ESPNInsider Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 I can't believe that the media is now sticking up for him. Everywhere you look now the media is saying that it was taken out of context and that he is just standing up for what he believes and that he is the nicest guy when it comes to fans. COME ON! No one that plays a professional sport should EVER be telling that sport's fans (especially the few NHL fans there are) to kiss his butt! Everyone is saying that Dan Patrick was horrible with how he interviewed him yesterday and that he was way too tough. I think Patrick did what 99% of the country wanted to do, in asking him the tough questions and questioning why he would ever even consider saying what he did. There is a good story on ESPN Page 2 right now that pretty much mirrors my feelings: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hruby/050629 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eskimos Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 I'm really not sure what media you are listening/reading/watching/hearing, but I would say that the media is far from sticking up for Roenick and what he said. As a hockey fan, I was not impressed with Roenick saying we could kiss his a##, but I watched/read the whole press conference and was almost blown away by what he said during the whole thing. He said that the players had really blown it and they were going to get a worse deal than they would have earlier in the year, he also said that the owners needed to make money and he definitely seen their point in the lockout. He was very pro-fan during the whole press conference, except for the clip that got put out everywhere. I'm not sure you could find one person in America who agreed with Roenick telling the fans to kiss off, but I find it funny how someone is honest and gets ripped for speaking his mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoteauRinkRat Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 I can't believe that the media is now sticking up for him. Everywhere you look now the media is saying that it was taken out of context and that he is just standing up for what he believes and that he is the nicest guy when it comes to fans. There is a good story on ESPN Page 2 right now that pretty much mirrors my feelings: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hruby/050629 <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You say that the media is sticking up for him, but then you post a link to an article that "mirrors" your feelings? Can you find me anything from anywhere that sticks up for what Roenick said? What I've seen and read so far, is no one is sticking up for what he said, but some in the media are welcoming the honesty for once in this debate, especially from someone associated with the NHL. Dan Patrick is known for taking an interview like the one with Roenick and turning it into a segment about himself and how he is this tough interviewer. His arrogance almost overshadowed that of Roenick's ego and that is hard to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESPNInsider Posted June 29, 2005 Author Share Posted June 29, 2005 I'm really not sure what media you are listening/reading/watching/hearing, but I would say that the media is far from sticking up for Roenick and what he said. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Everywhere you look. Some examples: http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/stor...erry&id=2096354 http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/stor..._ray&id=2096420 Then if you watch any TV station other then ESPN people are saying that it is so nice and fresh to see a guy speaking his mind. Also, many radio-sports shows are saying the same thing, namely KFAN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESPNInsider Posted June 29, 2005 Author Share Posted June 29, 2005 Dan Patrick is known for taking an interview like the one with Roenick and turning it into a segment about himself and how he is this tough interviewer. His arrogance almost overshadowed that of Roenick's ego and that is hard to do. So was Matt Lauer turning the segment with Tom Cruise into a segment about himself? No, he was asking the tough questions that many people want answered. If these guys are going to speak down to people because they know so much about the subject then they have to be ready to take criticism and field some hard questions. (side note: I am really sick of Tom Cruise and could care less if I ever see him again) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 There is a good story on ESPN Page 2 right now that pretty much mirrors my feelings: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hruby/050629 <{POST_SNAPBACK}> As fixated as Patrick Hruby is on the idea of kissing Roenick's butt, perhaps "mirrors my feelings" is a poor choice of words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eskimos Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoteauRinkRat Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESPNInsider Posted June 29, 2005 Author Share Posted June 29, 2005 [ As fixated as Patrick Hruby is on the idea of kissing Roenick's butt, perhaps "mirrors my feelings" is a poor choice of words. Yeah, I don't want to kiss his butt, that's for sure. I will, however, not go to the rink or spend any time watching the NHL. And I certainly won't spend any money to help to pay a guy like that any money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 (edited) To me, this is the most telling statement that Roenick made: "We've hurt our league, we've hurt the reputation of our league and the integrity of our league by sticking up for something that might not have been the right thing to do.'' Sports journalists -- especially sports talk show hosts -- love it when a player of Roenick's stature "speaks his mind" or "says what he thinks" or is "refreshingly candid." It gives them something to write about and people a reason to watch or call into their shows. They know that controversy sells. Therefore, unless a player says something "John Rocker stupid," most sports journalists aren't going to bash players too much for speaking out because it's behavior they encourage. What Roenick said didn't bother me, although his statement about people being jeaous of NHL players was juvenile. To me, Roenick was expressing extreme frustration because he knows that the sport he loves was hurting before the lockout and it will be hurting even more after it. He probably realizes that the final years of his career -- if he comes back -- will be spent trying to revive a sport that's currently on life support. So I can understand where he's coming from, even if he used a poor choice of words to express himself. In my opinion, the NHL needs an enema, and this would be a good time to administer it. Pro hockey had a huge image problem before the lockout and it's going to be worse when it's over. And if that's as far as it went, I wouldn't care. Although I like watching the occasional NHL game, I'm no big fan of the league. The only reason I do care is because pro hockey's image has a strong influence on college hockey. Many sports fans wrongly assume that college hockey isn't much different from the NHL. But the reason I live for college hockey is because it isn't pro hockey. I don't watch hockey for the fighting or the blood