Do the Habs, and their fans owe Bettman?

[Habby1197]

We're off to a 7-2 start, while it's still very early in the season, it's also very impressive. I've been to all 5 games in Montreal and I can tell you first hand the new rules are way in our advantage. The Habs speed totally had Philly on their heals last night in the third period, there was nothing they could do about it, but take 5 penalties and allow us to tie the game.

In the old NHL the Habs were a good team, but their chances of a championship were no where as high as they are now. While we were able to spend upwards of 50 million a year, other teams were able to shell out 80+ million, while money doesn't buy you a championship, most of the high payroll teams were among the leagues elite.

Now everyone is on the same level playing field, money is no longer an issue. The teams with the best management will be at the top. If we do happen to win it all in the next few years, Habs fans should say a little thank you to Gary Bettman, as much as most of us dislike him, he's put our Habs in a much better position.

Teams are now considering us a tough team to play, Montreal is no longer a game other teams look forward to, we earned Philly's respect last night, and by years end I hope we have all 29 other teams respect.

[Mark Napier]

Let's hope the refs keep calling those penalties to allow the Habs to skate freely with no obstruction. I've seen a few signs of them wanting to revert to the old clutch and grab mentallity.

[shortcat1]

Interesting... two topics on the same subject by the same person in the same 'field'.

Kind of a shotgun methodof getting feedback.

[CoRvInA]

one thing I noticed ... and please tell me if Im wrong...the flyers didnt finish too many checks ... specially those where they could have plastered someone on the boards.. the thing is I doubt they will forget to do this next time Specially in the first period..

[simonus]

2 possibilities

1) Scared of penalties

2) Scared of missing and getting out of position

[habmanonthepacific]

While it is under Bettman's rule that the major changes to the NHL were made, i really don't think we should be grateful to him as much as to Bob gainey and the entire management team for having built the team that is now giving us so much hope for the future of our beloved franchise.

Because really, even if Bettman had made the changes, but Gainey hadn't had the foresight to build a team the way he has, one that is focused on speed, skill and positioning, we wouldn't be benefiting from the changes, as we are now.

[Lister110]

Remember Colorado did pretty well with a speed team in the old system. So did Tampa and to a certain extent Calgary with the likes of Iginla and Gelinas.

Montreal was improving every year and the permanent signing of Kovalev while dumping a lot of old players strengthened us a lot.

We owe Bettman not half as much as people will have us believe, especially the boys at TSN. Our team is coming into their own and this would have happened under the old system too. Lets not forget that all of our speed has not kept us out of the penalty box either.

Don't sell our Habs short.

Also a note, the hooking is being called but the clutching isn't. Our small players can be impeded just as easily by a big defenceman's arm as their stick. The small players seem to be judged under a different set of rules being ignored when thrown to the ice. Most penalties are being drawn from infractions against guys like Bonk and Kovalev not so much on guys like Plekanec or Higgins.

[shortcat1]

I'm going to add this here in case the other string with the same title gets deleted. It's a post that I made on it.

"It's not just Bettman that we have to thank. It's also the the NHLPA who co-operatively worked with the league to get this going.

It's also Bob Gainey and the COMPETITION COMMITTEE which is responsible for the game as it is.

It's not Bettman who will 'fold' under the pressure. If anything, it'll be the committee.

Check this links for further info. It's encouraging. "

http://www.nhl.com/nhlhq/cba/rules_changes072205.html

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=13113...130&hubname=nhl

:hlogo::ghg::hlogo:

[kaos]

Nobody owes Bettman anything.

He led the league through a lockout and a players strike.

Hes led the league to have franchises where they have no buisness being like Atlanta, Nashville, Pheonix and Carolina while driving them out of places they should be like Winnepeg and Quebec City.

And maybe the biggest sin, is he's Americanized it getting rid of all the history that is hockey, eg., There used to be the Wales and Campbell confrences, with the Norris, Smythe, Adams and Patrick divisions. THat was hockey. What the hell is a Northeast Division? Its so bland it makes me wanna puke.

Why do we owe Bettman for making sure that the referrees call the game the way it suppose to be? Geeze your not allowed to hook a guy and waterski behind him? What you can't maul a guy in front of the net and drag him to the ice? Owe Bettman? I think Not

[simonus]

Originally posted by kaos

Nobody owes Bettman anything.

I owe him a few kicks in the ass.

[TheMaxDaddy]

Bettman couldn't give a crap about any team in Canada succeeding. If we want to talk about conspiracy to help certain teams, how about those division leading Rangers?

[kaos]

Well said Simonus and MaxDaddy

[Habby1197]

I think we do owe him a thank you... even though he didn't do it for us, I haven't seen us be able to be this exciting in years. While I agree he doesn't care about the Habs or Canada... when we sip from Lord Stanley in the next few years, a part of all of us will know that his lockout didn't hurt us.

For the record I'm no Bettman fan, but I do appreciate the changes.

[GoHabs2002]

Remember Colorado did pretty well with a speed team in the old system. So did Tampa and to a certain extent Calgary with the likes of Iginla and Gelinas.  

I don't really believe Calgary was that fast of a team, not onthe same as TB or COL, that's for sure. They grinded it out with the best of them.

