World Record Crowd for Hockey Game

In Germany yesterday, the Veltins-Arena set the record for the largest crowd ever for a hockey game, hosting over 77,000 fans for an opening round game - between Germany and the U.S. - of the International Ice Hockey Federation World Championship (it's like the Olympic tournament, but with fewer stars - since the NHL playoffs are underway - and more advertising).  The Germans, backed by a raucous crowd, won in overtime by a score of 2-1.

The stadium, located in the city of Gelsenkirchen, hosted several soccer games during the 2006 World Cup and is the permanent host of Bundesliga club Schalke 04, currently in second place in league play.

I'm impressed, mostly because 77k is a lot of people to watch an opening round game.

Big Crowds in Phoenix and Small Gatherings in Camden Yards

Considering I've been following the Phoenix Coyotes some this season, I did enjoy watching their return to the Stanley Cup playoffs.  No matter what is currently happening with the soap opera that is the Coyotes ownership situation, a sellout crowd of (mostly) Coyotes fans did their part last night, filling the Jobing.com Arena with a the oh-so-popular whiteout.  The atmosphere - a some 17,000 "loud and boisterous" fans packed the arena - had to have energized the upstart Coyotes, who beat the Detroit Red Wings 3-2 to take the opening game of the 7-game series.

Derek Morris after scoring the 3rd period goal that gave the Coyotes the lead.

And yes, someone threw a rubber snake on the ice after the first Coyotes goal.  It was only fair, however, as an octopi was thrown onto the ice during pre-game warm-ups.

Small, but it's a start.

As a polar opposite, earlier this week, the Baltimore Orioles played a game in Camden Yards in front of the smallest crowd in that ballpark's history: a paltry 9,129 fans.  Those few in attendance could not have left happy, as they witnessed the O's drop a 5-1 decision to the Tampa Bay Rays to fall to 1-6 on the season.  According to The Baltimore Sun, the crowd for that game on Monday was the first sub-10k attendance in 19 years of Camden Yards' existence.  It's so small a number, that I hate to say the word crowd; I prefer "gathering."

Phelps took in the game with a (very) few fellow Orioles' fans.

The number was so pitiful that one Sun sportswriter felt it necessary to ask his readers whether Camden Yards "is still worth visiting."  It's so small and so sad, that even USA Today has taken notice with the headline: "Hate Crowds? Go to Camden Yards."  To put it in perspective, Monday night's gathering was the lowest attendance for any ballpark in MLB this season.  Yes, that includes everyone's favorite MLB-punching bag, the attendance figures at PNC Park, home of the Pittsburgh Pirates.  Even the lowly Pirates have yet to dip below the 10,000 fan mark at home this season.

And yet, there are a few excuses from Orioles' director of Communication Greg Bader.  Namely, the Orioles don't draw very well...

• on Mondays in April, 
• in games against Tampa Bay in April, 
• on the first couple games after opening day, and

...well, they just don't draw very well, period.  After 12 straight losing seasons, even the players understand the fans aren't coming.  For the Sun story, Kevin Millwood opined, "You've got to play good.  If you will ballgames, they'll come." (As an FYI, Phoenix is a perfect example of how true that maxim is.  In early November, I blogged about a Coyotes home game that drew just under 6,000 fans).

Let's hope so.  After several seasons of continuous sell-outs in the 1990s (with season attendance figures averaging over 45,000 per game in 1997), Camden Yards has, sadly, fallen from grace.  I can only hope that there are brighter days for O's fans ahead.  Because unlike Joe Namath, I actually do care about the team strug-a-ling.

Channeling Our Sports Miracles, or...

"Sport That: Jerseys For Make Benefit the Glorious Nation of the United States."

Over the past couple of weeks, we've seen plenty of team USA uniforms.  Some good, some bad, some whatever.  But I am most interested, specifically, in how a new set of team USA jerseys for our men's national hockey and soccer teams are channeling our sports histories.  Both teams released new jerseys for the events of 2010: the hockey team for the Vancouver Olympics and the soccer team for the World Cup.  More importantly, both jerseys call on our nation's sports histories and focus on a few of its most dramatic moments.

