Part Two*
Potential Solutions to the NHL's American Marketing Problem


In Part One of this post, I identified two problems the NHL faces when trying to market the NHL product in the United States. In Part Two, I'd like to explore some possible solutions to those problems and suggest some solutions that could be reasonably implemented.

Summary of Problem Number Number One: There is a general lack of scandal surrounding NHL players that, quite honestly, bores American sports fans who are accustomed to headline-grabbing scandal rife with conflict.

What's Great About This and Shouldn't Be Changed: Hockey players drink protein shakes religiously rather than bulk up on steroids. The vast majority of NHL players aren't engaging in even the minor stupidities of bar fights and resisting arrest. In general, hockey players do their jobs, and any shenanigans in which they indulge off the ice (e.g. the hard-drinking culture of hockey) rarely involve breaking the law.

What's Problematic About This: Far too often, the average American dismisses hockey players as "boring," and not just boring, but dull. Perhaps part of this can be blamed on American provincialism: Americans are generally too lazy to listen to someone with an accent that's not easily identifiable. If you have to listen to a player speaking with a French accent or a Slovak accent, that requires effort. Not to mention that player hails from a culture, typically, very different than that of most Americans. Yet it's not just American provincialism that causes the problem: Hockey players can compound the problem by giving interviews in which they spew constant cliches and, whatever the reason, never reveal the dynamic personalities so often seen during in-game action.

Simple Solutions: Put microphones on the bench, the penalty box, the referee and linesmen, and on more than just a select player. And keep the microphones on for more than just 30 seconds or even just a few minutes. Truth told, the personalities of star players like Sidney Crosby and Jaromir Jagr are far more easily seen in on-ice performance than in most anything that occurs off the ice. Part of on-ice performance is the way a player interacts with others verbally--and let's be honest. Heat-of-the-moment drama is common in the midst of a hockey game, and sports fans can get the high drama they desire as part of in-game action. And for the family friendly crowd that might wince at some of the utterances of the hockey players, modern technology has invented a bleep-out device; plus, as far as I know, even children are experts at lip-reading, sound or no sound.

Going along with this simple solution, the NHL itself needs to allow the players to be themselves. Local broadcasters often do this best; it's why players with charming personalities, a la Max Talbot, or pranksters, a la Colby Armstrong, are beloved by Pittsburgh fans. When the NHL has a national broadcast in the States, it would be far better for the league, rather than encouraging players to say nothing controversial, to encourage players to be true to who they are--whether that's serious and focused or loose and comical. Honestly, NHL, nothing earth-shattering will really come from allowing an on-ice broadcast to reveal that a certain star player, in addition to being a star, is also extremely emotional. In fact, the NHL, while doing nothing to change the game at all, might begin to catch the imagination of American fans due to the high drama inherent in the matches themselves.


Summary of Problem Two: On-ice displays of Neanderthal behavior turn off the average American sports fan, while off-ice "minor" scandals don't grab the headlines of the public but remain an image problem for the NHL.

What's Great About This: While I'd like to say that it's good that, for example, bar fights involving NHL players don't typically make major headlines in the United States, I'd almost prefer that a royal fuss would be thrown any time a NHL player broke the law off the ice. Because that kind of uproar in grabbing the headlines would at least be proof that the NHL is relevant in the States. Unfortunately, I have to go with the fact that there's nothing great about problem two.

What's Problematic About This: When hockey players get in trouble, alcohol is usually involved. In the worst cases, drunk driving is involved. Besides the fact that drunk driving is irresponsible, dangerous, and far too often deadly, drunk driving arrests present a "just like the rest of them" image problem for the NHL. So-called "boring" NHL players show themselves to be no different than their peers in other professional sports when the police ledger reveals that players were driving cars with blood alcohol levels over the legal limit.
And I think it's enough to state the obvious problem inherent when a player wields his hockey stick to an opposing player's neck in the same way one would chop down a tree.