And as for the Bettman bashing. I criticize some of the things he does, but people have to understand what his job is. It's obvious he was hired to grow the league. The NHL Board of Governors wanted the league on a bigger platform and Bettman presented a feasible plan. A plan of that magnitude required proper co-ordination of multiple elements, which was probably not done as effectively as Bettman or the B.O.G had planned/hoped for.

He is the commissioner of the NHL. He works for the owners, who own and manage the league. His position was created so there was one individual who is able to look at the entire picture and act on behalf the well-being of the collective owners.

He grew the game. No one can dispute that. But there were way too many growing pains. Supply and demand raised player's price and the need to ensure respective competition forced the NHL to adopt a lower standard of rule enforcement.

But he didn't run away and give up and leave this league on its own in the mess he created. For that, I give him and the B.O.G all the credit. He had a plan, it turned out to be a 10 year plan. (1993-2004). A plan of that magnitude is not uncommon in the corporate world.

Bettman is absolutely right when he says the league couldn't focus on improving the game until the economics were set straight. It might make him sound pure business, but it's common sense. Firstly, if teams are losing large sums of money on a regular basis, they will focus on changing that situation before they care about anything else. And when you are losing resources, as they were, it's hard to fathom to apply even more resources to 1)fill the hole created by the losses and 2) improve the game. Sure, fixing the game could have lessened the economic struggles, but it wouldn't have fixed it. The system was out of wack.

Now, after his 10 year plan, he's got a financial system where the teams have a fixed amount of money to spend enabling each market to have a realistic shot at acquiring quality players and manageable amounts of money. And, properly located, properly supported and properly managed franchises will earn a respectable return on investment.

WIth that, they'll be much more inclined on improving upon the current results with better games, better presentation and better approaches. They don't have to worry about finances (or not as much).

After 10 years:

NHL is seen by millions more in N.A and worldwide (despite not respectable numbers, its still comparatively high).

On national television (Had no network deal in '93)

Revenues have been increased 5-fold.

Players are better.

Presentation of games (both live and on tv are better)

Coverage of the games are better.

And now, the final piece of the puzzle, financial system is in place.

Now, Bettman has initiated a product-quality improvement plan.

He's done a good job, people just have to take emotion aside and understand where he was coming from.

(the NFL is the model league, its operations are the best. I don't think it's coincidence that the league really took off once they had their finances in order, beginning with revenue sharing in the 60s and 70s).

[Rooster]

We owe Bettman for years of bad management and terrible expansion decisions that put the league financially against the wall and forced the owners to strongly resolve to put in place a new economic system and then a new "look" to the game to bring back fans after the lockout which was necessary to put in place the new economic system.

So, basically, thank you for screwing things up so bad that a big change was mandatory for the owners.

[simonus]

Yeah, but you have to remember that Bettman essentially screwed the economic reality by overexpanding. If he had slowly bled in teams, the salaries wouldn't have shot up as much and maybe clutch and grab could have been avoided/reduced. The OLN contract (although slightly better than that offered by ESPN) is a failure on the part of the NHL. I am the only person I know amongst my friends that has the channel and I am not the only hockey fan.

That being said I think the NHL could be in a good position if some things go well - OLN increases subscribership/improves presentation quality, NBC picks up more games, rule implementation (Gainey's baby) stays strong, and a little 'buzz'. Of course Bettman still doesn't understand why there are no free throws.

[GoHabs2002]

A good point to consider is that Bettman has been employed by the NHL longer than he had ever been with the NBA.

Was his expansion strategy well-planned? Not at all. Everything about it could have been done better.

But in the end, he probably accomplished everything he had promised to the Board upon his hiring. He just took the long road to do it.

[PurpleHills]

Originally posted by GoHabs2002

But in the end, he probably accomplished everything he had promised to the Board upon his hiring. He just took the long road to do it.

I think that pretty much sums it up...

Yes, He made some bone head decisions. But if the league turns out better off by the end of his tenure than when he started, he has succeeded. And right now, it's looking a whole lot better.

[simonus]

you have to measure Bettman against 'relacement-level' commish. Do you think another reasonable, qualified commish would do worse than Bettman? Highly unlikely.

You don't give an arsonist a medal for putting out fires. By the same logic I don't give Bettman props.

[Edited on 10/28/2005 by simonus]

[GoHabs2002]

Originally posted by simonus

you have to measure Bettman against 'relacement-level' commish. Do you think another reasonable, qualified commish would do worse than Bettman? Highly unlikely.

You don't give an arsonist a medal for putting out fires. By the same logic I don't give Bettman props.

I agree.

But at the time no one was really criticizing Bettman's hiring. He was deemed the big-league savior the league needed to boost its exposure.

And,sure it might have been wise to let him lose half way through when things were going really badly...but why would they??

They had already invest millions into his salary and into his enterprise-wide plans. In return, no matter how poorly the product was, he kept bringing them big sponsor and corporate money.

It would have made no sense to fire Bettman halfway through HIS organizational plans. He was the architect and, to ensure internal continuity, they had to let him see it through.

If he failed with the CBA and the relaunch, then he wouldn't have saw it through successfully and he probably would have been gone in the summer of 06. And he must have knew that.

He was the best man at the time of his hiring and becuase of that, it made sense to let him complete his plan.