I Hate You, Don't Leave Me
Yesterday,
P.J. at Sharks Page posted a thoughtful response to my recent commentary that claims the players union has little incentive to provide hockey fans with clearer information about their current collective bargaining position. In his column, P.J. is very adamant about his belief that, because the players depend on fans for their livelihood, the union should at least have the common courtesy to provide the hockey world, as the league has, with a rough proposal aimed at preventing an extended lockout.
P.J. mentions four reasons why the players should be more receptive to involving fans in the negotiating process, one of which was particularly comical. See if you can pick it out:
First of all, it might encourage fans not to support any scab league or replacement players. Second, it would give fans, some of whom pay several thousand a year for season tickets, a reason to come back to the game after an extended lockout. Third, it might keep merchandise sales, advertising revenues, and television ratings from plummeting. And fourth, the PR it would generate could help bring a resolution that is in their favor.
Firstly, I’d like to point out that I’m not insulting my colleague when I dissect his commentary. Anyone that has read my site knows that I commonly express views that are against the grain, and P.J. just so happens to be today’s verbal pinata. I respect his viewpoint, as it is likely shared by the majority of hockey fans.
Nevertheless, no matter how many shots of burbon enter my body, I simply cannot manage to convince myself that a single die-hard hockey fan in this universe will dare consider abandoning the game
under any circumstances. In the wake of the Todd Bertuzzi incident back in March, Steve Ovadia of
Puck Update asked in an article how many fans would stop watching hockey because of the negative stigma associated with a game that featured gratuitious violence.
I responded:
The answer to this question is simple: None. No current hockey fans will stop watching the game. If we haven’t stopped because of the escalating ticket prices, low-scoring, and the lack of free-flowing action, then we’re not going to throw in the towel now. I can at least understand the image question if your concern is creating new fans outside of the traditional hockey market (and it shouldn’t be, because that, in itself, is a pipe dream), but to even entertain the notion that hockey fans will turn their back on a game they hold so dear is utterly ridiculous.
Why? Quite simply, I don’t think we, as hockey fans, have the guts. Baseball fans didn’t. We don’t either.
Sure, a lengthy lockout would unquestionably result in fan bitterness towards the players. You could even argue that those resentful feelings will linger for a certain period of time following the conclusion of the lockout. Regardless, when it’s all said and done and the puck is finally set to drop next season – whether it’s this January or next – you, me, and everyone else that has been supporting this game in recent years will be counting down the seconds to our favorite team’s opener. By the time the playoffs start and another seven-game Cup final is on the horizon, all will be forgiven.
The hockey community is a very tight-knit one. I’ve been around all kind of sports fans just like any other red-blooded American, and beyond the shadow of a doubt,
hockey fans are the most passionate and dedicated on the continent. During a television interview, I once referred to the hockey populace as one big family. Whereas other major sports enjoy varying levels of popularity with the casual sports fan base in this country, hockey has never been a fashionable mainstream commodity, having always relied on the support of its small, but frighteningly fervid fan base.
As hockey fans, we’re the people that
universally mourned the loss of NHL 2Night when it was announced that the show was being cancelled by ESPN prior to this season. We’re the folks who stay up until 1:30 a.m. on the east coast to watch a meaningless game between the Kings and Coyotes. We’re the crowd that continues to pay three digits for the NHL Center Ice package, even though we know most of the games aren’t worth watching. We’re the folks that routinely dismiss the ignorant comments from pompous windbags like Christine Brennan, who claim that
nobody would miss NHL hockey if a lockout occurs.
We know better.
I'm Only Sleeping
I couldn’t help but chuckle after I read a
commentary from P.J. at Sharkspage that chastises the players union for failing to provide fans with sufficient information regarding their CBA negotiation position. P.J. claims he supported the NHLPA during the 1994 strike, but says he now has no sympathy for the union, which is supposedly thumbing its nose at the fans.
First off, I have a hard time convincing myself that the players owe the fans a detailed explanation of their position. I’m not saying the players shouldn’t be indebted to the fans, as we do provide the owners with gate receipts, which subsequently partially contribute to player salaries. But what we, as a whole, don’t seem to realize is the fact the players and the league are involved in a bitter legal dispute over the distribution of finances, and by no means are we deserving of any private bargaining information or proposals.
Would divulging such information be beneficial to the union from a PR standpoint? Absolutely. Still, what’s the point?
Before you can judge the players and understand the union mentality, I think you have to try to look at this situation from a realistic perspective. If you do, it becomes painfully apparent why the players have absolutely no intentions of winning over the fans. They’re not trying to go head-to-head with the league in some kind of public relations duel because, in essence, that would be a fruitless endeavor.
According to recent polls, the majority of fans are overwhelmingly
in support of the league’s bargaining position. Most broadcasters and sportswriters feel the same way (you don’t have to spend much time to convince an underpaid beat writer that hockey players are financially spoiled), and as a result, they have
no sympathy for the players and their plight. With little effort, Gary Bettman has used the media to disseminate his message to the fans in a savvy public relations campaign that has featured the revealing of six “good faith” bargaining proposals from the league. The players, conversely, have not come to the fore publicly with a substantial proposal since last year.
Now the fans look at this situation and say to themselves, ‘Wow, it really seems like the league is making a concerted effort to salvage the season, and maybe even training camp. You’d think the players would be willing to accept just one of those six proposals! Why are they being such brats?’
The reason for
the players’ recent dismissal of the six financial concepts concocted by the NHL is simple – all six plans revolve around a salary cap, and the players have made it abundantly clear that they will not accept such a salary restriction. And unless Gary Bettman and his henchmen (sounds like a band) are dumber than I think they are, I’m willing to bet they knew damn right well that the union was inevitably going to reject all six proposals
when they initially formed the concepts. To me, the public release of the six “good faith” proposals was nothing more than an exhibition of public relations on the part of Bill Daly and company, and was not a sincere attempt by the NHL to address the problems at hand.
The union, on the other hand, did make an attempt at achieving the goals of itself and the league
on October 1st of last year. On that date, Bob Goodenow proposed a five percent rollback on player salaries, a substantially smaller salary cap on entry-level contracts, and a luxury tax and revenue-sharing system. Even though specifics were not mentioned, the players’ proposal did address (on the surface) some contentious issues the league has with the current CBA. Nevertheless, the league publicly disregarded the proposal less than a week after it was presented by the union.
At least the players had the decency to consider the league’s six proposals for two weeks. Regardless, the union was simply prolonging the inevitable
negative fan reaction. Fans don’t give a hoot about the players’ position, because if we did, we would be able to read between the lines of the political posturing and the public relations fodder that we’ve been fed by the league over the last year. I’m not saying I support the union, but to side with ownership - who, by the way, would be primarily responsible for a lockout, should it occur - is completely asinine. What is even more sickening is the fact that fans seem to be falling prey to a perfectly executed NHL PR blitzkrieg that is making the players look as sinister as the big bad wolf and the league appear as innocent as Little Red.
Time to
put some coffee on the kettle, folks.
