• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
stevkrause

Sidney Crosby - The most hated player in the NHL

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Hockey has been the Black Sheep of the sporting world in the US. They have looked for ways to get new viewers and this was the answer. A high scoring poster-boy everyone loves to hate that they shove down your throats. Like a David Beckham of hockey. Is it coincidence that scoring has gone through the roof over the last 10 years. No. People don't want to see tight games that end in 2-1 or for that matter 1-1. So they continue to pander to those people who never loved hockey in the first place and continue to change the setting and rules on the existing fans of the game. Shootouts anyone? Ovi-rated and Cindy draw viewers. That is why the 2011 Winter Classic is again with Pittsburgh and not one of the many other teams that are waiting for their frozen chance. Bury your head in the sand if you like, but Crosby is just part of the big corporate machine. Take him out of the equation and Hockey drops right back down in the ratings scale below water polo. It's a shame but it is true.

Read this for fun. Circa 2006.

http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2006/05/17/15645/

I'll let you guess who fills the shoes of the "Controversy part".

I fail to see the problem with most of the points you've made. The scoring is not even close to what it was in the mid 80's early 90's.

The game has to evolve rule wise, I really don't have an issue with the game itself besides the hooking penalties and shootouts so I understand where you're coming from. But you have to make sacrifices to insure a future product, a league isn't just going to survive on past models/success. Hockey is growing as a sport, and in order to grow you have to adjust the game. Every sport has had to change, hockey is not going to be any different.

Marketing is about creating and promoting to new fans, not to cater to the fan that has been watching his whole life. And the league needs new fans in order to grow and be successful, it seems to me a necessary "evil". As long as they don't completely change the on-ice product(ban fighting etc.) I'm ok with almost anything they do to get new fans.

I don't get why people hate the new "bandwagon" fans. As a fan you have to start off at some point, and even though they may be annoying there is still a chance as the season's go by that they will learn the nuances and tradition of the game and become great and loyal fans. And to me that's what a "marketing" campaign should do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it coincidence that scoring has gone through the roof over the last 10 years. No.

Scoring has gone through the roof? Have a missed out on when that happened?

2006 - 7 players with 100+ pt. seasons, leader = 125pts

2007 - 7 players with 100+ pt. seasons, leader = 120pts

2008 - 2 players with 100+ pt. seasons, leader = 112pts

2009 - 3 players with 100+ pt. seasons, leader = 113pts

2010 - 4 players with 100+ pt. seasons, leader = 112pts

This is not a heck of a lot different than where we were 10 years ago and a hell of lot worse in terms of scoring than where the NHL was even less than 15 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scoring has gone through the roof? Have a missed out on when that happened?

2006 - 7 players with 100+ pt. seasons, leader = 125pts

2007 - 7 players with 100+ pt. seasons, leader = 120pts

2008 - 2 players with 100+ pt. seasons, leader = 112pts

2009 - 3 players with 100+ pt. seasons, leader = 113pts

2010 - 4 players with 100+ pt. seasons, leader = 112pts

This is not a heck of a lot different than where we were 10 years ago and a hell of lot worse in terms of scoring than where the NHL was even less than 15 years ago.

The moral of all of these previous points is that individuals are not a team. Game total scores are higher. Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marketing is about creating and promoting to new fans, not to cater to the fan that has been watching his whole life.

Nice. Cell phone company mentality. Screw the loyal ones, we need more money. There in lies the problem. It isn't a sport, it is a corporation. Canada lost hockey to the US and this proves that fact. Canadians were perfectly content with the sport but the beer drinking gut wearing football public of the US needed a hook to watch. Something to get them into the sport and dump millions on. Scoring too low, we'll fix that. Tired of games ending in a tie, welcome the shootout. Lack of cheerleaders got you down, ice girls (Thank god this hasn't caught on with every team). I give you American hockey. You're source for the stupid people I have to sit near when I go to games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice. Cell phone company mentality. Screw the loyal ones, we need more money. There in lies the problem. It isn't a sport, it is a corporation. Canada lost hockey to the US and this proves that fact. Canadians were perfectly content with the sport but the beer drinking gut wearing football public of the US needed a hook to watch. Something to get them into the sport and dump millions on. Scoring too low, we'll fix that. Tired of games ending in a tie, welcome the shootout. Lack of cheerleaders got you down, ice girls (Thank god this hasn't caught on with every team). I give you American hockey. You're source for the stupid people I have to sit near when I go to games.

