NHL Playoffs '10

[redwing77]

Cam Ward?

I got my history mixed up.

I thought Ward and the Hurricanes made it to the Finals but didn't win it all.

[Goon]

I got my history mixed up.

I thought Ward and the Hurricanes made it to the Finals but didn't win it all.

Cam Ward was the goalie when Commie and the Caines won the Cup.

[siouxforeverbaby]

Cam Ward was the goalie when Commie and the Caines won the Cup.

2006, they played the Oilers in the finals...I believe

[Goon]

Crosby is a great player and a great leader I would never deny that.And he's already accomplished a lot in his short 5 year career.But I think he's a whiny little cry baby and an arrogant jerk.The way some analysts talk you would think that he's the only great player in the NHL which clearly isn't the case.

You know I agree Crosby is a great player but the NHL has to get out of the mind set that he is the only thing keeping the NHL a float and that isn't true.

[82SiouxGuy]

You know I agree Crosby is a great player but the NHL has to get out of the mind set that he is the only thing keeping the NHL a float and that isn't true.

Selling a league by using star players is a proven way to attract fans. Almost every league and every sport tries to promote their stars. Especially if they are young. Crosby is a natural. He is talented and accomplished at a young age. The NHL would be foolish if they didn't try to use it.

[redwing77]

Selling a league by using star players is a proven way to attract fans. Almost every league and every sport tries to promote their stars. Especially if they are young. Crosby is a natural. He is talented and accomplished at a young age. The NHL would be foolish if they didn't try to use it.

Who did the NFL use to this extent?

It seems to me that the extent of which these stars are used is directly related to the condition of the league. The more desperate they are, the harder they push the stars. LeBron James and Kobe were two that were pushed by the NBA as of late to try to build interest in a pro sport that was fading almost as much as the NHL (though it never can thanks to ESPN's undying loyalty. I maintain that the world can turn to hate the NBA but ESPN would still show it primetime on one of their channels at least).

Baseball used to steroid users to try to save baseball (Sosa and McGwire).

But what of the NFL? TO? No. I can't remember a single player that had as much PR push behind him than LeBron or Sidney. Why? Because they don't need it. They already got a very popular sport that is engaging and entertaining.

The NHL is FINALLY building entertaining games. They need to start promoting the sport itself and the organizations that make the case for the NHL. I'm not saying cut Crosby out of the picture. I'm saying it's time to start promoting the sport itself rather than one good player.

And Goon is right, 82, they do a great job of giving the impression that, without Sidney, the NHL would fold.

[choyt3]

Ever hear of Bret Favre? Or Payton Manning? Or Tom Brady?

[xI Hammer Ix]

Ever hear of Bret Favre? Or Payton Manning? Or Tom Brady?

Every time Brett Favre farts it's the headline on SportsCenter.

[82SiouxGuy]

Who did the NFL use to this extent?

It seems to me that the extent of which these stars are used is directly related to the condition of the league. The more desperate they are, the harder they push the stars. LeBron James and Kobe were two that were pushed by the NBA as of late to try to build interest in a pro sport that was fading almost as much as the NHL (though it never can thanks to ESPN's undying loyalty. I maintain that the world can turn to hate the NBA but ESPN would still show it primetime on one of their channels at least).

Baseball used to steroid users to try to save baseball (Sosa and McGwire).

But what of the NFL? TO? No. I can't remember a single player that had as much PR push behind him than LeBron or Sidney. Why? Because they don't need it. They already got a very popular sport that is engaging and entertaining.

The NHL is FINALLY building entertaining games. They need to start promoting the sport itself and the organizations that make the case for the NHL. I'm not saying cut Crosby out of the picture. I'm saying it's time to start promoting the sport itself rather than one good player.

And Goon is right, 82, they do a great job of giving the impression that, without Sidney, the NHL would fold.

The NFL started using star players to sell the league from the time they started the league. Ever hear of Jim Thorpe? Or Red Grange? The league was ready to fold before college phenom Red Grange was brought in to the league. After that there were guys like Bronko Nagurski and Sid Luckman of the Bears, Slingin' Sammy Baugh of the Redskins, Don Hutton of the Packers, Otto Graham of the Browns, Steve Van Buren and Chuck Bednarik of the Eagles, Johnny Unitas of the Colts, Bart Starr and Paul Hornung of the Packers, Dick Butkus and Gale Sayers of the Bears, Dan Marino, Joe Montana and Jerry Rice, John Elway, on and on. Have you noticed how much publicity Peyton Manning gets, along with Brett Favre as someone else mentioned.

