All-Star games are supposed to be about the fans. And the fans decided they wanted to see this hard-working defenseman make the All-Star game. They also wanted to prove their voice counts. I thought it was awesome what they did, and thought the NHL should have done the right thing and added Fitzpatrick in. I bet there was not one mean spirit in thier bone when they did this.

Yeah they followed this story pretty frequently on Deadspin.com while it was playing out and it seemed to me like the motives behind the push were all about rewarding an everyman who worked hard. I'm not a big hockey fan, but I certainly didn't see anything sinister behind it.

Nonsense. The people voting for Rory were not "fans" they are disruptive punks who want their "voices heard" for no other reason than they want their voices heard.

All Star games, regardless of the sport, are designed to showcase the best that sport has to offer. Rory clearly did not fit that criteria. That said, there was something amusing about the campaign to get him in, but overall I think attempts like this, if successful, risk watering down the true meaning and intention of such events and lessening their value, which is a bad thing.

This should be true, but All Star games are about money. Plain and simple.

I cannot deny that. True about anything really...doesn't change the fact that these events really should be about showing off the best.

Oh my God!

Money?!?

...are you sure?


The NHL is trying to make money?

How dare they, next thing you'll be telling me is Banks are trying to make money off of my accounts instead of just providing a free service.

I'm just saying people get so crazy whining and complaining about All Star games which is a general waste of time. Leagues love the game because they bring in added revenue. Players want to get named to the teams so they can get paid more on their next contract and get endorsement contracts. That's all. It's business like anything else. Anyone who thinks All Star games are about showcasing talent had better be under 12.

This whole thing is a non-issue and therefore doesn't really matter.

By the way, "The NHL is trying to make money?" - If they are, they're not that good at it.

I wasn’t aware the NHL was playing anymore.

If a league plays but nobody cares or watches does it count?

South of Canada of course.

I totally agree with Pot Odds here. The game is about the fans but Rory Fitzpatrick is not a veteran defensemen who has been in the league for years. He has played the better part of his career in the AHL.
http://www.nhl.com/nhl/app?service=page&am...69&tab=crst
I could see doing this for a 20 year NHL veteran who has been close but has never made it to the All star game, but that is not the case here.

A big part of why this campaign was launched was to get the nhl to change the way players are voted into the allstar game, to change the "popularity contest" attitude. This was clearly stated on the original voteforrory.com page.

It is apparent that this succeeded, as it is clear that the nhl manipulated the votes in order to ensure that Rory was NOT invited to the all star game.

In order to vote for the all stars, you needed to select one player for EACH position in BOTH CONFERENCES. Your vote would not be logged if this wasn't complete. HOWEVER, when the total votes were released by the nhl, the western conference had ONE HUNDRED THOUSANDS LESS votes for players, if each vote was tallyed up.

The only explanation for this was votes thrown out for Rory, and other players to balance it out.

This has been mentioned a few times in the media, but no big public outrage happened. The nhl denied this claim as well.

Any thoughts?

No it doesn't, unless someone cares about you, which is clearly not the case here.

I just thought it was great that they did this for someone who they admired. I know Brad Marsh once made it and I also remember that baseball used to have an extra spot for a veteran.

Acutally, these people were terrorists. Osama Bin Hockey Fans.

"No it doesn't, unless someone cares about you, which is clearly not the case here. '

Relax, my point was the NHL has just killed itself in the States, which also happens to be the reason it exists. I have season tickets, trust me you can't give them all away. If you look at the rating they are terrible, they have a TV deal tha makes them vitually ZERO and the tickets are expensive.

I am fortunate to have season tickets for the NFL, MLB and NHL. The value is in that order too. Hockey was at one time the 2nd best sport for the combination of value and entertainment for the dollar. It was never cheap but the games were great....now they just suck.

I am not alone on that thought all you have to do is check every indicator avalable. Check the rating for the All-star game.

