Archive for October, 2009

October 30th, 2009

Is the Washington Post’s Sports Coverage Vulnerable?

That's a question that Slate's Jack Shafer is considering in light of the news that Joe Allbritton, the owner of WJLA-TV and NewsChannel 8, has asked former Washington Post reporter and editor Jim Brady to start a Web-only publication for the D.C. area:

Most newspapers place the sports section at the end of the caboose, forcing you to page your way to the baseball and football news. To command Washington eyeballs, Brady will turn that convention inside out by putting the sports "section" on the site's home page, and putting local news in the first back seat, and business news and national news in the third row. Just as Politico has made inroads on the Post's political coverage, Brady should steal the sports beat, making it the foundation of his site.

Memo to Brady: You could fill out your sports section mighty quick with a strong co-hort of talent from the local independent sports blogging community. Something tells me that more than a few of those folks would kill for the chance to cover local sports.

 
October 29th, 2009

Crime Imitates Failed Television Show Art

A couple of years back, I caught a few episodes of an ABC television sitcom dubbed the Knights of Prosperity.  The premise was simple: a bunch of folks down on their luck conspired to rob celebrities like Mick Jagger and Ray Romano.   David Letterman was the producer, and the lead actor in the series was Donal Logue, the man you might remember from the cult comedy, The Tao of Steve.

In any case, while the show was quickly pulled from the ABC schedule, apparently a number of Hollywood teens accidentally discovered that while the idea might have been a ratings dog, it still provided the outline of a viable business plan (somebody call Wharton!).  Here's the scoop from the AP.

Now, I'd really like to excerpt that AP piece, but I'm afraid we don't have a legal team here at Off Wing Opinion these days.  Instead, click and enjoy.

 
October 29th, 2009

More on the Caps, Redskins and How to Handle the Media

Over at D.C. Sports Bog yesterday, Dan Steinberg picked up on the same vibe I did earlier this week when I read some common sense advice Ted Leonsis dispensed on dealing with the media.  Give it a read.  Primary assist to J.P.

 
October 27th, 2009

Is This a Great Time or What?

Purchase price of 42 inch 1080p high definition television: $800.

Monthly subscription to satellite television service: $100.

Yearly subscription to NHL Center Ice: $165.

Listening to an online radio feed of the Caps and Flyers after spending all of that money in order to ensure that you can watch any hockey game you want: Senseless.

There are some things money can't buy, and that apparently includes a simple regular season hockey game being played in your own hometown.  Thanks for nothing Versus, DirecTV and the NHL.

 
October 27th, 2009

Are They Listening at Redskins Park?

From Monday morning's Washington Post piece on the popularity -- or lack thereof currently -- of the Washington Redskins among the locals:

David Donovan, the Redskins' chief operating officer, disputed Powell's analysis, saying that team records show a 12 percent dip in merchandise sales, which he said was understandable in a down economy.

Donovan also said that the team hasn't detected a significant decline in fan loyalty and that the team's attendance figures are accurately gathered by bar-code scanners at the turnstiles.

"I think the relentless negative coverage in The Washington Post is a real difference from previous years," Donovan said. "But in terms of the way our actual fans are behaving, we don't see any difference."

Just a few hours later, Washington Capitals owner Ted Leonsis dispatched the following advice to the Obama Administration concerning their dispute with Fox News.  But as I read it, I couldn't help but wonder if the Redskins weren't the actual target of his advice:

Can you ever take on the media and blame them for your troubles?

I don’t think so.

Just look. Fox News ratings are way up. The President’s approval ratings are way down. Is it any wonder then that Fox News is hyping their disagreements with the White House? ”Oh woe is me. Watch what we do that has the White House so afraid of us.”

By talking about the media or a specific outlet, it only increases their value. And it diminishes you.

Sports teams that blame the media for their troubles are no different.

So what's the ultimate solution? According to Leonsis, "[J]ust win. The rest will take care of itself."