Let's begin with the hockey team, who recently finished second at the the Vancouver Games' Olympic hockey tournament.  A thrilling tournament from start to finish, the players from the USA wore the following series of hockey jerseys, designed by Nike, for the first time in Vancouver.

These offerings replaced the uninspiring U.S. jerseys 

worn in the past couple Olympic tournaments.

Nike designed the jerseys with a retro feel to channel those worn in both the 1960 Squaw Valley Olympics as well as the 1980 Lake Placid Olympics.  Both of those hockey teams, of course, won gold. Let's see how they compare.

The gold-winning 1960 Squaw Valley team was picked to finish 5th.  

Some call their victory "The Forgotten Miracle."  

Interestingly, Herb Brooks got cut from this team during tryouts.

In 2010, during the preliminary round victory against Canada.

Very similar design elements, from the diagonal block shadow letters to the crest on the upper left shoulder.  The striping also matches.  These jerseys are pretty close.  Let's check the jerseys from 1980.

The 1980 team was backstopped by Jim Craig.

So, naturally, the media played on the connections to

current US goaltender Ryan Miller.

Some elements are different, like the shade of blue and the color of the letters, but there are a host of similar elements too: the USA is similarly arched, there are stars on the shoulders, and a red stripe at the bottom of the jersey.

The same "retro feel" phenomenon accurately describes the jerseys debuted yesterday by the US men's soccer team.  In a friendly defeat against the Netherlands, the US presented their 1950-World Cup-inspired shirts, featuring a diagonal stripe from right shoulder to left hip.

The US squad before their underwhelming performance against the Dutch.

The 1950 US squad.  Their victory over England is, unfortunately, 
known today as the "Miracle on Grass."

The sash in color.

While it seems almost sash-like, the jersey's diagonal element has a purpose.  It was lifted from the jerseys of the 1950 team that beat England 1-0 in a group stage match.  Just the fourth World Cup ever, the tournament was hosted by Brazil and won by Uruguay.  The US did not progress past the group stage, but their victory over the perennial football power has reverberated throughout history, both at home and abroad.  Coincidentally (or not), in this summer's World Cup, the US will once again face favorites England in the group stage of the tournament.

In sum, my curiosity lies with this national team retro trend and how it embeds current jersey iterations with the hauntings of glorious sports victories past.  Because while, for years, retro jerseys have proliferated throughout sports culture, this seems to be unique - in that these current shirts have something special to them.  It could be weight, in the form of expectation, that delivers an extra sense of pressure when competing for your country.  Or, in the case of traditional underdogs in hockey and soccer, could it be that these jerseys are designed to remind our national athletes of the possibility of accomplishment?  Could it be a reminder of others that have gone before them and overcame the odds?

Seems strange to channel the past without a red stripe.  Hooray revisionism!

Even if these jerseys are nothing more than shirts, if they teams can win (and hockey just missed out), they will surely make benefit at least one group: the glorious corporation of Nike.  Both retro jerseys were designed and produced by the Beaverton, Oregon sports manufacturer and, as such, both jerseys have one glaring foreign element, an almost alien presence among the retro ambience: the ubiquitous Nike Swoosh.

NBC Olympic Broadcasting Fail?

Last week, I noted some objections to the handling of Olympic broadcasting duties by NBC, the country's fourth-placed national broadcaster.

Not mentioned in that critique was the placement of Sunday night's eventual "tremendously tremendous" hockey game between the USA and their rivals and hosts, Canada, on cable outlet MSNBC.  What did the mother network show instead?  The original dance portion of the ice dancing competition.

To its' credit, the ice dancing compulsories did 

produce some interesting costume choices.

