Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Compare the Y's

Yesterday, Dan Gross of the Philadelphia Daily News did his best to save us all from the painful drought that is hockey's off-season when he wrote an interesting "exposé" (gossip column) on the Mike Richards and Jeff Carter trades...complete with inside information from two unnamed Flyers players.  In his article, Gross writes that partying and refusing to be a part of "Dry Island" (more on that in a minute) may have played a role in the shocking overhaul that saw the Philadelphia Flyers trade away two of their best players, one of whom was their captain.



From Dan Gross:
The two unnamed players said the Flyers front office was disappointed in Carter and Richards' longstanding party lifestyle and that teammates were concerned about the pair's drinking.
Shortly after his arrival in December 2009, coach Peter Laviolette instituted what players came to call the "Dry Island." Laviolette asked team members to commit to not drinking for a month, and each player was asked to write his number on a locker room board as a pledge. No. 17 (Carter) and No. 18 (Richards) were absent from the board on the first Dry Island, as well as the estimated five more times the policy was instituted.
In a phone interview Thursday, Flyers General Manager Paul Holmgren confirmed that Richards and Carter hadn't put their numbers on the board, but said there had been others who declined. "We carry 23 players and there wasn't 23 numbers up there."
We will never know the 100%-true story here, of that much we can be certain.  Maybe it was never that big of a deal in the first place.  But if any of this is true, in any way, it's almost as though a moderately powerful earthquake just hit "Hockeyland", tearing open a gaping hole to the Flyers' locker room...and the aftershocks of that and of the issue at hand will be interesting to examine.

What's so amazing about this story is that 1) two players would discuss this with any member of the media and 2) something like this may have actually played out to the point where Richards and Carter essentially "lost their jobs."

Lately, my friends and I have been talking about the jobs and the job application process and how that all relates to living in a world of TMI and incriminating Facebook photos, blog posts, Tweets, etc.  We are an extremely connected generation.  A very opinionated, self-important, overly trusting connected generation...and that can come back to haunt us at the worst possible times.  Especially when you consider that our generation places quite a bit of importance on balancing work and play...something potential/current employers know all too well.

But can you be part of "our generation" if your job depends on near-total dedication for a seven (or nine if you're that good) month span?  Does "our generation" have room for people who achieve most when their bodies are in peak condition?  When their time spent 'at work' markedly increases their chance for success?  When work IS life?

Sometimes when we view professional athletes, we don't see them in the context of what they really are:  People.  Mike Richards is a 26-year old man.  He's my age.  He also happens to be one of the best centers in the NHL and, up until last month, the captain of one of the more successful hockey franchises as of late.  And Jeff Carter?  He is also 26, also my age...and also a damn good center.  From October to April (or June...if they're lucky), these two men have a job to do (which of course doesn't account for off-season training) and over the past few seasons, they've done it well.  You can't talk about the top 25 centers in the league without including their names.  You can't form gold medal-winning Team Canada without including their talent (at least initially.  Carter was the last man cut...).  And up until last month, you couldn't imagine the Philadelphia Flyers without picturing their faces.

And now, at least some of that has changed.  The talent is still there...but the identity and what that meant is gone.  The pair who defined the Flyers, who represented their future, has been broken into two single players, both of whom will have to carve new careers from the remains of their former one.   As for the Flyers, they are no longer the same team that came within two wins of a Stanley Cup one year ago but instead, but are instead a team that has changed so remarkably, it won't even recognize itself in the mirror when the puck drops in October.

The trades of Richards and Carter felt so unnatural, so strange, and so improbable that much of the hockey world was completely shocked any GM in his right mind would sign off on them.  But Paul Holmgren did...

...and now this.  Now comes the speculation that at least some of the decision was based on what many people would term "acting like a normal 26 year old man".

So where's the line?  How much can these men act like men and not only like hockey players?  How much of a personal life can you really have when so much of your personal life is wrapped up in the requirement that your body is the most important tool of your your job?  And if you can still do your job while living your life outside of it, can your boss really have a say in what you do during your time off?  Especially if what you do has no impact on how you perform at work?  And if you're a professional athlete, is that your job...or your identity?

And what happens when your co-workers essentially throw your personal life in your face?  When "what happens at work stays at work" becomes null and void?

