Why is Bettmen hated?

[seeinred 1,488]

Other then the fact that we lost 1 year of hockey what was so bad about the lockout?

For some reason, this made me laugh out loud.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Other then the fact that we lost 1 year of hockey what was so bad about the lockout?

Hockey was at its all time low before the lockout, from the business side of things, I think it was worth it. From a financial standpoint the game is much healthier now than it was pre-lockout. Prior to the lockout, there were several smaller market teams that struggled financially. The only one that I recall having any serious issues since the lockout has been Nashville.

We lost a half of a season in 95 as well under Bettman. Two lockouts. A season and a half.

What was so bad about losing a season worth of hockey? Do I really need to explain that? As I said, other pro sports have managed to settle labor disputes without it costing a full season.

Ok, so you say hockey was at an all time low during the latest lockout, at which point Bettman had been commissioner for ten years. So isn't that his fault that the league was in such bad shape? He doesn't take any of the blame for the NHL getting to that point?

[Coolio Mendez 7]

1) you still didn't say if it's adjusted for inflation over the years.

3) You cited the Red Wings ratings beating the pistons, the ratings for 4 Stanley Cup finals games on NBC, and the winter classic game. Yet your statement was that American local television ratings are at their highest ever.

So you still haven't supported that claim. You only mentioned three isolated examples of ratings being up.

4) you claimed that players salaries are at their highest level ever. The article you cited just talks about the raising cap and revenues. Unless I'm missing something, you still haven't supported that claim.

Yes the Winter Classic got good ratings. That hardly means Bettman is doing a great job.

I must not understand what your saying. The average NHL salary is 1.9 million this year. Higher then ever. I'm looking for a more reliable source but in the meantime check this one out.

http://proicehockey.about.com/od/collectiv...hl_salaries.htm

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

I must not understand what your saying. The average NHL salary is 1.9 million this year. Higher then ever. I'm looking for a more reliable source but in the meantime check this one out.

http://proicehockey.about.com/od/collectiv...hl_salaries.htm

I'm just looking for you to cite a legit source to back up your claiim.

The first one you linked to just talked about the raising cap. I didn't see anything about the average salary being the highest it's ever been.

[soultrain 43]

Don't be surprised when you see Nashville moving to Las Vegas in a few years.

i thought it was weird when i went to vegas last year a saw a bunch of avs and kings fans EVERYWHERE! it was a preseason thing...really weirded me out with all the avs fans everywhere and me wearing my wings jacket. vegas is going down, but if they had a team there...i would plan a trip when the wings played. i really would like to do a west coast and follow the wings. vegas would be dope...sorry!

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

His robotic appearance, plus the lockout, plus the fact that hockey has plummetted in ratings with this Versus deal.

All these issues have contributed to his low popularity. Everyone in a position of power is going to be automatically hated, but Bettman has only been able to fuel that fire much like Bud Selig has done in baseball.

The fact that he kept his job after a lockout is also something most people can't stand. He just has unlimited job security, and some just want to see a change and to forget about this guy already.

[StevieY9802 6]

The fact that he kept his job after a lockout is also something most people can't stand. He just has unlimited job security, and some just want to see a change and to forget about this guy already.

Him having such job security gets me a little too. I know the owners want their money but do they not care about the bad parts that he has done? They have a good model in place that gets them their money that just needs tweaking to help out some small market teams so it's not like a new guy would be able to just get rid of all of it. You would think some of the smaller market owners would step up a little.

[Coolio Mendez 7]

1) you still didn't say if it's adjusted for inflation over the years.

3) You cited the Red Wings ratings beating the pistons, the ratings for 4 Stanley Cup finals games on NBC, and the winter classic game. Yet your statement was that American local television ratings are at their highest ever.

So you still haven't supported that claim. You only mentioned three isolated examples of ratings being up.

4) you claimed that players salaries are at their highest level ever. The article you cited just talks about the raising cap and revenues. Unless I'm missing something, you still haven't supported that claim.