and gore. I don't consider those aspects part of the game. I consider them distractions from the game. The best thing that the post-lockout NHL could do for itself is become more like college hockey. Crack down on fighting and obstruction. Allow the two-line pass. Get rid of touch-up icing. Require everyone to wear a full face mask or shield. To generate more offense, I'd also advocate either larger goals or limiting the size of goalie pads. The NHL needs to do something to bring back the old fans and attract new ones. Anything the NHL does to improve its image and attract new fans will benefit college hockey. That's why I hope the league and the players take advantage of this opportunity to give the game a much-needed facelift. But I have no illusions about that actually happening. Edited June 29, 2005 by PCM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoteauRinkRat Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Great post PCM. I'm not that great at clearly articulating my point of view and even though I disagree with some of your thoughts, I definitely agree that the NHL needs to make some serious changes to capture the attention of old and new fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESPNInsider Posted June 30, 2005 Author Share Posted June 30, 2005 PCM, do you think the full mask thing would ever fly? I don't think it would considering that they keep saying they want to make the players more marketable when/if they come back. Putting a full mask on them would hurt this a bit I think. Back to Roenick's words, I think that in a league hurting for fan support you should never say those things. Sure ESPN, FoxSports and the likes only played certain parts, but those were the parts that were newsworthy. Does the news talk about Randy Moss' charity fishing tournament? No. If Moss was found to be using a Whizzinator as a trolling motor would they report it? Of course. Roenick can't blame the media for replaying, and replaying, and replaying his words, even if they don't play the entire interview. I don't think ESPN is out to get NHL, although, maybe they don't want the NHL back so they can keep poker on and get higher ratings? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 PCM, do you think the full mask thing would ever fly? Given the NHL's resistance changing anything that alters its own macho image of itself, probably not. I don't think it would considering that they keep saying they want to make the players more marketable when/if they come back. Putting a full mask on them would hurt this a bit I think.How marketable are players when they're out for weeks or months at a time with eye or other facial injuries? How marketable are players whose careers are cut short because of a stick to the eye or a slapshot to the face? It seems to me that the most marketable players are those who have long and productive careers. And how is it that the trend in the NFL has been toward increased face and eye protection for its players without hurting their marketability? I don't buy that reasoning. Then again, I don't buy a lot of the NHL's reasoning for doing what it does. Roenick can't blame the media for replaying, and replaying, and replaying his words, even if they don't play the entire interview. I agree. If you're going to make such controversial statements, you better be prepared to live with the consequences and not blame others for how they're portrayed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoteauRinkRat Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Back to Roenick's words, I think that in a league hurting for fan support you should never say those things. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Again, no one is defending what Roenick said, you are preaching to the choir on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESPNInsider Posted June 30, 2005 Author Share Posted June 30, 2005 How marketable are players when they're out for weeks or months at a time with eye or other facial injuries? How marketable are players whose careers are cut short because of a stick to the eye or a slapshot to the face? It seems to me that the most marketable players are those who have long and productive careers. And how is it that the trend in the NFL has been toward increased face and eye protection for its players without hurting their marketability? I don't buy that reasoning. Then again, I don't buy a lot of the NHL's reasoning for doing what it does. I know NFL players have fought for the right to be able to remove their helmets after plays for marketing reasons. I think it is pretty dumb too, but think that they will use this as a reason to not bring it into effect. I think the main thing that hurts hockey players, as far as marketing is concerned, is the same thing that hurts their league in general, lack of fan support. Not that many people in the country like hockey, so why would a product use a hockey player as a spokesman when not many people will even know who he is? The NHL will never be on par with the NFL, MLB, and NBA so they need to realize this. I think many of the players are beginning to realize this by dropping their salaries and becoming willing to play for less. Like someone said earlier, the game is going to have to change drastically to gain more fans. They were arguing this point on KFAN yesterday and I wanted to see what you guys thought... They were saying that the Wild will sell out all of their home games next year (assuming they are playing). I find that very hard to believe, although Minnesota has probably the best chance in the league, I think they will feel the effects. Sure, they may have treated people nicely over the past year (sending them "no-hockey survival kits") but that can only do so much. The average fan that went to a few games and watched a few on TV will likely not want to pay to go to games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESPNInsider Posted June 30, 2005 Author Share Posted June 30, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoteauRinkRat Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESPNInsider Posted June 30, 2005 Author Share Posted June 30, 2005 Remember the Glee Club on Saved by the Bell? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Remember the Glee Club on Saved by the Bell? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Bell? The choir needs more cowbell? Consider it done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upper Deck Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Remember the Glee Club on Saved by the Bell? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Mmmmmmm . . . Kelly Kapowski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESPNInsider Posted June 30, 2005 Author Share Posted June 30, 2005 Mmmmmmm...Lisa Turtle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Mmmmmmm....Jamie Luner and Lisa Rinna Oh wait...they were on Melrose Place. Oh well. anyways Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Mmmmmmm . . . Kelly Kapowski <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Kelly Kapowski: Rowrrr!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoteauRinkRat Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Kelly Kapowski: Rowrrr!!! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> She was damn hot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.