Oh, I agree. I just don’t focus on any Olympic “bounce” talk because if you logically think about it for 3 seconds, Olympic hockey (other than being hockey) isn’t really comparable to the professional league sport.

And I also agree that the league doesn’t enforce it’s own rules, but even that to me takes a back seat to the fact that it’s the most under-marketed league out there between it’s TV contract and other marketing.

I’d love to see a series of articles, week after week, dwelling on that point vs. anything that calls out fighting (even if it’s not really their main point)

But his point – whether he meant it or not – doesn’t seem to be "fighting is holding the NHL back", but rather "the NHL doesn’t enforce it’s own rules." That’s a legitimate claim.

That part I have no problem with. But what Ford (and other non-fans) fail to realize is that fighting is necessary. Why doesn’t anyone talk about the Olympic cheap shots doled out by Tollefsen, Pitkanen, and Boyle (slew-footing Semin)? Because if you take fighting out of the game entirely, you have more of that crap going on.

“If the NHL bosses actually delude themselves on the topic, it leads to a spate of new teams in places they should never be….”

I think what he’s saying here is that if the NHL actually believes it’s going to bring in a new audience from the Olympics, it will lead to more franchises. Like the way Bettman tried to bring new fans in with all the new teams before. He makes this statement before fighting is mentioned.

And I think you’re right about the his view of the non-enforcement of the rules. Bob Ford, in my view, seems to think that’s the real problem, not even so much the actual fighting. However, later in the article he mentions the fights at the beginning of the Florida game. Unfortunately, he shows his lack of understanding of the game there, by not realizing the carryover effects from the previous games between these clubs.

And how the hell do you use the blockquote correctly? I can’t figure that out…