At least you apparently gained a new sport in American bashing. :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least you apparently gained a new sport in American bashing. :thumbup:

I am American. I just get lit up at the fact that we destroy things that are good. Why not welcome the sponsors on the jerseys. You know, have an easton logo, Gatorade, bengay, McDonald's, valvoline (zamboni oil), Toyota, etc. We already have the arenas named for millions. Makes perfect sense to go to an arena named after a bank. After all, you are just giving them your money right. How soon until Preparation H Arena or the Tampax Centre. When is enough enough is my point. Some people/things you just don't want to be in the mix. The league is attracting some bad apples and it is hurting it for the "fan that has been watching his whole life." I would love to see a Gordie Howe or Steve Yzerman Arena (or Joe Louis II for that matter) but I know it will be some company that slaps its name above the new home of the Red Wings that has nothing to do with the game. I cannot be the only one on this board that feels like that "fan". If I am, then it is far worse than I thought.

Plus, I just like getting people revved up on these boards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am American. I just get lit up at the fact that we destroy things that are good... I would love to see a Gordie Howe or Steve Yzerman Arena (or Joe Louis II for that matter) but I know it will be some company that slaps its name above the new home of the Red Wings that has nothing to do with the game.

I hate this too. It's not just hockey, though; this seems to be the way everything is going. Advertising has just gotten out of control, and I'm not honestly sure what to do to fix that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am American. I just get lit up at the fact that we destroy things that are good. Why not welcome the sponsors on the jerseys. You know, have an easton logo, Gatorade, bengay, McDonald's, valvoline (zamboni oil), Toyota, etc. We already have the arenas named for millions. Makes perfect sense to go to an arena named after a bank. After all, you are just giving them your money right. How soon until Preparation H Arena or the Tampax Centre. When is enough enough is my point. Some people/things you just don't want to be in the mix. The league is attracting some bad apples and it is hurting it for the "fan that has been watching his whole life." I would love to see a Gordie Howe or Steve Yzerman Arena (or Joe Louis II for that matter) but I know it will be some company that slaps its name above the new home of the Red Wings that has nothing to do with the game. I cannot be the only one on this board that feels like that "fan". If I am, then it is far worse than I thought.

Thats why i dont care if Hockey ever becomes popular in the states. In fact i rather have it be less known like it is now/was. I dont want the sport to become Americanized and ruined but it looks like its too late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Crymson   
Guest Crymson

Bettman wanted a poster-boy for the new NHL, in order to attract new fans. Sidney was a young, exciting, good-looking and heavily-hyped player, and so Bettman chose him for the role. He heavily promoted Crosby and gave him a huge amount of general airtime in order to increase his (Crosby's) publicity and renown. Unfortunately for him, the plan backfired, because Sidney Crosby is simply unlikeable to many fans. He is immature and unsportsmanlike, and he is prone to constant whining on the ice---indeed, he was voted 'biggest complainer' by his peers---and to temper tantrums whenever things do not go his way. Fans of every other NHL team rapidly tired of having Crosby proverbially showed down their throats, and the favoritism shown he and the Penguins by the league became difficult to bear.

In the end, this all had two effects: one, it drove many fans to seriously resent the NHL; and two, it made Crosby the most disliked player in the league amongst fans---the clear promotion and favoritism shown towards Crosby by the league generated general resentment towards Crosby amongst fans; this constant status of his at the forefront of NHL marketing, when coupled with his immature behavior and distasteful antics on and off the ice, spawned flat-out dislike for him amongst non-Penguins fans. It's pretty simple and it makes sense. If he hadn't been marketed so ardently, he wouldn't be as disliked; but as is---and to put it bluntly---the league constantly demonstrated favoritism towards him and constantly shoved him in our faces whenever we watched hockey, and the guy is a twerp and a prick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The moral of all of these previous points is that individuals are not a team. Game total scores are higher. Period.

