|
Articles and Opinions
|
Articles and Opinions
|
|
Written by Matthew Coller
|
|
Tuesday, 18 May 2010 20:05 |
|
While many NHL franchises have struggled to make money, seeing poor attendance and major losses, the intensity and quality of the NHL Stanley Cup Playoffs has given an enormous boost to the league’s popularity and pocketbook.
Business not as usual:
New league partners Gieco, Starwood Hotels, Enterprise Rent-A-Car, LG Electronics and Hershey’s Canada have added up to a 20 percent raise in corporate sponsorship of the NHL. Additionally, ad spending on NHL media increased by 37 percent and NHL.com ad revenue is up 50 percent over the last year, according to a league press release.
Web accomplishments also include 32 percent more unique visitors, 25 percent more NHL Game Center Live subscriptions and a 12 percent increase in sales at Shop.NHL.com. NHL Mobile also reached 1.6 million. The NHL’s use of video on NHL.com is also paying off, seeing a 153 percent boost from last year.
TV Highlight reel:
-Between NBC and Versus, the Stanley Cup Playoffs have averaged 742,000 viewers, the most since 2000 and a 24 percent increase from last year.
-The average 1.04 million viewers for Versus’ coverage of the Conference Semifinal surpassed all other playoff series’ dating back to 1994.
-TSN set a record for the most watched NHL game ever that did not involve a Canadian team. The 2.1 million audience wasn’t a shock considering TSN’s average audience was up 61 percent from last year, from 681,000 to 1.1 million viewers. The game also brought in an 11.7 rating on Comcast Philadelphia, making it the most watched Flyers game on the network.
-Game 1 of the Blackhawks-Sharks series earned an 11.2 local rating in Chicago, beating the Cubs, White Sox and NBA Playoffs Boston-Orlando series.
-Game 2 of the Detroit Red Wings-San Jose Sharks series averaged 1.77 million viewers, making it Versus’ most-watched Conference Semifinal game in network history and the most-watched second-round game since 2000.
Matthew Coller is a staff member of the Business of Sports Network, and is a freelance writer. He can be followed on Twitter
 Follow the Business of Sports Network on Facebook
|
|
Articles and Opinions
|
|
Written by Matthew Coller
|
|
Monday, 10 May 2010 03:39 |
|
 ESPN’s Scott Burnside is reporting that the City of Glendale and the Ice Edge Holdings group have agreed on all points on a new lease agreement that would keep the Phoenix Coyotes in Arizona. Ice Edge and the city are expected to sign an agreement on a memorandum of understanding that gives the group exclusive negotiating rights. If the city meets the NHL’s requirements, which include paying back the $20-$30 million in losses the league eat after taking over the team, it could take up to eight weeks to complete the sale of the team to Ice Edge.
As Biz of Hockey reported Friday, the city’s deal with the Reinsdorf Group collapsed, possibly because the group may not have been committed to keeping the team in Glendale. The city originally raised concerns about Ice Edge’s ability to pay.
"Ice Edge continues to believe in the future of hockey in the valley," the group said in a statement released Saturday. "We have held several discussions with the city of Glendale over the past few days, and those discussions continue through the weekend."
Here’s a timeline over the past two months Phoenix Coyotes sale saga:
April 7:
Arizona Legislature puts forward a bill that would allow for community facilities districts in the state to establish a reserve fund against bonds they take out. The bill allows for bonding against property tax revenue in the designated area, which would help in working out a lease between Reinsdorf or Ice Edge.
April 8:
Phoenix Business Journal reports that Ice Edge COO Daryl Jones says the group is “frustrated.” Jones wants the city to publicly disclose difference in least and sale proposals by Ice Edge and Reinsdorf. He also said the frustration stems from the city’s changes to previous agreements related to the lease, but hopes the group can still move forward in its bid.
April 9:
Glendale signs preliminary lease deals with Reinsdorf and Ice Edge and releases the proposed terms of those deals. Major differences include Ice Edge’s desire to play games in Canada and Reinsdorf’s potential opt-out clause.
