Dabura

Thanks for contributing. Really.

A recent study reports that Elisha Cuthbert has not helped the NHL earn new fans (literally not one new fan). Taking this to be a snarky statement, one member of LGW said, "Oh, what, and Avery hasn't brought in new fans?" This was, of course, a misguided critique, as the study had never argued to the contrary. In fact, it clearly states that Avery is generally good for the the league. When asked to comment, another prominent member of LGW said simply, "Screw Buttman man I've had it they've gone too far this time Avery only helps the league Buttman only hurts it." More details as they become available...

ESPN reports that since Avery's sentencing, no one (literally no one) has been following hockey. On the day that Avery's six-game suspension was enacted, one NHL official, who wished to remain anonymous, lamented the loss of the NHL's biggest, brightest star, saying, "This will be the death of the NHL. Mark my words."

But how do you guys really feel about Cherry?

KILL BETTMAN!!!1111oneoneone

I can guarantee Babs is worrying about this now, as that's his job. I think fans have every right to share in the critical thinking without someone saying, "OMG guys, it's December!" every time the discussion comes up. The Wings' D has been alarmingly shaky. I believe they'll turn it around. However, in order to turn it around, they need to start...well, turning it around. The more they put off turning it around, the less airtight it's ultimately going to be.

Pronger also isn't as popular as Avery, meaning his actions don't grab as much media attention, meaning the bad things he does generally aren't going to damage the league as much as the bad things that Avery does will. I feel like I've explained this quite a few times already...

I'm not saying she "has to be" one of them -- just that she is, and it's a pretty good relationship. Like Harold and I have said several times before, there's a middle ground here, and it's frustrating that a lot of people don't seem to realize that. Just because I'm slamming Avery doesn't mean I think the NHL should become the National Lady Byng League. Just because I'm pointing out Cuthbert's value to the NHL's marketing department doesn't mean I'm a feminist who think she's going to lead the way to the Promised Land. She does good work for the league. The fact that you didn't know she was blogging during the playoffs doesn't make this any less true. In short: grow up.

No, it's not. You think they just let her blog on nhl.com for the hell of it? They let her blog because she's a draw for the league. More than that, she's a stunningly attractive draw who genuinely loves the sport and who appeals to some of the key demographic groups the league is trying to win over. Saying Elisha Cuthbert is of absolutely no importance to the league is the very definition of provincial thinking.

No. Again, work on your reading comprehension. Mors said athletes should never be suspended for what they say. I said that's a crock, and used an NHL player calling another NHL player a "n*****" as food for thought. Mors then tried to draw a comparison to this particular incident with Avery, not really sure why. I played along and basically said, "It's funny you should say that, as Avery's comment actually was, in fact, a pretty pointed one." Note that this is not the same as saying, "Avery basically called a black guy a n*****." Nor is it the same as saying, "I personally find the term, 'sloppy seconds,' offensive and I'm going to let this fact cloud my judgment." Maybe you should read (as in, carefully read all the way through, not glance over and look for hot-button words and phrases) the posts I've made in this thread. I've explained the ins and outs of this particular incident several times already, and I don't really care to do so again.

*sigh*

No. Work on your reading comprehension skills.

I was responding to the poster's argument that athletes should never be suspended based on things they say. My argument was not "What Avery did is like calling someone a n*****." My argument was "That's a really stupid argument." Moreover, the league is not really in a position to say, "Well, you know, we personally don't find that term ('sloppy seconds') especially offensive, so: play on!" It's a good thing LGWers don't run the NHL.

I honestly don't know why so many people here are being so boneheadedly provincial about this incident. It's not difficult to see this as being more than "Elisha Cuthbert's feelings are hurt; Avery is suspended indefinitely." And I've explained why a number of times already. I've also explained why Cuthbert is important to this league. If Sean Avery is going to be praised for putting people in the seats, she should be praised for doing the same -- and doing it without insulting tons of people in the process. The league is trying to court a substantial number of new fans and get them to stay with the sport (i.e. be more than bandwagon fans who only show up for one game because they read a blurb in a tabloid). Things like this may spike interest for a week, but in the long run they will do more harm than good. As for your argument about my "n*****" example being different than this particular incident because it "involves one player referring directly to another player": 1. Avery was pretty clearly targeting Phanuef. 2. What if the person in my example says, "I hate n*****s"? Does the league pat him on the back because "At least he's not referring directly to another player"?

