I am a HUGE hockey fan (college and NHL). I guess I haven't really gotten into it a whole lot more than watching the game and checking out stats. I've been seeing a lot of questions/comments on here about his "ignorance", "living in the stone age", etc. where the game is concerned.
Now before I get any stupid remarks like "If you were a REAL hockey fan, you'd know why..." I want to let you know that I genuinely want to know others' opinions and reasons on this matter. I am not interested in your opinion on the level of my love for the game because I don't know much about this. Of course I mean this in the kindest way :) Hey, I've read how some people answer, and it can be pretty mean and disrespectful to the asker.
Like I said, I truly want to get an idea of what's going on. Thanks!!
2007-02-21 16:42:46 · 18 answers · asked by Belle 3 in Sports ➔ Hockey
To "betterhanrating": I like the details in your answer. BUT don't you even think for one second about moving The MN Wild anywhere! We lost the North Stars in 1993 when Norm Green moved them to Dallas. Guess what? At the first Wild home opener Norm says "We should've never left". No S**t! You know that riot two_eighty_eight mentioned? You'd be looking at one here: In the State of Hockey. Oh and by the way in case you forgot, Detroit is known as "Hockey Town." Sorry to sound harsh, but taking hockey away from MN is almost as bad as taking it away from Cananda.
2007-02-21 17:41:52 · update #1
Short answer? Bettman thinks he can "expand" the fan base and all he is really doing is alienating the REAL fans. Oh sure you get some Bandwagon fans but as soon as that team starts to lose they suddenly no longer have fans. In other words he isn't attracting new fans. He is doing the same thing that has been going on for years. Well except that part where he chases the fans off. That is what he is doing to the sport. He is chasing off the real fans in chase of the fair-weather bandwagon fans. Also he wants to "expand" the fan base so he is adding teams. The talent was there for the teams. So now you get diluted talent and now you won't get new fans because they have no interest in the actual game, unless "their" team is winning. Then the goal of putting the teams in the South to "expand the fan base". Well that might not be as bad if he didn't pick such stupid places. You know how popular Nashville, Atlanta, Phoenix, and most Southern Cities are? Although Columbus wasn't the best choice for a Northern City it seems. Yeah I know not too short but that is just the tip. Another thing is the constant rule changes. How can someone get used to the game and learn it when they have new rules to learn every year.
bp I agree with most of what you say but the glowing puck was actually FOX, not the NHL. At that time Fox didn't really know what they were doing. They just really started on sports.
2007-02-22 00:06:53 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, if you were a REAL hockey fan...oh, wait, sorry. lol
I think most of the people who doesn't like Bettman on this site are either Canadians or long-time American NHL fans. Bettman wants to drastically change the rules to promote it, like 1 minute penalties during OT, or phasing out enforcers. To me (being a Canadian), that's not changing the rules to "better" the game, that's changing the game into a circus sport like that trampoline basketball game on Spike TV a few years back. The NHL is more or less fine the way it is. The only reason why people in Atlanta, lets say, aren't watching hockey is because everybody down there watches NASCAR or some other pseudo-sport like that.
And yes, Canadians take it very personally when our game is changed by some American yahoo who doesn't have a clue what he's doing. I'll bet real money that if Bettman changes the rules enough to turn hockey into, again, a circus sport, we will turn that soccer riot in Italy (where one police officer died, by the way) into a day at a sunny beach with the rioting we will cause (maybe even the police officers will join in the passion...).
2007-02-22 00:56:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why do people want to get rid of bettman? Because he's ruining the NHL. The games are decided by referees, the shootout is gimmicky, it's like deciding a baseball game with a homerun derby, he thinks high scoring is the key to the game. He has no idea that real hockey fans like intensity not high scoring. Some of the best games that I've seen in my life were 2 -1 or 3 -2. Those were usually some of the most physical and intense games.
But welcome to the NBA on ice. Where phantom fouls (penalties) are called with every other rush to the net.
2007-02-22 14:26:04 · answer #3 · answered by Guylemieux 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are a number of reasons for why Bettman is not highly regarded, especially in Canada. I think a lot of it stems from two things.
One is playing with part of the tradition of hockey. An example is the elimination of the names of the divisions and conferences to Northwest, Southeast and West and East. They used to be known as Wales, Campbell's, Smythe etc.. These were great hockey traditions as they were considered to be nods to the history of hockey and the predecessors who had helped shape it. Throw in gimmicks like allowing the glowing puck thing and elimination of fighting (which was popular with fans and used to be how the the star players were protected) and it became apparent that Bettman was trying to create an NBA on ice.
The biggest thing, though, for Canadian fans is the loss of the Winnipeg and Quebec franchises. These are great hockey markets that should have teams but just couldn't compete financially in the pre-lockout era, much like Edmonton. Coupled with the fact that they then insisted on expanding into non-hockey markets like Nashville, Florida etc where they are really struggling to simply draw fans and are now contemplating expansion or relocation to places like Las Vegas and Kansas City when Winnipeg and QC could easily support a team now that there is the salary cap, it's just pouring salt on the wound.
