Will Wings Revisit Signing Phaneuf?

[LeftWinger 4,953]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqF-CI5TDgA

Actually, we could use someone like Racine...

[number9 3,297]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqF-CI5TDgA

Actually, we could use someone like Racine...

Crossing the blue line was a death wish in the 90s. Wish the game was still played like that.

[frankgrimes 1,836]

I think we can all agree on this finally: hockey in the 90s and pre 2005 was just so much better and more exciting it's not even close. But as long as the stupid BOG doesn't act or finally getting changed to guys like Mr. I, Pegula...we won't see an improvement.

[xtrememachine1 795]

I think we can all agree on this finally: hockey in the 90s and pre 2005 was just so much better and more exciting it's not even close. But as long as the stupid BOG doesn't act or finally getting changed to guys like Mr. I, Pegula...we won't see an improvement.

I'm actually glad to hear (or read) that other people feel this way too. It was more exciting, the players were better, the teams were better. Its kind of amazing to me that the Stanley Cup final ratings are so high these past few years considering, as a hockey obsessed maniac myself, I could care less who was in it or who won these past few years. I wonder if its because the last 5 years of finals have been played in mostly big cities (Chicago, Philly, NY/NJ, Boston and LA).

[Hack & Whack Rule! 160]

I'm actually glad to hear (or read) that other people feel this way too. It was more exciting, the players were better, the teams were better. Its kind of amazing to me that the Stanley Cup final ratings are so high these past few years considering, as a hockey obsessed maniac myself, I could care less who was in it or who won these past few years. I wonder if its because the last 5 years of finals have been played in mostly big cities (Chicago, Philly, NY/NJ, Boston and LA).

I think a lot of people don't realize how different the game is. I really miss the way hockey was played back then.

As for the ratings, I'm pretty sure you've touched on a large part of it. It wouldn't surprise me to see that future SC finals will be played in predetermined arenas, a la the NFL. Everything seems to be geared toward ratings and growing the fan base.

But since this is a thread about Phaneuf...he sucks.

Edited June 24, 2015 by Hack & Whack Rule!

[rooter2309 28]

HAHAH the players were better? You guys crack me up. Hockey has never seen the speed and skill it has now. All that clutching and grabbing was dumb and honestly line brawls were a sideshow to the actual game. And the ratings are better because the advertising is reaching so many different mediums and the game is being watched everywhere and anywhere.

[kipwinger 8,522]

HAHAH the players were better? You guys crack me up. Hockey has never seen the speed and skill it has now. All that clutching and grabbing was dumb and honestly line brawls were a sideshow to the actual game. And the ratings are better because the advertising is reaching so many different mediums and the game is being watched everywhere and anywhere.

Nah. The game is boring and stupid if there aren't a bunch of pituitary mutants out there banging their skulls together. That's real sport.

Flower Power!!!!

[kipwinger 8,522]

The game has all the hitting it ever had, AND it has all the speed and skill that it lacked during the clutch and grab era. Those who romanticize the "good old days" are speaking out of both sides of their mouth. They say they want hitting and aggression, but they willfully ignore all the hitting and aggression in the modern game? Why? Because they don't JUST want hitting, they want a PARTICULAR KIND of hitting. The violent kind. The dangerous kind. The kind they hurts people. Many people say they want the reckless hits out of the game, but they don't actually mean it. They all secretly long to see Scott Stevens out there blindside hitting guys in the head, because that was AWSOME!

Except it wasn't...at all.

Here's a "best of" video for the season, showing many of the big hits. Nobody took toughness out of the game, they just took recklessness out of the game. And lots of folks, contrary to what they say, don't actually like that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nR93uEtbYE0

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

HAHAH the players were better? You guys crack me up. Hockey has never seen the speed and skill it has now. All that clutching and grabbing was dumb and honestly line brawls were a sideshow to the actual game. And the ratings are better because the advertising is reaching so many different mediums and the game is being watched everywhere and anywhere.

