from Larry Brooks of the NNew York Post,
My opinion on the matter that is engulfing the NHL is that the Panthers organization showed great courage in holding a night in support of the LGBTQ+ community in a state where such corporate endorsement is not always looked upon favorably by governing bodies with power to punish.
I believe captain Matthew Tkachuk’s unambiguous support of inclusivity is significantly more noteworthy than the decision of Eric and Marc Staal to defer from participating in Thursday’s pregame warmups in which all of their teammates wore Pride-themed jerseys.
“A night like tonight, for me, is really about including everybody,” Tkachuk said. “In my opinion, it’s by far the greatest game in the world, and everyone’s invited in my locker room and our locker room as an organization.”
And I believe that the unqualified endorsement of the NHL’s initiative by Connor McDavid certainly outweighs the significance of San Jose goaltender James Reimer’s decision to opt out of pregame warmups when the Sharks held their Pride Night a week ago.
https://scontent-ord5-1.xx.fbc...
While you may feel that way you would be in the minority of fans that are in their early 40's and younger (the image is from 2014 which means the percentages are skewed even higher now):
and that is precisely why the NHL (and every other corporation that makes their money from gate revenues) is adopting the younger generation's attitude.
Support for same sex marriage is not the same as support for everything the alphabet people stand for, aka pride night. Just because one might support same sex marriage does not mean they want it politically involved in hockey.
Even though the above link looks a bit spammy, it isn't and it is a hockey related pic.
No way, lets focus all of our attention on the .5% that dont participate. Its just not totalitarian if you dont get 100% compliance lol
Brian Burke is talking about this issue as I am writing this on HNIC...If anyone thinks that holding one pride night on the season is an issue that needs to be talked about, perhaps they should focus more on the in games computer generated adds where players disappear or more importantly the constant gambling being integrated into the game. I don't see any players speaking up on the horrors that this issue is doing as it is aiding their pocketbooks.
I would not want my nieces and nephew watching tv broadcasts of the NHL because of this. Exposing them to gambling at such a young age is a huge mistake and will lead to major problems. As such I think anyone developing the next generation of fans is doing actual harm to children. And I am appalled that parents think such exposure to a developmental brain is okay--especially those that feel there are issues of being around someone that celebrates pride, but let their children watch about lines, odds, parleys, etc.
That's the generational difference---no one cares about pride in my generation. But Boomers they can't comprehend that. And this is just one of those generational issues that will come front and center as Boomers lose their political power.And that is exactly why Larry Brooks is wrong: he along with the other Boomers need to get used to changes that frankly should have happened years ago.
I would think the majority (but, granted, not every last one) of kids watching sports at this age would be sitting with a parent or parental figure with whom the responsibility would fall to discuss why gambling isn't for everyone. Much like these figures have to explain other things which are broadcast on the television.
I'm annoyed by the gambling advertising with my sports because the advertising is annoying and omnipresent. I'm in the wheelhouse of potential bookies(I earn a good wage, I spend times in casinos, including taking trips to Vegas to partake in gambling activities, I'm a sports fan, etc.). Now I'm not prone to addictive behaviors (be it alcohol, other mind-altering substances, gambling, etc.) I'm in a relatively stable environment, and my progeny has developed into an adult unlikely to be affected by such advertising. I'm NOT concerned about advertising coercion of me or mine with regards to sports betting. I still don't care for the ads.
In terms of the Hockey is for Everyone initiative, I'm pretty cynical. In the grand scheme I think a major marketing department has determined this stance provides more incoming dollars than it chases away. I'm sure that some individuals and some clubs hold more entrenched beliefs that this is a good thing or a bad thing, but overall the league "averages" these stances and has determined it's a net benefit. To what extent they deal with opinions far afield from that baseline has a similar cost-benefit analysis.
If I owned a club, was the GM of a club, or was the captain of a team, I'd want to make sure "the talent" had a unified stance where everyone was comfortable. I would not want a league-generated marketing program to ruin the team unity required to present my best product.