April 12:
Ice Edge writes a letter appealing to the residents of Glendale pleading for the city to reconsider. In the letter, Ice Edge wrote:
“No one is paying us to do this. We are simply passionate hockey fans who believe in the long term future of Glendale and its hockey team. This is not about creating a business option for ourselves, but rather it is about developing a successful business plan to enable the Coyotes to succeed long term. While the pundits have consistently doubted us, we have continued to prevail at every turn.”
The letter also includes highlights of the Memorandum of Understanding between the group and the city noting that the group will not relocate and plans to play games in Canada.
April 14:
Glendale chooses the Reinsdorf Group over Ice Edge Holdings, approving the preliminary agreement. The agreement would include the group buying the team for $103 million while the city would create a special bond district around the arena that would take out bonds against the property tax revenue. The bonds would be used to pay the NHL $65 million.
April 14:
Goldwater Institute, a group that tracks public subsadies to private corporations, says the Reinsdorf Group places too much burden on Glendale taxpayers. “He really seems to have insulated himself completely from financial ability,” Goldwater lawyer Carrie Ann Sitren said.
May 4:
Commissioner Gary Bettman says Reinsdorf owning the Coyotes will be “great for the league.”
May 7:
Phoenix Business Journal reports that Ice Edge might still be in the mix as a backup plan and that another suitor may have emerged. True North Sports & Entertainment Ltd. Of Winnipeg issues a statement saying:
“While we understand the current situation with the hockey team in Glendale is an uncertain one, we will continue to respect the efforts of all parties involved to maintain the Coyotes in Arizona, including those of the National Hockey League. As we have stated many times in the past, if that situation changes, we are certainly open to reviewing the opportunity with the NHL,”
May 7:
The Reinsdorf Group is reported to be dead as the city is making attempts to bring Ice Edge back into the picture.
May 8:
Ice Edge Group and Glendale reported to be near an agreement to purchase the team almost a month after the city initially rejected the Ice Edge proposal.
OTHER NEWS FROM THE BUSINESS OF SPORTS NETWORK
(THE BIZ OF BASEBALL)
Matthew Coller is a staff member of the Business of Sports Network, and is a freelance writer. He can be followed on Twitter
Follow the Business of Sports Network on Facebook
|
|
Articles and Opinions
|
|
Written by Matthew Coller
|
|
Wednesday, 28 April 2010 15:03 |
|
 It’s everybody’s dream: make a living as a sports fan. It’s exactly what Kukla’s Korner founder Paul Kukla does. The site takes you on a journey of a man searching for the latest in hockey news. OK, maybe it isn’t that deep, but what Kukla’s Korner does is provide the most up-to-date hockey news from around the US and Canada. His site went from a regular fan blog to 12 million hits per month. Hockey fans weren’t the only ones that were impressed by Kukla’s work, NHL.com signed him up as a contributor.
Biz of Hockey had a chance to chat with Paul Kukla:
Matthew Coller:
How did you come up with the idea to start Kukla's Korner? What were you doing before?
Paul Kukla:
I started Kukla's Korner after a friend suggested I start blogging about the CBA lockout since hockey fans in Detroit were not receiving much news on the status of the lockout. It was as simple as that, no five year business plan, just dove in head first and began providing information to readers. Before I started blogging, I was selling air time to advertisers for a major radio station in Detroit.
MC:
How did you get hooked up with NHL.com?
PK:
Out of blue, I received an email from them about four months after I started the blog. I made sure it was real, answered their request to see if I was interested in doing a weekly blog for them and the rest is history.
MC:
I've heard you say that you don't consider yourself a journalist, why not? Do you consider your resident bloggers journalists?
PK:
In my opinion, you have to have the training/schooling to be considered a journalist. I've witnessed the real journalists work and believe me, I am not one of them. I am just a hockey fan who happens to write about the sport I love. I consider it the perfect job and hope to continue to do what I do until I decide to stop.
The folks who have their own blogs at Kukla's Korner are first off hockey fans. Some have more talent than others when it comes to writing and one blogger may actually have a writing background, but I won't divulge who it is. Let the readers decide.
MC:
That’s right, you have quite a few contributors to your site, talk about their role in running a blog full time.
PK
It is very simple, they write when they want to write. Some do more writing than others, most have a regular job or attend school, so at times it is difficult for them to find the time to get into their blog. I don't edit their posts, don't tell them what or what not to write, but did give them some guidelines when they first came on board.