Let me put it another way then. Here are the average goals per game, per team for the past 20 seasons:

1990 - 3.68

1991 - 3.34

1992 - 3.48

1993 - 3.63

1994 - 3.24

1995 - 2.99

1996 - 3.14

1997 - 2.92

1998 - 2.64

1999 - 2.63

2000 - 2.75

2001 - 2.76

2002 - 2.62

2003 - 2.65

2004 - 2.57

2005 - no season

2006 - 3.08

2007 - 2.95

2008 - 2.78

2009 - 2.91

2010 - 2.84

So, I still fail to see how scoring has gone through the roof in the past 10 years. Scoring started to decline in the late 90s due to the success of defense first teams (in my opinion), reaching a low in the year before the lockout. Coming out of the lockout, new rules were implemented with a goal of increasing scoring...which did result, but as you can see, scoring has started to come down since then. In the post lockout world, scoring is still a far cry from where it was even only 15 years ago.

You don't even want to know how current scoring compares to the 70's and 80's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice. Cell phone company mentality. Screw the loyal ones, we need more money. There in lies the problem. It isn't a sport, it is a corporation. Canada lost hockey to the US and this proves that fact. Canadians were perfectly content with the sport but the beer drinking gut wearing football public of the US needed a hook to watch. Something to get them into the sport and dump millions on. Scoring too low, we'll fix that. Tired of games ending in a tie, welcome the shootout. Lack of cheerleaders got you down, ice girls (Thank god this hasn't caught on with every team). I give you American hockey. You're source for the stupid people I have to sit near when I go to games.

Now I see wherein your point of view really does stand.

How are they screwing the loyal ones? What is the definition of a "loyal" fan? Am I not loyal? I have a shared season ticket package even though I'm still paying my way through college? I've played hockey my whole life, I even played in a semi professional league. I love the game of hockey, and I want it to be a successful sport that can capture the world.

A sport has to be a corporation or else it's just not going to survive. Is every other major sport ruined now because they are "Americanized"? You seem to just want the game of hockey to be a niche sport of a couple teams and just never grow. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree if that's the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest screwdahawks   
Guest screwdahawks

Bettman wanted a poster-boy for the new NHL, in order to attract new fans. Sidney was a young, exciting, good-looking and heavily-hyped player, and so Bettman chose him for the role. He heavily promoted Crosby and gave him a huge amount of general airtime in order to increase his (Crosby's) publicity and renown. Unfortunately for him, the plan backfired, because Sidney Crosby is simply unlikeable to many fans. He is immature and unsportsmanlike, and he is prone to constant whining on the ice---indeed, he was voted 'biggest complainer' by his peers---and to temper tantrums whenever things do not go his way. Fans of every other NHL team rapidly tired of having Crosby proverbially showed down their throats, and the favoritism shown he and the Penguins by the league became difficult to bear.

In the end, this all had two effects: one, it drove many fans to seriously resent the NHL; and two, it made Crosby the most disliked player in the league amongst fans---the clear promotion and favoritism shown towards Crosby by the league generated general resentment towards Crosby amongst fans; this constant status of his at the forefront of NHL marketing, when coupled with his immature behavior and distasteful antics on and off the ice, spawned flat-out dislike for him amongst non-Penguins fans. It's pretty simple and it makes sense. If he hadn't been marketed so ardently, he wouldn't be as disliked; but as is---and to put it bluntly---the league constantly demonstrated favoritism towards him and constantly shoved him in our faces whenever we watched hockey, and the guy is a twerp and a prick.

Anyone that thinks he is good looking has to be hard up, yuk! Mr. worm lips :puke:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I see wherein your point of view really does stand.