The NHL is a business, not a frat house.

So if someone calls a black NHL player a n***** at a press conference...no big deal? Cool. Hell, there's no need to use an extreme example like that -- because this particular instance is bad enough. Those comments Babs, Ozzie, Drapes and Cheli made are dead-on.

Nah, he'll be back.

It boggles my mind that we've talked about this for 18 pages. The guy's a jackass, he crossed the line, and now he's paying for it. It's really that simple. His own team won't even come to his defense.

Opie, like I said, what Avery did and the implications of this action, combined with his history, make this a very serious matter for the league. A lot of people see this as "just some comment." What I've been trying to show is that this is not just "some comment" and is not about this one isolated incident. Avery is the face of the league to certain demographics. It is with this in mind that the league has tolerated his crap in the past. But now he's gone and crossed the line, saying something that has absolutely no place in hockey. That's really bad news considering the fact that he's an unofficial league representative -- an "ambassador," if you will. So, what he's done reflects poorly not only on him, but also on the league and on the sport at large. Chris Pronger? Pronger doesn't get the kind of attention Avery gets. Generally speaking, an Avery incident like this is guaranteed to get more press than a Pronger elbow.

Again, I'm not saying the NHL should cater to "church ladies" and breed players who "talk boring like a robot." But it also shouldn't embrace over-the-line antics like this. That the league is still a bastard child in the States doesn't suddenly mean it's OK to let Sean Avery do and say whatever he wants. To me, it makes a lot more sense to think the ticket to heightened popularity and respect for the league is not through pimping jackasses who talk trash on women and people with speech impediments, but rather, through implementing smart marketing strategies -- and, crucially, doing so shrewdly. I think the problem with the current "regime" is that it really isn't very smart or savvy when it comes to the kind of marketing I'm talking about.

That's sort of the point, though. Avery has made himself a problem; he's demonstrated he's completely willing to cross the line. Considering the fact that he's one of the most popular guys in the NHL outside of the die-hard hockey fan constituency, that can be more damaging for the league (and hockey in general) than a Pronger elbow.

One of my all-time favorite games. Good god was that fun.

I expect better from you, esteef. That the NHL is at the bottom of the totem pole doesn't mean my ideas have any less weight and that incidents like this one are suddenly OK. If anything, it makes the latter even more deleterious than it otherwise would be (which was sort of my point in the first place). Hell, the trap is one of the reasons the league's at the bottom to begin with. So what are you saying? Not addressing the trap will surely help move the league from the bottom? Again: think, people.

Sean Avery is not inherently bad for the game. And in fact, most of his antics have probably helped the league in its quest to break into new markets, new demographics. However, in terms of that "outreach initiative" (i.e. courting a wider audience, trying to legitimize itself as a heavyweight North American sports league), this particular incident is bad news. That's what people are saying. There are ways the league can earn more fans and respect. It can manufacture some crazily intense rivalries. It can stick some good-looking superstars in fashion magazines. It can find ways to get teams to stop playing the boring-as-hell trap. Those are all reasonable ideas. Condoning calling Elisha Cuthbert "sloppy seconds" at a media Q&A is quite a few steps below those sorts of ideas. In fewer words: it's stupid and offensive. And if you let it go, it could potentially bite you ("you" being the league, and by extension, the sport of hockey) in the ass. Talk about crossover appeal -- the NHL loves Elisha Cuthbert because she's an (absurdly attractive) entertainment star who genuinely loves hockey and who has graciously pimped the NHL on more than one occasion. That's great exposure. You don't want to burn that bridge. And that's saying nothing of corporations, entrepreneurs, and deep pockets in general. They're usually big on "morality clauses" and things of that nature, the point of which is to say: "Be professional and we'll contribute. Be unprofessional and we'll walk (and possibly bury you in the ground, depending on the extent of your screwup)." I can assure you that most corporate suits with vested interests in the league aren't too thrilled about this incident. That's not me being a Bettman apologist, it's just common sense. Contrary to what a lot of people here seem to believe, the league is not in a position to say, "Well, the NFL/NBA/MLB can do it, so why can't we?" It doesn't work that way. If the world of professional North American sports leagues were a court, the NHL would be held in perpetual contempt -- and then some. Think, people. Think.

tmmlol Sammy is clutch.