Monday, February 16, 2015

Is the NHL heading to Vegas?

A friend of mine recently asked me if I had heard about the Las Vegas ticket drive that opened on February 10, and what I knew about the NHL planning to place a team in there. To be honest, at the time, I didn't know that much. I knew about the rumors and about the ticket drive, but I was not sure how this would really all come together. However, I have since dug deep to give you everything I could find.

The Owners
Those of you who keep tabs on NHL rumblings via hockey news or the Twitterverse know that Las Vegas has been mentioned as a possible site since the whole Phoenix Arizona Coyotes debacle was being settled. Although Las Vegas was not the frontrunner in that race, things have definitely taken a turn since then. William Foley, a Florida millionaire businessman who owns an insurance and mortgage company, has stepped forward with the Maloof family, brothers Joe and Gavin are former owners of the NBA team the Sacramento Kings and currently are minority owners who run the Palms Resort Casino in Las Vegas, as the owners for the proposed Las Vegas NHL team. 

Foley fondly recalled how he had played pond hockey in Ottawa as a youth when his father, who was in the US Air Force, was stationed there to Kevin Allen of USA Today. This is where Foley developed his love for the game and his desire to own an NHL team. And Foley is extremely serious in this endeavor as he has already acquired Wayne Gretzky as an unofficial advisor. The two have been friends and business partners, but there have been no firm details as to exactly what role The Great One has played in all of this and will play if things do progress the way Foley and the Maloofs want. Moreover, Foley has already been talking like an owner. According to Ed Graney of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Foley promised, "We are going to bring a winner here. I'm going to make it easy on people to support this team, because we're going to win." He does not even has a team yet, and he is already promising wins! Maybe that's easier to do when you don't have a roster?

The Arena
MGM Resorts International and Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG) have teamed to build an arena that began construction in May 2014 and is projected to be completed in April 2016. It will seat 20,000 and sits behind the New York-New York and Monte Carlo hotels.

What Is Happening Now
Foley and his group opened a ticket drive on February 10th with the goal to sell 10,000 season tickets ranging from $150-$900. This was an effort to demonstrate that Las Vegas could indeed support a fanbase, which will be discussed in a later section. Foley's group has reported that they reached half their goal in the first two days of the drive. If you are interested in purchasing season tickets, you can click the link here. You will receive a refund if a team never comes to fruition.

The official NHL stance is that they are NOT looking at expansion or making any promises about bringing a team to Las Vegas. However, they are keeping a very close eye on what is happening with the ticket drive. In fact, NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman not only attended the ticket drive, but he also spoke. He did reiterate the company line about no guarantees, but it is hard not to draw any conclusions from his presence at the event. Although, he might have been there to get some new shoes after being spotted at the White House sporting some truly awful ones earlier this month.

ESPN's Scott Burnside did report Bettman's observation, "There was a big turnout and a high level of enthusiasm." This would indeed add more fuel to that fire that although the NHL continues to tow the company line of no action being taken, there is obviously a great interest from the head office to really take a team coming to Las Vegas seriously. Considering that Bettman views the ticket drive as having "a big turnout" and that there is "a high level of enthusiasm," I believe that he is very keen on the idea and definitely sees that the worries about the fan base may not be as great as once believed. There will not be any more ticket drives because the NHL feels that they already have a pretty good idea of what the market is like in other potential cities.

So What Does All This Mean?
In Kevin Allen's article on the ticket drive, Bettman is quoted as saying, "You need a good market, stadium or arena and ownership. All three better be good." So far Las Vegas has the ownership with an arena underway, and they are trying to prove a good market. Again, the NHL is not actively seeking to expand or relocate, but Foley and his group are definitely making it difficult to ignore what is happening in Las Vegas. The issues at hand are: who the fan base really is; expansion vs. relocation; a decision whether to enter a smaller media market; and other cities that might make more sense.

The Fan Base
Because of the nature of Las Vegas, there are questions as to whether the city can support a professional sport, especially a hockey team. This was the whole point of the ticket drive, after all. If you look around the NHL and see what teams are doing well financially over which teams are struggling to turn a profit, you will find that those teams that can sellout games on a nightly basis are the ones that are making money. Teams that cannot sellout the majority of their games continue to bleed out money every year. The league is a gate-dependent economy, meaning that teams need fans to pack a house on a regular basis in order to survive financially. The city of Las Vegas has a population of just over 600,000 but draws from a population of approximately 2.2 million. Las Vegas also receives over forty million visitors every year. Is it realistic to expect to sell 10,000 or more season tickets? And who are you selling them to?

Upon hearing of the idea of expansion in Las Vegas, ESPN's Scott Burnside wrote an article in which he pondered, "With so many people working so many different shifts, would the ability of fans to attend games be affected?" Although he doesn't specify, I'm guessing Burnside is talking about casino workers and taxi drivers. This is true. The city is bustling mostly at nights and on weekends, which would be key work hours for these types of workers, and would most definitely interfere with their ability to attend games.

And more than just availability, there is a question of whether or not Las Vegas natives have disposable income for season tickets. In Kevin Allen's article from USA Today, he interviewed John Vrooman, a sports economy professor at Vanderbilt University, who stated, "The underlying financial structure of Vegas is fragile. Almost one-half of the home mortgages are still under water." Vrooman points out that there are a lot of people who may not have the means to purchase tickets. This definitely goes against any optimism for a fan base.

In that same article mentioned above, Burnside also dismisses the possibility that Las Vegas could support a team because of "the notion that Vegas casinos would buy large blocks of tickets to give away to fans runs against casino practice, which is to keep patrons in your own building rather than send them elsewhere." Casinos may wish to keep you on their premises, and they may be hesitant to send you away from their premises instead of mindlessly giving away all your hard-earned money in the slot machines and table games. However, I don't completely buy into this casino angle because casinos focus heavily on customer service. There are so many options when it comes to dining, shows, and clubs, and everyone wants to go to the newest and/or most popular places. Casinos know that they may not have exactly what their clientele want at that moment, and they do try to keep patrons within the properties associated within the ownership. However, it is not unheard of for the Bellagio to accommodate a guest who wants to get tickets to the Blue Man Group, which is at the Venetian, a hotel not within the Bellagio's network. They do it because that is the only place to see that show and know that giving patrons what they want is how to keep them coming back. Burnside does hit on an important note though. Any team that comes to Las Vegas, not just a hockey team, is going to need full casino support in order to make the endeavor work.

In Kevin Allen's article, he also talked to Bob Strumm, a former NHL team executive and former manager of the minor league hockey team the Las Vegas Thunder. Strumm indicated that the casinos are going to be key because sellouts are going to be crucial to success. "People here in Vegas only want to go if you can't get a ticket," he said. "You want to go where you have to know someone to get a ticket. That's the identity of Vegas when it comes to tickets." Perhaps casinos buying blocks of tickets for packages and the like will be exactly what needs to be done.

It also may become exclusive with the launch of the Maloofs' Las Vegas Founding 50. Allen reports that this those who join the group and are able to sell sixty season tickets will be on the team's advisory board. In fact, this proved so popular that it has expanded to become the Founding 75 and includes celebrities such as Daniel Negreanu, a poker legend, and boxing champion Floyd Mayweather, Jr. With this type of star power, the hockey game may be a hot ticket in town.

The casinos are also a resource that Foley and his group should fully utilize to their advantage as well. TSN's Rick Westhead interviewed Don Logan, president and chief operating officer of the Las Vegas 51s, a minor league baseball team, who reiterated the idea that success for any sports team will depend heavily on casino involvement. "These are properties with deep-rooted, sophisticated networks," Logan said. "They know who the fans are, who has the disposable income and the ability to come to Las Vegas. It's the most well-equipped marketing industry in the world." This is incredibly true. Do you often wonder why those deals the casinos mail you just seem so perfectly tailored for you? That's because the casinos know exactly how much you spend and what types of things you like to do. The casinos would be able to tap into their resources to distinguish the hockey fans and direct them towards Foley and his group.

But enough about the casinos. What Foley and his group are banking on are businesses in the area and the new residents that Las Vegas is drawing. Foley told Kevin Allen that "his group's marketing research shows there are 130,000 hockey fans, making $55,000 or more, living within 35 miles of downtown Las Vegas." He also revealed that he plans to use Las Vegas's image as a a gambler's mecca to his advantage. "It could bring an identity to Las Vegas, " he said. "Vegas is identified as a gambling city, and if it has an NHL team, the local residents will identify with that team. That's why I think we will have so much support." Foley is hoping with the fact that there is no major professional sports team in town, the locals will begin to identify with this team, especially in a place like Vegas. Here you would be able to put your money on your own team then go watch the game and, hopefully, collect your winnings later.

However, Foley is aware that there is more to Vegas than just the gambling. In an article that ran in the Las Vegas Sun, Foley stated that "A number of software companies, development companies have located in Las Vegas...Those companies and those people who work for those companies, that's our target. Those are the people that we want come to these games." Las Vegas is constantly changing its identity, and it is evolving as more than just a gaming city. There are some new business in town that are starting to plant its roots in Vegas. Foley is also banking on the fact that some of these new transplants are hockey fans and would have an interest in buying tickets. And here is where those concerns about odd works shifts begin to vanish because these people would have more normal business hours. They are employed and have the availability to go to the games.