The biggest problems that the NFL and NHL have using this theory is that the faces aren't quite as recognizable. The players wear helmets when they play so it makes it a little harder for people to make the connection. But the 24 hour sports stations and the Internet help them overcome this. Your problem is that you don't like Crosby, so you magnify everything they say and you don't notice the amount of time that they mention some other players. But selling Crosby, Ovechkin and a couple of other players is the best marketing strategy to increase the visibility of the league. You get people interested in seeing specific players and hopefully they will like the rest of the product.

[redwing77]

The NFL started using star players to sell the league from the time they started the league. Ever hear of Jim Thorpe? Or Red Grange? The league was ready to fold before college phenom Red Grange was brought in to the league. After that there were guys like Bronko Nagurski and Sid Luckman of the Bears, Slingin' Sammy Baugh of the Redskins, Don Hutton of the Packers, Otto Graham of the Browns, Steve Van Buren and Chuck Bednarik of the Eagles, Johnny Unitas of the Colts, Bart Starr and Paul Hornung of the Packers, Dick Butkus and Gale Sayers of the Bears, Dan Marino, Joe Montana and Jerry Rice, John Elway, on and on. Have you noticed how much publicity Peyton Manning gets, along with Brett Favre as someone else mentioned.

The biggest problems that the NFL and NHL have using this theory is that the faces aren't quite as recognizable. The players wear helmets when they play so it makes it a little harder for people to make the connection. But the 24 hour sports stations and the Internet help them overcome this. Your problem is that you don't like Crosby, so you magnify everything they say and you don't notice the amount of time that they mention some other players. But selling Crosby, Ovechkin and a couple of other players is the best marketing strategy to increase the visibility of the league. You get people interested in seeing specific players and hopefully they will like the rest of the product.

No, my issue isn't with the promotion of Sidney Crosby but my question for you is this:

You said: But selling Crosby, Ovechkin, AND A COUPLE OF OTHER PLAYERS.

Please list.

THAT is my point.

Not that they are using Crosby. Not that the practice this marketing tactic. The fact that it seems like everyone else are mere afterthoughts after Crosby and Ovechkin is detestable.

What I'd LOVE to see is a marketing study for "Joe Sportsfan" asking them to name as many current hockey players as they can. There will be NO question that Crosby and Ovechkin will be mentioned, but how many others will be?

As for all those football references, wow, look at the plethora of talent. How many years did the NFL market these players? And of course, no more than 2 played at the same time right?

The fact is, the NHL is more than just two great players. There are a lot of them to varying degrees.

Where's the media spotlight for players like Ryan Miller, the Sedin Twins, Toews and Kane, Nichlas Backstrom, Martin St. Louis, Steven Stampkos, Nicklas Lidstrom, Pavel Datsyuk, Henrik Zetterberg, Teemu Selanne, Martin Brodeur, Miiko Koivu, Joe Thornton, Dany Heatley, etc.?

Heck, you could even push Evgeni Malkin too.

Then there's the hordes of young and upcoming talent like Tukka Rask, Pekka Rinne, Matt Duchesne, Jim Howard, Doughty, Jaroslav Halak (Sheesh, the storyline was dropped in their laps in this case), and so on.

So, fine, promote Crosby and Ovechkin... but DIVERSIFY! Give the idly interested channel surfer some talent to tune into just in case Versus or NBC or whoever is showing a hockey game that DOESN'T feature Ovechkin or Crosby.

That's my point.

[82SiouxGuy]

No, my issue isn't with the promotion of Sidney Crosby but my question for you is this:

You said: But selling Crosby, Ovechkin, AND A COUPLE OF OTHER PLAYERS.

Please list.

THAT is my point.

Not that they are using Crosby. Not that the practice this marketing tactic. The fact that it seems like everyone else are mere afterthoughts after Crosby and Ovechkin is detestable.

