The Show.

The picture* to the right was taken during the second period of a Phoenix Coyotes game on October 21st. The Coyotes beat the Kings that night 4-2 in front of a crowd that didn't quite reach 7,000 people. For a team that went to game 7 and nearly upset Detroit in the first round of last years playoffs, that number is frankly embarrassing. However, Phoenix isn't the only team to boast a crowd lower than 10,000 this week. Atlanta had two games last week in which less than 10,000 people showed up. On Wednesday, Oct. 20th, the Thrasher's suffered a 4-1 loss to Buffalo in front of just under 9,000 people, and just two days later in a loss to the Lightning only about 9,100 people showed up. Columbus had a game against the Ducks last week where 9,800 people showed up. People may think that this is a coincidence or just a fluke that will happen once in a while, but the fact of the matter is that there are too many hockey teams in unmarketable, apathetic cities, and that if the NHL wants to grow it's going to have to make some adjustments. Keep in mind that the season is less than a month old; what's going to happen if these teams are ten games under .500 40 games into the season and their playoff hopes are gone?

To put things in perspective and to think about the way things could and should be, consider this: there are six Canadian teams in the NHL. According to ESPN's attendance statistics, five out of those six teams averaged 100% capacity at their home games during the 2009-2010 season. The one team that didn't average 100% capacity was the Ottawa Senators, who averaged 98.8% capacity. In the same year six American teams averaged under 80% capacity. Perhaps even more astounding is that the Toronto Maple Leafs averaged a 102% capacity rate during the 09-10 season, despite finishing the year as the second worst team in the league. The worst team in the league, the Edmonton Oilers, averaged 100% capacity. This has to tell you something. Canadian teams will sell out whether their team is the best in the league or literally the worst in the league. The Leafs and Oilers were not even close to making the playoffs, yet every seat was filled in their rinks. Meanwhile, the Phoenix Coyotes, who were a playoff team, had the worst attendance in the league, averaging under 12,000 fans a game. In fact, of the ten teams with the worst attendance in 09-10 (all of whom are US teams), four were playoff teams. So when the worst teams in the league can average nearly twice the crowd of certain playoff teams, it tells me one thing: hockey isn't dead, it's just in the wrong places.

As hockey's crowds have diminished over the past couple years it's evident that there are certain US markets where a hockey team isn't practical, such as Phoenix, Atlanta, Florida, and Nashville. People will argue that these markets have been good at some point or that they have the potential to be better, and these arguments may be true, but when you consider what these teams could be if they moved to different markets, the comparisons aren't even close. It's one thing to have a great year and have great crowds during a playoff run, but it's a completely different thing to have sold out crowds regardless of how good or bad your team is. Imagine if the league cut four of its US teams and put them in Canada. Having two teams in Ontario, two teams in Quebec and two teams in British Columbia, for example, could do wonders for the game in terms of the rivalries and interest that would inevitably spike. Hockey's goal should be to bring the game to the most passionate, interested, and marketable cities possible. The league has accomplished this in many US cities, such as Detroit, Philadelphia and Chicago, however many US markets diminish the impact these cities have been able to make on the game. Although seemingly a contradiction, moving the teams from non-viable markets to more legitimate markets (perhaps in Canada) could effectively make hockey more prevalent in the US. Hockey is thriving in Canada as it always has, but in certain places in the US it is merely surviving. However, we're starting to see a trend that could ruin hockey in much of the US. Changes need to be made by the NHL to ensure that hockey doesn't fade in the US, but rather begins to thrive.

Going back to the Phoenix Coyotes game against the Kings in which less than 7,000 people showed up, Paul Bissonnette (BizNasty2point0), a Coyotes winger, said on twitter after the game, "...Thanks to the 5000 fans that showed up. Did people think it was 11 o'clock start?" and later said, "...Guess we actually had more then 5000 fans for our game. Didn't realize it was dress like a seat night. Close to a sell out." Although making light of the situation, the fact that Phoenix is a terribly suited market for a hockey team remains. Certain people may blame the game of hockey but it's not the game's fault, rather it's the market's fault, and if you think there's any doubt about it being the market's fault then watch the Coyotes play in front of 21,000 people Monday night in Montreal. Upon seeing this it becomes evident that to Montreal fans, much like the fans in other legitimate hockey markets, it doesn't matter how good or bad their team is or who's coming into town to play them. All that matters is that there's a hockey game.




*Picture courtesy of James Mirtle twitter (@mirtle)

I heard a story about a guy who, prior to the 2007-2008 NFL season, placed a $400 bet in Vegas saying the Patriots would go undefeated that season and win the Super Bowl. By the Super Bowl, the bet made it's way to $12 million. That's a tough bet to make (and if you read on you'll find out what happened to that bet!), but an even tougher bet would've been to say the Dallas Cowboys would start this year with a 1-4 record. I don't know anyone who would've guessed that, especially considering the majority of people considered the Cowboys a favorite to represent the NFC in this year's Super Bowl. So what exactly is going on in the big D that has the football world scratching its head?