What's more is that Vegas is evolving to becoming a world city. Dr. Robert E. Lang is a professor of sociology at UNLV and also a leading urban analyst wrote an article about how Las Vegas is beginning to make its mark on the furniture and home design world. Vegas is famous for hosting numerous conventions throughout the year, but one of its biggest showcases is the World Market Center. This is the largest furniture convention in the world. Along with this, there are year round trade shows, and if Vegas continues to grow this type of convention, it would not be long before design centers start to flourish in the city, which could lead to architectural and design firms establishing bases there as well. In theory, Vegas could become the next Milan.

And Lang notes that it is not just in the furniture market that Vegas can make its mark. The fact that there are so many conventions can be a part of Vegas's identity. It can become a convening city. When you get down to it, conventions are all about making deals. In fact, there are more face-to-face interactions at a Las Vegas convention than on the floors of the New York or London stock exchanges. In fact, Lang suggests that "Las Vegas is a place where you can, and maybe even should, mix business with pleasure." This is a city in which you can not just work hard but play hard too. You always hear how so many business transactions are not always made in the office but on a golf course. Well, Las Vegas hotels are now equipped with those as well. Perhaps you meet a potential business partner or client on the convention floor, you could take him or her over to the hotel for drinks and talk business or play a round of golf. If Lang is right about the potential of Las Vegas becoming a world city, Foley has a new fan base ripe for the taking.

While it may be difficult to establish a loyal fan base in Las Vegas, it is by no means impossible. Foley will need full cooperation from the casinos, at least to begin this venture. If Foley's market research is correct, he could have his fan base of 130,000 which could grow if Las Vegas continues to grow as a city and evolve into a world city.

Expansion vs. Relocation
Even if Foley and his group can prove a viable fan base that can support a team in Las Vegas, there is still a huge question as to how this will be incorporated into the current structure of the NHL. Commissioner Bettman and the owners will need to decide whether to expand the league or to relocate a struggling team. There will need to be a two-thirds majority vote in order to decide upon the fate of incorporating a new team.

Expansion
After the 2013 lockout, the NHL restructured with fourteen teams in the Western Conference and sixteen teams in the Eastern Conference. The commissioner and the owners clearly allowed room for expansion in the Western Conference. Despite what can be said about Gary Bettman and his stewardship, he has expanded the league and placed teams in very non-traditional hockey cities. Yes, not all of those ventures have been a smashing success, but he made it happen. Clearly, Bettman is gunning for expansion because it will add to his legacy of his being an expansionist. His era will be remembered for being able to grow the game in unlikely cities, and yes, lockouts as well. This is why he was so adamant about keeping the Coyotes in Arizona. I believe this is also why Bettman has a personal reason to have a team in Vegas and/or another West Coast city.

Another reason the NHL would push for expansion is that it will collect the expansion fee. Since Charles Wang sold the New York Islanders for $485 million, the expansion fee for a new team to enter the league will run in the ballpark of $450 to $500 million. Rick Westhead reports that many owners expect the expansion fee for Las Vegas to land at roughly $475 million. When the league last expanded in 2000, the Columbus Blue Jackets and the Minnesota Wild each paid an expansion fee of just $80 million. This is a considerable increase in the last fifteen years. Because this fee is not counted toward hockey-related revenue (HRR), the NHL will get the entire fee and not have to share any of it with the players. And if the league does lean towards expansion, they will be collecting this fee not just once, but twice. That's a lot of money on the table that has to be really tempting.

However, that expansion fee could possibly work against the league. That is a lot of money for any potential ownership to acquire and that is only to enter the NHL. This does not account for paying a lease agreement, payroll, etc. If Las Vegas does get into the league and that expansion fee does land at $475 million, this now sets the bar for the second team. The price could even increase if that second team is Quebec City or one in the greater Toronto area (GTA) because it would infringe upon the territorial rights of the Montreal Canadiens or Toronto Maple Leafs. The high expansion fee may set the bar too high for a second team to be able to enter the league, and there will need to be a second team to enter if Las Vegas is to do so.

Relocation
Gary Bettman has already stated many times that relocation is a last resort, but it may be the more logical option. There are already teams in the NHL that are struggling financially, so if there is going to be a Las Vegas team, it may make more sense to relocate one of those teams rather than expand the league. According to Rick Westhead, an owner divulged, "I think the Panthers and Coyotes are going to have to move. I just don't see it working out long-term in either market." Although the Panthers have a long-term lease agreement, the owner pointed out that it would make sound business sense to break the lease and move the team to a more profitable market than to keep a team that is will be going deeper into debt just because there is a lease agreement. Speaking of the Florida Panthers, Greg Wyshynski of Yahoo!'s Puck Daddy reported, "A theory I've heard from more than one connected individual: The Panthers are eventually bought out of their lease by the Quebec ownership and relocated, with the Quebec group getting a smaller relocation fee from the League in exchange for making the Panthers' problem go away for Bettman."Based on this information, if the Panthers are on the move, it would seem that they would continue to stay in the Eastern Conference, and Las Vegas would not figure into the equation at all. This would make more sense because if the Panthers moved to Vegas, that would then squarely put them in the Western Conference which would then create an imbalance between the conferences. A Western Conference team would then have to go to the Eastern Conference, and this would probably be a lot of work rather than simply relocate the Panthers to Quebec, if there is an ownership group in place.

Another team that is struggling financially that is flying a bit under the radar is the Ottawa Senators. Eugene Melnyk is the owner of the Senators and is a pharmaceutical businessman. When Melynk purchased the team in 2003, the team carried significant debt, and currently his business is having some financial struggles. The NHL does have a line of credit based in the US that is extended to all owners at a low interest rate. However, Canadian teams do not currently have access to that line of credit. David Shoalts reported that the NHL's legal team failed to comply with Canadian government regulations when it opened its line of credit last October. It seems that "the Canadian Revenue Agency ruled that the line of credit is offside, perhaps because of how interest payments to a U.S. entity are handled." In the meantime, Melnyk is believed to have a credit interest of more than ten percent, while the line of credit open to the Arizona Coyotes is at least less than eight percent of that. Television deals may keep the Senators afloat, but if the debt continues to mount, especially at the high interest rates, they may be going the way of the Coyotes and Panthers. As of now, the financial struggles are reflected in the player payroll as the Senators rank the third lowest in the NHL. It is possible that this is another team that may be on the move, but again this is an Eastern Conference team, so Quebec City may be the most logical option, barring lots of restructuring within the league. However, it is is within reason to believe that Ottawa could be relocated to Las Vegas because it would then have access to a low interest credit line.

Small Media Market
Another issue that the NHL will have to consider is that Las Vegas is a small media market. It is most comparable to that in Buffalo, New York. When the Atlanta Thrashers had to relocate to Winnipeg, the team moved to another small media market. The league will have to decide whether they want to do this again. If another city with a larger market emerges, it may be more enticing than Las Vegas.

Other Cities That Make More Sense
As discussed above, it is not as simple as there will be a team in Las Vegas. There are a lot of factors to consider between expansion and relocation. And at that, there may be other cities that would be a more logical place to be added or relocated to than Las Vegas. For example, Quebec City as mentioned above. There is a new arena being built, the Quebecor Arena, but there is no ownership currently in place. Quebec City once was home to the Quebec Nordiques, who were forced to move because the Canadian dollar in the mid-1990s had weakened substantially in comparison to the American dollar and not because of lack of interest. (The problem here is that while customers would pay the Nordiques in Canadian money, all payroll and expenses were paid out in American dollars.) Quebec City does infringe on Montreal Canadiens territory, but there are enough fans within the area to support two teams. If Quebec City can put forth an ownership group, they would most likely be a top contender in expansion or relocation.

The Greater Toronto Area (GTA) is another place that would be a viable place for hockey to thrive even with the presence of the Toronto Maple Leafs. According to a study by Neil Paine, Toronto has the largest avid hockey fan base of just over five million. In fact, "[e]ven if the new Toronto franchise lures just 20 percent of the area's hockey enthusiasts away from the franchise, the expansion club would instantly have about as many devotees as the Chicago Blackhawks, Los Angeles Kings or Calgary Flames." This would make Canadian cities like Kingston, Halifax, Moncton, Sherbrooke, or Sudbury more viable than Las Vegas in terms of fan bases. However, from what I've heard on Toronto sports radio, the problem is that they are at a cross roads in terms of building an arena and obtaining an ownership group. There have been many city meetings to discuss raising taxes to pay for a new arena in an effort to lure a new NHL team, but this will require hundreds of millions of dollars with no guarantee of obtaining a team. While there is definite interest, citizens are hesitant to make such a huge commitment without some sort of promise from the NHL of a team. Of course, the league would never make any such overtures. Those who want to build an arena argue that they have to take the risk because there is no way the NHL would seriously consider the GTA if you promise that a new arena can be built in five years time. Proponents believe that it would be far easier to persuade Bettman and the owners if there is already an empty arena ready to welcome a new team. In any case, they remain at a stand still, but the potential of a successful franchise in the GTA is undeniable.

What Would It Be Like if There Were a Las Vegas Team?
Given the glitz and glamour of Las Vegas, I am pretty sure that this would be one of the best places to watch a game. In Kevin Allen's article, Brett Hauer, a former Las Vegas Thunder player, recalls, "You skated out through a big slot machine. And the AC/DC (Thunderstruck) was playing." How cool is that? And this was for a minor league team, so you can only imagine what it would be like for a professional hockey team. With all the advances in technology and showmanship, I'm sure that Las Vegas would definitely make every game a big event. Not to mention, they might even be able to swing some high-profile celebrities to sing the anthems every now and again.