What I'd LOVE to see is a marketing study for "Joe Sportsfan" asking them to name as many current hockey players as they can. There will be NO question that Crosby and Ovechkin will be mentioned, but how many others will be?

As for all those football references, wow, look at the plethora of talent. How many years did the NFL market these players? And of course, no more than 2 played at the same time right?

The fact is, the NHL is more than just two great players. There are a lot of them to varying degrees.

Where's the media spotlight for players like Ryan Miller, the Sedin Twins, Toews and Kane, Nichlas Backstrom, Martin St. Louis, Steven Stampkos, Nicklas Lidstrom, Pavel Datsyuk, Henrik Zetterberg, Teemu Selanne, Martin Brodeur, Miiko Koivu, Joe Thornton, Dany Heatley, etc.?

Heck, you could even push Evgeni Malkin too.

Then there's the hordes of young and upcoming talent like Tukka Rask, Pekka Rinne, Matt Duchesne, Jim Howard, Doughty, Jaroslav Halak (Sheesh, the storyline was dropped in their laps in this case), and so on.

So, fine, promote Crosby and Ovechkin... but DIVERSIFY! Give the idly interested channel surfer some talent to tune into just in case Versus or NBC or whoever is showing a hockey game that DOESN'T feature Ovechkin or Crosby.

That's my point.

For marketing purposes you simplify, not diversify. Especially when you are struggling or trying to break into a market. Putting too many people out there loses the focus. If people aren't interested in the game right now they aren't going to learn who all of those players are. But if you keep putting a couple of people in front of them that might catch their attention, they might start watching your sport. If you tried to publicize all of the players that you listed you would be able to watch eyes glaze over all around the country and the NHL would never have a chance to get bigger and stronger.

The best example is the NBA in the early 1980's. The league had done pretty well in the 1960's, but had lost its luster. There were drug issues, other problems and the league was struggling financially. Magic Johnson and Larry Bird came along and they became the focus of everything. It was Magic and the Lakers against Larry and the Celtics. It didn't matter that there were other really great players like Kareem Abdul Jabbar playing with Magic, Julius Erving, Domique Wilkins, Moses Malone, Isiah Thomas and Robert Parish. Magic and Bird were everywhere and probably saved the NBA. But it took the best basketball player of all time, Michael Jordan, to break into the spotlight with them.

Golf is another sport that usually uses 1 or 2 name players at a time. Right now it is Tiger and to a lesser extent Phil. Jack Nicklaus was the big dog for years and there was usually someone trying to chase him down, like Tom Watson. Before that it was Arnie Palmer. You have 1 or 2 faces in front of people and that gets them to watch.

Even soccer knows this. That's why they tried bringing Beckham over to play in the United States. They needed 1 big name to sell the sport. They tried it in the 1970's with Pele. It worked about as well with Beckham as it did with Pele. But they know that the only way to sell the sport is to have 1 or 2 well known players as the face of the sport.

As far as that list of talent in the NFL, you do realize that the list covered 90 years of league play don't you? When you are on top you can then diversify your message and try to get talent recognized in every city. But when you are low man on the totem pole you have to use your few minutes to sell the same thing over and over. Repetition is what makes the names familiar. If SportsCenter is devoting 40 minutes out of an hour to the NFL they can try to sell 30 or 40 players. If they are giving 2 minutes to hockey you better use the same 2 players as often as you can to get them recognized.

[nodak hockey fanatic]

i will add to the crosby/nhl marketing discussion...

1. it is not crosby's fault he was annointed the next one at such and early age, in fact i think it is even more a testiment to the player he is that he has done what he has in spite of the hype and pressure OTHERS placed on him. he goes out and plays his game. he is the best in the world, period. ovi is right there, but until he can win something, crosby has the upper hand. im not sure why he has been labeled a "crybaby" but imho, if he didn't have such gaudy offensive numbers, would probably be given selke consideration like his teammate staal, his overall game is just phenomenal and he gets little credit for most of it but his offense. sit and watch him for a whole game once, he's a mix of osh and toews with an offensive upside a floor or two above, his motor doesn't quit, on either side of the ice. don't hate the guy because his league uses him to grow and sell. the nhl needs crosby, and he abliges their every whim.