The bloggers really do not do any of the running of the website. I had an assistant for some time, but then a baby was due, then born, so hopefully next season, the assistant can assist again, but I sure do miss her now.
MC:
Do you think bloggers should be allowed in locker rooms and press boxes?
PK:
I feel it is a decision that should be made on the team level. There should be a set of rules for bloggers and if that criteria is met, then they should be welcomed in the locker room. But I find many of the bloggers really do not have a desire to enter the locker room. They are happy with just writing about the team, the sport or anything they want to write about.
MC:
What types of things have you done to expand Kukla's Korner from a simple blog to a legitimate news source? How did you achieve visibility?
PK:
What I have done from the start of my blogging career is the same I do today. I provide hockey fans the news I feel they would want to read about. All I do is point out the news to them, then they decide if they wish to 'read on' as I say. If it is considered a legitimate news source, that is fine with me, but I am not making the news. All I am doing is pointing it out or in simple terms making it easier for hockey fans to find.
MC:
The NHLPA is somewhat of a mess right now with no true leader, do you think Donald Fehr is the answer to all their problems?
PK:
Who knows. All I do know is the players want their fair slice of the pie and Donald Fehr is one person who may be able to get it for them. Hopefully the right choice is made and we all can move on. Our game does not need this type of issue to turn into a problem every year or so.
MC:
If you were negotiating the next CBA for the NHL owners what would be your No. 1 priority? What about the NHLPA?
PK:
I really don't follow all the negotiation talk, who wants what, etc. I try to focus on the game played on the ice, not in a boardroom.
MC:
You and I are huge hockey guys. My entire life it's always been: you're either a hockey person or not. That's clearly changing with boosts in ratings despite being on Versus. Does the growth of the game affect the way you choose news stories?
PK:
Not at all. The people who follow Kukla's Korner are mostly die-hard hockey fans. What numbers Versus does produce has no influence on those types of fans and therefore I don't view how Versus is looked at in the least bit.
MC:
I know you're a Detroit fan, they can't make it three trips to the cup in a row, right?
PK:
Yep. San Jose has had real problems with the Wings this season and there are matchup issues they must figure out to win this series. After that, it would be either Chicago or Vancouver and I give the Wings a very fair chance at winning that series too.
OTHER NEWS FROM THE BUSINESS OF SPORTS NETWORK
(THE BIZ OF BASEBALL)
Matthew Coller is a staff member of the Business of Sports Network, and is a freelance writer. He can be followed on Twitter
Follow the Business of Sports Network on Facebook |
|
Articles and Opinions
|
|
Written by Matthew Coller
|
|
Monday, 26 April 2010 20:05 |
|
The good news: 14 of the 22 U.S. teams with available ratings had more people watching local NHL broadcasts than last year. The bad: If you add up the bottom seven teams’ households, they still fall short of the Pittsburgh Penguins. The strange: The Buffalo Sabres, who missed the playoffs in 2008-09 had 18 percent less viewers on average in 2009-10 and the San Jose Sharks, who spent most of the season at No. 1 in the Western Conference (and finished first) also saw a significant drop (20 percent). Also in the strange department, the St. Louis Blues, who missed the playoffs, brought in 20.8 percent more viewers than last season.
Before we get to all the numbers, here’s a look at how the best and worst teams compare to other major league sports (other sports based on last season):
Here’s how the top rated teams stack up:
Pittsburgh Penguins rank 3rd for local rating in all sports behind the Boston Red Sox and Cleveland Cavs. They rank 13th in total households sandwiched between the Seattle Mariners and the Chicago Blackhawks.
Buffalo Sabres draw similar local ratings as the San Antonio Spurs and Minnesota Twins, ranking 8th overall among all major league sports teams. The mid-market Sabres rank 45th in the total households category, drawing similar amount of households as the Portland Trail Blazers and San Diego Padres.
Detroit Red Wings stand at 13th with a 4.21 local rating right behind the New York Yankees and in front of the Chicago Cubs. They rank behind the San Francisco Giants at 19th and in front of the Chicago White Sox.