The action at Pacific Coliseum could not match the electric atmosphere in Canada Hockey Place, where over 19,000 watched the US take down Canada by a score of 5-3.  The win was the first Olympic Games victory for the US over their northern neighbors in 50 years (highlights).  The historic quality of the event was matched by the incredible intensity of the game, the pressure on the Canadians to defend home ice, and the prevalence of skill among the two rosters full of top-level NHL talent.

Canadian fans were looking forward to a celebration.

Instead, as the Americans celebrated the goal that sealed the game,  

Canada went catatonic.

ESPN hockey analyst Barry Melrose, after the game, "I hope no one has to call Canada for anything tomorrow.  There ain't gonna be anyone working."

The result of the dramatic victory, which was backstopped by a 42-save effort from goaltender Ryan Miller, put the US team at the top of the tournament's preliminary round.  Not only will the US get an extra day's rest - and a bye to the quarterfinals - they will avoid a potential meeting with tournament favorites Sweden or Russia.

And yet, despite its placement on cable - and not national network - broadcasting, the game was the premier event of the Olympics' first week.  Certainly, NBC and other members of the media took notice:

Sunday night's New York Times home page.

On NBC's Olympic home page.

ESPN.  When's the last time hockey made the front page on the WWL?

The political consequences of a US win?  

Good luck importing Canadian bacon.  Or maple syrup.

"US Canada hockey" was the top Google US search term on Sunday night.

This all returns us back to the title of the blog post: why was the game on cable?  The answer points to Sut Jhally's concept of the sports/media complex, where (among other things) sport is only as valuable for a network like NBC for its ability to deliver audiences to advertisers.  This "complex" is fairly well-understood at this point, but was most recently made patently obvious by this month's Super Bowl (the highest-watched ever) and a Wall Street Journal report the previous week that showed an NFL broadcast contains just 11 minutes of action.

So, where does that leave the Olympics? Just today, the Wall Street Journal provided a follow-up to the analysis of football broadcasts and found the following comprised the 3.5 hours of NBC's Olympic programming last Friday evening:

Unfortunately for ice hockey, its games do not fit this model, especially in the Olympics when there are no TV timeouts - and no time for commercials - during the game.  If you've been watching, you've noticed that when the whistle blows in an Olympic hockey game, there is no more than 15-20 seconds until play resumes (oftentimes after showing a brief commercial, MSNBC returns to game action that has already started).  Therefore, it was clear that ice hockey games would not provide enough time for commercials and Bob Costas, apparently, to warrant NBC placing even such a "tremendously tremendous" sporting event on its national network (side note: NBC's opening segment on Monday night's Olympic coverage featured a live shot of Bob Costas landing in a seaplane.  With Al Michaels narrating.  Scintillating).

NBC president Jeff Zucker: Re-thinking the decision to put hockey on cable,

or simply puzzled by the ice dancing scoring system?

The whole affair is especially unfortunate considering that NBC currently has a broadcasting rights contract with the NHL and the Olympic Games would be a great way to market NHL talent.  Ultimately, NBC rationalized their decision to put the hockey game on cable because ice dancing on the major network would have the ability to attract the coveted female viewer demographic.  Relatedly, I find it equally reasonable that the network assumed they could not get the same amount of advertising revenue from hockey as compared to ice dancing.

After the fact, the only question that remains is should the game have been on cable?  We don't have the national numbers for NBC just yet, but MSNBC reported today that the hockey game delivered its second highest number of average viewers ever.  With an 8.2 million average viewership, the game provided an audience number that was higher than all but John McCain's concession speech during MSNBC's coverage of Election Night 2008.  Wow.

The team celebrates a hard-earned win.  Is there a win in the national ratings as well?

Furthermore, reports from the local TV market in Buffalo, NY - albeit a devoted hockey town - showed that ratings for the game outdrew the ice dancing ratings.  This happening is so rare - MSNBC beating NBC in evening ratings - that the Buffalo News mused, "Do you believe in miracles?"

I'll update the national ratings as they come in.

UPDATE: Sunday night, NBC averaged an national audience of 23.3 million, down 3 million from the ten day average of 26 million per night, but still good enough to dominate the other networks' offerings.