How are they screwing the loyal ones? What is the definition of a "loyal" fan? Am I not loyal? I have a shared season ticket package even though I'm still paying my way through college? I've played hockey my whole life, I even played in a semi professional league. I love the game of hockey, and I want it to be a successful sport that can capture the world.

A sport has to be a corporation or else it's just not going to survive. Is every other major sport ruined now because they are "Americanized"? You seem to just want the game of hockey to be a niche sport of a couple teams and just never grow. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree if that's the case.

So a bastardized version of what the game once was is ok with you??? Then we do have to agree to disagree. I could care less if the game gets more viewers than the Stuperbowl. And yes, all American sports are tainted at this point. It's an American Idol society after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a bastardized version of what the game once was is ok with you??? Then we do have to agree to disagree. I could care less if the game gets more viewers than the Superbowl. And yes, all American sports are tainted at this point. It's an American Idol society after all.

I don't agree that the game has been as "bastardized" as you state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To all the guys who are questioning whether or not Cindy is good looking: Yes, he is- if you're a teenage girl.

If Cindy had a great personality, carried himself well, was gracious in defeat and humble in victory, and if he was allowed to make a name for himself based on his performance rather than having his name hyped every thirty seconds by a announcers who seem to find the sound of it to be an erotic experience, maybe- just maybe - he would achieve the status that they are trying to force upon him.

And maybe we'd actually like him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree that the game has been as "bastardized" as you state.

I may be using strong words but that is because I am passionate about this. Mickey Redmond doesn't go on tangents every game because it has changed for the better. It is because it is nothing like it was when he played. He hates to see the game change as I, and others I'm sure do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be using strong words but that is because I am passionate about this. Mickey Redmond doesn't go on tangents every game because it has changed for the better. It is because it is nothing like it was when he played. He hates to see the game change as I, and others I'm sure do.

Well not all the changes are bad.

* Passes from behind the defensive blue line to the attacking blue line will be considered legal. The center red line will be ignored for purposes of the "two line pass".

* "The Tag-up Rule" will permit play to continue if offensive players who preceded the puck into the zone return to the blue line and "tag" it.

* Icing the puck offenses still will be penalized by a face-off in the defensive zone of the team that ices the puck.

* A team that ices the puck cannot make a line change prior to the ensuing face-off.

* The neutral-zone edges of the blue lines will be positioned 64 feet from the attacking goal line and 75 feet from the end boards in the attacking zone. The addition of four feet in each of the offensive zones should encourage more offensive play, particularly on power-plays.

* The goal lines will be positioned 11 feet from the end boards, two feet closer to the end boards than previously.

* The size of the neutral zone will be reduced to 50' from 54'.

* The blue lines and center line will remain at 12 inches in width.

Are just some of the changes the past couple years that have made hockey "better". In my opinion.

I agree I hate the chintzy stick penalities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am American. I just get lit up at the fact that we destroy things that are good. Why not welcome the sponsors on the jerseys. You know, have an easton logo, Gatorade, bengay, McDonald's, valvoline (zamboni oil), Toyota, etc. We already have the arenas named for millions. Makes perfect sense to go to an arena named after a bank. After all, you are just giving them your money right. How soon until Preparation H Arena or the Tampax Centre. When is enough enough is my point. Some people/things you just don't want to be in the mix. The league is attracting some bad apples and it is hurting it for the "fan that has been watching his whole life." I would love to see a Gordie Howe or Steve Yzerman Arena (or Joe Louis II for that matter) but I know it will be some company that slaps its name above the new home of the Red Wings that has nothing to do with the game. I cannot be the only one on this board that feels like that "fan". If I am, then it is far worse than I thought.

Plus, I just like getting people revved up on these boards.

I hear you!! The advertising in sports just drives me through the roof!! I understand the need for some, but they just keep pushing for more and more. It has me wondering how far it will go.

I can see it now, "And now, the Pittsburgh(Brought to you by Bud Light) Penguins(Click it or Ticket) We have Bengay Crosby and Vavoline Staal"!! lol

They may push it to the point of ads on unis and selling the naming rights of team names, for instance the Detroit Fords and the Chicago Bank of Americas. I hope the "Big Four" would have the taste and respect for the traditions of their teams and respective leagues, but who knows.