Players might enjoy a very nice home-ice advantage as well. Bob Strumm who had managed the Thunder in the 1990s recalled to Allen, "We only lost two home games one year. The good thing about the NHL is that you have to fly in the night before. I like the chances of an NHL team having a good home record if it comes to Las Vegas."  William Foley has already promised to bring a winner, and he may be right. If Foley's team can achieve what the Thunder did and lose one of the possible forty-one home games, he could very well be bringing in a winning team. Not to mention, there is nothing better to bring in new fans than to have a team that has a strong home record.

Another factor for having a Las Vegas team would be that Foley could possibly lure higher-profile players because Nevada has no state income tax. A lot of players are willing to go to even a losing Florida Panthers precisely because of the fact that there is no state income tax. If Las Vegas were to enter the league, there may be high-profile players who may be interested in the financial aspect of the contract.

Bonus Section
Since this is a much longer blog than usual, I am rewarding you with a little extra information that I was able to find. According to Elliotte Friedman who interviewed William Foley on Hockey Night in Canada, Foley has a proposed name for the team. Although the team will be in Las Vegas, he is more partial to naming the team Nevada. He also would like to name the team The Black Knights. He told Friedman, "I love the name Black Knights because I was a West Point guy, went to Army, it's close to my heart... And the black knight, many people don't know this, is actually the good knight. And I think that Black Knights would be a good name." However, Foley does plan to hold a Name the Team contest if he is awarded a team. Although he is partial to the Black Knights, he is planning on allowing the fans to weigh in on a name. This is probably a smart idea in order to drum up interest in the team.

Now, you probably know much more than you want to about whether or not Las Vegas will or will not be hosting an NHL team. Although there is a very serious push to bring a team there, it is going to take some time to really hammer out what is going to happen in terms of how to make it happen. I have a feeling that if the league can gain another city to also put forth a team, this will happen because there is far too much money on the table for Bettman to walk away from. We'll just have to continue to wait and see what happens.

Sunday, February 8, 2015

Putting Some Perspective on the Los Angeles Kings

For all those Los Angeles Kings fans out there, do NOT hit the panic button. Well, only maybe a little. As those who read my blogs know, I am a Kings fan, so let me speak to you directly. I think we all have to accept the fact that there is a good chance that our beloved team will not be back-to-back Stanley Cup champions. I know it's hard to accept, but it is going to be okay. Let's think about the big picture.

This season has not gone the way we, the fans, nor the Kings organization had hoped. Obviously, there have been major problems on defense. First, Willie Mitchell, a vital piece to the defense, had to be moved. This was definitely a rational decision at the time. With his contract ending and his salary demand rising along with the fact that he is thirty-seven, it made sense to depend on Drew Doughty, Slava Voynov, Robyn Regehr, Alec Martinez, and Matt Greene along with developing some rookies. After all, the Los Angeles Kings have always had a solid defense. This was probably the biggest roster change heading into this season. However, Willie Mitchell had missed parts of the previous season due to injury, so this was something that the coaches most likely felt they knew how to work around.

The second blow to the current Kings defense was definitely losing Slava Voynov at the end of October because of the domestic violence charges. Do not misunderstand me when I write this because domestic violence is a very serious issue, but Voynov's indefinite suspension by the league is a direct result of the blowout from the NFL's Ray Rice incident. I believe this is true because Semyon Varlamov, goaltender of the Colorado Avalanche, faced domestic violence charges at the end of October of 2013. He was allowed to immediately rejoin the team after being released from jail and even went on to compete in the Olympics. Varlamov's charges were dropped after prosecutors did not feel they possessed enough evidence to pursue the case. At the time, the NHL took a passive stance, and at the time of the arrest, the league decided to wait to see if the case would be taken to court. With Voynov, Bettman took immediate action to suspend the defenseman until the matter had been settled. Although the Ray Rice, Semyon Varlamov, and Slava Voynov are all different, it is clear that the highly publicized three-ring circus of the Ray Rice incident has made its impact on all sports leagues in its handling of domestic violence. I think Bettman did the right thing in this instance to suspend Voynov, but I also believe that the NHL had better really start to analyze what is the right thing to do in handling these types of situations. This is a topic that can be discussed another time.

So the Kings have already lost Willie Mitchell and Slava Voynov on defense, and it seems that defenseman Alec Martinez will be missing some games at this critical juncture in the season. In a clean hit by the Tampa Bay Lightning's Cedric Paquette, Martinez's head hit the glass pretty hard. This was in the first period, and he never returned to the game. He is currently listed as day-to-day with a concussion. Not that I want any one to be injured but why ANOTHER defenseman? WHY? WHY? Being down three of your top defenseman is a pretty big deal. I do wish Marty a speedy recovery and not to rush coming back because concussions are a very serious matter (again, another topic that can be discussed at a later time), but it is frustrating that this beautiful Kings defense is just being knocked down one by one. The Kings are already fighting a steep, uphill battle just to get into the playoffs, and this really is not helping.

However, there is a bright side to this. Let's look at the big picture. Even if things do not work out this season, Martinez will return. He has not had a career-ending injury. He will recover. Depending on what happens with Voynov's case, he may or may not come back. And even if he does not come back, there is an off-season to work out a trade or something. However, the brightest point is that we have DREW DOUGHTY!!! What Dewy has done is almost unimaginable. He has been such a blessing, and he really needs to be in serious contention for a Norris and maybe even the Hart (although, we all know that defensemen aren't really considered for that). He has been eating up big minutes on a consistent basis, and he has been absolutely tireless. He has really stepped up when the Kings have needed him. This may be his best season yet, and he is only twenty-five years old! Like we didn't already know this, but he is a big star and probably hasn't even hit his peak. We are so very lucky!

Mike Richards. Oh, this makes me so sad because I absolutely adore Richie. I have been a fan of his since his days with the Philadelphia Flyers, so I was ecstatic when they decided to part ways with him. It is heart breaking that he has not been very good this year and has been sent down to the minors. However, I think he just needs to get his confidence back and work out whatever he needs to, and he will return. Maybe his being sent down is just the swift kick in the behind the Kings need just like in 2012 when Lombardi fired Terry Murray. This big change may just be the key to unlocking that inner champion. This may be the wake-up call they need. And to big picture it. In my opinion, Richards was instrumental in the 2012 Stanley Cup win. He brought experience, and he was the reason Jeff Carter and Simon Gagne came to the Kings. Sure Gagne was not a top six forward, but he was still a great player for the team. If it were not for his friendship with Richards who called him and talked him into joining him, Gagne would have signed elsewhere. And when Carter was unhappy in Columbus, it was definitely the friendship with Richards that brought him to Los Angeles. Carter was definitely the last key offensive piece the Kings needed to make their last push into the playoffs and eventually to winning the Cup. I'd also like to believe that Richards had a big part in the defeat of the San Jose Sharks in the 2014 Stanley Cup playoffs. He had been the captain of that Flyers team that became the third team in NHL history to win a series after losing the first three games when they beat the Boston Bruins. Although Richards was never an official captain of the Kings, I would think he was a leader in the locker room, much like St. Louis with the New York Rangers. There are always those players who don't wear a letter but can provide leadership in the room, and I believe Richards is one of those. I am not trying to undermine the great coaching of Darryl Sutter, but I would think that Richards would know what to say and how to convey confidence in his teammates having been in that exact situation once before. So in the big picture, Richards has been a wonderful King, and I have faith in seeing him return!

Lastly, I have seen some people doubting Jonathan Quick. True, he has not been the same 2012 Conn Smythe winner this season, but he has still been a major star. With all the problems on defense, it should not be too much of a surprise to see his numbers dip. Not to mention, since 2012, he has undergone back and wrist surgery after injury. It's hard to tell if that might contribute to his slight slip in play. Once again, let's think big picture. When Quick was coming up through the system, he was not even projected to be a face of the franchise. We were all waiting to bring up Jonathan Bernier. Do you remember that? But then Quick just absolutely stood on his head and shot straight for the stars. He has surpassed all expectations. That 2012 season was dire, and the only reason that the Kings even had a chance to make it into the playoffs was Jonathan Quick. I forget the stat, but there were so many games in which the Kings lost one-goal games because they weren't generating any offense. In fact, the only reason they were even close was because Quick was a brick wall. Unstoppable... or stoppable, depending how you want to look at it. And for those who have lost their faith completely in Quick, do the names Cloutier, Huet, Cechmanek, Ersberg, LaBarbera, and Fukufuji mean anything to you? Do you want to go back to those days? Yeah. I thought so. While Quick has not been at that top 2012 form, he has still been amazing.

The Kings may be facing an uphill battle, but remember this is the team that can defy the odds. The 2012 team became the first team in NHL history to beat the number 1, 2, and 3 seeds in order to make it until the finals. That same team also was the first eighth seed to win the Stanley Cup. The 2014 team was the fourth team to win a series after losing the first three games. That same team went on to become the first team in NHL history to win three consecutive game sevens to enter the finals. With few roster changes over the years, there is every reason to continue to believe that this team can continue to overcome what often seems like the impossible.

So Kings fans, let's be grateful. We have enjoyed seeing the Kings win two Stanley Cups in three years. And so what if the team does not make the playoffs this year. In the long run, I think this is still a great team with a brilliant future. They WILL be back in the playoffs. So in the meantime, we can all do what Bailey says and believe! Plus, we should be really glad that we're not Toronto, Edmonton, or Buffalo. You know, just keep it all in perspective!

Friday, February 6, 2015

Why Is Hockey the Only Major Sport That Allows Fighting?