There are LOT of indicators in Canada which would tell you otherwise. The problem with the NHL is they expanded in the US too fast. Tampa Bay, Florida, Nashville, Columbus to name a few. No offense to these great cities but they don't need/care/or even want a hockey team so why do they have them? There are at least 3 or 4 cities in Canada which could have a very successsful franchise. (Winnepeg, Quebec, Halifax) The problem is the NHL doesn't want this because none of the US teams in the weak markets want to watch their team play any Canadian team. My thought is they don't wanna watch them play any other US team either so why keep the franchise.

"My thought is they don't wanna watch them play any other US team either so why keep the franchise. "

I agree but...most of the CA cities in question had teams but couldn't afford to support them, correct?

I see the some of the problems being

1. expansion. It has watered down the product

2. lack of fighting. I don't need a fight evey game but tell me the games against your bitter rival weren't beter with a fight or two....THEY WERE.

3. Helmets....required for saftey yes but it was so cool to see it without them.

4. still tooooooo many teams in the playoffs.

i'm sure there are more and better reasons but that is some of them.

ridiculous. Even WITH helmets, players lives are being risked, without helmets would result in certain deaths. Actually, that seems kinda cool!

I live in Halifax (well Dartmouth) and you are certifiably insane if you think this market could support an NHL team as well as Tampa Bay. Nothing against Halifax (hey I live here) but the city just isn't big enough or rich enough. (You may have a point with the Panthers though.) Your problem is lumping all expansion teams in the same boat -- towns like Dallas and Tampa, while not "traditional" markets, support their teams better than many traditional markets.

Bottom Six in NHL Attendance:

25 Boston
26 New Jersey
27 Washington
28 NY Islanders
29 Chicago
30 St. Louis

Montreal is the only team in Canada with better attendance than the Lightning. (Granted Toronto could well have higher attendance if they had a bigger arena ... then again that's their own fault for not building it bigger.) Tampa has been second and third in NHL attendance the past few years. Toronto, Montreal (and maybe Vancouver) are the only cities where tickets could be expensive enough to make as much money as they do in Tampa.

While I might be inclined to agree they went a little too far in expansion, when you lump in one of the best supported NHL teams as one nobody cares about, your argument loses validity.

Just because we're Canadian and want to support our cities doesn't justify being ignorant of the US expansion cities which (even if we don't like it) do support their teams very well. If you want to talk about the Panthers or even the Hurricanes, then it's a different discussion. The likes of Tampa and Dallas don't deserve to be lumped in the same boat as the others.

As for Rory, the problem wasn't so much the fan's motives as the fact that the NHL manipulated the votes and then lied to their own fans in a year in which they are promoting is so "Fan"tastic. If they didn't want him in they should have just said so -- even if you agree with their motives I don't see how you can agree with them changing the vote count and lying.

Tampa Bay's attendeance figures are widely recognized as "extremely padded". At least a third of the "tickets" are freebies and promos, and in any given "sell out" their are hundreds of empty seats. When the lighting won the Stanley Cup, they were GIVING AWAY 2nd and 3rd round tickets by the truck load, and i also believe they had some sort of "free beer' promo to entice fans as well. I'd be VERY surprised if Tampa is making all this money you seem to think they are.

Problem with this nonsense is one of my best friends lives in Tampa. They weren't giving away second and third round tickets -- they had an overflow in the parking lot where people watched on screens. If they could have fit anyone else in the building they would have. The number of wildly inaccurate, biased, and mean-spirited condescending "we're better than them" articles from the Canadian media during that series was nauseating. I choose to believe people who were actually at the game, plus media reports which stated there were thousands watching games outside on screens because the games were sold out. Plus I went to a regular season game in Tampa in January of last year (two actually) and both games were legit sellouts. If two regular season games are sold out I find it hard to believe "truckloads of free tickets" were given away for the Eastern Conference Finals. I declare shenanigans on that BS. Newsflash: The Canadian media, during a playoff series which pits a southern team against a Canadian team, is not to be trusted. Google the past the years of Canadian news and you'll see Vincent Lecavalier being "strongly rumoured" to being traded to Montreal about every two months (this is well after the period when he was actually potentially to be traded). They figure anyone will believe anything they write about a southern team because they won't bother checking for themselves ... which certainly seems to be true.

