Friday Five: So It Begins

Another week and another season has started for the NHL. We've got the European games, the domestic games, and other games....I think....or something. Anyway-- we'll get into my Friday Five questions and some awful inane answers to contribute.

1. Is there a time where the European games don't make sense??

The time is coming soon, especially when you don't have many "sexy" teams heading over there this year. The downsides to this is just the teams lose a home game, which loses revenue for the team-- even though it could help some teams because they won't lose money because people won't come to the rink anyway. The problem is, with the fact Rene Fasel is still the head of the IIHF, that there's issues in North America with teams having troubles-- the NHL in Europe is just for show and if you want to do anything; go back to the old school times where one or two teams do a tour of a country and use that as their pre-season and to get the league out there. The Caps did it in Russia in 1989, the North Stars did it in France in 1990; set it up like that. Don't put regular season games there because it's not going to win anyone over.

2. It seems youth is being served early: Brandon Sutter and Jeff Skinner in Carolina, Sergei Bobrovsky in Philly, and the Edmonton Three. How long can this last for them?? (Assist to Captain Hammer for the idea.)

For the Edmonton triad of Taylor Hall, Jordan Eberle, and Magnus Paajarvi (SVENSSON!!)-- it could last all season. Hall seems to be the real deal, Eberle should have been there last year, and MPS is the great compliment to those two. In Carolina, it looks like Skinner is ready to get things going-- but it could be just no one knowing how to play him, time will time. Sutter has the alternate captaincy, so he could be ready-- but because he plays where he does; no one is onto him.

Bobrovsky could be the wild card. We have always seen goalies get off to the quick start, then falters when people catch onto them-- right Jim Carey and Blaine Lacher?? That said, Bobo could be the guy who stops the goaltending carousel for the Flyers. He couldn't do any worse than the guys they've seen come in and out of the door. If nothing else, he's a guy that could keep the confidence given and parlay it into a solid season and beyond.

3. With Raitis Ivanans getting knocked the eff out by Steve MacIntyre, is this a record for people like Bob McKenzie to rag on fighting??

It could be, but I understand McKenzie's point of the game being out of hand and it being a worthless cause for this to happen. Yet, at the same time-- you try to get some kind of momentum into the next game if it's a lost cause-- whether it's a flurry of goals or a fight. Granted, Ivanans getting KTFO isn't what the Flames wanted, but he made a stand. If that could have happened earlier in the game with a different result-- who knows what could have happened. Yet, we'll see how much of a backlash this gets if something happens again.

4. What opening ceremonies thus far have been somewhat meaningful??

Though I very much dislike the Penguins, having Mario Lemieux put some of the melted ice from Mellon Arena on the Consol Energy ice was pretty snazzy. Not as cool as what the Montreal Canadiens did when they closed down Forum, but what do you expect from a team that has the history the Habs do??

Other than that, it seems like it's by the book for most teams. The Leafs bringing out their alumni for the opener, the Europeans bringing out their stars, teams just going through the elaborate opening announcing the team. It's nothing that's out of the ordinary, but it seems to have the same excitement factor behind it all.

5. What would be the perfect opening ceremony for a team that you were in charge of??

For one, you need fire-- that's a must. Have the mascot come out of the sky and hopefully not get stuck in the rafters. I'd go by the book and get the introductions and have the players do a victory lap to thank all the fans. Put replays of last year's season up there, good or bad, and then hype the team up about how well they're going to do and they're ready for a big Cup run.

All the while, I'm counting the money and trying to sell off some of the team's stuff like Charlestown Chiefs owner Joe McGrath or be like Howard K. Duff VIII and look for a way to move the team to Albuquerque and not let anyone know about it.

---------

And that's another week. If you have any ideas of questions-- I'll answer them. Email Scotty.Wazz@Gmail.com and I'll put into the upcoming F5 and you can join in. If you don't like this and didn't submit-- you have no room to complain about this craptasticness.

Continental Divide

On Tuesday, the topic at the World Hockey Summit was the happenings between the NHL (and rather North America hockey in general) and Europe in terms of some teams "over fishing" the European leagues in terms of talent and plucking the home-country leagues of talent, especially in terms of their junior leagues.