A classmate from high school first posed this question to me when I was looking for new blog ideas a few months ago. This really stumped me because I didn't really have an adequate answer for it, so I've been letting it stew in the back of my mind since September. A few weeks ago, Daryle "The Guru" Johnson posed the same question on the radio show Zakariah and The Guru on 95.7 The Game. (By the way, they won Weekend Show of 2014, so give them a listen!) That tiny seed of thought continued to fester in my brain. It seems like a common enough question. When I took my best friend to her first hockey game (which was a pre-season game), she was shocked that fighting was allowed but totally enjoyed it. Of all the four major pro sports, why is it that hockey has fighting?

A caller on Zakariah and The Guru suggested that it is because the other sports are not really contact sports. He argued that in baseball and basketball there is no fighting since there is little physical contact among the players to incite a fight. This makes sense to a certain degree. If there is limited physical contact, there is not going to be a lot of tit for tat retaliation in terms of you hit/pushed/shoved me, so I'll do it back and as tempers flare a full-blown fight breaks loose. However, that argument only goes so far. Daryle challenged the caller by pointing out that football is a very physical sport, so why is fighting not allowed then? A very good point, and the caller, nor I, had any real idea how to counter that logic. 

Daryle and my classmate, Jonathan, both suggested that it may have something to do with race. Daryle seemed to imply that he believed that the difference lay between the dominant races of each sport, but he decided to leave his argument for another day. Jonathan also posed a similar thought, "Is it simply because viewers get don't get scared when they see white people exhibiting violent behavior against one another?" I think that this is a fair question to ask, and I think that there may be some racial issues behind it considering the historical context of this nation. However, I posit a much simpler reason why football does not allow fighting.


When I was watching this year's Super Bowl, a fight almost did break out between the New England Patriots and the Seattle Seahawks. A lot of the players were pushing and shoving, and a few players got in man-to-man tussles. However, nothing too serious came of it because the referees broke up the fights, as it is, of course, against the rules. This is when it hit me. They do not allow fighting in the NFL not because of race but because of safety. Think about it. There are twenty-two men on the field, plus the other eighty-four men on the sidelines who have no physical barrier to prevent them from rushing the field. And these are football players, so these guys are huge and exceptionally strong specimens of mankind. What I noticed was that if the referees had not stepped in, it looked like it could have turned into a huge, uncontrollable street brawl. In a sport like football when guys are basically trying to maul each other anyway, tempers can flare, and if the teams get involved, things can escalate and become very dangerous very quickly. This is why I believe that football does not allow fighting.

Similarly, basketball has made dramatic changes throughout its league after the Malice in the Palace incident. Again, safety is the key issue for these changes but targeted more at fans than at the players. Basketball is the one sport that offers an extremely intimate setting in that fans can actually sit right on the court with their favorite players. There is heavy security that serves as a barrier between fan and player but nothing like sitting in raised stands removed from the court. It also should be noted that the ticket prices for the on-court seats are extremely high and usually cater to celebrities. There are also rules that disallow players from coming off the bench in order to incite or join a fight on the court to limit the magnitude of a fight. For the most part, there is only some pushing and shoving and no full-on fisticuffs as in the NHL. Like football, these are rules aimed at safety rather than race.

There is not a lot of fighting in baseball, but there is charging the mound. When a batter feels that a pitcher intentionally hit or almost hit to him, the batter and/or his teammates will rush the field. Either the batter and pitcher will duke it out, or it could be a huge team brawl. This does not happen very often, and it is against the rules. There are often fines, suspensions, and ejections for unsportsmanlike conduct that are handed out. However, this does not happen very often and is not quite the throw down the gloves and fight as in hockey.

So what is it that makes hockey so different? Well, the NHL does not actually "allow" hockey in the sense that there are no repercussions. There are five minute penalties given to the players involved and more penalty minutes for other infractions related to the fight. Players may be ejected from the game for unsportsmanlike conduct, but this does not usually happen. However, hockey is different from the other sports in one very important way. Once two players decide to fight, the referees let the players to do so and wait until it is over to hand out the penalties. It is in this context that hockey "allows" for fighting. So why is that?

There are several reasons why hockey exists in hockey, and I'm not going to get into all that because it doesn't quite tie directly into why hockey is the only major sport that accommodates for fighting. I think Jonathan touches on this when he asks, "Why is fighting, like punching each other in the face repeatedly not only ok, but celebrated, in hockey, and so so so far away from OK in other sports, esp bball and fball?" The key word is "celebrate." That is exactly what hockey does. It celebrates the fighter.

There is a lot of controversy about whether or not fighting should or should not be in the NHL, but the truth is hockey celebrates the fighter. Hockey has two kinds of players: the skilled players who can dominate at a position and the player with heart who has to literally fight in order to be able to play in the league. For every Sidney Crosby, there is a John Scott. As hockey fans, we love to root for those guys who put it all on the line night after night and try to give their team the edge. There is a great respect for those players who may not be making the highlight reel every night but find other ways to contribute. They reach deep within themselves and play with such heart that it is hard not to love them. Hockey allows for this type of player to exist.

I read an article about Bobby Farnham that discusses this idea. Nate Scott interviewed NHL hopeful Bobby Farnham who plays for the Pittsburgh Penguins and explores the role of the fighter in hockey. Scott puts forward the idea that "[i]t isn't just about protecting the stars really, but more so about allowing non-stars to stay in the game." Back in the day, for every Wayne Gretzky there was a Marty McSorley who would act as his bodyguard to allow the Great One to do what he did best. The game has changed since then, and the role of enforcer is not quite as brutal. There is still an enforcer, but he is more of a pesky player rather than bodyguard. Case in point is Bobby Farnham. Right now he is struggling to make it into the NHL and is being shuttled back and forth between the Penguins and its minor league affiliate, the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton Penguins. He does not possess enough talent to be a goal scorer, but he is quick and knows how to get under the skin of his opponents in an effort to draw a penalty, which can give his the team the opportunity to win. He will not run from a fight despite the fact he is only 5'10" and roughly 188 pounds. Right now, he has not earned a roster spot to stay in the NHL, but he is trying to make an impression to stay. What is even more impressive is that his family owns a grocery-store chain, and he received a degree from Brown University. He does not have to try to fight every night to justify a roster spot. In the AHL (the minor league), there is no team plane, luxury hotels, and fancy meals. There are buses, motels, and pizza. Not exactly the high life. Farnham chooses this life because he has a passion for the sport and knows that this is his only way in. Hockey celebrates the Bobby Farnhams.

Another example of hockey celebrating the fighters, the non-stars, is the documentary The Chiefs. The Laval Chiefs take their name from the infamous hockey movie Slapshot. The documentary illustrates the life of the semi-pro. These are the real fighters. These leagues are made up of players who do not possess the talent to play in the NHL, AHL, nor ECHL (the league below the minor league), but they still have the desire to make it into the NHL. They do not make much money from the team and find revenue from other places. Those who cannot afford their own place live in a converted apartment inside the arena where they play. It is most definitely not the glitz of even the AHL, but these players are trying to live their dreams. In games, fights seem to break out quite often, and these teams have loyal, diehard fans just like any other sports team. The fans support their teams and are proud of them. I don't think that these types of leagues would exist if it weren't for the fact that hockey celebrates the fighter.

This post would not be complete without explaining that there is a talent to fighting. Brandon Prust of the Montreal Canadiens recently contributed to Derek Jeter's The Players' Tribune on his experiences in his article "Why We Fight." He describes his realization that he needed to make a choice in order to fulfill his dream of being in the NHL. He remembers, "I had a big problem. I was a walk-on for the London Knights and I wasn't as good as the skill players, but I also wasn't much of a fighter. I realized that I had to add something to my game in order to stand out." Like Farnham, Prust decided to learn how to fight. This may sound weird, but there is an art to the hockey fight. He explains, "[T]his isn't a normal street fight. We're on skates and we have big baggy jerseys that can be pulled over our heads. A ton of physics that goes into it...the balance and leverage and grips." Hockey celebrates the fighter because he is not just a goon throwing out punches. These guys have to really learn how to fight, much like a boxer, but they also have to factor in the ice. Most of the time there is a veteran on the team or an alumnus associated with the team who is willing to teach a younger player how to fight. When George Parros was coming up through the Los Angeles Kings organization, Marty McSorley who was an analyst for the team at the time showed him the ropes. So just as Sidney Crosby took that summer to perfect his face-off, fighters like Parros and Prust take the time to learn how to fight in order to best serve their team.

While all the major sports do not allow fighting, it is only hockey that celebrates the fighter. Hockey allows the non-star to fulfill a dream. Fans love the scrappy player because what he may lack in skill he makes up for with heart and passion. I celebrate the fighter because what they do demands respect. They are willing to put it all on the line for the team. As long as there are players who are willing to throw down the gloves to give their team an opportunity to win night after night, hockey will always celebrate the fighter.


Friday, January 16, 2015

The San Jose Sharks: One Hot Mess?

I stumbled upon an interesting article that had been retweeted by San Jose Sharks blogger and insider Kevin Kurz (@KKurzCSN). James Mirtle (@mirtle), a Toronto journalist, described what he believed was a dysfunction relationship within the Sharks organization. He cited to rumors that have been swirling that general manager Doug Wilson and head coach Todd McLellan have been butting heads, which may lead to the coach's dismissal by the end of this season. Mirtle offered the waiving of Adam Burish as an example of how the two have not been getting along. According to Mirtle, McLellan had wanted to utilize Burish more in games, but Wilson wanted to give the younger players more time on the ice and effectively waived Burish to ensure his wish was granted. To make matters worse, Mirtle claimed that Wilson did not even inform Burish personally and had even pretended to help the player by offering to make a favorable trade or move for him. Reading this was very surprising, as it directly pointed to mismanagement of the team.