Yes the Winter Classic got good ratings. That hardly means Bettman is doing a great job.

I can't specifically find an article stating "The NHL has the highest T.V ratings ever" but i can show you signs of improvement

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratings_for_The_NHL_on_NBC

[McCartyFanForLife 17]

His robotic appearance, plus the lockout, plus the fact that hockey has plummetted in ratings with this Versus deal.

All these issues have contributed to his low popularity. Everyone in a position of power is going to be automatically hated, but Bettman has only been able to fuel that fire much like Bud Selig has done in baseball.

The fact that he kept his job after a lockout is also something most people can't stand. He just has unlimited job security, and some just want to see a change and to forget about this guy already.

HAHA, I loved how he looked like a bobble head doll when he was presenting the Cup to Lidstrom

[joshy207 156]

Bettman is disliked/hated for a lot of reasons, some of them justified, some not.

While the lockouts SUCKED, the second one was vital to the survival of the league. Bettman and the owners knew that but Bob Goodenow (ex-NHLPA head) couldn't see it, or refused to. Goodenow was of the belief that money grows on trees and the owners could continue to pay the players upwards of 75% of their total revenues. Ultimately it was Goodenow's refusal to budge on the Cap issue that cost the NHL a season (as well as his job). Bettman did what was necessary for the league to continue to exist as we knew it. Perhaps Bettman's biggest fault was not demanding the NHL and NHLPA start negotiations sooner than they did--like by a year or two.

Bettman gets blamed for the lack of quality marketing, poor TV ratings, obscure TV networks, rules changes, short suspensions for major incidents, Detroit's geographical location in relation to the rest of the league's clubs, questionable franchise locations, schedules, the economy, the weather, and the war in Iraq. Some of these things he can control. My biggest beef with Bettman is for not having enough "hockey people" in his ear and for not fearing alienating the base of loyal, longtime hockey fans.

It seems for every step forward the league takes, it also takes a step backwards, along with a lot of sideways movement. Placing NHL teams in warm-weather cities that liked cheap-ticket, fight-filled minor league hockey wasn't a well-thought-out move. Eliminating divisional playoffs--THE key to "rivalry" hockey--was a backward step. Moving to VS from ESPN? The league did get a lot more money from the deal, as well as top billing on that network. Unfortunately there was no major push from the league office to get cable networks nationwide to add the channel. So now nobody sees the product. Signing a deal with NBC with no up-front money for the league? Well, nobody else was willing to show games, you have to try something. Keeping Detroit in the West? Look at a map, but first, mark each NHL city with a big X. Count the X's east of Detroit, then the X's to the west. Detroit is West by NHL standards, and as long as the league has been truly geographically split, has always been in the western half. Detroit should not "go back to the east where it belongs".

I'm not a Bettman fan. I can't blame the guy for trying to grow and improve the league, but he has to try smarter. Not harder, smarter. Do what makes sense and listen to the people who know and care.

[Rivalred 630]

HAHA, I loved how he looked like a bobble head doll when he was presenting the Cup to Lidstrom

Seriously, I wanted to bring this up before yet I forgot...

Am I the only one or does anyone else notice that his head shakes a lot? It looks like he may have a medical condition, give it be a pinched nerve or a much more serious neurological disease...

[YoungGuns1340 1]

Hes way too obssessed with making hockey a national sport in the U.S. Thats never going to happen. And the way he goes about it - giving little breaks to s***ty unmarketable teams here and there (or the team that carries the ugly "face of the NHL" for that matter) - makes me want to puke.

[tony 3]

HE HATES CANADA

[Coolio Mendez 7]

Bettman is disliked/hated for a lot of reasons, some of them justified, some not.