At first glance it's tough to see why the Cowboys are struggling so much so far this season. After all, they're in the leagues top 5 in total offense, (400 YPG - *all stats as of week 6*) total defense (281 YPG) passing (305 YPG) and passing yards against (180 YPG). They seem to be getting production from the places they're expected to get production from, however some key aspects have made all the difference for the struggling Cowboys. Only 5 teams have been penalized more times so far this season (and the Cowboys have only played five games), and the teams turnover margin is -4 - 27th in the league. Compare that to the Jets who have a +11 margin. Needless to say, it's hard for the opposing team to score if they don't have the ball. The team has got to be frustrated because they know that their record is a reflection of their own careless mistakes and missed opportunities. Wide receiver Roy Williams told Sports Illustrated, "We're 4-0. The Dallas Cowboys are 4-0. Our losses are because we beat ourselves. We can't turn the ball over, and make all these mistakes. I'm tired and I'm frustrated, because we're better than what we're doing.'' So while they've had the ability to win many games they've lost, the Cowboys have learned first-hand that little things done wrong add up, and ultimately lead to being unsuccessful. All four losses this year have been by 7 points or less, so it's clear that they've been in every game, but with that being said it's evident - as cliche as it is/sounds - that little mistakes and blown chances can be the difference between a winning and losing record. Between being the team you should be and the team you are.

It's clear that the Cowboys have all the talent a football team could want, so it's certainly conceivable that they could turn things around and maybe even find themselves in the playoff hunt, but it won't be easy at all for them. If they want to make the playoffs they're going to have to win at least eight or their remaining eleven games, but with two against the Giants, two against the Eagles, one against the Colts, one against the Saints and one against the Packers, they had better figure some things out soon or they're going to be hitting up the golf courses early this year instead of playing for the Super Bowl on their home turf like everyone expected them to.

In the midst of all the disappointment and frustration going on in Dallas, they seem to be sticking with what they have. Jerry Jones made it clear that Wade Phillips' job is safe (for now at least) which may not be a popular decision in Dallas but it does tell you that the organization seems to trust their original plan, and they see what they have as being adequate. Speaking of adequate, I (as promised) have to explain what happened with that Patriots bet. Before the Super Bowl the place the man made the bet with told him the bet had been raised from the original $400 to $12 million. They said he could back out before the game and they'd give him $6 million on the spot, or he could stay in and go for the $12 million. Perhaps not seeing the $6 million as adequate or maybe being blinded by the Patriot's overwhelming status as favorites and shoe-in's for the Lombardi Trophy, he stuck in there, going with his original plan (much like the Cowboys are doing now) and ended up -$400. Come to think of it, maybe Dallas shouldn't stick with Wade Phillips...

Tonight is a big night in baseball. Game 5 of the ALDS is tonight between the Rays and Rangers, the winner of whom will face the Yankees in the ALCS. Since about game 30 of this season I've had a feeling the Rangers would represent the AL in the World Series this year, so without further ado here are my 5 reasons the Rangers will win Game 5 tonight:

1) The Rays' (Lack Of) Home-Field-"Advantage"

In most ballparks a playoff atmosphere is extremely uplifting for the home team and rattling for the visitors. However, with the Rays recent playoff success over the last couple of years it has become evident that their ballpark is slightly different. Tropicana has become notorious for being a boring ballpark, even in the post-season which is slightly embarrassing. The fans in Florida are a bit too relaxed to effectively rev up a ball club which will in turn hurt the club.



2) Cliff Lee

This guy is dominant in the playoffs. In fact, he's never lost a playoff game. You can't argue with results. If I'm going into a playoff game with him I'm pretty confident, and nothing against David Price but the Rangers have a big edge when it comes to starting pitching tonight. If the Rangers bats are going at all tonight they should be in a good position to win the game. I mean, if Cliff Lee is on the mound you have a good shot at winning if you score 3 runs, which isn't the case with most pitchers.

If you'll all remember a few weeks back for me when the New York Jet played the New England Patriots, you may recall an interaction between two disputing athletes. In case you forgot, it was settled with this:





Making that one-handed catch was ex-Patriot wide receiver Randy Moss, and struggling to catch him was Jets cornerback Darrelle Revis. What makes this interesting is the fact that Revis was quoted as calling Moss a "slouch" during the offseason, and with the media being what it is, the match-up was built up and hyped like crazy. After getting beat on the play Revis went out with a hamstring injury, and a lot of people have speculated whether the injury was an excuse or for real. Luckily for those people, answers may come this Monday night as the Vikings and newly acquired wide receiver Randy Moss take on the Jets with recently-healed and expected-to-play Darrelle Revis. Reports this week claim that Revis has been practicing and is expected to play on Monday night in the Meadowlands.

It's as if they were meant to be together. Just as Revis is getting back to full health, Moss gets traded and will immediately test that newly rehabilitated hamstring that he burned just a couple weeks ago. My guess is that Revis is going to have somewhat of a "lingering" pain in the hammy making it hard for him to cover Moss (and make sure to look for extra limping from Revis any time a receiver he's covering makes a catch). I'm putting my money on Moss, and don't be surprised if Revis is on the DL again come Tuesday.

