John Gonzalez of the Inquirer doesn't like hockey, therefore nobody else does either
It's safe to say that John Gonzalez, writer for the Philadelphia Inquirer, is not a hockey fan. And because he is not a lover of all things puck, he apparently believes that nobody else is, either.
In a column in Tuesday's paper, Mr. Gonzalez takes a few cheap shots at the NHL by saying that, among other things, the league should stop national broadcasts because nobody in America cares, and that if every team in America besides the Flyers moved to Canada, Philadelphians wouldn't notice.
[Hockey has] become a niche sport, a regionalized pastime with devoted fans who love the home team but not necessarily the international product. It's partly why hockey's American television ratings consistently rank last among the four major pro sports.
I wonder how long they'll even bother to keep those figures. I read a story in the Toronto Sun recently that said talks about renewing a deal between the NHL and NBC have yet to "heat up." NBC is in the final year of its two-year deal with the NHL. The piece made it sound like the two parties might reach a new agreement - or they might not.
When I contacted the NHL to ask if it was possible that national hockey broadcasts might vanish from our televisions, deputy commissioner Bill Daly told me that the league's relationship with NBC "has never been stronger."
"We continue to share the common goal of growing the NHL's exposure and importance as a national television property in the United States, and our current relationship with NBC has been instrumental in demonstrating our ability jointly to achieve that objective," Daly said.
Well, hey, good luck with that, Bill. Because my first reaction to the news that NBC might bail on the NHL was "hooray." It made me dream of a world where no one suffers through national hockey games because they will have disappeared from our television.
In the Sun article that Mr. Gonzalez cites, the writer paraphrases NHL Senior VP for Broadcasting John Shannon, saying "talks won't heat up on renewing the deal until after the Super Bowl hangover subsides. That also will give both NHL and NBC executives a chance to see how the next few weeks draw, beginning with Saturday's Stanley Cup final rematch between Pittsburgh and Detroit." Somehow, Gonzalez draws from that statement that "NBC might bail on the NHL," an assumption that is misguided and flat out incorrect.
NBC's ratings have been on par with last season, but the Winter Classic on New Years' Day was the largest TV crowd in NHL history. In December, both NBC and the NHL were happy with the agreement, and The Globe and Mail in Toronto reported that they were expected to renew their agreement for 2010.
But the current deal with NBC is not a money-maker for the NHL. Coming out of the lockout, they didn't have much of a bargaining position. But now, mainly due to the success of the Winter Classic, the league feels it does have leverage, and as The Hockey News points out, there is word Fox is interested in the contract, giving the league a potential bidding war which would allow them to garner bigger profits off of their television contract -- a vital key in continued growth of the game (much to the chagrin of Mr. Gonzalez, I'm sure).
To be clear, I have no beef with the Flyers. Catching the local guys on Comcast SportsNet is fine by me. But I'd rather watch an Arena League Football game - if the AFL were still operating, that is - than settle down for three periods of out-of-town hockey. And I don't think I'm alone.
Would you be that broken up about not getting the next Calgary-Columbus clash? Would you head out to the bar or buy the NHL package to catch Colorado vs. Washington?
Last year's Arenabowl XXII, won by the Philadelphia Soul, garnered a 5.3 rating in the Philly market. Comparably, the final game of the 2008 Stanley Cup Finals, which featured Pittsburgh and Detroit, picked up a 5.5 rating in the Philadelphia market. Out-of-town hockey beats in-town arena football in Philly -- what a shocker!
Also, keep in mind that the Flyers were knocked out of the playoffs by Pittsburgh just two weeks prior to that game. I don't know about anybody else, but I don't want to watch my teams' biggest rival, who just beat my team to a bloody pulp, play in the Finals.
I think it's safe to say that Mr. Gonzalez actually is alone.
Not long ago, there was a rumor about the NHL putting another team in Toronto. While the hard-core puck heads up in Ottawa no doubt debated the plan, it seemed like hardly anyone south of the border noticed. The NHL could move every team in the league (save the Flyers) to Toronto and it's doubtful anyone around here would blink. I'm betting the same goes for other American cities, too.
Oddly enough, Ed Moran of the Philadelphia Daily News (one of Mr. Gonzalez's colleagues, given that they work in the same building) felt it was necessary to mention how the Phoenix Coyotes are in trouble and might have to move in an article last month. And back in 1997, when the Hartford Whalers moved to Carolina, the Daily News and Inquirer both printed headlined articles on the subject. But of course, it's safe to say Philadelphians don't care about the movement of other teams. We wouldn't blink if the Rangers, Devils, or Islanders moved to Canada, either. No way.