The original idea behind the Rory Fitzpatrick campaign was to get the NHL to change their All-Star selection format. Many of the more passionate fans don't like the fact that the fans selected the All-Stars because of their tendency to pick players that had no business starting in the All-Star game.

It was definitely NOT to see a hardworking player get a spot on the roster. Rory Fitzpatrick was picked because he was considered one of the worst players in the NHL, not one of the most hardworking.

I come from australia so i dont know much about this situation only what i have read on this forum ( so i should be an expert if i read right )

that being said i dont think you would have to worry about the further watering down of a product. This one player got in this one year and it added some novilty to the event. It is a post hoc hallacy to say that if more worst player campaigns where added that more of them would make the game. NHL dont care because one player which would take the place of a fringe player of the all stars (frindge because the better players got the most votes theoretically) compared to the publicity and intrest generated in the game because of the event. Eventually it will go away because people want the idea of the original product. More people in the nature of sport want the all star game then to see it completly destroyed with multiple and eventually singular mediocre players.

The little high school kids who grew up with the all star game will laugh at this for a couple more years before they deside that they want the all "star" game back.

Since this is a team sport and not an elimination challange like idol it isnt that big a deal.

I already said that.

Also, re: Tampa Bay - as i originally said, about a third of the tickets were bought BY THE LIGHTNING and given away. Just because the stadium is filled, doen NOT mean people paid for those seats. Just because there were allegedly people OUTSIDE (which there were not during the first 3 rounds, only during the final) does NOT mean that those people were willing to pay a hundred bucks to ENTER THE BUILDING.

This is not up for argument. It is a FACT. Stop arguing with me.

What is your source for that fact?

The real question is why are you arguing with me? If you believe I'm lying about my experiences in Tampa then why argue with me? If you are willing to have an adult back and forth conversation then here are some uppercase facts for you:

I live in the Halifax area, one of the cities you mentioned that would be better for the NHL than Tampa. If I were to be biased toward any side of the argument I would be biased to making out like Halifax is capable of supporting an NHL team better than Tampa. I'd love to have an NHL team here -- not that I don't like the Mooseheads (double OT winner last night) but c'mon. However, having actually been to games in Tampa, I know there is no way we could do that.

So I've been to hockey games in both Halifax and Tampa. When I went to Tampa I purchased tickets to the hockey game as far in advance as I could. It was either late September or early October when I got tickets for games in January of '06. At this point the best tickets I could get were on the third level, very high up. Total nosebleeds. Eventually I got tickets off StubHub which were better but the point is that there was nothing available. If you want me to believe that they buy up tickets for games three months away, before they've even had a chance to sell any, then I don't believe that.

I can't remember exactly what the face value of the tickets was but I believe they were over $60 US each ($68 is sticking in my mind). They were first row on the third level. There is no way a city like Halifax could support almost $80 CAD for third level tickets. I live here. I know.

Regardless of what may or may not have happened on their Cup run, this got started because I said the Lightning were 2nd and 3rd in attendance the last few years and you said the numbers were padded. My point is that if I couldn't get decent tickets three months before a game then they are selling a lot of tickets -- there hadn't been time to buy their own tickets yet.

I found this story which backs up my claims (you know, evidence rather than hearsay):

Wednesday's biggest crowd was in Tampa Bay, where 22,120 fans filled the St. Pete Times Forum as the Lightning raised their 2004 Stanley Cup banner prior to the home-opener against the Carolina Hurricanes. With season ticket packages reducing available seats for opening night to fewer than 2,500 amid phenomenal ticket demand for the upcoming season, the Lightning had to institute a lottery to equitably distribute remaining tickets for this game.
http://www.nhl.com/news/2005/10/237032.html

So that makes sense that only nosebleeds were available if they'd sold all the good seats via various season ticket packages. Granted this is the season opener but since I found only nosebleeds for a game in January I'd say only maybe 3-4K were put on general sale for each game.