While the lockouts SUCKED, the second one was vital to the survival of the league. Bettman and the owners knew that but Bob Goodenow (ex-NHLPA head) couldn't see it, or refused to. Goodenow was of the belief that money grows on trees and the owners could continue to pay the players upwards of 75% of their total revenues. Ultimately it was Goodenow's refusal to budge on the Cap issue that cost the NHL a season (as well as his job). Bettman did what was necessary for the league to continue to exist as we knew it. Perhaps Bettman's biggest fault was not demanding the NHL and NHLPA start negotiations sooner than they did--like by a year or two.

Bettman gets blamed for the lack of quality marketing, poor TV ratings, obscure TV networks, rules changes, short suspensions for major incidents, Detroit's geographical location in relation to the rest of the league's clubs, questionable franchise locations, schedules, the economy, the weather, and the war in Iraq. Some of these things he can control. My biggest beef with Bettman is for not having enough "hockey people" in his ear and for not fearing alienating the base of loyal, longtime hockey fans.

It seems for every step forward the league takes, it also takes a step backwards, along with a lot of sideways movement. Placing NHL teams in warm-weather cities that liked cheap-ticket, fight-filled minor league hockey wasn't a well-thought-out move. Eliminating divisional playoffs--THE key to "rivalry" hockey--was a backward step. Moving to VS from ESPN? The league did get a lot more money from the deal, as well as top billing on that network. Unfortunately there was no major push from the league office to get cable networks nationwide to add the channel. So now nobody sees the product. Signing a deal with NBC with no up-front money for the league? Well, nobody else was willing to show games, you have to try something. Keeping Detroit in the West? Look at a map, but first, mark each NHL city with a big X. Count the X's east of Detroit, then the X's to the west. Detroit is West by NHL standards, and as long as the league has been truly geographically split, has always been in the western half. Detroit should not "go back to the east where it belongs".

I'm not a Bettman fan. I can't blame the guy for trying to grow and improve the league, but he has to try smarter. Not harder, smarter. Do what makes sense and listen to the people who know and care.

:clap:

What people fail to realize is that there are at least 15 teams further east than them: Boston, Buffalo, Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Atlanta, Carolina, Washington, Florida, and Tampa Bay.

Of the Western Conference teams, the Columbus Blue Jackets are actually the furthest east. So Detroit wouldn't even be the 16th team.

HE HATES CANADA

Why you say that?

Edited July 29, 2008 by Coolio Mendez

[jim3033 1]

The year long hiatus of NHL hockey and obvious slanted calls during important games are why I dislike Bettman so. Punk ass fool played himself.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

:clap:

What people fail to realize is that there are at least 15 teams further east than them: Boston, Buffalo, Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Atlanta, Carolina, Washington, Florida, and Tampa Bay.

Of the Western Conference teams, the Columbus Blue Jackets are actually the furthest east. So Detroit wouldn't even be the 16th team.

Why you say that?

Several of those teams should not even exist because of their poor hockey markets.

I would love for the Wings to play in the East.

[Wings_Dynasty 267]

Several of those teams should not even exist because of their poor hockey markets.

I would love for the Wings to play in the East.

DINGDINGDING!!! We have a winner.

[Echolalia 2,961]

The thing is if the nhl is going to succeed as a top sports league in the US, it has to begin to express itself in a more positive manner to "bad hockey markets". Sure we can relocate the Predators, Kings, Panthers, Islanders, Ducks, and any other team to any Canadian city where they're sure to be welcomed, but that would essentially be Bettman admitting defeat as the face of an inferior sport in the US, which is the exact opposite of what we need to do. Transferring these teams to other American cities might not be as bad, but there will still be huge damage done simply by withdrawing a failing team from a city. Especially if we withdraw all the teams that we can argue are failing. Any city who was borderline about a sport when they had a team will surely fall to the other side of the fence if the team is taken away. "Hockey couldn't make it in this city; its inferior, so I'll stick with Nascar", will be the reasoning. Yeah, it seems contradictive to leave a failing team in a city for the good of hockey, but in the long run, if the league can keep chipping away at the borderliners and football diehards, then all these struggling teams can turn into goldmines. If a team leaves the city all together, that kind of goal seems impossible. Its a s***ty situation to be in, one that I think has its roots in bad (or no) research. I think we do need to target markets who don't have a lot of hockey culture, but there's a right way and a wrong way to do it. In the case of Nashville, it was done in the wrong way.