When you then consider the lockout over a CBA that Bettman himself had negotiated leading to a loss of a full NHL season, you can see why a lot of people are unhappy with him.
2007-02-22 14:46:22 · answer #4 · answered by CT 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gary Bettman took a once proud league from world dominance to international obscurity. The NHL was a great league before Bettman came in. Here are a few "highlights":
-the creation of the glowing puck on Fox
-lock-out in 1994 cancelling half the season
-the TV contract with OLN/Versus
-the goalie trapezoid
-the new schedule
-the cancelled 2004-2005 season
To the mob: WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE SHUT clueless_nerd UP? HE OBVIOUSLY ISN'T A REAL HOCKEY FAN AND SHOULDN'T BE ANSWERING HOCKEY QUESTIONS! This isn't the first time he's done this.
2007-02-22 11:20:43 · answer #5 · answered by trombass08 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Bettman is a HUGE problem for the NHL and is decreasing its popularity. He has screwed up the schedule and has made physical play difficult to do without getting penalties. The NHL is playing on versus which leads to less people watching and the All-Star game being during the week on versus as well. Half of the NHL fans I know didn't even know when it was going to be until I told them. Not to mention some of his terrible ideas like the glowing puck incident. And now his best new idea is a new type of jersey??? He should be focusing on trying to fix the damage he has caused and bringing fans back to the NHL.
Go Wings!
2007-02-22 01:39:31 · answer #6 · answered by bp236 2 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Because somebody has to be made a scapegoat for the league's problems created PARTIALLY but far from ENTIRELY by Bettman.
Bettman has definitely made mistakes, but in general he is caught between a rock and a hard place in terms of pleasing everyone. Nobody likes what is happening to the league, but it is hard (for me at least) to see what he should have done differently.
Yes, we lost the entire 2004-2005 season, but that situation was created by owners giving players ridiculous salaries of their own free will, then whining they were losing money.
Yes, the contract on Versus is ridiculous, but ESPN thought poker, fly fishing and mountain climbing were more important to promote.
Yes, there is less fighting but the rules regarding that have not changed, teams are deciding it is more important to give a roster spot to a HOCKEY PLAYER.
Yes, there is a shootout, but fans were complaining for years they did not want ties.
Yes, there are more goals because the rules have changed, everyone complained they hated the trap.
Yes, the schedule where you might not even get to see Ovechkin or Crosby on the West Coast is dumb, but there are 30 teams now and you can't see them all 6 times a year.
Yes, there has been too much expansion, but when the Panthers, Ducks, Sharks, etc. first came in the league the buildings were packed and merchandise was selling big time. Now who should go? It's not that simple. People want hockey in Canada where it's hard to do Buisiness. The last 2 cup winners have been expansion teams. The next team thought to move (Pittsburgh) is one of the most exciting teams.
Yes there is a lack of big-name stars, well compared to Gretzky and Lemieux that was going to happen. Crosby and Ovechkin and others need to be promoted, but that responsibility lies with ALL of hockey, not just Bettman.
Personally, I think hockey has far more problems that Bettman, and whether or not I want to get rid of him is moot anyway, it's up to the owners.
2007-02-22 14:17:24 · answer #7 · answered by clueless_nerd 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
There are just not enough good hockey players in the world to fill out 30 NHL teams. Bettman's latest expansion was just a Ponzi scheme. It's just a fact that most players in the NHL today would be just pretty good amateurs back in the original six days. So why should I pay $100 to watch them play? I can pay $10 and see some good CHL hockey. I saw Crosby play for Rimouski, and that was ten bucks well spent.
2007-02-22 01:39:57 · answer #8 · answered by michinoku2001 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
bettman was under david stern in the NBA. there was an opening for the commish job in the NHL in 93, at the time the 2 leagues were very competative in ratings. stern knowing bettman was stupid recommended him for the job because he wanted to get better ratings than the NHL, better ratings= more money. since bettman came around the league has suffered, his ideas are horrible, ex glowing puck, moving games to VS channel which most people dont have instead of network tv that almost everyone has or espn the world wide leader in sports. he even moved this years all-star game to VS. and got about aa hundred times less veiwers than last year(literally). he has turned this league into a laughing stock. hockey has always been my favorite sport. and i think lately college hockey is more popular than the NHL because of what bettman has sone to the league. oh and recently he just signed on to be commish for longer, forgive my lack of enthusiasm
2007-02-22 00:53:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Wow Betterthanrating just might make a worse commisioner than Bettman. I didn't think that was possible. Oh and how many cups is it the Ducks have won?
My main problems with him are the following
- Bungled All Star game. He moved it to Wednesday night so it wouldn't have to "compete" against weekend programs... and also decided to show it on VS.
- VS... enough said
- He has an annoying tendency to let teams move and screw over their fans.
- He had his brain surgically replaced with a deflated basketball in the mid 80s
Most people would also throw in overexpansion of the league. I personally don't think that is a problem, in few years all the teams will be able to have more than one star line again. As long as he doesn't expand anymore
2007-02-22 10:12:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