Have you been watching hockey for 5 minutes?

Gretzky, Lemieux, Hasek, Roy, Jagr, Sakic, Bourque, Yzerman, Lindros, Chelios, Bure, Forsberg, Fedorov, Brodeur, Belfour, Messier, Hull, LaFontaine, Selanne, Francis, MacInnis, Mogilny, Gilmour, Leetch, Oates, Neely, Shanahan, Roenick, etc.

Name me today's best players and we'll have a nice laugh as to which generation is better. The generational talent was way better in the 90's, because the great players of the 80's were still strong, and the 90's were loaded with great young players from Europe.

In fact, I don't think there's ever been as much talent in the NHL as there were in the 90's.

Nah. The game is boring and stupid if there aren't a bunch of pituitary mutants out there banging their skulls together. That's real sport.

Flower Power!!!!

Read post above. The hitting and fighting isn't the only reason the game was better. There were more great players in the game back then than there's ever been. You can't come up with a comparative list of talent in today's generation. The pool isn't that deep.

Edited June 24, 2015 by GMRwings1983

[kipwinger 8,522]

Have you been watching hockey for 5 minutes?

Gretzky, Lemieux, Hasek, Roy, Jagr, Sakic, Bourque, Yzerman, Lindros, Chelios, Bure, Forsberg, Fedorov, Brodeur, Belfour, Messier, Hull, LaFontaine, Selanne, Francis, MacInnis, Mogilny, Gilmour, Leetch, Oates, Neely, Shanahan, Roenick, etc.

Name me today's best players and we'll have a nice laugh as to which generation is better. The generational talent was way better in the 90's, because the great players of the 80's were still strong, and the 90's were loaded with great young players from Europe.

In fact, I don't think there's ever been as much talent in the NHL as there were in the 90's.

Read post above. The hitting and fighting isn't the only reason the game was better. There was so many great players in the game back then than there's ever been. You can't come up with a comparative list of talent in today's generation. The pool isn't that deep.

I wasn't trying to. I think the old game was incredibly exciting, almost entirely because I loved their skill. But I don't think the modern game is as boring and unwatchable as some folks make it out to be. First, it's faster. Much faster. The skill is still excellent (though I agree that the talent isn't as once-in-a-lifetime as it was), and many of the boring systemic issues have been removed from the game (center line, two line passing, clutch and grab). And none of that came at the expense of hitting.

I liked the old game. I like the new game. I just think that many folks who bemoan the modern game are being disingenuous. They liked all the viciousness of the old game, but realize that it's getting less and less acceptable to say so. So they say the old game was tougher, grittier, etc. It wasn't.

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

I wasn't trying to. I think the old game was incredibly exciting, almost entirely because I loved their skill. But I don't think the modern game is as boring and unwatchable as some folks make it out to be. First, it's faster. Much faster. The skill is still excellent (though I agree that the talent isn't as once-in-a-lifetime as it was), and many of the boring systemic issues have been removed from the game (center line, two line passing, clutch and grab). And none of that came at the expense of hitting.

I liked the old game. I like the new game. I just think that many folks who bemoan the modern game are being disingenuous. They liked all the viciousness of the old game, but realize that it's getting less and less acceptable to say so. So they say the old game was tougher, grittier, etc. It wasn't.

The game may be fast because of less clutching and grabbing, but the lack of comparable star power and the robotic consistency of today's goaltenders has made it less exciting for me. The top players don't put up big numbers anymore as there's more balanced lines and goalies are too good. And yes, the lack of fighting and big hitters hasn't helped it any in my mind.

My guess is the NHL is not as popular for the everyday American sports fan Joe as it was in the 90's. Don't have any stats on that, but that's the way it seems. It's hard to promote a more exciting product but not have the big name power to go with that. Kind of like TNA wrestling.

[kipwinger 8,522]

The game may be fast because of less clutching and grabbing, but the lack of comparable star power and the robotic consistency of today's goaltenders has made it less exciting for me. The top players don't put up big numbers anymore as there's more balanced lines and goalies are too good. And yes, the lack of fighting and big hitters hasn't helped it any in my mind.