2. as to the "others" who are used besides crosby and ovi... do you watch the channels that actually carry hockey? not espn, they are pathetic. but vs and nhl network have marketing campaigns involving kane, toews, getzlaf, brodeur, and many more. the nhl has made a concious effort to broaden the scope of their marketing, be it on tv, in print, and now especially on the net via nhl.com or even youtube campaigns. i think the reason that the crosby and ovi thing gets played out so often is alot of factors like the number of times the pens or caps are on national networks (and when they are, how much those two are talked about during the game, although i think this has gotten better this year), the fact that these two have been on competitive, relavant teams and usually leading the league in scoring, but not the least of which is the fact that noone has touched on... both have major companies sponsoring them and those companies pay for airtime to have their commercials on many different channels at many different times. the fact that reebok puts crosby all over the place has nothing to do with the nhl.

3. you can't compare the nhl to the nfl... its two different animals. heck the nfl doesn't need to market, the game is so popular right now it markets itself. the nhl is trying tirelessly to grow its sport and fanbase, and in my opinion is doing a pretty good job. and they would be stupid if they didn't use crosby and ovi to help, they are the two best players in the world right now.

on a side note... toews and the hawks getting rolled by the canuks right now

[redwing77]

For marketing purposes you simplify, not diversify. Especially when you are struggling or trying to break into a market. Putting too many people out there loses the focus. If people aren't interested in the game right now they aren't going to learn who all of those players are. But if you keep putting a couple of people in front of them that might catch their attention, they might start watching your sport. If you tried to publicize all of the players that you listed you would be able to watch eyes glaze over all around the country and the NHL would never have a chance to get bigger and stronger.

The best example is the NBA in the early 1980's. The league had done pretty well in the 1960's, but had lost its luster. There were drug issues, other problems and the league was struggling financially. Magic Johnson and Larry Bird came along and they became the focus of everything. It was Magic and the Lakers against Larry and the Celtics. It didn't matter that there were other really great players like Kareem Abdul Jabbar playing with Magic, Julius Erving, Domique Wilkins, Moses Malone, Isiah Thomas and Robert Parish. Magic and Bird were everywhere and probably saved the NBA. But it took the best basketball player of all time, Michael Jordan, to break into the spotlight with them.

Golf is another sport that usually uses 1 or 2 name players at a time. Right now it is Tiger and to a lesser extent Phil. Jack Nicklaus was the big dog for years and there was usually someone trying to chase him down, like Tom Watson. Before that it was Arnie Palmer. You have 1 or 2 faces in front of people and that gets them to watch.

Even soccer knows this. That's why they tried bringing Beckham over to play in the United States. They needed 1 big name to sell the sport. They tried it in the 1970's with Pele. It worked about as well with Beckham as it did with Pele. But they know that the only way to sell the sport is to have 1 or 2 well known players as the face of the sport.

As far as that list of talent in the NFL, you do realize that the list covered 90 years of league play don't you? When you are on top you can then diversify your message and try to get talent recognized in every city. But when you are low man on the totem pole you have to use your few minutes to sell the same thing over and over. Repetition is what makes the names familiar. If SportsCenter is devoting 40 minutes out of an hour to the NFL they can try to sell 30 or 40 players. If they are giving 2 minutes to hockey you better use the same 2 players as often as you can to get them recognized.

Thanks for taking the time to explain this all to me. I'm pretty sure you find my opinion (despite the fact that I stand by it) to be annoying.

I see your point about marketing all of them at once, but... what about using Ovechkin and Crosby as the National campaign and then regionalizing the rest? Give the average sports fan a reason to tune in to watch the nearest NHL team? I guess that might seem silly or perhaps that's already done in the local areas, but not where there are no NHL teams. I'll take Omaha, NE as an example as I live here. People here follow football and admittedly Nebraska is a football state, but hockey could grow into a sport they like, even if it is going to be second or third fiddle to Football and perhaps baseball. The problem is, no one pushes the closest teams (Minnesota, Chicago, Colorado, St. Louis). Maybe this is unrealistic but I do think we could market TEAMS just as well as players.

I don't know much about the NBA so I'll take your word for it.

As for Golf, that's a sport of individuals. I see this as a different scenario than hockey, a team sport. If you were to promote the same way I'm pushing for, how would you even do it in Golf? You HAVE to promote an individual because that's all there is in Golf. I'm not saying that the NHL should promote EVERY player on EVERY team. I'm saying they should promote more than just 2 guys who happen to be playing on the East Coast (THAT isn't NHL's fault).