 
October 26th, 2009

Theo Fleury on ESPN’s E:60 Tonight at 7:00 p.m.

Here's the word from ESPN PR rep Andy Hall:

Theo Fleury Speaks Out on ESPN’s E:60 ESPN's award-winning primetime newsmagazine E:60 will feature a revealing interview with former NHL star Theo Fleury in the episode airing Tuesday, Oct. 27, at 7 p.m. ET. The program, which launched in October 2007, combines investigative reporting, in-depth profiles of intriguing sports personalities and features on emerging star athletes. These stories are presented in a fresh and innovative format that incorporates producer/correspondent meetings.

When he slid in jubilation after scoring an overtime goal in the 1991 Stanley Cup playoffs, Fleury produced an iconic image. Off the ice however, the hockey player careened out of control as he slid deeper into addictions of alcohol, cocaine, gambling and women. With the release of his new book, Fleury reveals the source of his demons: a two-year period of sexual molestation by Graham James, his junior hockey coach, beginning when Fleury was 14. In a U.S. television exclusive, Fleury speaks with E:60’s Jeremy Schaap about the shattering effects of the abuse and hiding the truth for 25 years. Fleury’s revelations come over 12 years after Sheldon Kennedy, who is interviewed by E:60, rocked Canadian hockey by accusing James of being a pedophile. In 1997, James pleaded guilty and began a jail sentence for molesting two players an estimated 350 times.

Normally ESPN provides a preview clip of interviews like this one, but Hall told me that this one was shot too late. "They are scrambling just to get the piece ready to air tomorrow night," said Hall.

 
October 26th, 2009

On Rob Scuderi and Jason Chimera: Can Anybody Spell Clipping?

I was reading Greg Wyshynski's account of Rob Scuderi's hit on Jason Chimera over at Puck Daddy late last night when it occurred to me that nobody had mentioned the penalty that could have been called: clipping.  Here's the reference straight out of the NHL rulebook.

Screen shot 2009 10 26 at 9 47 55 AM
Should they have thrown the book at Rob Scuderi?

Now, take another look at the video clip.  If what happened there isn't clipping, I don't really know why the rule is in the book at all.

So how did clipping wind up in the rule book in the first place? You need to go back to the 2002 Stanley Cup Playoffs, where Darcy Tucker took aim at Michael Peca during Game Five of the first round series between the Islanders and the Maple Leafs. Though the hit, one that changed the course of Peca's career, was legal at the time, the league later used footage of the incident as a textbook case of what constituted clipping:

So I'll write it again just to make sure I'm clear: If the Scuderi hit can't be considered clipping, why is it even in the rule book?

UPDATE: Aaron Brenner from Kings Vision has put together an extended highlight reel of the hit and the postgame reaction:

 
October 22nd, 2009

Redskins Fans Express Their Dipleasure to Mr. Snyder

Here's a picture for all the Washington Redskins fans.  The following picture was snapped by a friend of mine on Route 28 in Virginia near the team's training complex in Ashburn.

Snyder Cerrato
 

Apparently firing the owner isn't an option.

 
October 22nd, 2009

Willie Mitchell’s Clean, but Devastating Hit, on Jonathan Toews

Here's the moment everyone in the NHL is going to be talking about in the morning: Willie Mitchell's clean, but devastating hit on Jonathan Toews in Chicago on Wednesday night as the Blackhawks hosted the Canucks.

The hit, which came with the Canucks trailing 2-1 in a game that they eventually won 3-2, has already been talked about as the turning point in on NHL On The Fly: Final, especially as the hit came straight out of a shorthanded situation for Vancovuer, with Mitchell making the hit right after coming out of the penalty box.  Certainly, the hit was textbook clean, despite the fact that it left Toews stunned and stumbling.  Mitchell led with his shoulder, didn't target his opponent's head and his skates never left the ice.  Toews head was down and he was skating on train tracks.  I know in the past others have commented on hits like this one with the admonition that you, "need to keep your head on a swivel."  In this case, truer words were never spoken.

