I know money is money but shouldn't the last sporting event at Yankee Stadium be a Yankee game?

Jeter should be the only one allowed to watch the implosion of Yankee Stadium. It's only right that he be the last person to see it intact. The rest of humanity can spend that minute collectively in silence with our heads bowed just to be safe. Except for A-Fraud - he should be the one to press the big red button.

Jeter should be the only one allowed to watch the implosion of Yankee Stadium. It's only right that he be the last person to see it intact.

Give him the best spot to watch...standing still on the infield, midway between 2nd and 3rd base.

More outdoor games in the NHL will be like what Bud Selig has done with World Series night games and interleague play: Take a good idea and ruin it with greed.
Besides if any team should hold an outdoor game, should it be a Montreal vs Toronto game next year for the Canadiens 100th year?
Is Shea Stadium going to get a final NFL game to honor M Donald Grant keeping the Jets off the grass until late October? Bring bladder bags to honor the too few and dirty rest rooms that drive Leon Hess to the Jersey swamplands?

Besides if any team should hold an outdoor game, should it be a Montreal vs Toronto game next year for the Canadiens 100th year?

Nope -- 'Hawks vs Red Wings at Soldier Field or Wrigley should be next in a match-up between the West's best against a team who's on the verge of being in that discussion. Then again, I'm a (clearly) biased Blackhawks fan who wants to see it for mainly selfish reasons.

Besides if any team should hold an outdoor game, should it be a Montreal vs Toronto game next year for the Canadiens 100th year?

Speaking as a clearly biased Leaf fan, Leafs suck.

I know money is money but shouldn't the last sporting event at Yankee Stadium be a Yankee game?

That's easily solved. Give the Yankees a franchise in the NHL, and let them play the hockey game at Yankee Stadium. Voila!

Will they play the Islanders or the Devils?

Will they play the Islanders or the Devils?

I'd bet on the Bruins. Everyone wants it to be an original 6 opponent.

Red Wings.
Maple Leafs.
Michigan Stadium.
100,000 fans.
That is all.

I'd bet on the Bruins. Everyone wants it to be an original 6 opponent.

Yeah, but nobody wants to see the Bruins play.

Will they play the Islanders or the Devils?

You know what I want to see? With those three teams and all that extra space, could we build a pyramid or circular rink and have all three teams play each other simultaneously? I'm not any kind of hockey fan, but THAT I'd watch. Think of the stratgegy involved.

With those three teams and all that extra space, could we build a pyramid or circular rink and have all three teams play each other simultaneously? I'm not any kind of hockey fan, but THAT I'd watch. Think of the stratgegy involved.

I think WCW tried this in their dying days. Not a big hit.

More outdoor games in the NHL will be like what Bud Selig has done with World Series night games and interleague play: Take a good idea and ruin it with greed.

And that was the bad thing about the New Year's Day game being so good. You knew that Bettman would run the idea into the ground.

People think Selig is a bad commissioner? Geez, look at what Bettman has done to the NHL.

Potvin sucks.

And that was the bad thing about the New Year's Day game being so good. You knew that Bettman would run the idea into the ground.

I guess I haven't been following this that closely: Have there been a bunch of other outdoor games announced? Have there been any other outdoor games announced?

I think they should use Yankee Stadium for an NHL game, but only if they use the whole baseball field. Use the bullpens as the penalty box; keep the pitcher's mound as an island of dirt in the rink; and so on. Either the wide-open rink would make things very exciting or doom it to failure. And, really, when it comes to the NHL those are the only outcomes I'm interested in.

I guess I haven't been following this that closely: Have there been a bunch of other outdoor games announced? Have there been any other outdoor games announced?

Announced? No. But, it seems every cold weather city has talked about it. Buffalo, of course, wants another. The Rangers want one. The Red Wings. The Blackhawks. All the Canadian teams, with the exception of the Leafs so they can hide the embarrassment that is the Leafs.

The thing is, the gap between this year's and the previous one was like 3 years. I can almost guarantee there will be one every year, and in fact, I'd say there will eventually be like three to five.

What would be so wrong with having one every year? That seems about the right amount to me.

What would be so wrong with having one every year? That seems about the right amount to me.