Later in the day, Kurz issued an article about the relationship between Wilson and McLellan and what exactly happened in terms of the fate of Adam Burish. Kurz reached out to Wilson directly who categorically denied that there were any problems in his relationship with McLellan and that all coaching decisions were entirely up to the head coach. He admitted that while he did not speak to Burish directly about his being waived, he had informed Burish's agent who then informed the player. Wilson also stated that he never tells McLellan how to run the team and that they are on good terms.

As I read these articles, it made me also think about the general manager and head coach dynamic that turned into a complete catastrophe with the San Francisco 49ers organization. I am in no way suggesting that Doug Wilson and Todd McLellan are at odds or that either of them will be fired at the end of the season, but I did began to wonder what may be in store for the Sharks at the end of the season. The team certainly had an interesting summer as they rallied from what could be perceived as an embarrassing exit in the first round of the 2014 Stanley Cup Playoffs. I use the words "could be perceived" because I believe that their defeat looked worse on paper than it actually was.

Let's backtrack a bit. In the first round of the 2014 Stanley Cup Playoffs, the San Jose Sharks were matched against the Los Angeles Kings. The Sharks had an explosive start winning both home games against a lackluster Kings team. By the third game, the Kings had started to regroup and lost to the Sharks in overtime. It was in the fourth game that the Kings returned to their former glorious 2012 Stanley Cup Championship form and went on win the next four games, defeating the Sharks, and eventually winning the Stanley Cup for the second time in three years. It was a historic comeback, and Los Angeles became the fourth team in NHL history to win a playoff series after losing the first three games. The Sharks organization was shocked, and they began what the media dubbed "The Summer of Shame." While this came as a bitter loss to Sharks fans, I believe that is a half glass empty point of view. In the playoffs, the Los Angeles Kings morph into a monster team that steamrolls the competition. They seem to find ways to win the games that truly matter, and when they play in rhythm, they play some beautiful hockey. While it is disappointing to be beaten in the first round to a division rival, it's hard to be too down considering the team went on to become the champions.

From what I've read and heard from Sharks fans during "The Summer of Shame" is that there had been an expectation of change, or at least one really big change to refuel the championship expectations. Immediately following the Sharks exit from the playoffs, speculation started swirling over whether or not Doug Wilson and/or Todd McLellan would return the following season. At the time, I felt certain that at least Wilson would return, only because majority owner Hasso Plattner had stated that he knew relatively little about hockey operations and would rely mostly on his front office. I was unsure whether or not McLellan would return because he made an easy scapegoat for Wilson as to why the team had not met championship or bust expectations. However, I have the uneasy and cynical feeling that Wilson kept McLellan because he could later be blamed if the team did not meet expectations, yet again. Think of it this way, when there needs to be a shake up in management, who is the first to go? In most cases, the head coach is replaced because the general manager is essentially his boss. The only time a general manager would be fired first is if the owner or front office types demand a change. However, the new general manager often will select his own head coach and dismiss the former one. Thus, by staying the status quo, Wilson has the opportunity to dodge a bullet by offering McLellan as a scapegoat.

In any case, Wilson and McLellan returned to command the San Jose Sharks. In terms of the roster, there were few changes of note. They promoted an idea of a "tomorrow team" meaning that while Wilson and McLellan fully expected to continue to make the playoffs, they no longer felt that a Stanley Cup was as imminent. It was a tad confusing, but I think the idea was that rather than focusing on winning the Cup in 2014, the team would make tweaks in order to win the Cup within the next few years. There would be no rebuild like in Edmonton or Calgary, but there would be more focus on acquiring and developing younger talent to replace veterans. The biggest changes to the team were the buyout of Martin Havlat and the release of veteran defenseman Dan Boyle. I felt that Havlat's buyout would be more of an impact in the locker room where the team had difficulty finding the right chemistry than on the ice. I had heard from a few sources in the media that Havlat was notorious for being disliked by other players and the media and was one of the most difficult people to work with. One of the problems with the Sharks is they did not seem to have chemistry in the way great teams do. For instance, the New York Rangers rallied around new teammate Martin St. Louis (who is one of my absolute favorite hockey players) because he knows how to be a leader, and he is such a likeable person. When his mother passed away during their series against the Pittsburgh Penguins, he gave a very moving speech, and on the ice, you could watch his teammates play their hardest for him because he inspired such passion. It may be trite to say, but when players begin to play for each other, that is one of the intangible things that can elevate a team from good to great. The Sharks did not have that type of emotion, and it lead me to wonder from what I had heard about Havlat, if this might be a factor.

The release of Dan Boyle was also a big move for the Sharks in a way because he had been the heart and soul of the defense. However, he was getting older, and if Wilson wanted to promote his "tomorrow team" cutting Boyle fit into that plan. To fill the void, Brent Burns was moved back to defense. I thought this was a particularly wise move because Burns seemed to be a favorite among his teammates with his relaxed attitude and sense of humor. He would also be a young veteran who could mentor the younger defensemen like Matt Irwin and Matt Tennyson. Although Burns had some difficulty adjusting to the Sharks defensive scheme when he first arrived from the Minnesota Wild, I think he has a strong work ethic and wanted to be a central fixture on defense. As an outsider looking in, I felt this was perhaps the best move that Wilson made.

I think what most highlights what could be construed as friction between Wilson and McLellan is the acquisition of John Scott and Tye McGinn. While I would not say that they have a dysfunctional relationship, I believe that they are not necessarily on the same page in terms of how they envision the team. Todd McLellan is an excellent coach, and if he is fired at the end of the season, I believe it will be because he was not a good fit for Wilson's vision of the Sharks and not because he is an inadequate coach. Having come from the Detroit Red Wings, McLellan is familiar with a system that relies on fast skating and very solid defense. It is not to say that the Wings are a soft team because I do not think that at all, but they do not necessarily win their games with pure physical play. However, Doug Wilson seems to be looking at the competition within the Pacific Division and responding to the more physical nature and big bodies that the divisional opponents employ. Here is where the two differ, and it stems from Wilson's acquiring Scott and McGinn on a roster that already has Mike Brown and Raffi Torres.

When I first heard that Tye McGinn was traded from the Philadelphia Flyers to the San Jose Sharks, I was thrilled. I still remember watching McGinn in his first fight with the Flyers. He was a big body who learned how to use his size to his advantage under the tutelage of the Broadstreet Bullies, unafraid of physical play, and had the potential to be at least an average scorer. He's young, which fit the "tomorrow team" theme, and he could continue to learn to be physical with Torres as a mentor. Not to mention, he was the brother of former Shark Jamie McGinn, which could possibly facilitate friendships with his teammates. I recall Jamie being good friends with Logan Couture, so I figured it might help Tye adjust to his new team. Then Wilson brought in John Scott as a free agent. I didn't quite understand this move because he is basically an enforcer (but in the modern way), and the team already had Brown and Torres. However, it was revealed that Torres was injured and would be missing a large chunk of the season, so the move made more sense. I assumed Wilson would adjust the team once Torres returned.

The only thing is that I feel that with a roster that has Brown, Torres, McGinn, and Scott, despite them not all being active, is not quite the team that McLellan is familiar with handling. When you think back on the days when Ben Eager was on the roster, he was a big body who could get physical, but I do not feel that McLellan utilized him in the best capacity nor was exactly sure how. And again, there is nothing wrong with that. He came through a system that relied mostly on speed, the dangerous hands of Pavel Datsyuk, and a shut-down defense. Todd McLellan is a great coach, but with the roster that Wilson has given him, I am wondering is this is the right fit. Either Wilson needs to give McLellan more of the players that fit his scheme or find a coach who utilizes more physical bodies (possibly like now former Toronto Maple Leafs coach Randy Carlyle). So are the San Jose Sharks one hot mess? Absolutely not. I am inclined to believe that Doug Wilson and Todd McLellan do have a good relationship, but I do question whether they see the road to winning as the same road.

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

What I've Realized about the NFL in the Ray Rice Abuse Scandal

Perhaps one of the hottest topics right now is the Ray Rice suspension. For those who haven't heard or taken the time to follow what has happened, let me recap. Ray Rice was a star running back for the Baltimore Ravens and three-time Pro Bowler as well as Super Bowl champion. Up until recently, Rice has been considered a stand-up guy who never had any run-ins with the law or made any crazy, controversial statements. This all changed earlier this year when a security video at a casino showed Rice and his then fiancee, Janay Palmer, enter an elevator, apparently arguing, only to exit with him dragging her unconscious body. Roger Goodell, the commissioner of the NFL, suspended Rice for two games because it violated the player code of conduct clause (yeah, that actually exists). The incident occurred in February, and by March, Ray and Janay married by pushing up their initial wedding date. After some pressure from society about the leniency in Goodell's action or inaction, Rice was then suspended for the maximum six games but remained on the Baltimore Ravens roster. In the early morning hours of Monday, September 8, TMZ obtained the video footage from inside the elevator which depicts the physical altercation that took place between Ray and Janay. As soon as the video surfaced, the NFL suspended Rice indefinitely and the Ravens terminated his contract.