This ideal of "over fishing" was brought to life by Slavomir Lener's presentation about the how the Czech and Slovak juniors league have had their talent taken away by some agents luring them to North America to play in the Canadian Hockey League or even the NHL. Lener is the director of the national teams in the Czech Republic and showed that with the performance in the World Juniors and how the Czechs haven't been on a WJC podium in five years. Also, he stated that NHL GMs are noticing that the talent that was there like Jaromir Jagr and Marian Gaborik are being turned out much anymore, which....I don't know how that's the fault of developing in North America, but whatever. The main point is that Lener said because of the players leaving their home country early, the never develop into what they could because they're lured away by the allure of the NHL and North American hockey in general.

While, Lener does have a point, the fact of the matter is that I don't see how players migrating from Europe to North America is a big fault to the country's standing in the World tournaments. Regardless of where they are playing, they are still going to be of their nationality and still play for their country. If it's a philosophical thing between playing in North America and then for your home country-- that I can understand due to the different schools of thought each coach has when it comes to players. However, the CHL still has a rule that only two imports can be on a team, while the NHL has to deal with a transfer issue when it comes to getting players out of a contract in their home country's league.

Yet, why should the CHL be ran down because of the fact that they give the exposure and training for the next step, which is the NHL?? If anything, the model they have should be taken by these junior leagues in Europe and maybe implemented in some ways over others. It doesn't seem like Sweden and Finland have issues of their junior leagues being completely run down with the CHL looming overhead. Maybe it has nothing to do with North America's intrigue, but just the lack of structure in the leagues over in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Plus, you have other countries, like Switzerland, who have some guys in the CHL and even in the pro leagues in their country and succeeding in the junior ranks; so I don't know what's going on with the Czechs, but it's nothing to do with the North American game or not "fully developing."

Also on Tuesday, Rene Fasel of the IIHF was a bit on the heel side of things on this, by going on to say that the NHL won't get a division in Europe while he is sitting as the head of the IIHF. Fasel also said that the NHL being in Sochi Olympics is a must.

As far the the Sochi Olympics goes, I think it's a formality; to be honest. I totally agree that having the NHLers in Russia playing-- especially with Alex Ovechkin already saying he's going and has the blessing of his owner, so why not send the rest of them??

As far the NHL division, it's kind of a preemptive strike against the NHL, who is holding their Premiere series in Europe, maybe scouting out the territory. And why should the NHL want to go to Europe, aside from more money given to the league and teams. The teams are out of the control and if they are going over to Europe to have another 10-12 leagues, that would thin out the talent to the point where it'd be unbearable. If anything, the trips to Europe or less about scouting the territory, but to give the people a look at live action they wouldn't be able to see unless they wanted to drop a nice sum of cash to not only travel there, get shelter, and then find tickets. This way, it's closer with some decent teams and decent action.

And in the end, I don't think the NHL European division would be the best for the league or for Europe. The fact these countries and territories have their home leagues is something that would instill a bit of pride and there's no reason that the NHL should disrupt it. Even in North America, there's a lot of pride in the minors and some people who dislike the NHL because it messes with the minor leagues and leads to teams moving because of it.

For what it's worth, the state of hockey in Europe is something that should be looked at in some cases. When it comes to the Czech and Slovak leagues, that's a matter of getting better coaches or developers over there to teach these kids and actually develop them so that they can leave at 18 or even make those league desirable for the younger generation and be a pioneer of sort. The reason some kids leave is because of the fact they feel they're ready to get to their next level and aren't content with staying at home and maybe getting stuck because they waited to long. You can't fault other leagues or what-have-you for the shortcomings of your own program.

Eur-Insanity

Okay NHL, we get it-- you want the European market. But it's a bit rough when you're trying to grow the brand overseas when it's not completely sold in some of your markets Stateside. I don't get how taking a home game away from six teams helps grows the game where you need it. In actuality, it could be doing detriment to the team's well-being.