Simple Solutions: While I'm fairly certain the NHL tries to get the "no drinking and driving" thing through the heads of players, it's certainly fair to say that more can and should be done. E.g., most hockey players drink. Fine and dandy. Teach those players to drink responsibly. Teach those players to find someone in the team's organization to give them a ride when they've indulged themselves. Ream it through their minds, hearts, and souls, in every way possible, how to recognize when they've had too much to drink (e.g. this much is too much), how to err on the side of caution rather than the side of risk (difficult for hockey players), and how, their athletic prowess aside, they never have any business being behind the wheel of a car after a night of indulgence.

While getting the no drinking and driving mentality to take hold in the hearts, minds, and souls of professional hockey players, it is necessary for the hearts, minds, and souls of the powers that be in the NHL front office to realize that they must eradicate any resemblance to Neanderthal behavior from the game of hockey. As someone who grew up watching the sport, I understand the inherent "code." Beyond that "code," which has limitations, the NHL has to stomp down, swiftly and harshly, on stick work. There is no room in the NHL for Chris Simon swinging his stick the way he did this past season. Even if such stick work is "accidental" or a result of mere "carelessness," it must be punished, and punished harshly. And despite the "code," there is no room for deliberately attempting to injure another player.* Any incidents where a player deliberately attempts to injure an opponent should be immediately followed by the harshest of consequences, and if the rulebook needs to be amended for this change to occur, the rulebook needs to be amended immediately. Repeat offenders should receive a lifetime ban. Harsh? Yes. Necessary? Absolutely.


Yet even as I ponder potential solutions to the NHL's American marketing problem, I return to the last question I asked in the first post where I introduced what I believed to be the NHL's two main difficulties in marketing the NHL game to the American sports fan. That question, once again: Given the average American's lust for conflict-rife scandal, should the NHL even desire to start marketing the game to the average American sports fan?

My current answer: So long as the integrity of the game of hockey isn't compromised, absolutely.

Honestly, will putting microphones on players, all of whom will easily get consumed by in game action, really compromise the integrity of the game?

Would creating commercials that focus on conflict inherent in the game, for example, a disagreement between two opposing coaches or two opposing players, compromise the integrity of the game?

Would altering the rulebook to ensure that deliberate attempts to injure opponents are immediately followed by swift and harsh reprisal really alter the integrity of the game?

In answer to all those questions, the answer comes: Of course not. As much as "old-school" hockey types bemoan any type of change, the Stanley Cup finals were still the Stanley Cup finals, this in spite of Pierre McGuire now peppering players and coaches with questions throughout the in-game action. The reaction to Chris Simon's insanity was probably not harsh enough. In no way, however, did a lengthy suspension or a reporter with a microphone in the faces of players and coaches throughout the game itself drastically change hockey from what it is.

As an adult who got hooked on hockey as a young child, so long as the simple solutions to the NHL's American marketing problem do not change the very essence of what makes hockey hockey, why not try those simple solutions, at least a little--just to see if more people, perhaps, can be let in on the great secret that is the game of hockey?


*As I understand "the code," when an opponent takes an unnecessary/cheap shot at my team's star player, my team's "enforcer" (our guy who fights) looks for an opportunity to fight the player who took the cheap shot. That being said, however, when such a "code" evolves not into merely winning a fight, but into trying to injure the player who took the cheap shot, a line has been crossed that should not be crossed. (See Todd Bertuzzi trying to avenge Markus Naslund and what happened to Steve Moore.) Of course, idealistically, the best way to deal with "cheap shots" is not for an enforcer to "even the score" but for a team to punish the opponents on the scoreboard by scoring on the power play that should ensue following a cheap shot. Likewise, of course, the best way to eliminate the unnecessary/cheap shots and need for reprisal from the team is for the officials to enforce the rulebook consistently. And, of course, if the rulebook needs to be strengthened (as in the case of attempts to injure), the rulebook needs to be altered so that officials can enforce it. (Further discussions of "the code," changes to the rulebook, and issues in officiating will probably make good blogging fodder for the remainder of this seemingly interminable summer.)