The Beginning and the First Video
When the story first broke and the only evidence was the footage outside of the elevator, the Ravens defended Ray Rice, and head coach John Harbaugh referred to him as a stand-up guy. Many Ravens fans who didn't want to believe that their favorite player could have been caught in a domestic dispute. They wanted to believe that it must have been an accident or misunderstanding. After all, there hadn't been any indication throughout Rice's career or even in his college days that indicated that he had violent tendencies. I was listening to Damon Amendolara (@DAonCBS) on the DA Show on CBS Radio, and I agreed with him that there is nothing wrong with giving your favorite player the benefit of the doubt. For a lot of fans, this was somebody you rooted every Sunday for and watched with wonder as he blew the competition away and almost defied the odds considering his size. I don't think they were necessarily turning a blind eye, but I think those fans just wanted to hear the whole story.

For me, I felt that the facts were: 1. They entered the elevator in a heated debate. 2. Rice exited the elevator while dragging Palmer's body. Because there was a noticeable absence of panic and a need for an ambulance because his fiancee fell unconscious, given those facts, I believed the allegations of abuse. I mean, let's say I was arguing with a friend in an elevator, and if I really didn't touch her, but she lost consciousness and fell on the floor, I would be trying to do CPR, calling for an ambulance, and be in an absolute panic as to what medical condition would have put her in this state. If he had at least been concerned that the supposed love of his life was face-planted on the ground, I might have thought, maybe she tripped or something. Maybe. But he was cool as a cucumber and even kind of nudged the body with his foot. For me, I felt that it was apparent a physical altercation must have occurred inside the elevator which ended with her on the floor. This sure sounds like a domestic violence case, and this is exactly what the police concluded.

Okay, so a player that was once thought of as a good man is now charged with hitting his fiancee, which is definitely not acceptable. And when the NFL was supposed to punish Rice for violating the good conduct clause, Goodell only suspended him two games. This outraged not just sports fans but also society because domestic violence is a cultural problem. Major new sources began to cover the story and weigh in with opinions. It was ridiculous to think that Rice was only being suspended for two games. It was a joke. The NFL appeared to not care about women and did not take domestic abuse seriously. Phil Taylor's column "Message Unsent" in Sports Illustrated's August 4, 2014 issue had an excellent point that "[n]othing in Goodell's words or actions conveyed a sense that he was disgusted. Hows is anyone supposed to believe that the league truly cares about the welfare of its female fans after this? Putting players in pink cleats during Breast Cancer Awareness month suddenly seems like cynical pandering." He is exactly right. Goodell's lenient sentencing for Rice demonstrates that there is a disregard for women. And having players don the pink gear is going to look like nothing more than a farce. This is also conveyed in the NFL's treatment of its cheerleaders who are grossly underpaid and mistreated. I was surprised that in the materials I have come across regarding this topic, only Taylor's column even commented on this fact because the Raiderettes's suit was still pending at the time of this incident. The New York Jets, the Buffalo Bills, and the Cincinnati Bengals cheerleaders are also filing suits, so this is by no means a problem within one organization.

These suits also highlight how the NFL devalues women. In a recent ESPN article about the lawsuit, I learned that the cheerleaders are often not paid on a regular basis and only receive a paycheck at the end of the season. Not to mention, they make far far far less than minimum wage. The Raiderettes are paid $125 per game, which roughly equates to about $5 per hour. However, in July, their pay was increased to $9 per hour. In California, the minimum wage is $12 per hour, and there is a strong push to increase it to $15 per hour. This also does not include payment for the practices three times a week. Nor does it include the other appearances they are obliged to make throughout the season. The women are also expected to pay for any damages in their uniforms. From what I've read about the equipment managers who work directly with the players, they are not responsible for the tears or stains that they may incur while on the field. The teams pay the launderers to fix those items. Further, the women are expected to keep up a team-approved appearance from their own pocket, which includes manicures, pedicures, makeup, and more. The article cites that the cheerleaders are expected to pay for their own cut and color at team-approved salons. For those men who may be reading this, an average cut and color costs anywhere between $100-$200 or even more depending on the salon. I met a man who had been a lawyer then saved enough money to pursue his dream of being a broadcast journalist. Even at the studio, the broadcasters were given the option of having their hair cut at a studio-approved salon for free or at a reduced rate (from what I understood about half of what the salon usually charged). Despite the fact that the NFL is a multi-billion dollar enterprise, cheerleaders are the lowly dregs. What surprised me most in that article though was that the women were subjected to weigh-ins. They are docked pay if they do not keep within a certain acceptable weight limit. I thought that was banished in the days of Gloria Steinem when she went undercover in the Playboy Club. To subject the so-called Football's Fabulous Females to this, just made me sick to my stomach. It's barbaric.

However, what truly hits home to the NFL's disregard for women is the culture of abuse that keeps the cheerleaders in check. According to the ESPN article, the cheerleaders are threatened that they are disposable. If they decide to gain too much wait, miss practice, or do not follow any of the strict rules in place, they are told that it would not be difficult to find a replacement. This culture of intimidation is what is used to ensure that the women stay within the "sisterhood" of cheerleaders. They are lead to believe that they have been chosen to be part of a special sorority but that privilege can be revoked at any time. While the NFL players are given incentives to perform well through bonuses and perks on top of generous salaries, the cheerleaders are bullied into accepting whatever morsels they are given because they are replaceable. And this is where I find any words that Goodell or the NFL offer to be hollow because this culture of misogyny lies within their own organization.

Marriage and the Second Video
While I have no knowledge of the relationship between Janay Palmer and Ray Rice, I don't think that marrying him necessarily proves his innocence. There are those who point to the fact that she married Rice despite the incident as evidence that he must not be abusive because she never would have agreed to wed him in the first place. Well, I don't believe that. First, in some cases of domestic violence, the abuser may express some remorse. He may apologize and promise not to do it again and begin to treat the victim in a better manner. This is often why the victim forgives the abuser and agrees to remain with him. I do not know if that is the case with Palmer and Rice, but it is a known cycle to happen. Second, the marriage was pushed up to an earlier date. Why the rush? Well, I am not a lawyer, but I do know that husbands and wives cannot testify against each other, except under certain circumstances. I am not saying that this is what happened between Palmer and Rice, but it does make me question why the sudden urgency to marry. Weddings usually involve a lot of planning and revolve around a particular date. If there had been a set date, why move it up a few months ahead with little notice, and why at such a particular time shortly after the scandal broke?

With the release of the second video that clearly shows Rice punching Palmer twice, the second hit leaving her unconscious, it was evident that there no longer was any doubt about what happened inside that elevator. The NFL claims to have never seen the video and immediately suspended Rice from indefinitely while the Baltimore Ravens moved forward in terminating their contract with the running back. There are several things that happened at this point that I want to make a comment.

It is important to note that TMZ paid to obtain the video from inside the elevator, not the NFL. This is important because I believe that the NFL either wanted to be able to claim plausible deniability or just did not care enough to find out what really happened. Either way, it continues the idea that women and domestic abuse is not an agenda that the NFL deems notable to pursue. First of all, there had to be a video from inside the elevator. Anyone who has ever been to a casino or seen Ocean's Eleven (the George Clooney one, not the Sinatra one) or CSI: Las Vegas knows that casinos have cameras everywhere, except inside the hotel rooms. Goodell and everyone involved knew there had to be a video. There has been some back and forth as to whether or not the NFL had actually seen the videotape in question, but I don't think that is the point. The fact of the matter is that whether or not it had been seen or not, the NFL is a large enough conglomerate to have had the means to obtain the video and keep it if it had wanted to. Former NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue had the power to cancel the very popular television show Playmakers because he deemed it to be detrimental to the image of the NFL. In my opinion, if a commissioner of the NFL can do that, he can certainly obtain a security videotape from a New Jersey casino, just as TMZ did. I am also inclined to believe that even if the NFL had obtained the videotape from inside the elevator, they may not have actually watched it, so they could claim plausible deniability later. By this I mean, the NFL did not deny that a videotape ever existed, but when they claim that it had never been viewed, they can then go forward in "honestly" saying that they were unaware of the exact nature of what happened in the elevator. In this way, it makes it possible that evidence may have been sent over in a box, which then may have went purposely unopened and unexamined, so they could claim that none of this had ever surfaced in their investigation.

The last thing I want to say is that it should not have taken the second video to surface in order for any action to be taken. If the NFL really wanted to take a stance on domestic abuse, they did too little too late. Of course, the prosecutors also made a slight fumble in letting Ray Rice off so easily, but the NFL is a enormous conglomerate with far-reaching power. It is impossible to ignore it, and they know it. This is why when they could have made a statement they didn't. I don't think they had to suspend him indefinitely right off the bat, but a two-game suspension was a joke. And I say that he should not have necessarily been banned because everyone deserves a second chance. If Rice would go through counseling (and not with Ray Lewis, as he had offered), go through proper legal channels, and truly learn from his mistakes, I think it would be acceptable for him to return, granted there is no history of abuse that is uncovered. But when I look at the enormous fail combined with the culture of intimidation that they subject on their cheerleaders, I begin to realize that the NFL obviously cares little for women. If there is ever a call for feminism, this is it. We should not be living in a world where this type of behavior is acceptable. If those women against feminism really believe that inequality is a myth or that domestic violence doesn't target women, they are so obviously wrong.