Living in Washington DC, I've seen a fair amount of 26 year-old males on successful career paths...and I've seen a lot of them out at the bars, drinking, having fun, blowing off some steam, etc.  Obviously I have no insight into the depth and breadth of how they spend their free time, just as I have no insight into the depth and breath of what Richards and Carter choose to do when they're not on the ice, but isn't having that balance between work and play something all of us strive for?  Something all of us want?  Something that keeps us grounded and working and pushing to be better? And should we be penalized for it if it doesn't affect our jobs?  Should we be penalized for holding a drink in a snapshot?  For speaking our minds?  For having a weekend? Or has it become impossible to separate our life at work and our life at play?

The bottom line is, "we" can...but maybe they can't...because what differentiates Richards and Carter from other 26 year-olds in the workforce is that they are ultimately professional athletes first...and 26-year old men second.  In today's NHL, one simply cannot afford to lose a step because that may be the step you never get back.  But is that really fair?  Can anyone really be asked to be "at work" every second of every day?

You can't.  So the question now becomes, who in the Flyers locker room had a problem with it?  And did it really have any affect on how either Richards or Carter did his job?  And exactly how out of line was it for any of this to become public knowledge?

It's all out of the Flyers' hands now and whether trading Richards and Carter was the wrong decision or not is no longer up for debate.  What's done is done.  But how will this play out in the Flyers' locker room?  In locker rooms around the NHL?  Is it an isolated incident or something every player will be more aware of in the future?  And is that fair?  And, at the core, is it really that different from the dilemmas we all face when trying to enter the workforce or stay afloat within it?

I guess until you've had Chris Pronger someone spilling secrets about your personal life to the media, it's just not possible to say...

-Shaela


Tuesday, July 12, 2011

I needed to mourn the loss of another hockey season.  Now I need to get over it and move on to hockey season's much less attractive friend, baseball season.

I'll get there...

Thursday, June 16, 2011

Athens, Cairo...or Vancouver?

Based on recent events in Vancouver featuring burning cars, fan on fan violence, looting, police in riot gear, etc., I figured this little experiment would be fairly eye-opening.  It's called Guess Which City and it starts...right now.
First we have the aforementioned Vancouver, a once beautiful city in British Columbia now turned to ruin by a bunch of overzealous, angry, and immature hockey fans.  When the Nucks lost the Cup to the Bruins, Nucks fans...completely lost their shit.  Cars were flipped, fires were set, property was damaged, fans were attacked (by other fans).  It was complete pandemonium...over a hockey game.

Then we have Athens, Greece, a city known for its beauty and ancient architecture.  Riots have broken out this year over the ailing Greek economy and the new measures Greece must comply with in regards to the terms set by the 110 billion Euro bailout package. Major labor protests have occurred as Greece struggles to find a way out of bankruptcy. 

Finally, there's Cairo, Egypt, another beautiful city filled with history and antiquity.  The riots in January were part of a chain reaction initiated by Tunisia, about unsatisfactory social conditions and government oppression. High levels of unemployment were a heavily contributing factor. In Egypt, specifically, the government suppressed the Internet and cell phone communication of its citizens so that many details concerning the riots did not get transmitted onto web sites such as Yahoo! and Facebook.

Two cities in social unrest, another mired in the despair that comes with losing in the playoffs.  Can you guess which city is which?  Let's find out...

HIGHLIGHT CAPTIONS BELOW PHOTOS FOR ANSWER
Cairo
Vancouver








Athens

HIGHLIGHT CAPTIONS BELOW PHOTOS FOR ANSWER
Athens
Cairo
Vancouver
That's it folks.  Short game, I know but it really only takes two rounds to determine the magnitude one hockey game has on a city and its fans.  Unfortunately, when you're able to compare that event with serious social unrest...it's time to start asking some pretty heavy questions of a society at large...

I feel for you Nucks fans, I really do, but this is asinine.  Especially the fan-on-fan fighting.  Are you fucking kidding me?  You all fought together through an entire playoff run, urging your team on, and when it ends and you don't win, you turn on each other?  Does that make ANY sense? 

Disgusting.  Absolutely disgusting.

-Shaela

Oh Vancouver...



 

B's Win! And it only took 39 years of waiting...

For an Avs fan (and therefore, Nucks hater by default), Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals could not have ended any better.  The Bruins won in a shut out.  Thomas got the Conn Smythe.  Everyone booed Bettman (again). Horton got to lift the Cup with his teammates..and now we all get to spend the next 110 days or so (in which hockey goes into hibernation) without the burden of hearing how fantastic Luongo and the Sedins are.

