SamJamIam Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 I'm decidedly anti-conspiracy but if you know a bit about economics, you know about the prisoner's dilemma. A badly-designed system of rules and various other pressures can create strong personal motivations for the refs. These pressures include keeping playoff series close, a desire to endear oneself to the NHL (which usually means favouring the sunbelt teams) and to make as many regular season games interesting (via lenient interpretations of icing, offside, calling a play dead, where to have faceoffs, etc). As a ref, you could simply choose to call a by-the-book game but if other refs don't follow suit, you're probably out of a job. The refs per se are fairly neutral in this regard but by weighing their options, they do the thing that is in their own self-interests by creating parity. This all leads to a very contrived game, even if the specific bounces can't be controlled. Basically it's an organization thats broken from the top-down. Until the Bettman "hockey is a business" regime is out, the many staff of the league won't have any significant motivation to do anything but weather the storm. The positive side in all if this is that the bigger the stink CBA negotiations make, the more likely sponsors and owners will feel someone with a new attitude needs to take the helm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 I dont believe regular season games are overly rigged most of the time, maybe a little biased here and there, depending on the circumstances. The playoffs are another story IMO. Bettman definitely has a preference of who wins the SC every season and I think his word probably goes down the chain of command through to the on-ice officials, and in turn they will try to influence the result of certain games, if need be that is. If Bettman's preferred team is facing weak opposition, then they keep the officiating as legitimate as possible. Call me a conspiracy theorist if you must but I truly believe this kind of thing does or has happened at some time. Does no one else find it odd that before Bettman's reign, canadian teams won the cup with regularity? In the last 17 seasons 5 canadian teams (Vancouver twice) have made the SCF and they all lost. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Fixed is a strong word, but I do believe they have certain preferences to who wins the Stanley Cup. Most people will say I'm just a butthurt Canucks fans, so be it. I don't care what they say. When the officiating was one-sided in the Chicago series in 2011 in game 6, the Blackhawks won the game, a very very close game that could have gone either way. When Gillis stepped up and said something, "oh he's just a cry baby, there goes the crybaby Canucks, never won a Stanley Cup blah blah blah." He pointed out statistics, which never lie. The next game, the refs called it fair and the Canucks absolutely dominate. If it wasn't for Crawford the score would have been 5-1. The Stanley Cup wins that I believe were helped along were Pittsburgh in '09, Chicago in '10 and Boston in '11. I think Los Angeles won it pretty legitimately, mostly because the game is called to cater to their style, which is not their fault and their team was stacked. The league has very little to gain from Los Angeles winning, but Pittsburgh, Chicago and Boston? Two of the three are original six teams and Pittsburgh's got Sidney. Yes, put on my tinfoil hat the naysayers will say. And they're entitled to their opinion. But watch some series that involve Canadian teams that do not involve the Canucks. You will not be pleased with what you see. Montreal and Boston from 2011? So many blatant fouls let go that Boston committed. I'm a Canucks fan and I live in the midwest, about two hours from Chicago, two years ago all I ever heard was "Chicago is such a young team, they're so likeable, theyre so exciting, they're so talented, hockey's finally back in Chicago." Hockey never left Chicago for one thing. And when you're trying to market something what's the best way to get the product out there? Have them win the most famous trophy in sports. Now their attendance has skyrocketed and the league just took a once-pathetic market, and turned it into a huge profit. Ask yourself this, would Chicago or Boston have the attendance they do without the cup wins? I can't prove they wouldn't, but I have a strong inkling they wouldn't. The league has nothing to gain by Canadian teams winning the Stanley Cup, the game is so so so popular here the fans live it. But when an American team with struggling attendance figures win it, the lure of the American television deal, the American dollar buying expensive seats to the game, the American dollar buying merchandise left and right. The profit is immense. From a business standpoint, it makes total sense for the league to favor the 22 American teams versus the 8 Canadian ones. But it doesn't mean us fans have to like that our once proud league and game has been twisted and perverted for big business greed. Again, I'm probably just another butthurt Canucks fan according to most, but that's just how i feel. Go Canucks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drybone Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 