Part of that is because hockey has never been the country's favorite sport, and part of that is because the NHL lacks the oversize personalities that dominate other leagues. Almost everyone knows about LeBron or Kobe, but how many fans can opine about Alex Ovechkin or Marc Savard?
First off, since when is Marc Savard a superstar (he's having a great season, but come on)? Anybody with any ounce of credibility would've said "Alex Ovechkin and Sidney Crosby" in that sentence, and that's coming from someone who can't stand Crosby. And I guarantee you that a ton of people know who Crosby is. But, I digress.
When one thinks of "NBA" they think Kobe versus Lebron, like in this ESPN article where it takes an entire paragraph before "Cavaliers" or "Lakers" is even mentioned. You don't think of the teams they play for right off of the bat. Hockey is a different sport, more of a team focused sport. You think of "Rangers versus Flyers" or "Avalanche versus Red Wings" when you think of the NHL. In hockey, it's difficult for one personality to dominate a game, while in basketball it is commonplace. That's just a simple effect of the game.
Here in Philly, the Sixers cannot sell out a game for their lives. They have the 25th best attendance in the NBA, averaging 14,747 fans per game. The Flyers are operating at 99.8 percent capacity in the exact same building and have the fourth best attendance in the NHL. They are the only non-Original Six franchise in the top five.
The leader in NBA attendance is the Detroit Pistons. In May of 2008, the Pistons and their NHL counterpart, the Red Wings, had playoff games on the same night. The Wings game had an 18.2 rating in the Detroit market, while the Pistons had a 15.9 rating. This season, NHL attendance and television ratings have increased across the board while NBA attendance this season has remained flat.
The biggest, longest-lasting national news to come out of the NHL this season happened when former Dallas Stars winger Sean Avery said something not-so-nice about ex-girlfriend Elisha Cuthbert. In any other sport, Avery's comments would have barely registered. He's an extremely poor man's T.O., a watered down version of Stephon Marbury, a not-nearly-as-interesting facsimile of Manny Ramirez. It takes a lot more than trash talking a former flame to keep pace with that crew.
In the NFL, where shooting yourself in the leg is a mere hazing ritual, Avery would go almost totally unnoticed. But in the NHL, a league full of players as stiff as the ice itself, Avery was painted as a bad boy who had to be punished.
I cannot believe he tried to use that as justification. I'm sure hockey fans would love it if NHL stars led dogfighting rings, or if they carried illegal weapons into New York City nightclubs, or if they committed a laundry list of other criminal acts, but we're just not privy to that luxury. Instead we'll have to deal with "our stiff as ice" players, like this guy, these guys, and these guys. That's too bad.
Hockey is in fact the number four sport in America, and that's something that will perhaps never change due to a million different factors -- it's a complicated game, half of the country doesn't get snow, it's the most expensive of the major sports to play, etc. But it is not nearly as far off the pace and off the radar of the American sports fan as ESPN and this column would lead you to believe.
Mr. Gonzalez, I doubt you will read this because it appears you don't do much research before you pen an article. But if you do, I ask you to remember where you work. This is Philadelphia, one of America's greatest hockey cities. You are entitled to your opinion, but you are also entitled to back up your opinion with true factual data. Your column on Tuesday was both misleading and disrespectful to millions of hockey fans in the Delaware Valley and beyond.
0 recs |
13 comments
|
Comments
Inquirer
Funny that someone from the Inquirer is writing about hockey being a niche sport, considering that most people feel that newspapers are becoming a niche media.
by EaglesPhan53 on Feb 18, 2009 4:26 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
I really do think that every sports league needs a TV contract to gain support and popularity. And that hockey on television, while could be better, is still probably the best sport to watch on television.
by Zachary Zielonka on Feb 18, 2009 7:58 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Well, it’s nice to know that sports reporters write ridiculously slanted and poorly researched articles in other cities too.
Nice refutation.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
by PPP on Feb 18, 2009 9:18 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Oh wow, Gonzalez “dreams of a world where nobody suffers through national hockey games because they will have disappeared from television.”