Here’s how the bottom looks:
Florida Panthers are the worst team among all major sports teams that report ratings. Four of the bottom five in households in all professional sports are NHL franchises. The Charlotte Bobcats, who have the fourth least more than double the Panthers. In the rating share department, the New Jersey Nets stand just above the Panthers with a 0.29. In the Miami market, which is the 17th largest in the U.S., the Florida Marlins have more than 12 times the rating the Panthers have.
Western / Southern struggles. The Anaheim Ducks scored lower ratings than the Los Angeles Clippers in LA. In the Northern California area, the Warriors had more watching than the San Jose Sharks. The Phoenix Coyotes scored 2.56 lower than the Phoenix Suns on TV. The Thrashers scored 1.33 lower than the Atlanta Hawks.
*All numbers according to Sports Media Watch
Here's all the numbers from NHL Local Markets:
1. Pittsburgh Penguins (FS Pittsburgh) – 8.05 (Up 26.2%)
2. Buffalo Sabres (MSG Buffalo) – 6.45 (Down 19%)
3. Detroit Red Wings (FS Detroit) – 4.21 (Up 5.3%)
4. Chicago Blackhawks (CSN Chicago) – 2.45 (Up 131.1%)
5. St. Louis Blues (FS Midwest) – 2.33 (Up 21.4%)
T6. Boston Bruins (NESN) – 2.18 (Down 13.8%)
T6. Philadelphia Flyers (CSN Philadelphia) – 2.18 (Down 8.8%)
8. Minnesota Wild (FS North) – 1.67 (Down 27.4%)
9. Washington Capitals (CSN Mid-Atlantic) – 1.6 (Up 46.8%)
10. Colorado Avalanche (Altitude) – 1.56 (Up 13%)
11. Columbus Blue Jackets (FS Ohio) – 1.39 (Down 25.3%)
12. San Jose Sharks (CSN California) – 1.11 (Down 20.7%)
13. New York Rangers (MSG) – 0.89 (Down 18.3%)
14. Dallas Stars (FS Southwest) – 0.74 (Up 27.6%)
15. Phoenix Coyotes (FS Arizona) – 0.62 (Up 55%)
16. Tampa Bay Lightning (Sun Sports) – 0.60 (Up 27.7%)
17. New Jersey Devils (MSG Plus) – 0.58 (Up 48.7%)
18. Los Angeles Kings (FS West) – 0.48 (Up 50%)
19. Anaheim Ducks (Prime Ticket) – 0.42 (Up 50%)
20. New York Islanders (MSG Plus) – 0.36 (Up 100%)
21. Atlanta Thrashers (SportSouth) – 0.33 (Up 26.9%)
22. Florida Panthers (FS Florida) – 0.25 (Up 8.7%)
Households Watching
1. Pittsburgh Penguins – 93,000 (Up 25.7%)
2. Chicago Blackhawks – 86,000 (Up 132.4%)
3. Detroit Red Wings – 80,000 (Up 3.9%)
4. New York Rangers – 67,000 (Down 17.3%)
5. Philadelphia Flyers – 64,000 (Down 9.9%)
6. Boston Bruins – 53,000 (Down 13.1%)
7. New Jersey Devils – 43,000 (Up 48.3%)
8. Buffalo Sabres – 41,000 (Down 18%)
9. Washington Capitals – 37,000 (Up 48%)
T10. Minnesota Wild – 29,000 (Down 27.5%)
T10. St. Louis Blues – 29,000 (Up 20.8%)
12. San Jose Sharks – 28,000 (Down 20%)
T13. New York Islanders – 27,000 (Up 107.7%)
T13. Los Angeles Kings – 27,000 (Up 50%)
T15. Anaheim Ducks – 24,000 (Up 50%)
T15. Colorado Avalanche – 24,000 (Up 14.3%)
17. Dallas Stars – 19,000 (Up 35.7%)
18. Columbus Blue Jackets – 13,000 (Down 23.5%)
19. Phoenix Coyotes – 12,000 (Up 71.4%)
20. Tampa Bay Lightning – 11,000 (Up 22.2%)
21. Atlanta Thrashers – 8,000 (Up 33.3%)
22. Florida Panthers – 4,000 (Unchanged)
OTHER NEWS FROM THE BUSINESS OF SPORTS NETWORK
(THE BIZ OF BASEBALL)
Matthew Coller is a staff member of the Business of Sports Network, and is a freelance writer. He can be followed on Twitter
Follow the Business of Sports Network on Facebook |
|
|
Articles and Opinions
|
|
Written by Matthew Coller
|
|
Monday, 19 April 2010 15:35 |
|
SportsBusiness Daily reported that overall attendance in the NHL is down 2.2 percent from last season. In December, Biz of Hockey looked at how attendance was doing and found that it was down almost 5 percent from where the league finished in '09. The second half of the NHL season saw a sizable recovery possibly due to momentum gained from the Winter Classic, Olympics and playoff battles. And, despite the overall drop for the league's worst draw the Phoenix Coyotes, the team finished 12.4 percent higher than its first-half percentage. The Coyotes weren't the only team to see a second-half boost, the Nashville Predators finished 7 percent higher than they stood at mid-season while the Tampa Bay Lightning, Los Angeles Kings and Carolina Hurricanes finished with the overall numbers drawing just over 5 percent more fans than in the first half indicated. Only two teams saw second-half losses, the New York Rangers and the Atlanta Thrashers, both teams finished under 1 percent less than they were at mid-season.
