown are not NHLPA members, I say NO because frankly I do not feel so strongly for the NHLPA that I wish to join their picket line and I sincerely think many fans feel the same. Replacement players is not the perfect solution but it's become the only option it seems. I feel strongly enough against the owners and their minion Bettman, not to watch replacement workers. And the (lack of) principle of replacement workers galls me. They arrived at a solution that worked for a while, but now there is a lot of grumbling about inequities in their revenue sharing program. However, Paul Tagliabue, when asked how the NFL situation compared to the current one in hockey, said, "I'm not going to answer any questions that compare the NFL to hockey in terms of labor relations," Tagliabue said. "I said the negotiations have exhausted themselves, not the negotiators. And we're at a dead end."- abcnews.go.com/Sports/ESPNSports/story?id=602450For me the bickering has become more entertaining than I remember NHL hockey having generally been. Besides there are always the Bulldogs to root for. It will be even sadder if the rplacement players hit the ice. If some owners claimed that they were losing less money by shutting down operations with NHL players, I can't see how they would make money by putting scabs on ice. Unless...nah...they wouldn't lie about something like that... Well, that's the Bob & Gary Show, isn't it? On this I agree with you 100%. Excellent post, Doc. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Mar 29, 2005 20:32:43 GMT -5
Experience has taught me that you absolutely must keep an eye on the plumbers. I'm beginning to worry about you . . . eyeing plumbers . . . and cracks about cracks . . . |
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Mar 29, 2005 23:36:20 GMT -5
It will be even sadder if the rplacement players hit the ice. If some owners claimed that they were losing less money by shutting down operations with NHL players, I can't see how they would make money by putting scabs on ice. Unless...nah...they wouldn't lie about something like that... That's not hard, if enough people want to watch (big if I know). The point of replacement players is that they will play for less.... BTW, I'm against replacement workers as a general rule, but I don't see people replacing millionaire athletes for mere hundred's of thousands of dollars per year in the same way as I do replacement seamen, for example. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Mar 30, 2005 5:27:09 GMT -5
I think you extrapolate a little. To answer the question: Would you purposely avoid watching the NHL if the players shown are not NHLPA members, I say NO because frankly I do not feel so strongly for the NHLPA that I wish to join their picket line and I sincerely think many fans feel the same. Replacement players is not the perfect solution but it's become the only option it seems. As for the pupose of this deadlock, well, many arguments have been tossed from both sides but deep down it was all about how the revenue should have been shared between the owners and the players. The NFL eventually put an end to their conflict when both parties sat down and figured out what the pie was and agreed on how it would be split. Here we are now with a cancelled season behind us and nothing ahead of us but more legal battles… Obviously both sides have their good and bad but if they can no longer agree on anything, than I say gimme back hockey and continue your bickering in the courtyards… It’s absolutely horrible that we’ve come down to cancel a season and it’s absolutely horrible that the NHL must now get the show on the road without the NHLPA, it’s sad but it’s unavoidable. To me waiting more means hurting the industry even more. Sacrificing sponsors and network deals. Sacrificing season ticket holders and corporate box holders. It means unemployment checks runing out for the regular Joes that work in the NHL arenas and offices … Enough has been sacrificed for this war. Yeah, what he said. Actually Doc, is SaddleHump the Racing Donkey still alive? I need to borrow him. Ya know why? I'm gónna slap on my pink war paint and my ferocious camouflage thong, paint SaddleHump in bright orange letters with "Break the Union, Save the World"...THEN....we will set up a protest vigil outside them NHLPA offices until we BREAK them b*st*rds! Ya, we need to take matter in our own hands. Care to join? |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Mar 30, 2005 6:09:02 GMT -5
That's not hard, if enough people want to watch (big if I know). The point of replacement players is that they will play for less.... What will it cost to watch these fake NHLers? Actually we should know soon as the deadlines for announcing next season's ticket prices is fast approaching. I'm against on principle alone. |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Mar 30, 2005 6:33:29 GMT -5
I'm beginning to worry about you . . . eyeing plumbers . . . and cracks about cracks . . . Memories of house repairs. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Mar 30, 2005 8:26:12 GMT -5
Yeah, what he said. Actually Doc, is SaddleHump the Racing Donkey still alive? I need to borrow him. Ya know why? I'm gónna slap on my pink war paint and my ferocious camouflage thong, paint SaddleHump in bright orange letters with "Break the Union, Save the World"...THEN....we will set up a protest vigil outside them NHLPA offices until we BREAK them b*st*rds! Ya, we need to take matter in our own hands. Care to join? Ouch... Pink war paint, thong, donkey... In Toronto... ...you're on your own... As for Saddle Hump, you've seen him lately...  who knew that raising donkey could ever pay so much !!! |
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Mar 30, 2005 12:23:09 GMT -5
I believe most hockey fans support the jersey more so than the player!
Replacement player will work for sure in Canada and in the Hockey markets in the states.
However with that said, I cant see it working with the southern teams like Flordia or LA etc.
But who cares about those teams anyway, maybe if we're lucky they might just fade away.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Mar 30, 2005 17:23:50 GMT -5
I believe most hockey fans support the jersey more so than the player! Replacement player will work for sure in Canada and in the Hockey markets in the states. However with that said, I cant see it working with the southern teams like Flordia or LA etc. But who cares about those teams anyway, maybe if we're lucky they might just fade away. Fans support the team, not the player! I've supported the Habs since the Rocket, Bouchard, Harvey, Boom Boom, Fergy, Schutt, Robinson, and Begin. There hab been a lot of players who wore the sweater since them and I supported them all. (Even Breezeby, Travesty, and Rustinksky as long as they wore CH on their chest.) |
|
|
|
Post by Anardil1 on Mar 31, 2005 22:05:46 GMT -5
ppsttttt...... hey L.A....... it's Shutt. You are a Habs fan right?  |
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Mar 31, 2005 22:18:44 GMT -5
I'm against on principle alone. Maybe I would feel the same way if I felt the players had bargained in good faith and with reasonable objectives. Not to say that I am happy with all that the owners have done, but at this point I just want to see hockey. If the NHLPA forms their own league, perhaps I'll watch that. |
|
|
|
Post by TheHabsfan on May 23, 2005 8:05:39 GMT -5
I like watching all the players: stars, plumbers, rookies, defensive specialists, offensive specialists, goons.... Experience has taught me that you absolutely must keep an eye on the plumbers. ...but look away when they bend over to pick up a monkey wrench! THF |
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on May 23, 2005 8:48:24 GMT -5
First when it comes to Strachan you just take what he says, believe half is made up and the other half is just wrong.
Personally style of play is much more important than what stars are playing.
Give me fast skating, wide open hockey with some good clean body checks and I don't care if it NHL, junior or minor hockey, it is exciting and fun.
I could care less about teams winning a game 2-1 with a combined 25 shots on goal and would rather see a 2-1 game with a combined 60 shots on goal with goalies making huge saves and players getting quality scoring chances.
if anyone watched the Knights - Oceanic OHL game on Saturday, it didn't matter if it was Crosby or Perry scoring. It was a great game with lots of chances and suspense.
Hopefully the NHL watched it.
|
|
