Post by Ducky on Dec 5, 2004 19:25:50 GMT -5
Penguins Q&A with Dejan Kovacevic/poste-gazette.com
Q: Hi, Dejan, I just thought I'd let you get a feel for the atmosphere north of the border in this time of no hockey.
Canadians in the Hamilton/Toronto area are taking it quite badly and, in my opinion, quite selfishly. The Maple Leafs are king here. While listening to the radio the other night, there was a young gentleman pontificating on why it was unfair for the Maple Leafs to be shut out when they fill the arena every night and don't have any money problems. He then cited all the American teams as a reason why the lockout happened in the first place.
I must say that it is surprising and disappointing to me that the fans in this area are not the slightest bit interested in fixing a broken system. I realize that not everyone is a Penguins fan, but I think it is extremely shortsighted not to take into consideration the fates of the Nordiques and Jets who were not American teams and who experienced the same difficulties that the Penguins are now facing.
Also, a couple of weeks ago, someone wrote to you and asked why there was no hockey advertising during the lockout. I believe it was Molson here that did a commercial to the Culture Club song "Do you really want to hurt me?" and asked hockey to come back soon. Thought you might like that.
Bridget Croyle of Hamilton, Ontario
--------
KOVACEVIC: I would like listening to Culture Club under no circumstances, but thanks for the tidbit, Bridget.
Actually, if you canvas the various newspaper Web sites across the continent during this lockout, you will find that opinions on it are formed almost exclusively by the fate of the local club there.
In New York and Toronto, for example, there seems to be a general acceptance that the status quo is just fine. This undoubtedly is because the Rangers and Maple Leafs had no trouble with hockey's economics and because the mind-set inherent in following those teams becomes shaped a certain way. Tune into Toronto's 590-AM, and you are likely to hear callers citing a whole list of star players from around the league they feel the Leafs should pursue. In New York, it is even worse, where the callers act as if it is their birthright to be able to pluck stars away from the poor teams.
This is understandable, though. Even if the Rangers and Maple Leafs have had an epic lack of success -- one Stanley Cup between them from 1968 on -- their followers have been spoiled in getting what they want on a short-term basis. Why would they want to give that up? Why would they want to be on even footing with Nashville and Carolina? Why would they want to fret over the day they might have to watch Mats Sundin leave for another city for more money?
Oh, and a final point: I grow weary of hearing Canadians incessantly blaming someone else for the loss of the Jets and Nordiques. (I know you did not, Bridget, but please bear with me on a side-rant.)
All Winnipeg and Quebec City had to do to save their franchises was to build new arenas. Neither was sold in the dead of night. Each city had ample opportunity to step forward, put up a building and lock its team into a long-term lease. Neither did. Neither came close. And that is because neither the local nor provincial governments in Manitoba and Quebec showed any willingness to lead the process of financing a new arena, whether through public or private means.
Those teams did not leave, as some say, because the NHL economic system was too much for small markets such as Winnipeg and Quebec to bear. That likely would be true today, but it was not then. The Jets' final-season roster included Teemu Selanne, Keith Tkachuk, Alexei Zhamnov and Nikolai Khabibulin. The final Nordiques were a year away from winning the Stanley Cup. Each roster was plenty good enough to be competitive.
Plain and simple, those teams left because of a lack of leadership to save them.
A month ago, Winnipeg finally got around to building a new arena, but it has only an AHL team to house. If that arena had been built eight years earlier, the Jets still would be there. But it took leaders eight years to realize a building that was a half-century old did not suit the needs of the modern sports and entertainment industry.
How in the name of Dale Hawerchuk is that someone else's fault?
Q: Hi, Dejan, I just thought I'd let you get a feel for the atmosphere north of the border in this time of no hockey.
Canadians in the Hamilton/Toronto area are taking it quite badly and, in my opinion, quite selfishly. The Maple Leafs are king here. While listening to the radio the other night, there was a young gentleman pontificating on why it was unfair for the Maple Leafs to be shut out when they fill the arena every night and don't have any money problems. He then cited all the American teams as a reason why the lockout happened in the first place.
I must say that it is surprising and disappointing to me that the fans in this area are not the slightest bit interested in fixing a broken system. I realize that not everyone is a Penguins fan, but I think it is extremely shortsighted not to take into consideration the fates of the Nordiques and Jets who were not American teams and who experienced the same difficulties that the Penguins are now facing.
Also, a couple of weeks ago, someone wrote to you and asked why there was no hockey advertising during the lockout. I believe it was Molson here that did a commercial to the Culture Club song "Do you really want to hurt me?" and asked hockey to come back soon. Thought you might like that.
Bridget Croyle of Hamilton, Ontario
--------
KOVACEVIC: I would like listening to Culture Club under no circumstances, but thanks for the tidbit, Bridget.
Actually, if you canvas the various newspaper Web sites across the continent during this lockout, you will find that opinions on it are formed almost exclusively by the fate of the local club there.
In New York and Toronto, for example, there seems to be a general acceptance that the status quo is just fine. This undoubtedly is because the Rangers and Maple Leafs had no trouble with hockey's economics and because the mind-set inherent in following those teams becomes shaped a certain way. Tune into Toronto's 590-AM, and you are likely to hear callers citing a whole list of star players from around the league they feel the Leafs should pursue. In New York, it is even worse, where the callers act as if it is their birthright to be able to pluck stars away from the poor teams.
This is understandable, though. Even if the Rangers and Maple Leafs have had an epic lack of success -- one Stanley Cup between them from 1968 on -- their followers have been spoiled in getting what they want on a short-term basis. Why would they want to give that up? Why would they want to be on even footing with Nashville and Carolina? Why would they want to fret over the day they might have to watch Mats Sundin leave for another city for more money?
Oh, and a final point: I grow weary of hearing Canadians incessantly blaming someone else for the loss of the Jets and Nordiques. (I know you did not, Bridget, but please bear with me on a side-rant.)
All Winnipeg and Quebec City had to do to save their franchises was to build new arenas. Neither was sold in the dead of night. Each city had ample opportunity to step forward, put up a building and lock its team into a long-term lease. Neither did. Neither came close. And that is because neither the local nor provincial governments in Manitoba and Quebec showed any willingness to lead the process of financing a new arena, whether through public or private means.
Those teams did not leave, as some say, because the NHL economic system was too much for small markets such as Winnipeg and Quebec to bear. That likely would be true today, but it was not then. The Jets' final-season roster included Teemu Selanne, Keith Tkachuk, Alexei Zhamnov and Nikolai Khabibulin. The final Nordiques were a year away from winning the Stanley Cup. Each roster was plenty good enough to be competitive.
Plain and simple, those teams left because of a lack of leadership to save them.
A month ago, Winnipeg finally got around to building a new arena, but it has only an AHL team to house. If that arena had been built eight years earlier, the Jets still would be there. But it took leaders eight years to realize a building that was a half-century old did not suit the needs of the modern sports and entertainment industry.
How in the name of Dale Hawerchuk is that someone else's fault?