Overall, the league drew finished 2.24 percent higher at the end of the season than where it stood at mid-season. Here's a look at the numbers, starting with the percentage of the stadium that was filled, through Dec. 2009 and where NHL teams' attendance finished the season (all numbers according to ESPN:
| Team |
First Half |
Season End |
% chg |
First Half AVG. |
Season End AVG. |
| Blackhawks |
105.1 |
108.3 |
3.2 |
20668 |
21356 |
| Canadiens |
100 |
100 |
0 |
21273 |
21273 |
| Red Wings |
95.3 |
97.4 |
2.1 |
19128 |
19546 |
| Flyers |
99.6 |
100.2 |
0.6 |
19413 |
19535 |
| Maple Leafs |
102.3 |
102.5 |
0.2 |
19224 |
19260 |
| Flames |
100 |
100 |
0 |
19289 |
19289 |
| Senators |
96.2 |
98.8 |
2.6 |
17790 |
18269 |
| Canucks |
102.1 |
102.1 |
0 |
18810 |
18810 |
| Wild |
100.7 |
101.9 |
1.2 |
18197 |
18415 |
| Blues |
97.7 |
98.6 |
0.9 |
18712 |
18883 |
| Sabres |
98.2 |
99.1 |
0.9 |
18360 |
18529 |
| Rangers |
100 |
99.3 |
-0.7 |
18200 |
18076 |
| Capitals |
100 |
100 |
0 |
18277 |
18277 |
| Stars |
91.6 |
92.9 |
1.3 |
16978 |
17215 |
| Sharks |
100.3 |
100.4 |
0.1 |
17553 |
17558 |
| Bruins |
97.9 |
99 |
1.1 |
17193 |
17388 |
| Ducks |
86.5 |
88.3 |
1.8 |
14848 |
15168 |
| Penguins |
100.6 |
100.7 |
0.1 |
17051 |
17078 |
| Oilers |
100 |
100 |
0 |
16839 |
16839 |
| Hurricanes |
76.3 |
81.4 |
5.1 |
14286 |
15240 |
| Lightning |
72.9 |
78.4 |
5.5 |
14403 |
15497 |
| Kings |
88.2 |
93.6 |
5.4 |
16325 |
17313 |
| Devils |
84.3 |
88.2 |
3.9 |
14854 |
15546 |
| Panthers |
74.6 |
78.7 |
4.1 |
14352 |
15146 |
| Blue Jackets |
80.7 |
85 |
4.3 |
14641 |
15416 |
| Avalanche |
76.1 |
77.5 |
1.4 |
13707 |
13947 |
| Predators |
80.2 |
87.5 |
7.3 |
13731 |
14979 |
| Coyotes |
56.1 |
68.5 |
12.4 |
9825 |
11989 |
| Thrashers |
73.7 |
73.4 |
-0.3 |
13667 |
13607 |
| Islanders |
75.5 |
78.1 |
2.6 |
12303 |
12735 |
| Totals |
90.42 |
92.66 |
2.24 |
16663.23 |
17072.63 |
OTHER NEWS FROM THE BUSINESS OF SPORTS NETWORK
(THE BIZ OF BASEBALL)
Matthew Coller is a staff member of the Business of Sports Network, and is a freelance writer. He can be followed on Twitter
Follow the Business of Sports Network on Facebook |
|
Articles and Opinions
|
|
Written by Matthew Coller
|
|
Monday, 18 January 2010 07:09 |
|
 All this talk must be making him Ilya. One thing is clear about Atlanta Thrashers winger Ilya Kovalchuk: he’ll be next on the list of famous departures from Atlanta sports teams. The list includes names such as Dominique Wilkins (Hawks), Deion Sanders (Falcons) and more recently Dany Heatley and Marian Hossa of the Thrashers.