What happened up there in Vancouver last night?  It was as though Boston put their foot on the gas pedal and never let up, but Vancouver couldn't even get their car started. This was Game 7, Nucks.  This was "Lay it all on the line, win or go home, battle 'til the final whistle, don't look back" hockey.  And honestly, the only team to do that last night was Boston and as a result, they deserve every single moment they have with the Cup this summer...and the Nucks deserve to sit back and question everything they did wrong.

Life is good.  And so was this year's Final.

It really was a fantastic series with so many amazing story lines.  We all watched Tim Thomas, a 37-year old previously-discarded goalie become a puck-stopping maniac and playoff hero.  We all wondered if Luongo could rise above the pressure and the expectations of failure and pull out one final win on home ice.  We all took guesses on exactly how badly Ryan Kesler is injured.  We all teared up a bit (okay, maybe just me, but I have no shame) when Nathan Horton poured Boston water on Vancouver ice and then, later, actually got to skate out on said ice and lift the Cup with his team (after languishing away in Florida for six seasons, it was SO good to see what this kid can really do). 

We all watched this incredible series with the remarkable knowledge that it was always, until Game 7, a tale of two cities.  Had history repeated, this Nucks hater would be writing a much different blog today.  Instead, this morning, she's smiling, happy, elated.  The world seems as it should be (unless of course you happen to live anywhere near Rogers Arena.  Then your world is still potentially on fire...)

And so, we put hockey to bed for the season and begrudingly turn our focus to baseball.  Come quick, October; this will not be pretty.

-Shaela

Sunday, May 22, 2011

The Thrasher Caveat

I'll admit it:  There's a large part of me that wants the Thrashers to move to Winnipeg.  After all, if the team isn't widely appreciated in Atlanta, why shouldn't they move somewhere they would be celebrated?  It seems logical, kind even.  Winnipeg gets a team back and Atlanta...gets to stay Atlanta.

But that's not the whole story.  Not by a long shot.  It would be if the Thrashers had no one cheering for them at all, but they do (albeit a small fraction of Atlanta's population).  And those people are about to lose all of it.

By next season, there may never be hockey in Atlanta again.

What gets me more than anything is the hypocrisy of it all.  How long has the NHL fought to keep the Coyotes, who are one rung below Atlanta in attendance, in Phoenix?  And for what?  Have Coyotes fans really come out in droves to support their PLAYOFF-CALIBER team?  Not really.  And to me, that is much more telling than Atlanta's attendance issues, as the Thrashers have only made the playoffs once in ten seasons.  In that same time frame, the Coyotes have gone four times. 

And yet, Phoenix is saved while Atlanta is likely Winnipeg-bound.  It could have been either team but it's ultimately the less successful one, the one with fewer opportunities to cultivate a fanbase through its successes.  Who's to say the Thrashers weren't all that far off from a few playoff runs?  And who's to say a few playoff runs couldn't have changed things, even just a little bit?

Now we'll likely never know (although to be fair, the Thrashers would make the second team Atlanta has lost, third if you count the Knights.  Hockey has been in Atlanta before...and failed.)

The photo above could not be more telling.  The fight is there...unless the opportunity for a clean sale overpowers it.

"Because we fight hard for every city [except Atlanta] and our fans need to know that we don't just run out [unless we can make a clean break]"

I'm really sorry, Thrashers fans.

-Shaela

Monday, May 16, 2011

Winnipeg...Thrashers

Breaking, although not entirely shocking, news out of Atlanta today.  According to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Atlanta Spirit LCC, the group that owns the Atlanta Thrashers, is in negotiations with True North in regards to the sale and relocation of the team.  After all the talk about selling the Phoenix Coyotes and sending them up to Winnipeg, it appears as though Atlanta is now the much more likely candidate.

It hasn't been easy to be a Thrashers fan.  Since their first season in 1999-2000, the Atlanta Thrashers have been in the playoffs once and were swept by the NY Rangers.  Many of Atlanta's superstars have gone on to play for other teams and, despite the Thrashers' slow growing group of solid players, it's difficult to say whether anyone will really ever consider Atlanta to be a viable piece of the hockey world.

I personally liked where Atlanta was heading.  They did well during free agency to bring in some very decent players and were, at one point this season, in sight of another playoff berth.  In my opinion, they won the Ilya Kovalchuk deal and had some good things to look forward to in the coming years.  But it's not about what the Atlanta Thrashers did.  It's about what the fans did not do and plainly, they did not show up.  To the tune of 28th in attendance...