Roy Halladay was a question to some going into playoffs. Yes, he had an unbelievable season - one that will most likely earn him his second Cy Young award - but he had never pitched a playoff inning, and regardless of how good a player may be, there's always a question about how an athlete will perform come playoff time. However, Roy took that question and answered it with an exclamation as he pitched a no-hitter in his first ever playoff start.


As I saw this happening it was of course exciting. There had been only one playoff no-hitter in the history of baseball, but what's more is that, for those who forgot, Halladay already pitched a no-hitter this year (actually, it was a perfect game if you want to get technical about it.) Tonight he became the first player to ever pitch a no-hitter in the regular season and playoffs of the same year. So like I said, exciting? Of course. Surprising? Not totally. If there's one guy in baseball who could do this it'd be Doc Halladay. His work ethic is legendary, and the amount he studies his opponents gives Peyton Manning a run for his money. So with that being said, let me rephrase what my emotions were like: was I surprised that a major league pitcher was able to throw a regular season and playoff no-hitter in the same year? Absolutely. Was I surprised that that pitcher happened to be Roy Halladay? No.

As for an impression, Halladay has Phillies fans breathing easy. Like I said earlier, how a guy will perform in the playoffs is always a question. Look at A-Rod. He's notorious (with the exception of last season) for slumping in the playoffs. He'd put up great numbers all season and come playoff time he'd choke. That's what the post-season can do to a lot of players. The pressure is too much, it gets in their head and they crumble. Halladay isn't like other players though. You wanna talk about pressure? This start has been building up for 13 years. He's been a top three pitcher in baseball for the last decade and now, after all that time and all that dominance he was getting his shot in the spotlight with everyone watching. So being the kind of player he is, he took that shot and did what he's been doing his whole career. With the pressure on he was like a rock. He was in the zone and there was no way he was gonna crack. If you watched the game you know what I'm talking about. Some of his pitches were literally unhittable. But that's what Doc does, even when it counts most.

As for the Phils, they've been known as an offensive team, which explains a majority of the success they've had in the last few years, but now combine that veteran offense with the three aces the team has and you have a very scary combination (unless you're a Phillies fan, of course.)

And in case you missed it:

If you haven't seen Ron Shelton's 30 for 30 documentary about Michael Jordan entitled Jordan Rides The Bus, run, don't walk. It was aired a few weeks ago and I caught most of it as it re-ran a couple nights ago on TSN, and from the time I turned it on my eyes were glued to the TV, amazed by what I was seeing. We've all heard about MJ's stint as a baseball player in the minor leagues, but what people don't think about is what that really meant. This is a guy who left the world of basketball when he was on top, looking down at all those who worshipped him. He took his fame and put it in jeopardy, knowing very well that his decision to play baseball was an unpopular one. He took a step down from his pedestal and joined the class of normal athletes fighting for a job. Minor league baseball is a grind, and Jordan worked for the same goal all minor leaguers work for, without special treatment (hence him riding the bus.) It's so easy to look at the most elite, successful athletes in the world and crave for what they have, but Jordan took everything that anyone would ever want and started over. There aren't many reasons why an athlete would consider a change like this, but then again not many athletes have the amount of drive or love of competition Jordan had. The craving to be the best consumed him. He took that idea so many of us have of accomplishing whatever it is we want to accomplish - no matter how out-of-reach it may seem or how much sacrifice it may require - and he made it his reality, fearlessly.

The question that kept going through my head during this entire documentary had nothing to do with why he decided to make this dramatic change. Why he did it was clear - other than his obvious love of the game, he wanted to live a dream he shared with his father as well as answer a lingering question about whether he could rise through the ranks and make it to the big leagues. The question I did ask myself, however, was where (and whether) we could see this today. Watching this film reminded me of Jordan's legendary passion. His passion was clear when he played basketball and apparently clear when he played baseball, according to those who were around him. Jordan's hitting coach talked about the countless hours Jordan would spend trying to perfect his swing, and he also said he couldn't remember a player who worked harder than Jordan did at getting better every single day. Remember, we're talking about a guy who had already won 3 world championships and had ruled the sport he was known for playing. This kind of passion is rare, and I'm not going to say that there aren't any athletes with passion today, but I will say that finding an athlete who can do what Jordan did strictly for the love of the game and competition is extremely hard to find.

The intrigue of Michael Jordan doesn't just lie in the numbers he put up, the records he broke, the championships he won or the accolades he acquired along the way. What's intriguing about Jordan is that he did it all for the sport. It's cliche but he looked beyond the perks - the money, fame, cars, etc. - and played for the love of sport, and if this love was ever in question, it was answered when he decided to play baseball.

He clearly and simply illustrated his attitude toward his athletic career when he said, "I play the game because I love the game." It's not a very complex attitude but Jordan wasn't a very complex player. His style of play was straight forward. He played his heart out every night and played to win, and when he did win he wanted more, and regardless of the sport he played to be the best. His play and attitude were inspiring, and this 30 for 30 film illustrates that without leaving a stone unturned. So if you haven't seen it, do yourself a favor to remind yourself what an athlete should look, play, and act like: