Don Cherry's Days Numbered?

[RADIO TRUTH]

50% of Canadians think Don Cherry is a buffoon.  50% of Canadians like Don Cherry.  Overall the quality of Hockey Night In Canada has greatly deteriorated over the years as they lost Foster Hewitt, Danny Gallivan, Bob Cole, Dick Irvin and Dave Hodge.  Each of those announcers had a distinct and unique style.  Today's announcers all sound the same.  As far as Don Cherry goes, he played in one NHL game in 1955 and was a career minor leaguer.  He is over 80 years old.  I think it's time for him to go.  They should replace his segment with something that Hockey Night In Canada did years ago on radio between periods.  It was called the hot stove league.  4 or 5 hockey beat writers would discuss important current hockey topics without stroking their ego like Don Cherry has done for the last 30 years.

[landtuna]

I'm an American who catches up with Ron and Don via the CBC 'net and sometimes those shows are a bit behind the hot topics in the NHL but...

I've generally found Cherry to be entertaining so long as you can tolerate his schtick and he stays on general hockey topics (the recent verbal bashing towards Brian Burke was not of major interest to those of us south of the border). 

I don't think his age has much to do with anything but the fact that he is an unabashed Canadian and still sees hockey in minor league terms (including his stint as coach of the Boston Bruins) is.  But I also realize Coach's Corner is intended for the Canadian market so I don't have issues with that either.  I think it would be nice to have Ron take over a bit more of the dialog but that's just a personal opinion.

[OldNumber7]

If CBC does let Cherry go, my guess is it won't be because the NHL doesn't want him on their broadcasts (they want all the attention, and promotional potential, they can get, whatever they say for public consumption). It'll be because NBC, which is expanding its NHL coverage to include weekend broadcasts on the main network and games on the new NBC Sports Channel on basic cable, wants him as a featured commentator on their network and opens up the Peacock's checkbook. He's a known quantity in the US, and a popular character wherever hockey is closely followed, from prior playoff broadcast appearances and from his years coaching in Rochester and Boston.

I grew up in Rochester and loved Don Cherry as a player and coach. Heck, the whole city once loved him and there are probably still enough of us old timers around to elect him mayor if he wants the job. That said, I can't see how he can fit in with any long terms plans by NBC or any other U.S. network to build an audience for the NHL. His presence on U.S. broadcasts reinforces the reasons why so many Americans don't follow hockey -- he's old, he's Canadian, he is the kind of character that Canadians embrace and Americans are more likely to consider loony (no pun intended). A serious U.S. TV effort for the NHL has to take the sport in a new direction -- American announcers, former U.S. players/coaches as commentators (any "Miracle on Ice" guys need work?), fewer games involving Canadian cities, spotlights on current American stars, fewer interviews with players with French/foreign accents, etc.

[landtuna]

A serious U.S. TV effort for the NHL has to take the sport in a new direction -- American announcers, former U.S. players/coaches as commentators (any "Miracle on Ice" guys need work?), fewer games involving Canadian cities, spotlights on current American stars, fewer interviews with players with French/foreign accents, etc.

I know that country of origin is a big deal for Canadians but Americans are used to having the game dominated by Canadians and I'm not so sure most Americans care which side of the border a player or coach is born on.  Of more importance probably is the number, which seems to be increasing, of "overseas" players.  In that respect the NHL is becoming more like IndyCar than the traditional North American sport it long has been.  Given the general excellence of those players from across the pond though it seems they are quickly accepted on the teams. 

The only non-subscription telecast of the NHL nationwide currently is the Sunday afternoon game on NBC so Doc Emrick gets the nod for best American announcer by default.  I don't know how the Canada market feels about him but I have always liked his style.  But it really wouldn't matter to me if the announcer/color guy/studio hosts were American or Canadian - as long as they were knowledgeable and entertaining.

The main problem hockey has, and will continue to have, is the youth access to the sport.  It is never going to have the exposure of baseball, football or basketball because of the natural limitation of ice rinks (required in most of the USA) and the expense of equipment and ice time.  It will continue to be a regional sport in most of America for the foreseeable future.  The fans of tomorrow are largely the players of today and compared to other youth sports there simply aren't enough of them.

But hockey has another issue and that is public perception of the game.  In most non-hockey towns across the USA the only time you hear or see anything about the game is when something like the recent face-off fight happens.  Thus, most people only see the WWE side of hockey and write it off as being just thuggery.  The NHL has been its own worst enemy in this issue failing to deal effectively with goons and cheap shots which take away from the beauty of the game.  As a comparison, see what the NFL did recently to penalize the Saints for their "bounty" program.  Hockey needs to reach the same level of discipline in its arenas or it will always be considered a second-tier sport. There was a time when Wayne Gretzy, Yari Kurri and Mark Messier displayed what a great game it is (and Montreal before that).  The NHL needs to get back to those types of games and rid itself of all the bad publicity of cheap shots, concussions and clutch-and-hold hockey.

[TheBigA]

The NHL needs to get back to those types of games and rid itself of all the bad publicity of cheap shots, concussions and clutch-and-hold hockey.

Funny...I think the NHL would disagree.  They feel the future, and the way to attract young people, is to emphasize that hockey is a full contact sport.  Less about skating, more about hitting.  This was the subject of the 1977 Paul Newman movie "Slap Shot."  As seen in the movie, it was the hitting that popularized the team.  That theme has continued today.  So hockey has become a form of demolition derby on ice, accompanied by hard rock music, strobe lights, and pyro.  Not exactly the place for a 78-year-old former player.  Although he scores points having a pit bull for a pet.

[OldNumber7]

A serious U.S. TV effort for the NHL has to take the sport in a new direction -- American announcers, former U.S. players/coaches as commentators (any "Miracle on Ice" guys need work?), fewer games involving Canadian cities, spotlights on current American stars, fewer interviews with players with French/foreign accents, etc.

I know that country of origin is a big deal for Canadians but Americans are used to having the game dominated by Canadians and I'm not so sure most Americans care which side of the border a player or coach is born on.  Of more importance probably is the number, which seems to be increasing, of "overseas" players.  In that respect the NHL is becoming more like IndyCar than the traditional North American sport it long has been. 

And how has that worked out for Indy? The sport has gone from American tradition to afterthought in a single generation.
In all seriousness, I don't doubt that hard-core hockey fans don't care much about the nationalities of the players. The issue is how best to broaden the fan base in the US beyond the hard-core fans. Back to my original point -- Don Cherry is not the solution.

[landtuna]

The NHL needs to get back to those types of games and rid itself of all the bad publicity of cheap shots, concussions and clutch-and-hold hockey.

Funny...I think the NHL would disagree.  They feel the future, and the way to attract young people, is to emphasize that hockey is a full contact sport.  Less about skating, more about hitting.  This was the subject of the 1977 Paul Newman movie "Slap Shot."  As seen in the movie, it was the hitting that popularized the team.  That theme has continued today.  So hockey has become a form of demolition derby on ice, accompanied by hard rock music, strobe lights, and pyro.  Not exactly the place for a 78-year-old former player.  Although he scores points having a pit bull for a pet.

Don Cherry is exactly the kind of guy who remembers the chaos that were the minor leagues and the temporary success of the Bruins and Flyers when they resorted to goon hockey.  But it doesn't last.  The major problem is that most skilled players are not overly large and tend to play the game instead of handing out hits.  There is more than enough full contact in hockey without head-hunting and driving your opposition head first into the boards.  You risk injury to your skill players and usually fail to win without them.  Losing will drive fans away faster than almost everything else.

"Slap Shot" was a parody of minor-league hockey and shouldn't be used to illustrate the NHL game.  Montreal won five consecutive Stanley Cups in the 50's by skating and both Edmonton and the Islanders won consecutive Cups with skill players as well.  There have been teams that gooned it up and won as well but they were not hockey dynasties.

Your "opinion" is a reality of sorts though as that is exactly how many sports fans see hockey and decide they don't want to pay big bucks for something they could see far less expensively at their local fairgrounds arena.

The NHL should be looking at the various college hockey programs for examples on how to structure their product.  It is still a full checking (contact) game but there are very severe penalties for overt fouls and fights result in immediate ejection (as in the NFL).  There is no room for goons in college hockey and there should not be in the pro game either - regardless what Cherry says.

[landtuna]

And how has that worked out for Indy? The sport has gone from American tradition to afterthought in a single generation.

The increasing number of non-American drivers in IndyCar has undoubtedly caused some old-time fans to find other forms of racing but the driver's nationality is a minor issue in the disintegration of open-wheel racing in the USA.  By far, the largest factor has been management and ownership issues which fractured USAC into competing camps each with their own rules, technologies and venues.  I doubt that the younger fans of open-wheel racing care much where their favorite driver comes from but it did use to be important when USAC dirt tracks were where most drivers started their careers before moving into the bigs.

In all seriousness, I don't doubt that hard-core hockey fans don't care much about the nationalities of the players. The issue is how best to broaden the fan base in the US beyond the hard-core fans. Back to my original point -- Don Cherry is not the solution.

If I gave the impression that I thought Cherry was an attraction to widening the fan base it was an obvious mistake.  Cherry's appeal is to existing hockey fans even though he uses his soap box to preach to the young players who may be watching.

I don't have a good answer as to broadening the fan base in the US.  I do know that most of the people who are not fans dismiss hockey as a goon sport ala the WWE and that needs to be changed. 

I also know the sport needs media champions who will report consistently and fairly on games where they exist and perhaps spread the message out within their local regions.  As an example, we have a team here in Phoenix which gets very poor coverage.  The games are televised only on cable and articles appear in the newspaper and TV only when events of special interest happen.  If the team misses the playoffs (a normal occurrence) all coverage stops.

Another more common problem for hockey though is timing of the season.  It begins in October when the World Series is taking place hence very little hockey coverage.  State fairs also happen during this time so some teams are forced to take lengthy road trips right at the beginning of their season.  Then, just as the regular season is winding down and competition for playoff spots is getting intense we have March Madness which sucks all the air out of all other sports (unless you live in a major hockey market).  In between, and competing for fan dollars, is NCAA and NFL football.  The Stanley Cup playoffs then frequently go well into June when people are beginning their summer vacations, summer camps etc.

It is going to be very difficult, if not impossible, for hockey to increase substantially its fan base against such competition and scheduling.

[TheBigA]

Your "opinion" is a reality of sorts though as that is exactly how many sports fans see hockey and decide they don't want to pay big bucks for something they could see far less expensively at their local fairgrounds arena.

I don't know how often you attend NHL games in your area, but I go about once a month.  My experience is as I describe it, more like a KISS concert with hard rock, lights, and pyro, than a sports event.  It gets pretty loud.  And the fans are pretty young.  There are meet & greets before the game, heavy promotions with contests and give-aways, and live music between periods.  This seems to be what the NHL is aiming for.  You may not like it, but that's the direction they're going in.

[RADIO TRUTH]

Here's hockey the way it should be.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6doRKqexqmU