It's difficult to blame them.  When the product on the ice is so poor for so long, you really can't expect people to budget for tickets.  At the same time, is it crazy to believe owners would be more inclined to spend on talent if tickets were selling like crazy?  Doubled edged sword to say the least...

As an Avalanche fan, I feel extremely lucky to have been gifted such a talented team from day one.  Colorado benefited mightily from Quebec's failures and it is not outside of the realm of possibility that if we hadn't, the Avs would be in the running for Winnipeg as well.  Though that statement is disappointing, it is not far from the truth.  Attendance in Denver has been dipping significantly over the last few seasons...right along with the Avs' success (or lack their of).  In a few years, if things don't turn around, who's to say the Avs won't be the next Thrashers or Coyotes.

You really have to feel for the fans in Atlanta.  There are probably some who live and breathe the Thrashers just as much as I live and breathe the Avalanche.  But it's just not enough.  You can't hemorrhage $20 million a year and just keep things as they are.

All of this really makes you appreciate those other franchises who, despite extremely lackluster performances season after season, continue to sell out their stadiums and rally support for their team (Toronto Maple Leafs...I'm looking at you).  It also makes you question other franchises who succeed year after year and rarely ever fill their arena (WTF Devils fans...).

What does it take to draw fans exactly?  Is it success?  Simply starting in the right market?  A superstar or two?  A storied history?  A hockey culture?  All of the above?

Maybe in October, Winnipeg will get a chance to tell us...

-Shaela



"I Hate Winnipeg" by the Weakerthans

Saturday, May 14, 2011

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

To Detroit, With Love: Game 7 - - From: San Jose

Dear Sharks,

Now you've done it:  You've seriously, SERIOUSLY screwed yourselves.

Words cannot adequately portray just how big this "Detroit Problem" is right at this very moment.  Catastrophe doesn't quite cover it.  Crisis doesn't either.

I will grant there has been some very close games this series and moments in which I felt there was a legitimate chance for a Round 3 in your future...but the point is, after 60 minutes, you've been the loser three of the past three games.  And the glaring issue is that it would have only taken one push, one flurry, one huge shift...and this series could have been over with you advancing to play Vancouver on Saturday.

You haven't had that push, that flurry, that shift.  But Detroit has.  They've found their stride.  And that is why we're now possibly on the verge of witnessing a second 0-3 comeback in two years.

Fanfuckingtastic.

What the hell is wrong with you, San Jose?  How can SO much talent play that poorly together as a team?  I just don't get it.  And what is the deal with your big stars?  Why do they disappear in big games, like this game tonight?  Or maybe, the truth of the matter is, you don't have any big stars because big stars get it done, like Detroit did.  Big stars push it to seven, make something out of nothing, fight back from failure and succeed.  Like Detroit did.



Three game lead?  Gone.  So gone you've now put yourself into a winner takes all death match situation in which the "machine" known as the "Detroit Red Wings" is likely going to annihilate you.  And honestly, at this point, you deserve it.  Unless you can come up with a masterful performance and come out swinging in Game 7, you deserve a summer off.  And if, while you're at it, you could stop teasing your fans with post-season appearances that result in nothing because the SAME problems arise, that would be great too.

I get that you were without Ryane Clowe this game...but Detroit was out Johan Franzen and they seemed to make it work. That's what phenomenally-talented, playoff-winning teams do.  They make it work.  And in Game 7, Detroit will likely make it work.  No Franzen and a bum-wrist Datsyuk?  No. Effing. Problem.  Home ice advantage?  Worthless.  Patrick Marleau?  Still gutless.  Your 3-0 lead?  A prologue to the story of this playoff series.

At this point, I don't even think having you continue on in the series is all that good for anyone.  I may hate Detroit but at least they're playing some fantastic hockey as of late.  And I may hate Detroit but at least I know they'll show up on Thursday. 

It's impossible to say the same for you.  I don't think you have that extra level.  I really don't.  The same things that won you those three early games just aren't going to cut it this time.  Let's not kid ourselves here:  You barely eeked those wins out anyway.

If the Wings win on Thursday, I will barely bat an eyelash.  And if the Wings win on Thursday, I don't think you'll ever shake that "choking" reputation...

...because clearly, that's what Sharks do best...



-Shaela