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Why I Love Hockey

First, thank you to everyone who has followed me from the beginning. I apologize that I went AWOL for a while, but I am back. I first started this blog at the suggestion of my best friend in the world because she thought it would be a good idea to share my opinions on the internet. I'm pretty sure she just wanted me to stop boring her to death, so you have her to thank for unleashing me onto you. But I really have to thank her for encouraging me to do this because I have found such wonderful people through the blog and on Twitter. I'd like to thank John Harris, Will Moriarty, and the OT Mafia for being like one big extended family. Although I haven't been in touch for a while, none of you have been far from my thoughts. You guys are and have been the best, and I hope that you will forgive me for my absence. Also a special thank you to Chris Townsend who has been so encouraging in the few times that we have met, and I hope that I can give this blog enough momentum to hopefully be a guest on his show. What can I say, a girl can dream, can't she? That being said, let me get started.

A former schoolmate of mine posed this question to me: "Why should I care about hockey?" I responded that it wasn't any business of mine what he should or should not care about, but it got me thinking about why I love hockey. I enjoy sports, and I constantly listen to sports radio. However, of all the sports, it is hockey that has won my heart. For me it all started when I dated a guy in college (of course all roads lead back to a guy) who is an avid LA Kings fan. While we were dating, we went to many Kings games. I found Staples Center to be mesmerizing, and I was instantly sucked into the excitement. My first Kings game was probably in 2003 or so, and it was not a great time in the organization's history. However, I completely fell in love. The game is fast-paced, and it is isn't overly technical. When you compare it to football, it's amazing how little time is actually allocated to making plays, and there are so many stoppages for various reasons. I am in no way saying that football is boring, but it takes a great deal of time and energy to understand the line of scrimmage, all the fouls, etc. Hockey, you basically watch them drive at the opponents' nets, and you don't have to understand all the technicalities at your first game. So I was riveted as I watched Mike Cammalleri, Ziggy Palffy, and Alex Frolov skate across the ice. I was even fortunate enough to watch a win that first time! Palffy easily became my favorite player. While I enjoy football, hockey is just on another level for me. There is a sort of elegance to it that I cannot quite find the words to explain.

But I'm not going to lie. I love the fights! It's not as though I watch just for the fights because that is ridiculous. There is no way to predict a fight, especially in this era, but I enjoy watching two guys duke it out on the ice. I remember when George Parros was coming up with the Kings. I remember my then boyfriend telling me that he was learning to fight from the great Marty McSorley, who was an analyst for the Kings at the time. It was then that I learned about enforcers and the pests. Sean Avery is probably one of my favorites because he was a King. I know that a lot of people think he is a jerk, and he might be. I don't know. I've never met him. However, I find him hilarious. He runs his mouth like an idiot at times. In a pre-season game against the Phoenix Coyotes, Denis Gauthier hit Jeremy Roenick which led to a concussion. I believe Avery went out to retaliate, but Gauthier refused to throw down. In a post-game interview, Avery basically said that it was typical of a French-Canadian to hide behind his visor and pretend to play tough. Teammate Luc Robitaille, a Hall of Famer and most winningest left-winger, was asked to comment since he is from Montreal. Luc replied with something to the effect that this wasn't the first time Avery had said something stupid, and it wasn't going to be the last. While I'm sure there are people who find this offensive, I just had to laugh because it is exactly something that Avery would say in the first place. And the Sean Avery Rule is probably the most inventive way to be such a jerk that the league actually made a rule to prevent it from happening again. For those of you who don't know, before 2008, there was no actual parameters given when screening the goalie. Okay, I'll back up here. Obviously, the main idea of hockey is to get the puck past the goaltender and into the net. In order to make it harder for the goalie to see, the opposing team may place a player in front of him to prevent his line of vision and maybe have another player sneak the puck past and into the net. This is called screening the goalie. Despite the NHL having been formed in 1917, no one had actually decided to stand before a goaltender and wave his arms around like a maniac until Sean Avery of the New York Rangers did just that in front of future Hall-of-Famer and already legendary Martin Brodeur of the New Jersey Devils. It was such an outrageous, yet devilishly ingenious, move that the NHL amended the rule to disallow such action. Here is a video, so you can witness Avery in all his glory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ec_2oKWe2Gw.

However, not all enforcers are like Avery. In fact it wasn't until much later that I learned that enforcers, or goons (like that movie with Stiffler), aren't really goons at all. For example, George Parros has a degree in economics from Princeton University. He may be a tough guy on the ice, but he is very sharp! Another Princeton alum is another former Kings player Kevin Westgarth who received a degree in psychology. He also met his wife, Meagan Cowher, daughter of famed NFL coach Bill Cowher, at the university. Westgarth also played an instrumental role for the NHLPA during the most recent lockout. Despite the fact that he is mostly known for his size and inclination to throw down on the ice, he also understands the complicated mess of a collective bargaining agreement. John Scott who most recently joined the San Jose Sharks is another example. Scott holds an electrical engineering degree from Michigan Tech. Although not exactly an enforcer but does use his size to his advantage, Douglas Murray, formerly of the San Jose Sharks and now with the Montréal Canadiens, has a degree in hotel management from Cornell. When the Sharks played an exhibition game in Germany in 2010, Murray was instrumental in setting up travel itinerary and finding hotels. Despite the fact that many people think these goons are just big morons on the ice, it isn't actually true.

Which leads me to another reason why I love hockey: the players and coaches. The majority of players seem like good people. I'm not saying that they are all angels, but there are many who have good hearts. They know they are fortunate to be making the kind of money they do and also to be living out their childhood dream. For example, when most people think of former Vancouver Canucks head coach John Tortorella, the words "rude," "obnoxious," and "hot-tempered" most likely come to mind. What people don't know that when he isn't in coach-mode (yeah, that's a thing), is that he is a very nice person. I had the opportunity to meet him a couple years ago when he was coach of the New York Rangers, and they came to play the San Jose Sharks. He was at the Tank about 9:30 am or so, which was approximately a couple hours before his team would practice before the game. He was in shorts and an Under Armour type shirt because he was going for a run around the parking lot at the arena. There were a few fans hanging around, and he was very polite. He would autograph anything presented to him, but he asked not to take pictures. Although he didn't give a reason, one could assume, he didn't want a picture of him all sweaty in his jogging outfit to start filling the internet. He was happy to talk to anyone who approached, and he definitely was not the guy you would see in interviews. I also read an article in ESPN (see article here: http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/10922185/former-new-york-ranger-michael-del-zotto-stays-touch-superfan-trades-espn-magazine) about his special connection with a young boy with cerebral palsy. The New York Rangers participate in a charity organization called Garden of Dreams which helps to fulfill the wishes of children who are in need or sick. One lucky Rangers fan was able to attend a practice and game with his family. This child had struck a chord with Tortorella that they continued to keep in touch even after he was fired from the Rangers, and he even paid for an exercise machine that the child needed. Despite his salty disposition in the media, he has a very kind heart.

Another example is Scott Hartnell. He's a bit of a pest on the ice. He can deliver hard hits, but he also scores. He has a very fun-loving personality, and it makes it easy to want to root for a guy like that. While he was playing for the Philadelphia Flyers, a fan noticed that he falls on his own accord a lot. As a joke, the fan started a fall-count on Twitter. Hartnell took notice, and he turned the counter into a charity. He would donate a certain amount for every fall he made that would be spread among three charities that were important to him. He encouraged fans to also donate.

Similarly, Dustin Brown of the LA Kings is known as a hard hitter. Although it is debatable how accurate hit counts are, Brown is often in the top five in the league when it comes to hits. Because of this, he decided to donate $50 for every hit he made for a season. He also challenged fans to donate a per hit amount. This campaign won him an NHL award to honor his charity work. When I hear stories like these, it makes me proud to be a hockey fan. I feel like I'm supporting the good guys. I am in no way saying that there aren't players in other sports who are like this, but I enjoy learning more about the hockey players I love to watch on the ice.

But what I love about hockey most of all is how it makes me feel. Every time I watch a game, I can almost feel the chill of the ice and the excitement in the arena when I attended my first game. Even when I receive the latest issue of The Hockey News or The Fourth Period, I feel more alive. Hockey gives me something to look forward to, and I have something of an obsession for it. I am constantly on the hunt for things I can learn about the sport, its players, its coaches, and its history. With every game, I love rooting for the teams and players. Even as I watched my Los Angeles Kings win the Stanley Cup for the second time in three years, I could not help but feel a bit of my heart crush as I looked at the faces of Dominic Moore, Henrik Lundqvist, and Martin St. Louis of the New York Rangers. As happy as I was for my team and my favorite players, a part of me ached for those who had just been defeated because I feel like I know them. Dominic Moore had a great comeback season after losing his wife just the year before to cancer. Henrik Lundqvist has been such an elite goaltender but has yet to win a Stanley Cup for such a storied franchise, and his career is edging closer to an end. Martin St. Louis is a player who went undrafted but through determination and hard work, he has become one of the greatest scorers and is still seeking another chance at glory. At the same time, I was thrilled to see how elated Marian Gaborik and Robyn Regehr were to finally win that elusive Cup. I could almost feel how ecstatic they must have felt to be able to put their lips to the Cup at long last. Several organizations gave up on Gaborik being the star they needed to win it all, but he proved them wrong. Regehr was so close when he was with the Flames in 2004 but lost and hadn't been as close to winning since. These emotions are what make me love hockey.

What sports do you love? Why do you love them? You can share them in the comments section or tweet them to me @SportingAJenda.