I'm aware that teams often pad attendance, however there is only so much you can do that. For them to claim the 2nd and 3rd highest attendances they are packing in a good amount of people.

Back to your original point, considering I've been to games in Tampa, I know what the demand is like for tickets, I know what the tickets cost, I have first hand knowledge. Considering I live in Halifax I know what the demand and incomes are like here. We could not put 20,000 fans in for 41 games paying the kind of prices they pay in Tampa. If you want to disagree with me, fine, but I'd like to know why you think you're more qualified to form that opinion than I am. Not that I'm an expert on all matters NHL -- I just happen to have first-hand experience with these cities.

As I said, I have no pro-south, anti-Canada agenda. If you want to discuss, say Carolina v. Winnipeg, that's perhaps a different argument. Carolina are 15th in attendance the year after winning a Cup, which is pretty pathetic and could make a good case that the team might be better off elsewhere.

Easy there big fella, don’t get yourself too excited. You will mind much more mindless arguments about many more important issues.

You’re still new here…how do you feel about global warming…














SW

Still new here? I joined before you. I just don't have a lot of posts since, despite the evidence on display in this thread, I generally avoid pointless net arguments (hence my sig).

As for global warming, I'm all for it. Bring it on. The more the merrier.

By the way we are way off the original Rory Fitzpatrick topic but here goes...

It was me who brought up the Tampa Bay area. It was a bad choice on my part as there are definitely a lot worse markets in the US with NHL teams right now. Although it helps when you have won a cup and have 3 great players to market.
Halifax is definitely the 3rd best option for Canada of the options I gave but still it's a better option than a lot of the markets in the US.
I have heard from a player on the Lightning and he said they definitely aren't a "hockey" town. Now I know this is an extreme but if Robert Luongo, Jerome Iginla, Mats Sundin, Jason Spezza, and Saku Koivu were to walk down the street in the respective town that they played for, they would be mobbed by fans looking for autographs, pictures etc.. Whereas if Vincent Lecavelier and Brad Richrads walked down main street in Tampa Bay no one would notice.

"Still new here? I joined before you. "

LOL I didn't even notice i just saw the post count... good hand sir

That's true but I'm not entirely sure why that matters. There are very few cities in the US in which mainstream (i.e. non-season ticket holders ... just the average person on the street) would recognize a hockey player. Hockey is totally under the mainstream radar there. If being recognized on the street were grounds for "deserving" a hockey team then there would hardly be any teams in the US at all (which might make a lot of Canadians happy I know).

There are original six teams (Chicago, Boston) where I am sure the average player doesn't get noticed all that often ... and those teams (while admittedly bad this year ... although both those cities have had lousy attendance for a while) have far worse attendance than many expansion teams.

Plus I find it hard to believe that there are other towns in the US in which players are constantly being recognized on the street but then far less people can be bothered to go to the actual games than in Tampa. Doesn't add up. I think it's true that they aren't often recognized in Tampa; I just don't think that's any different than almost anywhere else in the US. Hell the Cup Finals get 2.x ratings -- average that out and it's less than 100,000 people in a given city watching hockey. Nobody knows hockey players in the US. Hardly unique to Tampa. Padding the numbers or not (and I've seen some of their games this season, plus heard from people who are actually there, and that place looks basically full -- I'm sure there might be a few nosebleeds open, and the team might claim a sellout despite that, which A LOT of other teams do) it doesn't make *that* much difference.

Plus my buddies down in Tampa must be blind and deaf because they've never found wherever this place is where the team is constantly giving away boatloads of free tickets to the games. Those suckers end up paying for them. I should let them know to keep an eye out for Jay Feaster on the corner of the street with a "free tickets and beer" sign around his neck.