Kovalchuk (who will be an unrestricted free agent after this season) and the Thrashers are reportedly unlikely to agree to a long-term extension, which leaves Atlanta with the option to trade Kovalchuk or let him go and get nothing in return. Rumors are aplenty. Monday, Jan. 11, Yahoo! Sports Mark J. Miller wrote that the Los Angeles Kings were a front runner. The King’s general manager Dean Lombardi took a personal trip to the ATL to see Kovalchuk play.
Other rumors include the Boston Bruins, Chicago Blackhawks, Detroit Red Wings and Vancouver Canucks. Then there were seven. By Friday, Jan. 15, another contender for the league’s leading scorer since 2002: the New York Islanders. The New York Post reported that GM Garth Snow did not rule out the possibility of jumping into the mix.
Whoever elects to pick up the monster goal scorer will need to have an agreement already in place to sign him long-term. With so many teams in the race, we may not know until the final hour. The trade deadline this season is March 3. Take a look at how things turned out in the past two seasons for some notable upcoming unrestricted free agents who were traded at the deadline:
Trade Deadline ’09:
Steve Montador: The defenseman was dealt from the Anaheim Ducks to the Boston Bruins at the ’08-’09 deadline for Petteri Nokelaine. The Buffalo Sabres signed Montador in the off-season to a 2-year, $3.1 million deal.
Ales Kotalik: Traded by Buffalo to Edmonton at last season’s deadline, Kotalik eventually signed in the off-season with the New York Rangers to a 3-year, $9 million contract.
Nik Anthropov: Rangers traded for Anthropov from the Toronto Maple Leafs for an ’09 draft pick. Anthropov was eventually signed by the Atlanta Thrashers to a 4-year, $16.25 million contract.
Dominic Moore: Traded from the Leafs to the Sabres at the deadline for a second-round pick. Moore signed before the ’09-’10 season with the Florida Panthers to a 1-year, $1.1 million deal.
Trade Deadline ’08:
Brian Campbell: Sabres traded defenseman Brian Campbell to the San Jose Sharks for a first-round draft pick and winger Steve Bernier. Campbell later signed an 8-year contract with the Chicago Blackhawks for around $7 million per season.
Cristobal Huet: Huet was dealt to the Capitals for a second-round pick. Once he hit free agency, Huet signed a 4-year, $22.4 million agreement with the Chicago Blackhawks.
Brad Stuart: After being traded from the Kings to the Detroit Red Wings at the deadline, Stuart decided to stick with the Wings at the price of $15 million over four years.
If you are noticing a trend, it’s that most of the players don’t resign with the team that trades for them. So, if Ilya gets traded, his suitor could possibly be a quick-fix team.
