This decision has stripped clubs of a powerful community outreach tool and removed meaningful support for Special Initiatives, all to protect a select few who do not want to answer any questions about their choices. I hope the NHL reconsiders in order to remain a leader in DEI. pic.twitter.com/SM5Fu56w7P
— Brian Burke (@Burkie2020) October 11, 2023
Kukla's Korner Hockey
Morning Line -Brian Burke
10/11/2023 at 10:19am EDT
Previous Post
10/11/2023
The Value Of NHL Teams Continues To Grow
Kukla's Korner Hockey
Next Post
10/11/2023
A Contract Extension for Lindy Ruff In New…
Kukla's Korner Hockey
About Kukla's Korner Hockey
Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.
From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.
Email Paul anytime at [email protected]
Most Recent Posts
Most Recent Comments
Comment by Paul in Kukla's Korner Hockey from the entry Open Post- Two Stanley Cup Playoff Games Tonight - 25 minutes ago
Comment by Paul in Abel to Yzerman from the entry Another Head Coaching Job For Jeff Blashill? - 31 minutes ago
Comment by Paul in Kukla's Korner Hockey from the entry Open Post- Two Stanley Cup Playoff Games Tonight - 44 minutes ago
Comment by Paul in Kukla's Korner Hockey from the entry Open Post- Two Stanley Cup Playoff Games Tonight - 45 minutes ago
Comment by Wingding in Abel to Yzerman from the entry Questions Answered On The Wings - 1 hour ago
I would use the tape, wear hats and advertise in any way I could for INCLUSION FOR ALL
Banning coloured tape won't stand up if the PA pushes back at all (they will), at least during warmups. I can see mandating only single, solid tape colors during games, tho.
But if Gary starts in with the "Hockey is for Everyone" stuff this year, he's already put the lie to it, so just like everything else he does, it rings completely hollow.
So Burke thinks the only way LGBTQIA+ people (or any group) would feel "welcome" at a hockey game is if the club has a special night for them. I'd say "How idiotic," but it's Brian Burke so that's a given.
Let the fans wear special clothing or bring signs supporting their favored group. It's not the role of the players to "answer questons" about their beliefs. Their job is to play hockey. Keep the rest of the political/social bullshit out of it.
Historically, locker rooms, athletic events, sports competitions, fan cultures, etc., havent been safe places to be out in the open about being gay. Thats why the pride nights/jerseys mattered. Its just as much about LGBTQ people feeling welcome as it is about YOU AND ME getting used to having them around, out in the open and accepted like they deserve to be. If you cant get with that, Pride Night is more about you than it is about them. The NHL is doing little more than providing cover for backwards attitudes.
So if I don't favor having the athletes being used by their employer to support a particular cause then you think I'm anti-LGBTQIA+? You seem to want these nights so I can show you that I'm comfortable "having them around." Utter nonsense.
To begin with, on a personal level, my attitude about almost everything in society these days is: "I don't care." I don't care who wants to marry or have sex with who. I don't care what you want to call yourself or what your "personal pronouns" are. I just don't care. Have at it.
On the other hand, don't tell me that I have to do something to show you what my personal beliefs are. That should go double for someone who's getting paid to do a job that has nothing to do with these social issues.
Athletes should feel free to express their beliefs publicly and support whatever group that want. They should not be forced to wear the symbols of someone else's belief just to prove to you that they believe what you believe. That's the complete opposite of free spreech.
Ok man. Number one, weve always gotten along, (I want it to stay that way) and I wasnt really addressing my remarks to you, but I see why it came off that way.
Second, athletes are used by their employers everyday, all the time. See NHL.com/shop, just for example. So spare me on the used rhetoric. Why are we drawing the line at players wearing a shirt in support of a minority group for thirty minutes, one night a year? Kinda speaks for itself doesnt? Players are getting used for a lot worse than little social posturing/marketing.
You say that hockey has nothing do to with social issues, but the heat this issue generates every time it comes up rather proves that it does. Otherwise no one would care about the damn shirts or theme nights.
Again, I am seeing the word forced coming into this discussion. Players arent powerless. You dont want to wear the sweater, dont go into work that day. Simple. You dont want to be included in inclusiveness, fine. Be anti-social at home. No one will question sitting out on a given night for a religious observance. When it comes down to it, pro sports are part of the hospitality industry. If you choose that way of making a living, dont expect to always be in your comfort zone. Be a professional. Dont be Ivan Provorov and demand to have your cake and eat it too.
Ok man. Number one, weve always gotten along...
I agree, bezukov, and I should have made it clear that, like you, I was referring to the universal "you" in my response. My apologies for that.
Second, athletes are used by their employers everyday, all the time. See NHL.com/shop, just for example.
Apples and oranges. Those things are directly related to their job as an employee of that organization. But pressuring someone to support a cause that has nothing to do with hockey isn't. As long as an individual doesn't discriminate against anyone, a company has no right to even know what their stance is on any issue that's unrelated to hockey.
You dont want to wear the sweater, dont go into work that day. Simple.
In effct, you're saying that you should either go along with a non-hockey-related issue you don't believe in or stay home and lose a day's pay (which is significant when it comes to pro athletes). That's completely unfair.
You dont want to be included in inclusiveness, fine. Be anti-social at home.
That's a really dangerous line you're drawing there. You're basically making the case that the club's stance on a given non-hockey-related issue is the "right" stance. So if you don't agree with it, you're an "anti-social" (and therefore evil) person. Again, not fair.