In terms of having no broadcasting and failing to see eye to eye with ESPN, I am fully behind Bettman with his decision to go with VS and NBC. From what I've read (and excuse me, because I can't find any sources, but I do remember reading something to this degree), ESPN was offering a pretty one-sided contract that would essentially limit the growth of the NHL to what ESPN was willing to give us, and for crap money. Bettman didn't agree to the terms and went with VS. Versus is an unproven network still trying to develop. They need the NHL more than the NHL needs them, so Bettman was able to make a more hockey-friendly contract. We don't get the coverage that ESPN is capable of, but we do have more freedom and respect with VS. To target a wider pallate of viewers, Bettman went after NBC for the second half of the year (possibly so not to compete with football). Another decent move, considering we wouldn't stand a chance if it were between NHL and NFL. Which brings me to the Winter Classic, which the nhl has done excellentlly to sell out as much as possible and put hockey on the same field to compete with football (college football, but its a giant step up, nonetheless). He is also targeting marquee teams and players to assure the best type of game possible. The face of the Eastern Conference (and the nhl in general) Crosby vs the Eastern Conference powerhouse Sabres. This year its the upcoming marquee team of the Western Conference vs the love em or hate em Stanley Cup Winners in a historic ballpark. That couldn't have been done better, IMO.

Anyway, Bettman is about bettering the nhl in America, and getting the league in decent competition with the NBA NFL and MLB. Its the type of situation where you're going to run into problems, regardless of how good you do. Its unexplored territory against titans, and I really think Bettman is going about this, for the most part, in the right way.

Sorry for such a long winded post.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

The thing is if the nhl is going to succeed as a top sports league in the US, it has to begin to express itself in a more positive manner to "bad hockey markets". Sure we can relocate the Predators, Kings, Panthers, Islanders, Ducks, and any other team to any Canadian city where they're sure to be welcomed, but that would essentially be Bettman admitting defeat as the face of an inferior sport in the US, which is the exact opposite of what we need to do. Transferring these teams to other American cities might not be as bad, but there will still be huge damage done simply by withdrawing a failing team from a city. Especially if we withdraw all the teams that we can argue are failing. Any city who was borderline about a sport when they had a team will surely fall to the other side of the fence if the team is taken away. "Hockey couldn't make it in this city; its inferior, so I'll stick with Nascar", will be the reasoning. Yeah, it seems contradictive to leave a failing team in a city for the good of hockey, but in the long run, if the league can keep chipping away at the borderliners and football diehards, then all these struggling teams can turn into goldmines. If a team leaves the city all together, that kind of goal seems impossible. Its a s***ty situation to be in, one that I think has its roots in bad (or no) research. I think we do need to target markets who don't have a lot of hockey culture, but there's a right way and a wrong way to do it. In the case of Nashville, it was done in the wrong way.

In terms of having no broadcasting and failing to see eye to eye with ESPN, I am fully behind Bettman with his decision to go with VS and NBC. From what I've read (and excuse me, because I can't find any sources, but I do remember reading something to this degree), ESPN was offering a pretty one-sided contract that would essentially limit the growth of the NHL to what ESPN was willing to give us, and for crap money. Bettman didn't agree to the terms and went with VS. Versus is an unproven network still trying to develop. They need the NHL more than the NHL needs them, so Bettman was able to make a more hockey-friendly contract. We don't get the coverage that ESPN is capable of, but we do have more freedom and respect with VS. To target a wider pallate of viewers, Bettman went after NBC for the second half of the year (possibly so not to compete with football). Another decent move, considering we wouldn't stand a chance if it were between NHL and NFL. Which brings me to the Winter Classic, which the nhl has done excellentlly to sell out as much as possible and put hockey on the same field to compete with football (college football, but its a giant step up, nonetheless). He is also targeting marquee teams and players to assure the best type of game possible. The face of the Eastern Conference (and the nhl in general) Crosby vs the Eastern Conference powerhouse Sabres. This year its the upcoming marquee team of the Western Conference vs the love em or hate em Stanley Cup Winners in a historic ballpark. That couldn't have been done better, IMO.