My guess is the NHL is not as popular for the everyday American sports fan Joe as it was in the 90's. Don't have any stats on that, but that's the way it seems. It's hard to promote a more exciting product but not have the big name power to go with that. Kind of like TNA wrestling.

There is less fighting, there is not less "big hitting". There's just less reckless hitting. I just provided a 15 minute long video of "big hitting" from this season alone. It's still there, regardless of how many times people say otherwise.

Again, I agree that there is less "star power" than in the 90's. But in saying that, you're arguing against the original point that others were making. Namely, that the old game was more exciting because it was "tougher". You're saying it's less exciting because there's not as much scoring, and because the goalies are too good. That has nothing to do with toughness.

As far as the popularity goes, the NHL keeps setting records for attendance, revenue, and TV ratings (despite not being on ESPN). If you accept those measures as proxies for "popularity" then I'd say it's MORE popular than it was, not less.

[Mckinley25 677]

Have you been watching hockey for 5 minutes?

Gretzky, Lemieux, Hasek, Roy, Jagr, Sakic, Bourque, Yzerman, Lindros, Chelios, Bure, Forsberg, Fedorov, Brodeur, Belfour, Messier, Hull, LaFontaine, Selanne, Francis, MacInnis, Mogilny, Gilmour, Leetch, Oates, Neely, Shanahan, Roenick, etc.

Name me today's best players and we'll have a nice laugh as to which generation is better. The generational talent was way better in the 90's, because the great players of the 80's were still strong, and the 90's were loaded with great young players from Europe.

In fact, I don't think there's ever been as much talent in the NHL as there were in the 90's.

Read post above. The hitting and fighting isn't the only reason the game was better. There were more great players in the game back then than there's ever been. You can't come up with a comparative list of talent in today's generation. The pool isn't that deep.

There's not as much generational talent because the pool is so deep. As you pointed out, goalies are far too good to have 80's type scoring, but that also goes for defensemen and team defense, and coaching. The talent is better, there's just too much of it.

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

There is less fighting, there is not less "big hitting". There's just less reckless hitting. I just provided a 15 minute long video of "big hitting" from this season alone. It's still there, regardless of how many times people say otherwise.

Again, I agree that there is less "star power" than in the 90's. But in saying that, you're arguing against the original point that others were making. Namely, that the old game was more exciting because it was "tougher". You're saying it's less exciting because there's not as much scoring, and because the goalies are too good. That has nothing to do with toughness.

As far as the popularity goes, the NHL keeps setting records for attendance, revenue, and TV ratings (despite not being on ESPN). If you accept those measures as proxies for "popularity" then I'd say it's MORE popular than it was, not less.

You must be talking about SCF ratings, because I was under the impression the league's TV ratings for regular season games are pitiful.

There's not as much generational talent because the pool is so deep. As you pointed out, goalies are far too good to have 80's type scoring, but that also goes for defensemen and team defense, and coaching. The talent is better, there's just too much of it.

That's true. I guess I prefer generational talent on the top lines and goons on the lower lines. Today's game has more balanced scoring on all four lines, but that has come at the expense of the talent I highlighted above and at the expense of Probert, Grimson, Twist, Kocur, etc.

Also, imo the uniforms were better in the 90's. The Reebok stripe garbage is not as pleasing to look at and very few teams are currently wearing the best ever version of their jerseys.

Even the technology has devolved, as in the 90's we had the Fox Track Puck and exploding robots.

[rooter2309 28]

Have you been watching hockey for 5 minutes?

Gretzky, Lemieux, Hasek, Roy, Jagr, Sakic, Bourque, Yzerman, Lindros, Chelios, Bure, Forsberg, Fedorov, Brodeur, Belfour, Messier, Hull, LaFontaine, Selanne, Francis, MacInnis, Mogilny, Gilmour, Leetch, Oates, Neely, Shanahan, Roenick, etc.