If you haven't heard, the NHL will be holding games in three European locations to start the season, with the Carolina Hurricanes taking on the Minnesota Wild in Helsinki, the Columbus Blue Jackets and San Jose Sharks going at it in Stockholm, and the Boston Bruins and Phoenix Coyotes dueling in Prague.

While the NHL could call this whole gimmick a success, it almost seems like they're beating a dead horse in terms of locations. They've done all these cities before, the second year in a row for Helsinki and third year in a row for Stockholm. The best part about the first games in London was the exposure of the game to a place who wouldn't have that caliber of hockey in their country. Same goes with the games in Japan in 1998, giving top-notch exposure to a budding hockey nation. You'd think that if the NHL wanted to get the exposure throughout the European Union, they'd diversify where they would go. With emerging countries like Switzerland, Germany, and Slovakia-- those could be the countries you'd focus on getting more exposure to. Imagine the Washington Capitals and Chicago Blackhawks playing at HC Davos' Vaillant Arena for their game; magical. How about taking on the KHL in their backyard of Russia or other fomer Soviet satellite countries?? That'd be something for them to go head-to-head.

Along those lines, you have to question if the allure of it will be going down as the year's go on. The question comes about when it comes to the idea of multiple outdoors game, but with the Winter Classic being the only game for it, the allure and want to go play in it is there-- as is the excitement. With the European games, it's very taxing on the players with all the air-time they'll be logging, thus making them tired early on and could handcuff them for the rest of the season if they lose crucial points in the early season. To travel that much in the early part of the season when players conditioning isn't at the peak, it's more of a hinderance than anything.

We'll have to see what will happen for the 2011-12 season and if they expand it to eight team in four cities or whatever. The really craptastic side is if the NHL doesn't do anything with this exposure in Europe or doesn't have an NHL Europe like has been thrown out there for a while. It would almost seem like a waste of time if nothing bigger comes from this. Is there going to be a time were we'll have 15 cities hosting all 30 teams in a European Vacation for the NHL?? Only time will tell.

European Stay-cation??

William Houston has an interesting piece up concerning the NHL's attempt to expand to Europe, at least-- that's what Bill Daly is saying. Daly said that within 10 years, it's a good possibility that there could be some regular NHL action in Europe. As far as reaction goes, it depends on how you see it. Jim Rutherford, GM of the Carolina Hurricanes, said that as long as the support and stability is there, he would see no problem in the expansion. Color-blind Pierre McGuire said that the time is right for European Expansion because of the amount of Euros in the NHL now.

You almost have to wonder if the inevitability is there for the European expansion and if it's a more of a "when" rather and "if" situation. Yet, at the same time-- why would bypass markets in your own continent that could succeed in order to fast track some European pipe dream?? Granted, the brass of the NHL hasn't been known for smart maneuvers when it comes to expansion placement, but what can ya do??

When you look at the marketplace and where the NHL would put teams in Europe, I think Rutherford can rest easy in the fact that the NHL would pick places that have a history of succeeding on the ice, as well as on the balance sheet.

However, the question I'd like to pose is whether or not the European clubs would want to join the NHL?? Okay, maybe it's not the clubs themselves, but the league that could be affected. If the Swedish Elite League loses a team like MoDo, that would be a disaster for the league because of the prestige that MoDo brings to the league. So, should the NHL expansion to Europe doesn't work-- not only would it ruin the big dream for the NHL, it would more than likely ruin hockey leagues throughout Europe should it fail. For the globalization of hockey, that would just be a horrible blow to the sport.

Granted, this is basically the "Space Race" all over again, but this time, it's the "Rink Race" (patent pending). Because the KHL has said they would want to go into Western Europe for expansion in the next couple of seasons, the NHL may feel that their talent pool could be threatened by the move west. Therefore, they are trying to trump the Russians and get into the markets that could bring the best talent to NHL Europe....and maybe seep into the NHL North America.

In the end, Rutherford is right, there needs to be teams put into markets like Winnipeg, another team in Ontario, and then maybe get back into Kansas City before going across the Atlantic to find teams. It'll bring in more fans where you need them most, plus if you mess it up-- there's not an international incident to come from it. There's no need to go out of your way to find some markets when there are markets in North America that are more than willing to take a team in their city.