Lightning...Bolt? (to Canada?)

Another post, another financially-stricken Florida sports franchise.

According to several news sources, the NHL's Tampa Bay Lightning (Forbes' 18th most valuable NHL franchise) had to ask for an advance on the revenue sharing guaranteed to every team at the end of NHL season in order to pay their players on time.  They weren’t just a few pennies short, either, borrowing approximately $2 million. That happened in April of 2009.

I know what you're thinking...these guys own an NHL franchise?

Now, reports are surfacing that there is still more economic uncertainty lingering after the 2008 sale of the team from Palace Sports - owner of the NBA's Pistons - to OK Hockey.  And by economic uncertainty I mean, of course, OK Hockey potential defaulting on their $100 million loan payments to Palace Sports.

Since the team was sold for $208 million and Palace Sports loaned the new group approximately half the money for the purchase, the contract was written with the stipulation that if OK Hockey defaulted on its loan, the team ownership would return to Palace Sports.  The issue has come to the fore since the Pistons and Palace Sports are up for sale and...well, no one wants to buy a property with a defaulting loan hanging around.  That means OK Hockey - and now, the NHL - is scrambling for new investors or new ownership to rescue the hockey franchise.

The Lightning are getting crunched...financially, too

It seems the problem is twofold. First, the NHL’s minimum salary requirement has strained the team's bottom line.  When the Lightning won the Stanley Cup with a small group of stars and relative unknowns in 2004, the squad payroll was in the neighborhood of $32-$34 million.  With this relatively small number, as well as the increased revenue from sold-out home games (including 13 home playoff games), the team easily turned a profit.  In subsequent years, however, NHL requirements have pushed the Lightning’s salary numbers north to a floor of $40 million.

After just 16 games with team to start the 2008 season, 

this man and his mullet are still being paid not to coach the Lightning

Second, combine those financial requirements with a 10% attendance drop this season to an average of just over 15,000 fans.  That number is down 20% from similar figures two years ago and, as a result, things aren't looking too hot for the Lightning.  If the current situation continues, the team could be returned to Palace Sports by as early as February 15th.

Inside the St. Pete Times Forum...plenty of good seats still available

How are the financial issues effecting the team on the ice? While they sit just 3 points out of a playoff spot, the team is in 13th place (out of 15 in their conference) with a rather pedestrian .500 record (21-20-10; W-L-OTL).

If you don’t follow the NHL very closely, this is the second time in the past year that an NHL team has been beset by financial issues.  In May of 2009, the Phoenix Coyotes declared bankruptcy and were purchased by the NHL (interestingly, the Coyotes also required an advance from the NHL revenue sharing deal in 2009).

When Canadian entrepreneur Jim Balsillie stepped up to buy the team, his plans included relocating to Canada.  Quickly, the NHL moved in to stop the sale and the team was eventually sold to a group of investors willing to keep the team in suburban Phoenix.

Currently, the Coyotes face the same attendance issues as the Lightning, drawing a scant 10,000 per game, but at least their marketing team has put in some creative efforts to bring fans into the JOBing.com Arena, including:

• Free shuttle service to the game in Glendale on the "Coyotes Express" from a variety of Phoenix locations
• Selling tickets in the lower bowl for just $25 (the same seat in other arenas cost over $200)
• "We Win, You Win" Promotion nights where, if you buy a ticket and the team wins the game, you get a free ticket to another game
• "Recession Buster" Promotion where, if you buy tickets for three games, you get the fourth game free
• All-you-can-eat ticket packages

Still, the only tonic for poor attendance is winning and unlike the Lightning, the Coyotes are doing that. Currently, the team - a mix of grizzled veterans and exuberant youth - is defying pre-season expectations and holds the fifth-best record in the Western Conference, good for a playoff spot. Furthermore, even with just 10,000 fans on average in the stands, the team has the 7th best home record in the entire league.