Anyway, Bettman is about bettering the nhl in America, and getting the league in decent competition with the NBA NFL and MLB. Its the type of situation where you're going to run into problems, regardless of how good you do. Its unexplored territory against titans, and I really think Bettman is going about this, for the most part, in the right way.

Sorry for such a long winded post.

An idea just came to me.

Why doesn't Gary Bettman petition the government to allow Sidney Crosby to be cloned, so that each clone can be donated to every team that plays in a struggling market.

This way, there wouldn't be any more struggling markets.

Problem solved.

[egroen 384]

He has done some good and solved some problems with hockey, but many of those problems were his own creations in the first place. To lose a 1 1/2 seasons during his tenure is simply unacceptable.

Ultimately, he just isn't a hockey guy.

[Coolio Mendez 7]

The thing is if the nhl is going to succeed as a top sports league in the US, it has to begin to express itself in a more positive manner to "bad hockey markets". Sure we can relocate the Predators, Kings, Panthers, Islanders, Ducks, and any other team to any Canadian city where they're sure to be welcomed, but that would essentially be Bettman admitting defeat as the face of an inferior sport in the US, which is the exact opposite of what we need to do. Transferring these teams to other American cities might not be as bad, but there will still be huge damage done simply by withdrawing a failing team from a city. Especially if we withdraw all the teams that we can argue are failing. Any city who was borderline about a sport when they had a team will surely fall to the other side of the fence if the team is taken away. "Hockey couldn't make it in this city; its inferior, so I'll stick with Nascar", will be the reasoning. Yeah, it seems contradictive to leave a failing team in a city for the good of hockey, but in the long run, if the league can keep chipping away at the borderliners and football diehards, then all these struggling teams can turn into goldmines. If a team leaves the city all together, that kind of goal seems impossible. Its a s***ty situation to be in, one that I think has its roots in bad (or no) research. I think we do need to target markets who don't have a lot of hockey culture, but there's a right way and a wrong way to do it. In the case of Nashville, it was done in the wrong way.

In terms of having no broadcasting and failing to see eye to eye with ESPN, I am fully behind Bettman with his decision to go with VS and NBC. From what I've read (and excuse me, because I can't find any sources, but I do remember reading something to this degree), ESPN was offering a pretty one-sided contract that would essentially limit the growth of the NHL to what ESPN was willing to give us, and for crap money. Bettman didn't agree to the terms and went with VS. Versus is an unproven network still trying to develop. They need the NHL more than the NHL needs them, so Bettman was able to make a more hockey-friendly contract. We don't get the coverage that ESPN is capable of, but we do have more freedom and respect with VS. To target a wider pallate of viewers, Bettman went after NBC for the second half of the year (possibly so not to compete with football). Another decent move, considering we wouldn't stand a chance if it were between NHL and NFL. Which brings me to the Winter Classic, which the nhl has done excellentlly to sell out as much as possible and put hockey on the same field to compete with football (college football, but its a giant step up, nonetheless). He is also targeting marquee teams and players to assure the best type of game possible. The face of the Eastern Conference (and the nhl in general) Crosby vs the Eastern Conference powerhouse Sabres. This year its the upcoming marquee team of the Western Conference vs the love em or hate em Stanley Cup Winners in a historic ballpark. That couldn't have been done better, IMO.

Anyway, Bettman is about bettering the nhl in America, and getting the league in decent competition with the NBA NFL and MLB. Its the type of situation where you're going to run into problems, regardless of how good you do. Its unexplored territory against titans, and I really think Bettman is going about this, for the most part, in the right way.