Well, the first time the weather isn't 100% perfect, the game is going to suck. Secondly, the game was good this year because it was also a good game. That's not always going to be the case.

Basically, if you make it an annual thing, and the game sucks, the whole things sucks because the novelty will be gone. At least if it's rare, people will enjoy because it's new and different.

It's the same thing that happened when they did North America vs. the World All-Star games. It was really cool the first year or two, but it got old real quickly.

I think they gave this year's game some official sounding title, like NHL Winter Classic or something. I got the impression that it was going to become a regular thing to have one each season. I'd rather have it be on Christmas when nothing else is on, since I choose bowl games over regular season hockey. Plus, it might be a chance to get people that don't already like hockey but want to escape the family to watch the sport. Have two teams a season forego their Christmas break that the NHL imposes.

As for Bettman, I don't like the guy, he's a weasel, but just as Selig has succeeded enormously at his actual job, which is to make owners wealthier, Bettman has done the same. Expansion occured too quickly, but the amount of talent has caught up, and exposure in those markets has generated interest among young people in those places. There are more American kids playing hockey than Canadian ones, and the US has produced a lot of the top draft talent the last few seasons.

The only piece missing is the attractive TV ratings. That's a huge piece, but it's just not doable. There was a piece in the WSJ today about how it's expected of people to detest meetings at work even though they secretly like associating with other human beings. The NHL suffers from the same thing. You're not cool unless you make a joke about hockey being unpopular whenever it gets brought up. I don't see a way to clear that hurdle and attract more ignoramus fans. But Bettman sure is trying, and even though I see his motivation, he is losing some of the beague's base of fans. I haven't watched a single game from beginning to end this season, and I will be excited when April gets here because it will be baseball season, not because the NHL playoffs will have arrived.

#20, the weather sucked in this year's game. It was snowing, the puck would stop before reaching the player it was being passed to because of snow buildup, and they had to stop the game at some point to run the zambonis around and clear the snow. Yet, as you say, it was a good game.

As for Bettman, I don't like the guy, he's a weasel, but just as Selig has succeeded enormously at his actual job, which is to make owners wealthier, Bettman has done the same. </i>

Is this true? Has every franchise across the board increased in value? Sure, some owners are getting rich, but other's aren't at all. And, without tv revenues, have they hit their upper mark?

Expansion occured too quickly, but the amount of talent has caught up, and exposure in those markets has generated interest among young people in those places. There are more American kids playing hockey than Canadian ones, and the US has produced a lot of the top draft talent the last few seasons.

Well, there's also the fact that there are more American kids - by a significant margin.

<i>The only piece missing is the attractive TV ratings. That's a huge piece, but it's just not doable.
.
.
.
The NHL suffers from the same thing. You're not cool unless you make a joke about hockey being unpopular whenever it gets brought up. I don't see a way to clear that hurdle and attract more ignoramus fans. But Bettman sure is trying, and even though I see his motivation, he is losing some of the beague's base of fans.

This is infuriating to me. People always rip on the NHL's tv ratings, but no one mentions the NBA's or how NASCAR's have been way down lately. And, I don't think he's trying, or at least trying hard. You want eyeballs, you need ESPN. That's the sad truth, but until Fox or CBS or some other network can do the exact same thing, ESPN is sports on tv. So, even if you have to take a hit financially, if you want new fans, that's where you should go.

I haven't watched an NHL game in over a year. I used to watch all the Hurricanes games when I lived in Raleigh, but now I'm on the west coast and I don't get Vs. Even if I did get Vs, 95% of their broadcasts are east coast games and are over by the time I get home from work. I'm an old fan and they can't even keep me.

#20, the weather sucked in this year's game. It was snowing, the puck would stop before reaching the player it was being passed to because of snow buildup, and they had to stop the game at some point to run the zambonis around and clear the snow. Yet, as you say, it was a good game.

What if the weather is just slightly above 32? Then you go from having ice to having slush. The players won't look to good plodding along. Snow sucks, I'll grant you that, but compared to what could happen it is nothing.

Potvin sucks.

Do they still yell that at MSG?

I haven't heard it in years.

Best Regards

John