My point with the NFL wasn't for the 90 year span. Look at how many of the players you listed played at the same time. Now how much media attention did they get compared to the scope of the league? Some, like Red Grainge, played when there weren't the number of teams the NFL now has. So, they weren't exactly narrowing the field, weren't they?

Look, I really liked the commercials the NHL put out a while back when they had Crosby, Ovechkin, and a few other different NHL players from different teams in hotel rooms or doing something. I thought they really did a good job at promoting the league and spreading the media attention around.

That's all I'm saying. No need to promote 36 different players. Or, as a compromise, promote the 2 off the ice. Fine. But during the game, it's time to back off and promote the game?

I dunno. I'm just tired of all Crosby all the time.

i will add to the crosby/nhl marketing discussion...

1. it is not crosby's fault he was annointed the next one at such and early age, in fact i think it is even more a testiment to the player he is that he has done what he has in spite of the hype and pressure OTHERS placed on him. he goes out and plays his game. he is the best in the world, period. ovi is right there, but until he can win something, crosby has the upper hand. im not sure why he has been labeled a "crybaby" but imho, if he didn't have such gaudy offensive numbers, would probably be given selke consideration like his teammate staal, his overall game is just phenomenal and he gets little credit for most of it but his offense. sit and watch him for a whole game once, he's a mix of osh and toews with an offensive upside a floor or two above, his motor doesn't quit, on either side of the ice. don't hate the guy because his league uses him to grow and sell. the nhl needs crosby, and he abliges their every whim.

2. as to the "others" who are used besides crosby and ovi... do you watch the channels that actually carry hockey? not espn, they are pathetic. but vs and nhl network have marketing campaigns involving kane, toews, getzlaf, brodeur, and many more. the nhl has made a concious effort to broaden the scope of their marketing, be it on tv, in print, and now especially on the net via nhl.com or even youtube campaigns. i think the reason that the crosby and ovi thing gets played out so often is alot of factors like the number of times the pens or caps are on national networks (and when they are, how much those two are talked about during the game, although i think this has gotten better this year), the fact that these two have been on competitive, relavant teams and usually leading the league in scoring, but not the least of which is the fact that noone has touched on... both have major companies sponsoring them and those companies pay for airtime to have their commercials on many different channels at many different times. the fact that reebok puts crosby all over the place has nothing to do with the nhl.

3. you can't compare the nhl to the nfl... its two different animals. heck the nfl doesn't need to market, the game is so popular right now it markets itself. the nhl is trying tirelessly to grow its sport and fanbase, and in my opinion is doing a pretty good job. and they would be stupid if they didn't use crosby and ovi to help, they are the two best players in the world right now.

on a side note... toews and the hawks getting rolled by the canuks right now

1. I don't hate Crosby the player. I don't care much for what the media does for him. Give it a few years and it will be Favre-esque. I think Crosby is actually good enough in-game to let his play do the talking. We don't need commentators turning into giggling schoolgirls every time he touches the puck.

2. Ok, how much of the broad population has the NHL Network? The NHL Network markets in broad spectrum because that's all they cover: Hockey and the NHL. Versus has a bigger audience but it is still is quite limited. You cite ESPN as being stupid and, although you are 100% correct, their audience is greater than both Vs. and NHL Network combined and then some. And then there is NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, etc. What's being done there? Now, I know enough about TV contracts and their likes to know that it will be almost impossible for the NHL to break into the basic cable environment without the help of ESPN, but they could ADVERTISE there, couldn't they? Even if it is to push Vs. or NHL Network.

3. I don't question the NHL's motivation. If they weren't tirelessly working to grow the sport and its fanbase, then Bettman would be fired long ago (I still think he should but I digress).

I'm just glad Crosby is living up to most of the hype. Everyone didn't want another Alexandre Daigle.

Oh well. I may not be Crosby's biggest fan. I may understand the motivation and reasoning behind the media (now). But I don't have to like what they're turning Crosby into.

[82SiouxGuy]

Thanks for taking the time to explain this all to me. I'm pretty sure you find my opinion (despite the fact that I stand by it) to be annoying.