UPDATE: It's important to point out that the Blackhawks retaliated against Mitchell in the immediate aftermath of the hit and the refs stopped play, something which resulted in wiping out a Vancouver scoring chance.  Though the Canucks would get a power play out of that fracas (a Kris Versteeg double minor was served by him and Patrick Kane), Mitchell, who never committed a penalty, was sent to the box for roughing.  Go figure.

ANOTHER UPDATE: I recorded this game to DVR, but I'm only getting to it now.  On the ensuing power play after the Mitchell hit, Dave Bolland delivered a very nasty slash to Henrik Sedin's wrists.  It was easy to tell it hurt, because Sedin let out a yelp that was picked up by TSN's microphones.  I shouldn't have, but I laughed when I heard it.  Now I feel shame.

 
October 20th, 2009

Hockey Relationship Advice

Via Twitter, Andy Sorensen of Minnesota passed along the following question in the early morning hours: "Am I a bad bf for sitting the gf down on our anniversary Sat night and having her watch her 1st hockey game (Canucks/Leafs on HNIC)?"

Dear Andy,

Introducing your significant other to one of your passions is a lot like shooting the puck on net: it's always a good idea, it's just that depending on the situation, it might not always be your best option.  With that in mind, I still need to know some other information in order to fully answer your question.  Did you ask her to watch the game as part of a number of activities that you could enjoy as a couple?  If so, and watching the game serves as a way to wind down from a special evening together, the request  is perfectly reasonable.  After all, if you're going to have a future together, she'll be watching many hockey games with you, just as you will be sharing many of her favorite activities as well.

If however, as I suspect from the tenor of your tweet, you gave your significant  other no choice but to watch the hockey game, I'm afraid that trouble may be brewing.  Though this anniversary might not mean much to you, it may very well mean quite a bit to your girlfriend.  If that's the case, "sitting her down" to watch the game could be interpreted as a sign that your relationship isn't all that important to you, or, alternately, that your wants and needs will always come first.

If so, while this was a mistake, it need not be fatal.  Simply sound out your girlfriend, give her a chance to express her anger/disappointment/untrammeled rage, apologize and find a way to make amends by making more appropriate plans.

Sincerely,

Captain Off Wing

P.S.  The Canucks and the Leafs play twice this year.  If you really need to see them play one another, get a DVR, or just wait it out until January 30, 2010 when the Maple Leafs host the visiting Canucks on Hockey Night in Canada.  Alternately, you could just ignore my advice, in which case you just might be watching that  second game alone.

UPDATE: Andy sends along the following note: "Thanks. Upon further debate (and after a nite of sleep), I'm retracting the idea. Leafs suck, and besides, apple picking's more romantic."  Bravo.

 
October 13th, 2009

Odds to Win the Stanley Cup

Well, we're almost two weeks into the NHL regular season, and I thought it might be a good time to take a quick look back at some numbers the folks at Bodog.com sent my way a few weeks back.  It was on October 1 that they published the odds to win the Stanley Cup.  Here's the rundown:

Odds to win the 2009/2010 Stanley Cup

Detroit Red Wings 5/1

Pittsburgh Penguins 5/1

Chicago Blackhawks 8/1

San Jose Sharks 8/1

Boston Bruins 9/1

Washington Capitals 10/1

Philadelphia Flyers 14/1

Vancouver Canucks 14/1

Anaheim Ducks 15/1

Calgary Flames 16/1

Montreal Canadiens 25/1

New Jersey Devils 25/1

New York Rangers 25/1

Carolina Hurricanes 28/1

Toronto Maple Leafs 28/1

Ottawa Senators 30/1

St. Louis Blues 34/1

Edmonton Oilers 35/1

Minnesota Wild 40/1

Buffalo Sabres 42/1

Columbus Blue Jackets 42/1

Dallas Stars 44/1

Los Angeles Kings 55/1

Florida Panthers 60/1

Nashville Predators 60/1

Tampa Bay Lightning 70/1

Colorado Avalanche 85/1

Phoenix Coyotes 85/1

Atlanta Thrashers 100/1

New York Islanders 150/1

After only a few weeks, one has to wonder why anyone would think the Maple Leafs were as legitimate a contender for the Cup as the Carolina Hurricanes, a recent champ that advanced as far as the conference finals just a few months ago.  Even after last night's choke job in Chicago, plenty of folks have to think that the Flames are a little better than 16-1.  Meanwhile, stock in Boston, Washington and Vancouver is probably dropping like a rock.