OTHER NEWS FROM THE BUSINESS OF SPORTS NETWORK
(THE BIZ OF BASEBALL)
- LWIB: The Media and Mark McGwire's Admission of Steroid Use
- Maury Brown on Sirius/XM (5:30pm ET): Sale of Rangers, Potential Sale of Astros
- White Sox Agree with Jenks, Quentin on Arbitration Avoiding Deals
- Reds Agree on 2-yr, $2.575M Deal with Nick Masset, Avoiding Arbitration
- John Maine, Mets Agree on 1-yr, $3.3M Deal, Avoiding Salary Arbitration
- Expect Sales Agreement on the Texas Rangers to Occur Any Day
- GREENBERG/RYAN GROUP RELEASES STATEMENT ON SALE OF TEXAS RANGERS
- Astros Avoid Arbitration with Keppinger, Sampson
- Transaction Action: Oakland Acquires Kevin Kouzmanoff from San Diego
- Rangers, Nippert Agree on 1-yr, $650K Deal Avoiding Salary Arbitration
- Complete Listing: 128 Players File for MLB Salary Arbitration
Matthew Coller is a staff member of the Business of Sports Network, and is a freelance writer. He can be followed on Twitter
Follow The Biz of Hockey on Twitter
Follow the Business of Sports Network on Facebook |
|
Articles and Opinions
|
|
Written by Matthew Coller
|
|
Saturday, 16 January 2010 07:24 |
|
 If Vancouver Canucks forward Alex Burrows played in the NBA, he’d be looking at a $25,000 fine. In the NHL, it’s $2,500. His crime? Burrows accused referee Stephane Auger was calling penalties in order to “get back at him” for a hit Burrows made in early December. What tipped off Burrows? First, Auger called the three penalties against Burrows in the third period of a 3-2 loss to Nashville. Second, Burrows says Augar told him he was going to.
After the game, Burrows said, “"It was personal. It started in warm up before the anthem. The ref (Auger) came over to me and said I made him look bad in Nashville on the Smithson hit (during a game Dec. 8, 2009). He said he was going to get me back tonight and he did his job in the third.”
Burrows said he thinks Auger should sit out the rest of the season. NHL Senior Executive Vice President of Hockey Operations Colin Campbell did not agree. He issued the following statement: “
The National Hockey League will not tolerate the personal nature of the comments Mr. Burrows directed at Referee Auger or the fact that he brought into question the integrity of both the official and the game.
"We have determined that Mr. Burrows’ account of Referee Auger’s comments to him before the game, and specifically Burrows’ suggestion that these comments indicated bias against the player or the Vancouver team, cannot be substantiated. While Referee Auger engaged the player in a brief conversation prior to the opening face-off, I firmly believe that nothing inappropriate was said and that Referee Auger’s intentions were beyond reproach."
Any time fixing, make-up calls or ref-player beefs arise, we can’t help but bring up former NBA referee Tim Donaghy. Whether you believe Donaghy or not, he brought possibility of dirty refs to the forefront. For example, Donaghy said in his book:
“As it turned out, Denver didn't need the win after all; they locked up a spot in the playoffs before they got to San Antonio. In a twist of fate, it was the Spurs that ended up needing the win to have a shot at the division title, and Bavetta generously accommodated. In our pregame meeting, he talked about how important the game was to San Antonio and how meaningless it was to Denver, and that San Antonio was going to get the benefit of the calls that night. Armed with this inside information, I called Jack Concannon before the game and told him to bet the Spurs.
“To no surprise, we won big. San Antonio blew Denver out of the building that evening, winning by 26 points. When Jack called me the following morning, he expressed amazement at the way an NBA game could be manipulated. Sobering, yes; amazing, no. That's how the game is played in the National Basketball Association.”
Quick note about this game: The Spurs shot 53 free throws compared to Denver’s 18 and won the game 93-67. Six players for the Nuggets had more than four fouls.
The lack of a harsh penalty against Burrows might not be meant to be an admission of guilt, but one could take it that way. Burrows claimed that Auger’s ego caused him to make bias calls. At very least, Donaghy proved to use refs can be egotists, too.
OTHER NEWS FROM THE BUSINESS OF SPORTS NETWORK
(THE BIZ OF BASEBALL)
Matthew Coller is a staff member of the Business of Sports Network, and is a freelance writer. He can be followed on Twitter
Follow The Biz of Hockey on Twitter
Follow the Business of Sports Network on Facebook |
|
Articles and Opinions
|
|
Written by Pete Toms
|
|
Saturday, 21 November 2009 04:11 |
|
 Despite Canadian billionaire Jim Balsillie’s recent failed attempt to buy the Phoenix Coyotes and re-locate the franchise to Hamilton ON., there is plenty of activity and conjecture which suggests that Canada could yet be home to one or more struggling presently US based franchises. At the same time, a number of struggling franchises in the “Sun Belt”, combined with a strong Canadian dollar and an abundance of available infrastructure dollars for new arenas make re-location(s) a realistic possibility. And does the willingness of Canadian politicians to commit to “public investment” in support of NHL franchises mark a change from previous eras when such proposals were met with a populist backlash against “corporate welfare”? If the “Sun Belt” implodes, will it cost Commissioner Gary Bettman his job?