I will end my rant now without mentioning the little weasel who complains about people throwing hats on the ice Crysby. We all know he is a big *****!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be using strong words but that is because I am passionate about this. Mickey Redmond doesn't go on tangents every game because it has changed for the better. It is because it is nothing like it was when he played. He hates to see the game change as I, and others I'm sure do.

To be fair Mickey is an old man now and complaining about how things have gone down hill since the old days is what men do in retirement. :D

Anyone else laugh whenever a composite stick breaks because they know what's coming from Mickey? :cool:

Regardless, Mickey's still awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well not all the changes are bad.

* Passes from behind the defensive blue line to the attacking blue line will be considered legal. The center red line will be ignored for purposes of the "two line pass".

* "The Tag-up Rule" will permit play to continue if offensive players who preceded the puck into the zone return to the blue line and "tag" it.

* Icing the puck offenses still will be penalized by a face-off in the defensive zone of the team that ices the puck.

* A team that ices the puck cannot make a line change prior to the ensuing face-off.

* The neutral-zone edges of the blue lines will be positioned 64 feet from the attacking goal line and 75 feet from the end boards in the attacking zone. The addition of four feet in each of the offensive zones should encourage more offensive play, particularly on power-plays.

* The goal lines will be positioned 11 feet from the end boards, two feet closer to the end boards than previously.

* The size of the neutral zone will be reduced to 50' from 54'.

* The blue lines and center line will remain at 12 inches in width.

Are just some of the changes the past couple years that have made hockey "better". In my opinion.

I agree I hate the chintzy stick penalities.

The tag-up rule really isn't a change. It was was brought back because the change to auto-offsides was actually slowing the game down. Tag-up offsides is an old rule. /nitpick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok answer this.

Which NHL player are they going to market?

Crosby has over 500 points before he is 23, career 1.3 PPG in the post season, a Stanley Cup, Olympic gold, Hart trophy, Lester etc.

Just on those accomplishments alone he's going to be marketed, not to mention the fact that he portrays himself as mildly as a cucumber to the media.

Stamkos will get his attention soon enough, but there aren't a lot of players that are in the top 3 of scoring perennially like Crosby and Ovechkin have since they've been in the league.

Maybe if Datsyuk, Malkin, Parise etc. followed up their performances 2 years ago they would be included with Ovechkin/Crosby but they didn't. It's clear that Ovechkin/Crosby are far and away are consistently two of the best players year in year out.

Bulls***. They are marketing him because he is Canadian. Datsyuk has 4 straight Lady Bings, 2 straint Selke Trophys and 2 stanley cups. But he's not Canadian. Lidstrom has SIX Norris Trophies, FOUR Stanley Cups an Olympic Gold Medal (he scored the winning goal) and a frickin Conn Smyth. But he's not Canadian. Do I need to continue...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree I hate the chintzy stick penalities.

Yep, whacking your opponent with a stick, slowing him down or tripping him with it, or using it as a weapon by hitting an opponent with the butt-end of the stick or cross-checking him.

Yeah, those are horrible and should not be penalties.

ALL stick penalties should be called. There should never be "while, he didn't slash him THAT hard" or anything like that where the penalty is let go.

In fact, no penalty should ever be let go because "it wasn't that bad" and the player didn't suffer any significant effect. If a guy grabs my arm while I am carrying the puck out of my zone but I just shake him off, he should still be called for interference. The penalties are written down in black and white. It's not "the referee has the discretion to completely ignore the rules if he wishes."

It's why "evening up" the calls to make sure teams get equal PPs annoys the piss out of me. If one team commits 9 penalties and the other commits three, then that should be the number called. People say "St. Louis was given the game by the refs because they got 5 PPs and Toronto only had 1" even if St. Louis played a very disciplined game and Toronto was playing to see who could hurt a Blues player first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this