Hi DCA - what makes you think that Boomers approve of the gambling ads? Or am I reading you wrong? I find it appalling that the sports world has embraced it. Locally, I love how Henrik Lundqvist and Eli Manning are shills for Caesars now. Henrik has an ad which shows I think he is troubled by being a celeb Gambling shill - by telling fans how to set limits and gamble responsibly. The money must be very compelling. Like "the Million Dollar Man" - Ted DiBiase once said in WWF wrestling -"Everybody has their price" Every team has gambling sponsors and given the impact of Covid - that opened the door wide open to take that money. Revenues were down and the gambling industry provided a cash infusion. Something is going to happen to make what happened with Shoeless Joe Jackson and the Black Sox look like amateurs someday. I think the gambling thing is a cash grab and not so much a generational thing. But I think i agree with the lions' share of your sentiment here! I have not watched the Burke video yet - I will later.
Baby Boomers are very, very insignificant statistically in regards to being parents of adolescent developing minds so gambling issue is one for Gen X and Millennials. And there is a huge difference between an adult and an adolescent children being exposed to gambling. So that's one separate issue.
As far as the other issue:
I don't know how to be any more clear that the pride issue is one with Boomers and decreases significantly as the age comes down (now are there outliers esp religious, sure)--but even then it's an age thing.
Even the discussion on here leads right towards a generational difference. Boomer (generalized traits (they have a/an): orientation towards prosperity vs ethical behavior, consumerist ethos, acceptance of peer pressure, ideal they solved social and political turmoil long ago (civil rights/feminist movements).
Often heard is the NHL (and every other business) should stay out of political issues and focus making their product the best it can be---that's straight out of the Boomer playbook. It simply doesn't fly with the younger generations. And the NHL brass is smart enough to know where their future revenues come from.
What a great point! If the NHL is so worried about being on the right side of social issues, why is it embracing gambling so hard? Oh, money?
Going to be interesting if a company like Grinder purchased a rainbow ad for the shoulder spot.
Thats an absolutely ridiculous yet great idea.
Chet - how about a porn site that hires Henrik Lundqvist away from Casears and has a spot with him and Stormy Daniels talking about using porn responsibly!
Why would they use Henrik Lundqvist? It was his teammate Michael Del Zotto (that was outed by Lisa Ann for having dated in 2013 and wanting her to provide him a stream of adult film stars afterwards (proven here: https://www.complex.com/sports...)
Or another choice would be the 2010 Flyers that were passing Gina Lynn around in an apartment (complete with photos from October--google it if you don't believe it was true--you'll still find the safe for work ones up).
oh you said using porn...not porn stars...my bad...
Watch the Burke segment dca referred to earlier in the comments.
I'm making popcorn and waiting for the Evander Kane living his BET life commercials! You know it's coming....
The discussion should have happened before the NHL and NHL teams decided to get into anything in the political sphere instead of just focusing on their business. Whether you or I or others may say this is not political or that it should not be political, it is in today's environment, the extreme on both sides has made it that way, the NHL knew it and they stepped right into a hot pile because of it. They tried to spin blame to Putin, but now that excuse fell flat on its face.
Any business that is smart in today's environment, needs to be 100% focused on staying out of anything that could be deemed political that could box your business or your representatives into a position to take sides, or you better well be sure you have 100% support.
The reason nobody cares about gambling being spoon fed to audiences is because gambling is not a political issue, it does not divide, it does not get the twitter attention.
Here's the simple reality for any business including the NHL, if you focus on delivering excellent product, it is already open to all, because whomever wants to consume it, they're welcome to do so.
You are prioritizing the short term results and ignoring the long-term consequences for these businesses. In the short term (where Boomers still control the country's wealth): you may be economically correct. However, the business that take that advice are in for a world of hurt as Boomers frankly die out and wealth is transferred to the younger generations.
You seem to be dividing the issue among party lines. I say that is 100% incorrect, it's a generational thing:
Incorrect, there is never a need to alienate or aggravate a portion of your consumers. What you are missing here is that this is doing so in BOTH directions, this is not a positive for the NHL, the extremes on both sides are not happy, and are focusing negative attention on the company, the NHL should've just played hockey and let both sides focus negative attention elsewhere.
Putting 100% of your company's efforts and focus on making and delivering good products/service, if you are successful people will buy them, you always win.
Create an Account
In order to leave a comment, please create an account.