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Fighting in the NHL

This is my most favorite time of the year as the NHL has started up again. I am still wrapping my head around seeing Vinny Lecavalier as second-line center on the Philadelphia Flyers, but it is exciting to see all the new line-ups and just finally watching games that mean something. But part of my excitement is hampered by all this talk of the hot-button issue of fighting in hockey. For those who are unaware, this is a divisive topic in which there really is no middle-ground. Although I have heard persuasive arguments for both sides, I not only prefer fighting in hockey but I also believe there is a place for it.

One of the best arguments that I have heard denouncing fighting hockey is that it is unnecessary in order to win championships is from Drew Remenda, the color analyst for the San Jose Sharks. He used the Detroit Red Wings as the best example for this because they have the longest consecutive playoff appearances to date of twenty-two years. They have eleven Stanley Cup wins, and they have the lowest number of fights when compared to all other teams in the league. Remenda makes an excellent point, and he is absolutely correct when he emphasizes that the Red Wings win because of their fast-skating and incredible stick-handling. But I'd also like to point out that they also have Todd "I Almost Killed a Man" Bertuzzi on the roster. Jordin Tootoo is perhaps the hired gun of the current group, but he doesn't quite fit the image of an enforcer/pest type. And let's not forget that Darren McCarty, Brendan Shanahan, and Martin Lapointe have been big parts of the Red Wings past. However, the Red Wings are the lone team who are able to have success with this system. They are the outlier. It has become far more the norm to utilize one or two players to be the tough guy on the team. These tough guys are more like pests rather than the enforcers in the old days. These pests are intended to rile the other players, throw down the gloves when necessary, but they have to have a more dimensional game. There has been value attached to players like Brandon Prust, Steve Downie, Scott Hartnell, and Steve Ott. They aren't merely hired guns but have to be able to score or offer something other than pure fighting. Thus, fighting has decreased over the years and hasn't always had the same "I'm going to kill you" feel to every scuffle that breaks out on the ice.

One of the arguments for fighting is that fans will not watch hockey without it. Drew Remenda pointed out that hockey fans will continue to watch the games without fighting, but they would not watch it without scoring. That makes sense, but I think this slightly misses the point. Hockey fans will watch hockey because they love the game. Fighting is like the decorations on a cake. They aren't necessary in order to enjoy the cake, but they do make it just a little bit better. Not every game has a fight and that does not make the game any less enjoyable (well, unless your team suffers a heart-breaking loss or gets completely embarrassed). However, fighting can draw in new fans which is what the NHL desperately needs. I am not saying that people will not become fans of hockey because there wasn't a fight, but when there is a fight, people become far more curious about the professional sport that stops in order to allow two players to duke it out where they stand. Suddenly, hockey becomes all that more fascinating. I remember taking a friend to her first hockey game, and she was amazed, "They can just fight like that?" Yes, yes, they can, and I love it. I have also heard people who have brought a friend who has never been to a hockey game before being fascinated and thrilled by seeing a fight. And I have never heard anyone ever say, "Our team won which was great, but there was a fight. That was awful." I guess there must be some people who feel that way, but I have never met them.

An argument against fighting is that it is too dangerous. In my opinion, this is not entirely true. In the majority of fights, the players might have a few cuts and/or bruises on their face or torso but not much more. They usually do not require any extra attention from the trainers because of injuries. What has brought the issue of fighting back in the limelight is that there was a lot of heated reaction after the George Parros-Colton Orr fight in the Toronto Maple Leafs at Montreal Canadiens game which opened the NHL season on October 1. During the fight, Parros tripped and fell head first onto the ice and was trotted off the ice in a stretcher. It was later determined that Parros had suffered a concussion and was required to spend the night in the hospital. All of a sudden, this fight (which had been their second of the night) reignited the debate. However, I think this is a very poor example that simply focused on the outcome. Yes, the fight technically ended because Parros suffered a concussion. However, he fell. He tripped, not punched in the head until knocked unconscious nor intentionally pushed to the ice. This scenario could have also happened if he had tripped from a chip in the ice.

There is far more danger in the (legal) hard hits delivered throughout the game. Studies have proven that the punishment the bodies of hockey players take from hits is what causes concussions far more than fights. The NHL has taken leaps and bounds as compared to other leagues since Sidney Crosby suffered his concussion in 201. I would even argue that had the player not been the Christ-child of hockey, the league would most likely not have been as tenacious in its efforts to protect its players, if they pursued the matter at all. Not only have the rules changed to eliminate the more dangerous plays (i.e. hits from behind), but how players recover from concussions has also changed. Sidney Crosby was the first professional athlete to dictate his return rather than the organization or trainers to simply medically clear him and put him back on the ice. It was a few months after Crosby was cleared to play that he actually returned because he could tell from how he felt that he was not ready. Trainers and doctors have become more willing to allow players to use their own intuition in an effort to help them recover from concussions.

Furthermore, the Blake Geoffrion story also exemplifies why the game of hockey is more dangerous than fighting itself. For those who are unaware, Geoffrion was a player for the Montreal Canadiens who had been playing for its AHL affiliate the Hamilton Bulldogs during the lockout when he suffered a career-ending injury. During a game against the Syracuse Crunch, Geoffrion was skating at full speed along the boards with the puck when Jean-Philippe Cote delivered a legal hip-check which flipped Geoffrion upside-down and in the process Cote accidentally fractured Geoffrion's skull with his skate. Geoffrion had to undergo brain surgery to remove fragments of his skull from his brain and have a plate inserted where the bone was broken. And this was from a legal hit, an inherent danger in hockey. Another example of how hits are more perilous than fights is the infamous Zdeno Chara hit on Max Pacioretty. During a game in the 2010-2011 season, Chara delivered a hard hit to Pacioretty which unfortunately collided him with the stanchion. He suffered from a fractured cervical vertebra and a severe concussion. The hit was deemed to warrant an interference call as well as a game misconduct, and the NHL pursued an investigation to determine if further punishment was necessary. The league ruled that there would be no further reprimand would be warranted because they did not feel Chara intended to hurt Pacioretty and that it seemed that the unfortunate injuries Pacioretty suffered was due more to where on the ice he had been. The league then moved to remove the stanchions from all arenas in an effort to avoid another incident. Although the hit was not within the rules, this injury was incurred from a hit not a fight.

Another danger of the game of hockey is blocking shots. Players sacrifice their bodies in order to stop an opponent's puck from finding the net. In a recent incident, Gregory Campbell of the Boston Bruins broke his leg blocking a slapshot during the Eastern Conference Finals against the Pittsburgh Penguins. Not an injury due to fighting. Matt Greene of the Los Angeles Kings has been known for using his head in order to block shots. In the first round of the 2009 Stanley Cup Playoffs, the Kings were facing the Vancouver Canucks, and in one of the games, the Kings were trying to hold their one-goal lead. Greene dove down on the ice as Alexandre Burrows took a slapshot at the net, but he dove a couple seconds too early. He was completely flat on the ice, and as he turned his head to the right to see where the puck would be coming, he realized it was coming just over his head. As any gritty hockey player would do, he raised his head to stop the puck with his face. He made a conscious decision to stop the puck at all costs because it is the playoffs. Of course, he repeated this same act in a regular season game during the 2011-2012 season, and I'm sure this will not be the last time we will see him do this. Taking slapshots to the head is far worse for your health than any fist coming at you.

To address the issue of whether or not there is a place for fighting in hockey. I believe that there is. Sometimes the fights that occur at the end of blowouts are superfluous, but the majority of fights are intended to rile up the players or to respond to a hit from the other team. Every so often, a team might start a game without energy, and the pest of the team will try to engage in a fight in order to inspire his team to have passion to play. Some critics don't feel that these fights are necessary, but I think if it gets the team going, why not? In an 82-game season, it is difficult to always be running on all-cylinders. If this is going to give you that competitive edge, do it. But where fighting really has a place is responding to the other team. Some teams are more physical than others, but an effective way to limit a team that may be bullying another is to hit back. This sends the message that if you're going to hit us, we're going to hit you back. In a game against the Boston Bruins, Buffalo Sabres goaltender Ryan Miller felt that Milan Lucic had been too physical in his front-of-net play which ended in Lucic crashing into Miller so intensely that he suffered a concussion. Part of the problem is that the incident reached that height because the none of the Sabres players tried to pick a fight with Lucic to send the message that his antics would not be tolerated. This incident also lead to the Sabres acquiring John Scott and Steve Ott to add toughness to the team. The Miller-Lucic incident is exactly why fighting has a place in hockey. Hits are what causes more physical harm to players than fights, and fighting can limit those more dangerous hits that can lead to injury. Lucic kept rushing the net because no one stopped him.

One last point I would like to make is that this is the beginning of the season. There will be more fights during this time of year as younger players desperate to have a spot on the roster may engage in a fight in order to attract the attention of the coach. Sometimes those players who do not necessarily have the talent to be a top goal-scorer will make up for that with the heart they show by demonstrating that they are willing to drop the gloves for the team. They will literally fight for a spot on the team. For example, Hugh Jessiman formerly of the Florida Panthers engaged in a fight in his NHL debut. He had failed to make the team at the beginning of the season but injuries warranted a call up to the majors. In an effort to make an impression on the coach as a bid to keep him on the team, he fought one of the toughest players on the opposing team, Troy Bodie. Although the ploy did not ultimately work, it demonstrates why some players will be anxious for a fight. Last season, Frazer McLaren of the Toronto Maple Leafs and Tye McGinn of the Philadelphia Flyers engaged in fights to begin their debuts with their respective teams in a similar effort to show how they could be useful to their teams.

Although the topic of fighting in hockey will go one to be debated, I strongly feel that it is still necessary to the sport, and I highly enjoy it.