I see your point about marketing all of them at once, but... what about using Ovechkin and Crosby as the National campaign and then regionalizing the rest? Give the average sports fan a reason to tune in to watch the nearest NHL team? I guess that might seem silly or perhaps that's already done in the local areas, but not where there are no NHL teams. I'll take Omaha, NE as an example as I live here. People here follow football and admittedly Nebraska is a football state, but hockey could grow into a sport they like, even if it is going to be second or third fiddle to Football and perhaps baseball. The problem is, no one pushes the closest teams (Minnesota, Chicago, Colorado, St. Louis). Maybe this is unrealistic but I do think we could market TEAMS just as well as players.

I don't know much about the NBA so I'll take your word for it.

As for Golf, that's a sport of individuals. I see this as a different scenario than hockey, a team sport. If you were to promote the same way I'm pushing for, how would you even do it in Golf? You HAVE to promote an individual because that's all there is in Golf. I'm not saying that the NHL should promote EVERY player on EVERY team. I'm saying they should promote more than just 2 guys who happen to be playing on the East Coast (THAT isn't NHL's fault).

My point with the NFL wasn't for the 90 year span. Look at how many of the players you listed played at the same time. Now how much media attention did they get compared to the scope of the league? Some, like Red Grainge, played when there weren't the number of teams the NFL now has. So, they weren't exactly narrowing the field, weren't they?

Look, I really liked the commercials the NHL put out a while back when they had Crosby, Ovechkin, and a few other different NHL players from different teams in hotel rooms or doing something. I thought they really did a good job at promoting the league and spreading the media attention around.

That's all I'm saying. No need to promote 36 different players. Or, as a compromise, promote the 2 off the ice. Fine. But during the game, it's time to back off and promote the game?

I dunno. I'm just tired of all Crosby all the time.

1. I don't hate Crosby the player. I don't care much for what the media does for him. Give it a few years and it will be Favre-esque. I think Crosby is actually good enough in-game to let his play do the talking. We don't need commentators turning into giggling schoolgirls every time he touches the puck.

2. Ok, how much of the broad population has the NHL Network? The NHL Network markets in broad spectrum because that's all they cover: Hockey and the NHL. Versus has a bigger audience but it is still is quite limited. You cite ESPN as being stupid and, although you are 100% correct, their audience is greater than both Vs. and NHL Network combined and then some. And then there is NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, etc. What's being done there? Now, I know enough about TV contracts and their likes to know that it will be almost impossible for the NHL to break into the basic cable environment without the help of ESPN, but they could ADVERTISE there, couldn't they? Even if it is to push Vs. or NHL Network.

3. I don't question the NHL's motivation. If they weren't tirelessly working to grow the sport and its fanbase, then Bettman would be fired long ago (I still think he should but I digress).

I'm just glad Crosby is living up to most of the hype. Everyone didn't want another Alexandre Daigle.

Oh well. I may not be Crosby's biggest fan. I may understand the motivation and reasoning behind the media (now). But I don't have to like what they're turning Crosby into.

I think I understand the problem now. The NHL is only going to do national marketing campaigns. They are selling "The Game" itself. It would be very hard and very expensive for them to also do regional campaigns. The teams do their own regional marketing. And they use their own players in their marketing. So the Wild use Backstrom, Burns, Koivu and even the Boogie Man for marketing purposes. I'm sure that the Blackhawks use Toews, Kane and maybe a couple of others. But you are in a market without a regional team. Not one of the teams is going to spend the dollars necessary to do a good marketing job in a region so far away that they won't get a decent return on their investment. So you only get the national campaign, you don't see the regional campaigns of any of the teams.

If Kansas City had a team it would probably be different. I would guess that you see a lot of Kansas City Chiefs football and Kansas City Royals baseball stuff in Omaha. It is similar to Grand Forks and Fargo being secondary markets for sports out of the Twin Cities. Since Kansas City doesn't have NHL hockey you don't get that connection.