He can't fill JOBing.com Arena, 

but he can get you a discount on any Acme purchases

Overall, are the financial difficulties for these teams a referendum on southern hockey franchises? I’m not sure why there are teams in Phoenix, Tampa Bay, Fort Lauderdale, or Atlanta, but I’m not NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman. Or am I putting too much blame on hockey since it is merely a fact that teams in areas of the country hit hardest by the recession will, by default, struggle with attendance issues?

I think it remains to be seen whether the Lightning and Coyotes can financially rebound over time. Still, given the passionate fans of hockey north of the border, it seems strange that there are only six Canadian teams (Calgary, Vancouver, Edmonton, Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa), when cities like Hamilton, Winnipeg, and Quebec City seem desperate for NHL franchises.  This is not to say that there are no hockey fans in Phoenix or Tampa Bay, but these teams had better find them and soon.

College Hockey mascot, destroying the Universe...again!

I know college hockey is probably not on the front of anyone's mind either, especially college hockey in Alaska. And, in the interest of full disclosure, I should assure you that this post only addresses a very minute element of college hockey.  Perhaps it's more about Alaska than it is about hockey. It is, either way, just plain funny.

However, the following video clips might encourage you to think otherwise.  Taken from the opening montages presented at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks' - the Nanooks - Carlson Center, these are a couple of intro videos that would put the vintage-Jordan-era Chicago Bulls entrance theme to shame...

First, from a matchup in 2006 against the Miami of Ohio Redhawks.  Not only do we get interplanetary Nanook/Polar bear intimidation, but pay special attention to the bird vs. bear beatdown at the 1:15 mark and, of course, the part where the Nanook mascot rips a hole in the Carlson Center ceiling and crashes onto the ice below:



Then, from the 2007-2008 season, our angry bear is at it again.  The roar from Ursa Major destroys half the galaxy and sends our friend, now accompanied by a hockey stick, hurdling through a time-space vortex/wormhole, destroying planets, suns, and even satellites (with a beautiful slapshot, I might add) in its path:



And now, the Bear returns in a montage from the current season.  In perhaps his best performance yet, the hibernating bear is first awoken by and later smashes an ice-breaking ship with his stick. He then calls up two of his buddies to be his wingman as the three pilot some F-14s and bomb Michigan State, Ohio State, Notre Dame, and then the entire planet into oblivion, leaving only a floating Carlson Center island to hover in space:



Suffice it to say, the UAF Nanooks are now my favorite CCHA hockey team.

Let's Go Outdoors

In just the past two weeks, three very successful outdoor hockey events have taken place - two in Boston and one in Sweden.  Check it out.

On December 28th, a European-record 31,144 fans packed the Ullevi Stadium in Sweden to watch the Frolunda Indians play Farjestads BK.

Just a few days later, on January 1st, Fenway Park was sold out to capacity (roughly 40,000) for a regular season matchup between the hometown Bruins and the Philadelphia Flyers.

Then, a week later in the same venue, rivals Boston College and Boston University, NCAA champions the past two years, respectively, staged their own outdoor game (another 40,000 fans) and added an incredible new chapter to what is one of the best sports rivalry in America.

The BC-BU tilt (which BU won 3-2) will not be the only outdoor college hockey game this year, however, as the University of Wisconsin and the University of Michigan will square off at Camp Randall Stadium next month.  Then, later this year, Michigan will host Michigan State at The Big House, in a repeat of of 2001's "Cold War," played at Spartan Stadium in East Lansing.  Dubbed "Cold War II," the game should once again be a tremendous success (74,000 fans).  Returning to the pro game,  rumors recently surfaced about the NHL allowing two Canadian teams to play outdoors next year in addition to the now-annual Winter Classic on New Years' Day 2011 (which will likely feature two States-based teams).

