The Show.

Welcome to The Show's first ever podcast! We're pretty excited about bringing some audio to our followers and we hope you enjoy it. Since this is a new feature, feedback would be much appreciated.

In this edition I'm joined by Ryan Pinder who's the play-by-play voice of the Penticton Vees of the BCHL, a contributing writer for NHL.com and a freelance writer and broadcaster. The NHL is on topic as we talk the good and bad of the league at this point in the season, salary cap, Steven Stamkos and the Lightning, hits to the head, PK Subban, NHL attendance and more.

Enjoy!





Ryan's blog can be found here

Anyone who has ever been on the playground during recess can appreciate what the NHL is doing with this year's All Star Game. Every league has a goal of keeping its All Star Games innovative and fresh so they can maintain fan interest, and the NHL has a history of switching things up and trying new formats. For a while they did North America vs. The World as opposed to East vs. West, but this year it's a whole new game, and in my opinion, a much better game. This year, two captains will pick from a field of players and the two teams will play. Pretty simple, just like the days of touch football in elementary school. With this format, instead of playing for a conference that a player probably doesn't have a ton of pride in, said player is playing for someone who picked them for a reason. This boost's up the pride factor which should make it a more intriguing game from a player's standpoint, which in turn will make it more interesting for fans. All Star games are notorious for being bland but I think this will put an interesting spin on things and make the game much more interesting.

One of, if not the most important part of any All Star Game is fan interest. How are you going to assure that fans are going to be interested and intrigued? Every league has tried different things to maintain a strong fan following. The MLB made their All Start Game matter by awarding the winning league home-field advantage in the World Series, and in the midst of receiving criticism about the declining interest in the NBA slam dunk competition, the NBA and it's players began to make things interesting by incorporating props, costumes, and even food. Fan voting is a good way to ensure interest, but only to an extent. Luckily, the NHL hasn't given fans 100% say in who is in the game, but they've given fans the power to choose the top six players (a goalie, two defensemen and three forwards), which is a very happy medium. The league will pick an additional 36 which will assure that the right players get into the game. Out of the 42 selected players, two captains will pick the team's they want, regardless of what conference the players are in. This will make it the best game possible for two reasons: The first reason is that the east vs. west format doesn't assure a good matchup. As we've seen in baseball, the AL has dominated the All Star Game by for the better part of the last decade, losing just once since 1997. With captains picking teams, there will be much more parity and will thus lead to a better game. The second reason is that the captains may not necessarily pick the best players, but rather the right players. It's not always about having as many top goal scorers on your team as possible, but rather having the players that will work well together and give you a well balanced team.

A big argument for those against this All Star Game's format is the fact that someone is going to be picked last. I'm sure you remember this process as a kid: the captains pick the best players first and when it comes to the last few players feelings inevitably get hurt. To me though, if I'm considered the worst All Star in the NHL, I'm still an All Star in the NHL, right? Being named to the game is enough of an honor, and if I'm picked last I could care less. Of course that's just me, but these players are grown men. I'm sure being picked at all will negate any hard feelings or embarrassment, if there's any at all.

I was skeptical of this change at first because it's such a dramatic one, but the more I've learned about it and the more I've thought about it, the more I like it. It takes pro hockey to the pond where all that matters is playing the game. It'll be a lot of fun to see these players playing for each other rather than playing for a conference. Although All Star Game's in general are known for being somewhat sluggish or trite, I think this new format will add a bit more energy and pride to make it a game of interest. Whether it will work or not, I have no idea. All I know is that the league has my interest as a fan, which is essentially their goal.

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)