Name me today's best players and we'll have a nice laugh as to which generation is better. The generational talent was way better in the 90's, because the great players of the 80's were still strong, and the 90's were loaded with great young players from Europe.

In fact, I don't think there's ever been as much talent in the NHL as there were in the 90's.

Read post above. The hitting and fighting isn't the only reason the game was better. There were more great players in the game back then than there's ever been. You can't come up with a comparative list of talent in today's generation. The pool isn't that deep.

It's been like 10 minutes, but whose counting?

Like a previous comment stated, the players top to bottom are much more skilled and way faster than the previous generations. Not saying the 90's didn't have all time greats, but the 30 or so you mentioned were skating around players out there solely to fight and hit. Today's game is losing that and for the better imo. Overall the goalies today are much better and much more athletic which is why scoring is down and numbers were inflated in previous generations.

I'm sure someone could go down the list of teams today and make a compelling list of future hall of famers as long, if not longer if they wanted. Hell, the hawks alone have 4

[kipwinger 8,522]

You must be talking about SCF ratings, because I was under the impression the league's TV ratings for regular season games are pitiful.

Here's an article about viewership from 2014. The article only talks about viewership from NBC and NBC Sports. So you can assume it's higher when you factor in ratings for local coverage like Fox Sports.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/04/15/nhl-regular-season-sets-viewership-records-across-nbc-nbcsn/254504/

Edit: They set ratings records in 2013, 2014, and saw a modest decline (from 2014 numbers) in 2015, though the 2015 ratings were still higher than the 2013 ratings. All in all the ratings are trending up.

Edited June 24, 2015 by kipwinger

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

Here's an article about viewership from 2014. The article only talks about viewership from NBC and NBC Sports. So you can assume it's higher when you factor in ratings for local coverage like Fox Sports.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/04/15/nhl-regular-season-sets-viewership-records-across-nbc-nbcsn/254504/

Edit: They set ratings records in 2013, 2014, and saw a modest decline (from 2014 numbers) in 2015, though the 2015 ratings were still higher than the 2013 ratings. All in all the ratings are trending up.

Yeah, but where does this compare to ratings on espn when they still hosted hockey? The ratings from NBCN are compared to prior years with the same network. I guess they have grown since the OLN days, but I'm not sure the TV ratings are better than they heyday of hockey in the 90's on ESPN.

And I'm guessing NBA ratings are much higher for TV viewership.

It's been like 10 minutes, but whose counting?

Like a previous comment stated, the players top to bottom are much more skilled and way faster than the previous generations. Not saying the 90's didn't have all time greats, but the 30 or so you mentioned were skating around players out there solely to fight and hit. Today's game is losing that and for the better imo. Overall the goalies today are much better and much more athletic which is why scoring is down and numbers were inflated in previous generations.

I'm sure someone could go down the list of teams today and make a compelling list of future hall of famers as long, if not longer if they wanted. Hell, the hawks alone have 4

I'd love to see this list and compare it to the one above.

And I don't remember guys like Lemieux, Bure or Yzerman being constantly matched up against players solely out there to fight and hit. You make it sound like matching lines and coaching was non-existent in those days. No coach would be stupid enough to have Jagr or Lemieux constantly matched up against his goon line.

[frankgrimes 1,836]

The best example is how good Phaneuf was when he first entered the league, this guy was heralded as a young Scott Stevens he was that good of an open hitter. I don't need the usual suspects flower power Greenpeace folks to know what I'm expecting from hockey and what I don't expect..sissy hockey, gimmicks such as 7 outdoor games , Rogers instead of Bell, less hitting hip checks, almost non exciting ufa lists...are for sure not things that I associate with hockey neither are showboaters and other questionable grow the game crap.

Anyhow Phaneuf will get dealt and I think he benefit tremendously from it...Toronto is just too tough of a market for most athletes especially if one has the burden of the C

Edited June 24, 2015 by frankgrimes

[kipwinger 8,522]

Yeah, but where does this compare to ratings on espn when they still hosted hockey? The ratings from NBCN are compared to prior years with the same network. I guess they have grown since the OLN days, but I'm not sure the TV ratings are better than they heyday of hockey in the 90's on ESPN.

And I'm guessing NBA ratings are much higher for TV viewership.

I don't know. It's reasonable to assume that you'd have more viewership if the channel carrying your sport was on basic cable, reached more people, and didn't have to be part of some extras package. In that sense you're right, but in effect you're comparing apples to oranges.

Comparing NHL games on ESPN to NHL games on NBC sports doesn't tell you about the popularity of the sport as much as it tells you something about the popularity of the network carrying the sport. Such is the case with the NBA, whose viewership is high but who's attendance is low. People don't go out of their way to be fans of the NBA, but they'll watch if (one of) the most popular network in America is carrying the games.

Which is why year to year comparisons on the same network or more telling IMO. If everything about is exactly the same from one year to the next, and you see an increase in viewership, it's more reasonable to assume that more people are interested in the sport. If the NHL got picked up by ESPN next season, you'd likely see an increase in viewership. But that would be the result of that network's coverage and market share, and not because of some explosion in the league's popularity.

[number9 3,297]

The best example is how good Phaneuf was when he first entered the league, this guy was heralded as a young Scott Stevens he was that good of an open hitter. I don't need the usual suspects flower power Greenpeace folks to know what I'm expecting from hockey and what I don't expect..sissy hockey, gimmicks such as 7 outdoor games , Rogers instead of Bell, less hitting hip checks, almost non exciting ufa lists...are for sure not things that I associate with hockey neither are showboaters and other questionable grow the game crap.

Anyhow Phaneuf will get dealt and I think he benefit tremendously from it...Toronto is just too tough of a market for most athletes especially if one has the burden of the C

Just mute your TV during hockey games and blast Godsmack on the stereo. Works for me.

[number9 3,297]

Agreed.

\m/

[kipwinger 8,522]

Tool? A little too high brow and emotive for my taste. I prefer my metal a tad more...brutal?

Edited June 24, 2015 by kipwinger

[rooter2309 28]

Yeah, but where does this compare to ratings on espn when they still hosted hockey? The ratings from NBCN are compared to prior years with the same network. I guess they have grown since the OLN days, but I'm not sure the TV ratings are better than they heyday of hockey in the 90's on ESPN.

And I'm guessing NBA ratings are much higher for TV viewership.

I'd love to see this list and compare it to the one above.

And I don't remember guys like Lemieux, Bure or Yzerman being constantly matched up against players solely out there to fight and hit. You make it sound like matching lines and coaching was non-existent in those days. No coach would be stupid enough to have Jagr or Lemieux constantly matched up against his goon line.

I mean there were players on those players teams that their only purpose was to protect them from getting touched. The goalies were brutal then too. Watch those highlights. A lot of those goals would be easily stopped today. Again, not knocking those guys, they were greats and paved the way for today, but to say today isn't faster and overall more skilled is wrong.

[number9 3,297]

Tool? A little too high brow and emotive for my taste. I prefer my metal a tad more...brutal?

That's fine, no Green peace flower power for u

Edited June 24, 2015 by number9

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

I mean there were players on those players teams that their only purpose was to protect them from getting touched. The goalies were brutal then too. Watch those highlights. A lot of those goals would be easily stopped today. Again, not knocking those guys, they were greats and paved the way for today, but to say today isn't faster and overall more skilled is wrong.

Yes, there were many enforcers back then, but I don't think their lack of talent is why the top players scored so many goals. They weren't matched up against them. The goaltending, on the other hand has improved immensely. The speed of the game and lack of clutching and grabbing has not resulted in more goals, which should also point to the improvement of the goaltending.

So if you like skilled goalies with big pads, then yes, today's NHL should be more enjoyable than the 90's.