I dont believe regular season games are overly rigged most of the time, maybe a little biased here and there, depending on the circumstances. The playoffs are another story IMO. Bettman definitely has a preference of who wins the SC every season and I think his word probably goes down the chain of command through to the on-ice officials, and in turn they will try to influence the result of certain games, if need be that is. If Bettman's preferred team is facing weak opposition, then they keep the officiating as legitimate as possible. Call me a conspiracy theorist if you must but I truly believe this kind of thing does or has happened at some time. Does no one else find it odd that before Bettman's reign, canadian teams won the cup with regularity? In the last 17 seasons 5 canadian teams (Vancouver twice) have made the SCF and they all lost. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksFan9 Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Fixed? Not exactly. Influenced, skewed, and adjusted to try and meet business goals and objectives? Without a doubt. The lockout isn't going to make it any better, sadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 The Ducks winning the cup didn't exactly breed a bunch of loyal fans in Anaheim. Attendance is the lowest it's been in 10 years. Colorado also saw attendance drop. Dallas as well. While Florida's is on the rise. Nashville too. Is the NHL is indeed fixing cup winners, i'm not certain what the point is. It's not as if that kind of success will turn their fairweather fans into forever loyal ones. Basically, fans like winners, and will only go to see winners. (Unless they're TO or Habs fans.) There are only a handful of markets that will keep their arenas filled during losing years. Not even NJ can keep their arena filled, despite winning multiple cups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
literaphile Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Call me a conspiracy theorist if you must but I truly believe this kind of thing does or has happened at some time. Does no one else find it odd that before Bettman's reign, canadian teams won the cup with regularity? In the last 17 seasons 5 canadian teams (Vancouver twice) have made the SCF and they all lost. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drybone Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 The Ducks winning the cup didn't exactly breed a bunch of loyal fans in Anaheim. Attendance is the lowest it's been in 10 years. Colorado also saw attendance drop. Dallas as well. While Florida's is on the rise. Nashville too. Is the NHL is indeed fixing cup winners, i'm not certain what the point is. It's not as if that kind of success will turn their fairweather fans into forever loyal ones. Basically, fans like winners, and will only go to see winners. (Unless they're TO or Habs fans.) There are only a handful of markets that will keep their arenas filled during losing years. Not even NJ can keep their arena filled, despite winning multiple cups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 I dont believe regular season games are overly rigged most of the time, maybe a little biased here and there, depending on the circumstances. The playoffs are another story IMO. Bettman definitely has a preference of who wins the SC every season and I think his word probably goes down the chain of command through to the on-ice officials, and in turn they will try to influence the result of certain games, if need be that is. If Bettman's preferred team is facing weak opposition, then they keep the officiating as legitimate as possible. Call me a conspiracy theorist if you must but I truly believe this kind of thing does or has happened at some time. Does no one else find it odd that before Bettman's reign, canadian teams won the cup with regularity? In the last 17 seasons 5 canadian teams (Vancouver twice) have made the SCF and they all lost. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 yes, i do find it odd that before Bettman, Canadian teams were winning so regularly. How could the smaller percentage of Canadian teams win so many Cups when there was a larger percentage of American teams? Guess that means the NHL must of been rigged for the Canadian teams prior to Bettman, right? See, I can play that game too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Of course it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drybone Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 I don't believe in the conspiracy but American teams just got more serious and then it became a numbers game. Van and Calgary were both in the 7th game which would have made a vast difference in the breakdown as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 I don't believe in the conspiracy but American teams just got more serious and then it became a numbers game. Van and Calgary were both in the 7th game which would have made a vast difference in the breakdown as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Given the obvious 'management' of games. . . Given the completely inconsistent officiating that ALWAYS seems to favour keeping games close and ... teams in it. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.