BU fans went home happy

That's a lot of outdoor hockey.  But why?  While I've done some extensive research on the subject - notably targeting the nostalgia of these events as well as the savvy marketing schemes that promote these commodified events as "returning to hockey's roots" - a recent documentary entitled "Pond Hockey" does a fine job extolling the magnanimous virtues of playing outdoors.  The documentary has now been released on Hulu, which means if you have a 120 minutes to spend, you can watch it for free.  I highly recommend this star-studded film (Gretzky!), which has received quite a good deal of critical acclaim.

Truly, an Empty Stadium...

In Phoenix last night, a mere 5,855 tickets were sold to an NHL hockey game between the Los Angeles Kings and the Phoenix Coyotes.  FYI - the home of the Coyotes, Jobing.com Arena, holds 17,799 (that's a 33% capacity).  Ironically, earlier in the day the Coyotes were relieved from their bankruptcy, so Coyotes fans would have had something to celebrate - one might think.

I've embedded the highlights here - the Kings won an entertaining game 5-3.  But you can hear the echoes resonate throughout the empty arena.  Note the goal horn masking much of the quieted noise.



Please compare that with the audio from the game this past Saturday between the Toronto Maple Leafs and  Montreal Canadiens (below).  Then tell me that Canada doesn't deserve another (or maybe a handful) hockey team.

Ovechkin's Celebrations...

"What I try to do is teach kids the Canadian way."  These are the words of Canadian broadcaster Don Cherry - one of the country's most beloved and recognizable figures - in reference to the celebratory tactics of players in the National Hockey League.  Disgusted with the goal celebrations of Russian-born NHL superstar Alexander Ovechkin, Cherry launches into a segment that is alarmingly xenophobic by juxtaposing Ovechkin with a number of foreign, dark-skinned soccer players swinging their jerseys over their heads, posing for the camera, and, as Cherry proclaims, acting like "goofs."  As a result, Ovechkin is seamlessly coded as "other," framed with the "goofs" that Cherry admonishes for their overly-enthusiastic goal celebrations.  Then, just as seamlessly, Cherry recites a list of Canadian players who celebrate appropriately in what could only be termed "the Canadian way."

While Cherry was ripped for racial insensitivity in the media after his appearance, his bias towards European hockey players has long been documented, frequently referring to foreign players as being soft or (in some cases) "everything that's wrong with the NHL."  Therefore, his criticisms of Ovechkin are not surprising - nor is his threat of imminent physical harm upon the Russian.

However, the debate over goal celebrations and "the Canadian way" underscores a discourse in sport that questions the prioritization of individualism.  In other words, is Cherry just an "old-schooler" who can't handle a new sportsmanship aesthetic (Cunningham, 2008) that embraces individualism?  Is he the victim of nostalgia?  Or is there supposed to be something uniquely dispassionate about Canadians?

Sports leagues deal with the issue of individualism in different ways.  While soccer's governing bodies are tolerant of exuberant behavior, the NFL fines its players for elaborate touchdown celebrations (the NHL, MLB, and NBA lack standardized celebration penalties).  Therefore, is it simply an outdated notion that drives the punishment of Chad Ochocinco or Terrell Owens for harmless celebrations like proposing to cheerleaders or shaking pompoms after they score?  Because, even if you believe Ovechkin is acting like a "goof,"  he is also primarily responsible not just for revitalizing hockey for the Capitals in Washington, D.C. (attendance figures and TV ratings are the highest ever for the franchise), but throughout the entire league as the excitement and passion he brings to the game resonates with fans and often places him on sports' front page or as SportsCenter's lead-in (an extreme rarity for the NHL in recent years).

Responding to Cherry's comments on the CBC broadcast, Ovechkin said, "Old people don't like [it] when people show energy and emotions. So they are like robots."  While Cherry may take pride in instilling a robotic disposition to Canadian athletes, the NHL needs the entertainment value that a dynamic Ovechkin brings to the game.  Ironic, it seems, that some 30 years after the "Miracle on Ice," that a Russian would be chided for showing too much emotion - essentially - for being human. But as long as Ovechkin's celebrations refrain from being derisive, what's the harm in having fun?