Because someone was previously forcing him to watch hockey games.
by Have a Seat on Feb 18, 2009 9:29 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think that the state of Hockey is as good as it’s ever been in recent memory. The league has done a great job at cleaning up the game by getting rid of the clutch and grab/neutral zone trap style of play, and the winter classic is already an instant classic. arguably the most talented athlete in america is alex ovechkin and as much as I hate him as a rival he is perfect as the face of the game. the NHL kinda shot itself in the foot through overexpansion because places like Florida and Atlanta just dont give a damn about hockey but in the major cities like philadelphia, detroit, chicago, etc. the game is alive and well. sure Hockey will never be embraced like the NFL for the reasons stated above but I think the sport has a really bright future on the horizon. just a few years ago people were writing the same shit about the NBA and now the NBA is back to it’s glory days. I can definitely see the NHL making the same leap.
by njh3293 on Feb 18, 2009 9:45 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I had to join just so I could comment on this piece. Very well done. I’m impressed that you managed to dissect his “argument” beautifully, succinctly and perfectly, and without resorting to curse words and name calling (which I likely would have done). As a hockey fan, I have to say thanks.
And, as PPP said above, I’m a little heartened to know that sports reporters in other cities can write pieces that are just as ill-conceived, poorly researched and idiotic as the rabble in Toronto so often do.
"So hide your passions in between the daily grind and broken dreams. The city is a drag."
by Mabel on Feb 18, 2009 9:53 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Kudos and glove taps to you
It’s hard to take any columnist seriously in this day and age when their entire reason for existence is to create discord with their opinions. Add in a heaping helping of ignorance, and you get what Mr Gonzales has forced upon the world.
You did a great job dissecting this piece, but one bit that really bothered me was the following from Mr. G:
Not long ago, there was a rumor about the NHL putting another team in Toronto. While the hard-core puck heads up in Ottawa no doubt debated the plan, it seemed like hardly anyone south of the border noticed.
What does Ottawa have to do with the NHL, beyond having a team there? Surely he doesn’t believe the Canadian government and the league offices are one and the same?
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Feb 18, 2009 10:22 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I was thinking the exact same thing. I was going to comment on that in the OP, but I didn’t know exactly what he meant. My guess is it’s just another ignorant American writer bundling all Canadian cities together… kinda like the same people that think Buffalo, NY is near New York City.
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog
Because the Broad Street Subway is orange for a reason.
by Travis Hughes on Feb 18, 2009 10:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good stuff. Great breakdown and refutation.
by Chris Haines on Feb 18, 2009 10:42 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
The more I read from this guy, the less I like him. At first he seemed witty, but it would appear he’s run out of things to write about and so is trying to tackle subjects of which he is completely ignorant.
Hockey is still recovering from the lockout. People seem to forget how long it took baseball to get back the people’s confidence after the strike(s) and football as well. Also, being on Vs. doesn’t help their case. I say MORE national telecasts of hockey are needed, not fewer. How will people learn about the sport and grow to love it if they can’t see it?
by doubleh on Feb 18, 2009 10:50 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Great response to the tired old columnist act
I love it. Well done. Beat reporters still provide value, analysts still provide insight — whereas the ranting columnists like this guy grasp desperately at something to “provoke” a fan reaction and cling on to relevance.
The tired hockey-hating columnist act is so old, his next response will likely follow the same old write-by-numbers template: “No, I know people don’t like hockey, because when I write a piece like this, I don’t get half the responses I get when I write about [insert roider of the day]-Rod.”
To which I usually think: Yeah, could be that. Or could be that when your premise is to piss on and/or pretend those fans don’t exist, they return the favor and don’t bother to take you seriously. Hockey fans have been there, heard that, and can easily take their eyes elsewhere.
Lighthouse Hockey: SBN's New York Islanders blog with hip issues.
by Dominik on Feb 18, 2009 11:06 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Excellent job. All the comments cover my thoughts pretty well, so all I’ll say is that I have been up until 2 am the past week watching west coast hockey games live streamed. Atlanta v. L.A. two nights ago? Great, great game. Vancouver v. Calgary last night, even better. If Mr. Gonzo (Is he trying to make people think of Hunter S. Thompson with that? Cause he there aren’t enough hockey players for him to stand on for him to be on his level) would watch a Western Conference game, maybe his opinion would change. It really is a different game out West.
by Geoff Detweiler on Feb 18, 2009 12:19 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
what did you expect
and by the way-i live down here in dc. i watch EVERY caps game, and try to catch the flyers at a bar whenever i can.
World F#$king Champions
by psudrozz on Feb 18, 2009 12:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 

