Sorry for such a long winded post.

Beautiful!

[IceMunkee 15]

His lack of passion for the game. His lack of understanding for the game. His incessant bold face lies about what the fans want, in spite of plenty of evidence to the contrary. Like for years when he denied clutching and grabbing was a problem. That he talked to the fans and players and they were content. Then the lockout and he's getting credit for the "new NHL."

or the new schedule "to promote rivalries" when it's really just a ploy for the cheap ass owners to save on travel. And even though the fans made it pretty clear they miss playing teams in the other conferences, they miss seeing the old rivals play, Bettman said they're changing the schedule back "in spite of that the majority of fans like it the way it is."

And in 94, the league may not have been exactly more popular than the NBA, but it was pretty close. Coming off the height of popularity for the sport and a great Stanley Cup finals, Bettman locked the players out in '95. Ten years later, another lockout. At the time the players took all the blame, but they're not the ones making the financial decisions here. It's the owners, and Bettman. Two lockouts in ten years, and a lost season and a half. That's a pretty bad record in my book.

While the owners are responsible for many of the bad decisions made over the years, as commissioner Bettman should be a steward for the game. Leading the owners at times, not just being a patsy for their whims. Particularly when their decisions are motivated by short term or selfish business interests, and not the overall health of the league.

He should have an eye on the long term health of the game, but shows little understanding or love of the sport.

1) you still didn't say if it's adjusted for inflation over the years.

3) You cited the Red Wings ratings beating the pistons, the ratings for 4 Stanley Cup finals games on NBC, and the winter classic game. Yet your statement was that American local television ratings are at their highest ever.

So you still haven't supported that claim. You only mentioned three isolated examples of ratings being up.

4) you claimed that players salaries are at their highest level ever. The article you cited just talks about the raising cap and revenues. Unless I'm missing something, you still haven't supported that claim.

Yes the Winter Classic got good ratings. That hardly means Bettman is doing a great job.

Bettman is to the NHL what Kwami Kilpatrick is to Detroit. He did a few decent things but the bad is so great that it is hard to notice.

I think the only answer one needs is that we lost 1.5 years of hockey due to him. He treats thestrong hockey cities like crap. Makes up ridiculous rules and adjust things to his liking.

Like an earlier post, I don't understand why it is a big deal if a hockey fan never played the game??? Actually that is kind of s***ty to even say. I really enjoyed Ironman, The Hulk, Batman, and Hancock but I have never been a superhero. Sometimes watching hockey with hockey fans that have played can be annoying because we tend to act like we know everything.

Fire Bettman. I don't like him and I will just leave it at that. Harold and NFM have already said everything that could possibly be said.

[Holmstrom96Screens 0]

"Why is Bettmen hated?"

that glowing puck from FOX? anyone remember it from the mid 1990's? Seriously, wtf!!

he did that as one of the techniques to make the NHl more pleasing to Americans audiences. but seriously if you cant see a black puck on white ice.....

I'd also like to add about the 2004 - 2005 lockout, it was the first time since the breakout of the world wide INFLUENZA (flu) PANDEMIC OF 1918 - 1919 that any stanley cup winner was not declared.

Just wanted to bring that up. History will remember the Bettman era for that.....

and the clutching and grabbing wasnt just complained about by hockey fans either. I distinctly remember Mario Lemieux in the 1990's complaning about that too. So it was definitely noticed and complained about by NHL players as well and not just by fans.

[Hockey9019 0]

Because Bettman is a douchebag. Plain and simple.

For anyone here that has met the guy, you would actually understand. Professionalism almost at its worst. Right behind Kwame

[Doggy 130]

Because Bettman is a douchebag. Plain and simple.

For anyone here that has met the guy, you would actually understand. Professionalism almost at its worst. Right behind Kwame

Have you met him? I'd love to hear this story if you have one.