That pholosophy is one reason why there's so much division in this country these days. I can't just support your right to believe what you want to believe even if I don't believe it myself. These days, society (through the scourge of "social media") demands that people support not just your right to your beliefs but must support your beliefs themselves. That's not the philosophy this country was founded on.
Having said all of that, let me make it clear again that I 100% support the rights of LGBTQIA+ individuals to be whoever they are or whatever they want to be. Just don't ask individuals to endorse (by wearing a certain color or symbol) everything you personally believe in.
I agree, I have a number of friends who are LGBTQ and I fully support their cause. There are more gay people in hockey(sports) than most realize, they just can't come "out"
Thank you.
No one wants to point a finger at the real culprit here, the media. The Pride Nights themselves were always secondary (at best) to the media. They were way more focused on finding dissenters and creating divisive stories for clicks and money. All the media had to do was celebrate the Pride Nights themselves and ignore the few people not going along and I doubt the NHL would have changed anything. That unfortunately isn't possible with a vast majority of the media these days who would much rather create news instead of just report on the news.
I think you're almost 100% correct. But I have a slight disagreement with your last line. The media isn't trying to "create news" instead of just reporting it. They're interest seems to be in creating controversy and then reporting that as if it's "news." It's a subtle but important difference.
Solid point
Blaming the media is lazy. Come on.
Right...because the league doesn't care one bit about good or bad press and how that effects the bottom line.
It'll be a great look for the league the first time a player tells them to kick rocks and uses the tape and they attempt to fine him for it.
Isnt $85 a ticket for lower bowl, (lower bowl being necessary because rumors of sporting events on the ice from the upper bowl cant be proven true), $25 parking, $10.50 a beer, and $13 for a Little Caesars pizza effectively has already banned them.
Well, there goes White Pride night.....
What actually got thrown under the bus was purple Hockey Fights Cancer jerseys, sticks, and gloves that were auctioned off and raised money that is actually important.
The real reason that the league issued this ruling is because the great white majority that BUYS tickets, have had enough of this forced alphabet soup nonsense. I've been a season ticket holder since 1972, I played in beer leagues until I was 58 and tore up my knee and I have NEVER witnessed a singled incident where any person was discriminated against because of their identity. NEVER!!
This is all WOKE media driven nonsense.
The biggest block of fans has spoken and Garry B knows that the League can't survive if they stay away.
The amount of actual revenue generated by the "pride" people is minuscule, and Garry knows it.
White men, with their families, make up the vast majority of ticket buyers. That's just fact.
In strictly business terms, why would a business risk offending the vast majority of their fan base to satisfy a tiny minority, who may or may not ever become ticket buying fans? Above all, Gary is a money-man!
Until the alphabet people can produce a single person (with a valid ticket) who was denied entrance into a hockey game, based on their sexual preference, they can get stuffed. Find something else to complain about.
A good use for that pride tape would be to wrap around Burke's big mouth.
Great job you did in Pittsburgh, you blowhard!
In strictly business terms, why would a business risk offending the vast majority of their fan base to satisfy a tiny minority...
As both Anheuser Busch (Bud Light) and Target found out the hard way.
The problem with statements like that is that they arent based in realitybut the product of fake news from largely one source pushing an agenda. Here is the truth:
AnheuserBusch InBev (BUD) reported earnings of $0.72 per share in 2023Q2, this beat the consensus estimate of $0.66 per share. BUD's next earnings release expected on October 26, 2023 and the consensus is $0.86 per share, reflecting a year-over-year increase of 6.17%.
Target shattered 2023Q2 earnings per share $1.80 (more than 4x higher than last years). The company lowered yearly EPS estimates from $7.75-$8.75 to $7.00 to $8.00 per share because of higher inventory shrink (theft and damage). Their EPS was $8.64 in 2021 and $14.10 in 2022. Anyone thats gone to a Target sees the locked display cases and knows what the business focus is.
Businesses dont care about fan bases they care about catering to their actual consumers. And Im afraid if youre been a season ticket holder since the 70s you are no longer their target demographic.
Bud Light was seeking younger drinkers. Younger drinkers have different value sets than older drinkers. The values are diametrically opposite. Yet, every company knows product boycott are fleeting at best. So that is why the businesses dont worry about offending the geriatric crowd.
What business should fear is trying to toe the line and appease the geriatric crowd like Disneys CEO CEO Bob Chapek did. For those that dont know Chapek was fired largely because he tried to toe the line and not offend anyone on Floridas dont say gay bill.
Bring this back to sportsnotice how these new arenas/parks have sections where the focus isnt on the game but a beer garden/restaurant or a pool or firepit or a open concourse with different options. Thats because they want to appeal to younger audiences that grew up with different entertainment tastes. But if they made this section too big then those that are there to watch the actual game would be offended.
But if these businesses dont reach out to a younger demographic then eventually the geriatrics start dying/not physically healthy enough to attend/ needing less of the product (dont need house cleaning supplies when you are dumped in a nursing homes) and they will lose market share anyways.
Its Marketing 101 and every business stumbles at the marginsits just been made more noticeable by todays polarizing environment.
"Anheuser-Busch U.S. Sales Decimated 'Primarily Due to' Bud Light Boycott" Newsweek 8-23-23
I also go by the eyeball test. At Meijer this morning, most brands of beer on the shelf were about half gone. Bud Lite's section had only one 12 pack taken.
Create an Account
In order to leave a comment, please create an account.