My point with golf was that even though it is an individual sport, they feature only 1 or 2 individuals at a time. They use them as the face of the game. And as I mentioned about the NFL, they are large enough, and have been for many years, to get the time to promote more than just a couple of players. The number of players that a sport can use to promote itself is usually proportional to the amount of coverage time they get on sports broadcasts. If you get 2 minutes you use 2 players and if you get 20 minutes you can use 20 players (the numbers used are only for example purposes and are not meant to be an estimation of the popularity of any sport or even to be an exact representation of the current marketplace). But even in the NFL they usually have a handful of huge names and then a next level of stars that get publicity.

As far as the NHL advertising on ESPN, ABC, CBS, etc., that isn't going to happen. Television networks almost never allow advertising for something on a competing network, unless they own that competing network. I only remember a few occasions where it has happened, and it was usually for a fundraiser of some kind that many networks were participating in. So you will never see Versus or the NHL Network advertised on ESPN. It wouldn't be good business for ESPN. But it does make it tough to break out of the box.

[nodakvindy]

I think at this point, the NHL has to be hoping for a final four of Montreal, Boston, Detroit and Chicago. Sure it would mean losing Crosby, but that's more than overcome by having four of the Original Six competing for the Cup. Boston and Chicago have both been experiencing hockey Renaissances in the last couple of years and no one can question the hockey cred of Detroit and Montreal. A Montreal-Chicago final would be ideal, ensuring either a Canadian Stanley Cup winner of the end of Chicago's lengthy drought. Either outcome (or even a Bruins win) would be a huge jolt for the league - much like the Red Sox and White Sox World Series wins in '04 and '05 were great for baseball. After nearly a generation of trying to move into new markets under Bettman, making hockey relevant again in core market cities is just the tonic the league needs.

[redwing77]

I think at this point, the NHL has to be hoping for a final four of Montreal, Boston, Detroit and Chicago. Sure it would mean losing Crosby, but that's more than overcome by having four of the Original Six competing for the Cup. Boston and Chicago have both been experiencing hockey Renaissances in the last couple of years and no one can question the hockey cred of Detroit and Montreal. A Montreal-Chicago final would be ideal, ensuring either a Canadian Stanley Cup winner of the end of Chicago's lengthy drought. Either outcome (or even a Bruins win) would be a huge jolt for the league - much like the Red Sox and White Sox World Series wins in '04 and '05 were great for baseball. After nearly a generation of trying to move into new markets under Bettman, making hockey relevant again in core market cities is just the tonic the league needs.

Take out Montreal (but have Pittsburgh win in 7 games) and you've got your final four.

[siouxforeverbaby]

1. I don't hate Crosby the player. I don't care much for what the media does for him. Give it a few years and it will be Favre-esque. I think Crosby is actually good enough in-game to let his play do the talking. We don't need commentators turning into giggling schoolgirls every time he touches the puck.

The Pierre McGuire Drinking Game? Take two gulps of your drink any time Pierre giggles during a game. For the full rules, see the facebook group.

[Speez]

GO PENS!!!

I have loved the Penguins since the late 70's when I first started to follow hockey, but right now it is particularly enjoyable for me thanks to not only the fact that they're good. They were very good in the early 90's too, but this current team seems to be a target for haters which is what makes it all that much more satisfying for me when they win. I'm happy that my team is winning first and foremost, but the mere fact that their success is pissing off the haters gives me extra added satisfaction.

"Crosby gets too much praise, wahhhh!!!:

Too funny.

PS - I'm in an especially good mood due to the fact that Ovechkin got bounced in the 1st round. Even if the Pens don't get past Montreal, Sid one-upped Ovie-rated yet again by advancing at least one round deeper into the playoffs.

Pens suck.

Go Hawks!!!

Go Fighting Sioux

[Goon]

Pens suck.

Go Hawks!!!

Go Fighting Sioux

I agree Pens and Crosby Suck

[Big A HG]

I agree Pens and Crosby Suck

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE YELLING ABOUT!!!

[Big A HG]

PS,

Vince Vaughn and myself say, GO HAWKS!

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

Go Blackhawks!!

[Goon]

Go Blackhawks!!

Go Blackhawks!! and Go Bruins... Pens Suck and Cancuks Suck...

[rjjockers]

Go Blackhawks!! and Go Bruins... Pens Suck and Cancuks Suck...

Amen

[Goon]

PS,

Vince Vaughn and myself say, GO HAWKS!

I did not realized that Vince was born in Minnesota... Mom is a Canadian.