Earlier this month while in Toronto, NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly told the local sports media that the NHL has no objection to a second franchise in the GTA. During the same discussion, Toronto Maple Leafs president and general manager Brian Burke said that under the right circumstances, Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment (MLSE, the Leafs owner) would not oppose the NHL locating a second franchise in “their” market.
“I don't think it's a point of contention even with the Leafs,” Daly said. “I can see a situation where by adding a franchise to a market, you can raise the tide for all boats. I don't think that because you put a franchise here, it necessarily makes the Leafs any less successful. And, in fact, it could create new revenue opportunities.”
Brian Burke, the Maple Leafs president and general manager, said the club has never officially opposed the idea of another franchise in its territory. Burke said if a study proved a second team would be beneficial to the Leafs and the NHL, the Leafs would not be opposed. Richard Peddie, president of the Leafs' parent company, Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment, has also said this.
The GTA is the most bountiful professional hockey market in North America (see recent Forbes NHL valuations) and nobody doubts that a second NHL franchise would be enthusiastically supported. However, the devil is always in the details and much would need to be resolved before a second franchise in the GTA becomes a reality. Whether or not the Leafs and maybe the Sabres (depending upon how close to Buffalo a second franchise would be) are entitled to “territorial indemnification” and what the value of that is, is somewhat a guessing game. And whether or not the Leafs and Sabres have a veto preventing a franchise from entering their market is another guessing game. In his aforementioned remarks to the Toronto sports media Mr. Daly remarked on the speculation surrounding a Leafs “veto”, “They can be dead set against it, but that doesn't mean they can stop the league from putting a franchise here if the league thinks a franchise here makes sense.” Mr. Daly’s remarks will do little to quell the speculation and uncertainty over the “veto”. During the bankruptcy auction of the Coyotes, Mr. Balsille’s lawyers presented a letter from the Leafs to the NHL stating that they (the Leafs) had a “veto”. There has also been much conjecture over the interpretation of the NHL constitution as it relates to franchise re-location. Some believe that franchise re-location requires a unanimous vote amongst owners - a de facto veto for the Leafs - while the league claims (at least publicly) that a simple majority vote is sufficient.
Ultimately these negotiations are solely about money, the details and legalities of the league constitution and territorial indemnification will be irrelevant if a deal can be brokered. (I.E. Leafs and/or Sabres satisfactorily compensated) A more fundamental concern to any owner wanting to bring a second team to the GTA is finding or constructing a suitable arena. Could MLSE (also owners of the Air Canada Centre arena) be landlord to a second NHL franchise or is it a necessity that a second franchise control “their” arena? Is a second NHL calibre arena in the GTA a realistic proposition (land acquisition, construction costs, zoning, transportation infrastructure, politics, public investment)? Mr. Balsillie’s plan was to move the Coyotes in to Copps Coliseum in Hamilton. (capacity approx 19,000) In Mr. Daly’s recent remarks in Toronto, he was cynical about the viability of an NHL franchise operating out of “Copps“, “….Copps Coliseum doesn't provide modern-day NHL economics.” Mr. Balsille recognized that Copps Coliseum required significant investment in order for it to generate the revenue necessary to sustain an NHL franchise. While Mr. Daly questioned where that investment would come from, local, provincial and federal politicians all eagerly pledged their support for Mr. Balsille’s plans to upgrade “Copps”. And upgrading “Copps” is a much less costly option than constructing a new arena. If the NHL is opposed to re-locating a franchise to Hamilton, it could be a result of wanting to protect the Buffalo market (vastly more vulnerable than the Leafs) or a vindictive response to local Hamilton officials unbridled and public support for Mr. Balsille’s "Make it Seven” campaign.
Select Read More to see the rest of "Relocating NHL Franchises to Canada" by Pete Toms
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 4 of 7 |
|
|
|
Articles and Opinion