 
October 13th, 2009

Hockey Fans Miss Another Great Game; DirecTV and Versus Fight On

The NHL has to be pleased that the Blackhawks authored such an epic comeback last night in Chicago, roaring back from a 5-0 deficit to defeat the Calgary Flames 6-5 in OT.  Unfortunately, just as was the case last week with Philadelphia's exciting OT win over the Washington Capitals, a good chunk of the hockey-loving universe that has DirecTV was left out in the cold because the game was carried on Versus -- and that includes thousands of local fans in the Chicago area who couldn't see the game.

No matter how much money the league is getting from Versus, shutting out a good chunk of the country from seeing games like last night's shootout in Chicago isn't helping the league grow the game.  One more time: the NHL needs to work a little harder to get these parties back to the negotiating table.

 
October 13th, 2009

Can You Find the Error in This Screengrab?

From the front page of the NYT's hockey section:

Screen shot 2009 10 13 at 1 32 34 PM
Did we fire that copy editor in the last round of layoffs?
 
October 6th, 2009

How DirecTV and Versus Are Hurting Hockey

Those of you who were able to watch the Philadelphia Flyers defeat the Washington Capitals 6-5 in overtime earlier this evening know that you were treated to one barn burner of a hockey game. When we look back at this season next Spring, there's little doubt in my mind that tonight's game will be considered one of the most exciting matches of the 2009-10 NHL regular season.

It's just too bad that millions of NHL hockey fans in the U.S. -- and potential fans for that matter -- didn't get a chance to see the game because it wasn't carried by DirecTV.

Up until this point, the cost of the dispute between DirecTV and Versus wasn't completely evident.  But the fact of the matter is that the NHL has structured its contract with the fledgling sports network to give it a series of marquee matchups over the course of the season in order to boost its ratings.  It's a schedule that's loaded with the league's best teams and biggest stars, and the NHL has done its level best to make sure that -- at least in the lower 48 -- there aren't any other games competing with the Versus schedule.

On opening night, when the Caps easily handled the Bruins in a 4-1 victory, it didn't seem like we were missing much.  That's over now, and the cost the game is paying for this ridiculous dispute has become all the clearer.

As much as the league might not want to step into a dispute between two of its broadcast partners, I don't think it has much choice anymore.  They need to broker a deal, and they need to get it done sooner rather than later.

 
October 2nd, 2009

Some Quick Thoughts on Caps Opening Night

It's hard to think about how things could have gone better for the Washington Capitals on opening night in Boston on Thursday.  Though just about everybody is having their say right now, I think J.P.'s wrap is most on point: everything that's always worked for the Caps in recent years continued to work (offensive flow); while everything that drove us insane a season ago (lax penalty killing) seems to have resolved itself -- at least for one night.

If there was any single surprise last night it had to be not only the play of Brooks Laich (2 goals), but the fact that he had more ice time than offseason free agent acquisition Mike Knuble (16:08 to 14:58).  That was thanks to the fact that Laich was playing on the team's first power play unit (2:16 to :56). 

For the most part, when we think of a team transitioning from year to year, we always take a look at the new parts, and perhaps don't pay enough attention to the players who are already here and how they may progress and evolve into a larger role.  I'll have to say that I'm probably guilty of that with Laich, who has managed to put his game together over the past two seasons, and done it in a way that augured well for his future success and his ability to hold his own while playing alongside the team's marquee talents.

I'll be in the box on Saturday night for the home opener against Toronto.  See you there.