Not to mention if things were that bad there that they can't sell Eastern Conference Final playoff tickets then they wouldn't fudge the numbers UP, they'd fudge them down so they'd have justification to move the team somewhere better.



You might be able to make a case for the worst US city v. the best Canadian market without a team. There is still the issue that they have to pay the players in US $ -- if the CAD takes a plunge relative to USD to the levels of the late 90's/early 00's the Canadian teams essentially end up paying their players double. It's sad but it's reality -- I think it would be very hard to be viable in any other Canadian cities.

Anyway, ultimately pointless discussion because, as the Fitzpatrick situation showed (look at this coming full circle) the NHL has no interest in what the fans want. If they want a mostly US NHL then that's what they'll have ... fans be damned. I admit it would be better to have two or three more Canadian teams (just not blindly replacing good US markets because they have palm trees) -- I just don't see how it's financially viable.

so you think Tampa bay Lightning make money?

"The run to the 20004 Stanley Cup gave Palace Sports & Entertainment, the Lightning's parent company, a $3.8-million profit on its Tampa operation, Campbell said. He said it is PS&E's only profit in the city since it bought the team and the Times Forum lease in 1999.

Campbell said the company lost $54-million entering the Cup season. Subtract the '04 profit and add subsequent losses, he said, of $8.8-million in the lockout season and $8-million last season, and PS&E claims losses of about $67-million in Tampa. Campbell estimates the company will lose $9-million in Tampa this season without a Lightning playoff run.""

no TV deal = teams losing money....nothing new there. Face it folks the NHL is almost a 2nd level sport....along the lines of arena football, bowling, soccer etc.

The problem is they have big time contracts and ticket prices.

Those profits don't include revenue from the arena, which they treat separately. The arena is one of the highest grossing arenas in the world. However the revenue is tied to ownership of the team (the hockey team own the arena -- if you move the team you lose ownership of the arena) so they make money with the Lightning. They don't want to move -- no way they'd give up the revenue from that arena.

The venue in downtown Tampa has been ranked as the leading concert ticket sales venue in North America, as well as second largest worldwide, by a music industry publication for the first half of 2005.
http://tampabay.bizjournals.com/tampabay/s...18/daily11.html

The whining about profits is PR to lower payroll and rake in even more profits from the arena ... treating the arena like the NFL's TV contract and they are the Arizona Cardinals. Think about it:

The NHL has a salary cap so every team spends around the same amount on players.

Expenses are around the same.

Ticket prices in Tampa are average or above average.

Attendance is way above average, or at least average if you think they're increasing attendance that much.

So if they are "losing money," with one of the biggest grossing concert venues in the entire world, then every single NHL team must be losing money (which, if you believe the owners, they are). Think about it, pretty much no other team gets as much revenue from their arena as the Lightning do. Expenses are pretty much the same. So either every team loses money ... or something fishy is going on with their book-keeping. They split profits on their books for business reasons and don't count concert revenue -- even though they wouldn't get concert revenue if they didn't own the team (can't move it because the team owns the lease).

Having said that, I don't recall saying I thought the Lightning made money; I merely said no Canadian city without a team could do better. If you think an arena in Winnipeg could be the second highest selling concert venue in the entire world then go ahead and build one.

OR, you can think I'm wrong about this. In which case that's more justification for not putting a team in a small Canadian market. Imagine how much money a team would lose without being a top three concert venue in the world. Knowing how much money they make in concerts, all your quote does is reinforce how a smaller Canadian city just couldn't be viable.

Anyway, we're going in circles here and there is really no point continuing. I've hurled enough shoes. I'll let you have the last word if you want it. Although I am curious about one thing: Are you a Flames fan?

FUUCKING hate the flames. Canucks fan.

Also, i'm right, you're wrong. last word. victory.