Commissioner Gary Bettman

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Locke

I'm somewhat surprised a bigger deal wasnt made of America's 2 biggest markets playing each other in the Stanley Cup Final.

A NYR vs. LA SCF should have been the Commissioner's wet dream.

Behind closed doors, NHL execs were probably high-fiving and doing cartwheels. But they would never publicly admit that they are happier with certain teams in the finals over others. The fallout from a statement like that would cause all kinds of conspiracy theories questioning the integrity of officiating and so on.

The league has to pretend they are just as happy with a Columbus/Nashville final as they are with a NYR/LA final. Don't think for a second the NHL weren't furious 2 seasons ago when the devils beat the rangers in the ECF which cost them another NY vs LA final.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Initially, but not for long. That - despite Vulcan's irrational hatred of the man - is not Bettman's fault, however. He was a new commissioner and (like the previous presidents) did not have as much control over the owners. Certainly nowhere close to what was required to counter Bob Goodenow on even terms. That's why he insisted on, and got, that seven-owner veto for the 2004 negotiation. Without it, there's a not unreasonable chance that 2004-05 would have ended the way 1994-95 did.

As to the hate, it's part of Bettman's job. One of his roles is to be the lightning rod that draws in all the hate that would otherwise go to the owners, and hell, even the players. Crosby, Giordano and Donald Fehr are as much responsible for last year's lockout as Edwards, Jacobs and Gary Bettman were. But Bettman takes all that in so that you can forgive the players and the owners - or at least forget their roles - and enjoy hockey. Xenophobic Canadians can blame Bettman for their hatred of teams in the American south rather than their own teams that insisted on expansion because they wanted expansion fees and larger TV contracts to line their own pockets. Etc.

Bettman knows his role, and it is obvious from things like last night that he enjoys the response. Boo him all you want. All it says is that he's doing his job well. If he wasn't, you'd be booing someone else.

Like I said there were excuses and also there is revisionist history. The fact is Bettman had the authority to cancel the season in 94, so he wasn't handcuffed by the owners. He initially thought he had a good deal until the rookies circumvented their cap with unlimited bonuses, driving up salaries even more. We were the last major sport to have a salary cap or a luxury tax to protect the teams and we should have had one in 94/95.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sport...uts/57276222/1

[DoubleF]

I don't love him, I don't hate him either. I know that the game has changed a lot since he has taken the reigns.

Under the changes, it seems like concussions are going down and there is more emphasis on disallowing some dirty hits and other crap. Don't know if it's attributable to Bettman, but, I like it.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

I don't know if it is directly attributable to him, but I hold him personally accountable for introducing shoot outs to the NHL.

I will boo him until I pass out, if ever given the chance.

[Hackey]

I think he's done a good job but I love watching him get booed. It was hilarious yesterday. Was equally as funny when they took the pic with Bennett and he went to Burke and Burke turned his back and completely ignores him. The lockouts were necessary and have helped the game. I don't think it bothers him so I don't see any harm. Gary probably loves it. It's almost tradition now. I wouldn't want it to change.

[Daradon]

Regardless of what you think about his achievements or lack of them, there are a few reasons why he's an easy target.

He doesn't have much of a personality, and even more than that, when you push him on a line of questioning he doesn't like he can get quite snippy and defensive. He answers questions like a politician re-framing most queries to say something he wants to say, not to answer the question.

But as people mentioned he is commish, and part of his responsibility is to be the lightning rod for bad feelings. I can't think of a commish in any other major sport that is liked so I assume there is some truth to the idea that part of his job is to be disliked.

As well, I think the average fan is becoming more and more alienated from the high profit sport leagues, so that probably lends itself to some hate at the figureheads of them.

[Geeoff]

I think Bettman relishes the boos. Even went through with his rehearsed line "I have a trade to announce and now the boos stopped" when he was still getting heavily booed. Epic-tier trolling.

I think he mostly gets booed for the 3 lockouts and the Jets moving the first time.

[Erick Estrada]

Really what feeds the ego more? A polite applause or a loud chorus of boos? I would say for a lot of athletes/celebrities it would be the latter.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Which is a very good thing in my opinion. Bettman DID win each of those times, and the proof for that is in the fact that the hockey is the best it has ever been, and the League is also making more money than at any other time in history.

The 2004-2005 lockout and the most recent lockout, sure, Bettman won.

1994? Not a chance, it was the owners who caved. The hot button issue was tying player salaries to league revenues through a salary cap, as a way to assist small-market teams. The Player's Association opposed a cap and wanted revenue sharing.

The result of the 94 lockout? We didn't get a salary cap, and three small-market teams relocated shortly thereafter: the Quebec Nordiques, the Winnipeg Jets, and the Hartford Whalers. Revenue sharing didn't do much to help those teams.

[Northendzone]

after every July 1'st I truly wonder if Bettman broke the union or gave them exactly what they wanted......it blows my mind that a guy like England (and he was not the only wild contract) is going to make almost $10 million dollars over the next couple of years playing hockey.......

[goodyear]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Really what feeds the ego more? A polite applause or a loud chorus of boos? I would say for a lot of athletes/celebrities it would be the latter.

I agree...

Little known fact: Bettman has a "He Hate Me" XFL jersey framed in his game room.

not really, but if I was a weasel-like and had $8 mill and a legion of haters, that is what I would do.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

after every July 1'st I truly wonder if Bettman broke the union or gave them exactly what they wanted......it blows my mind that a guy like England (and he was not the only wild contract) is going to make almost $10 million dollars over the next couple of years playing hockey.......

Except, as usual, for the fact that the players get 50% of HRR. Not a penny more, not a penny less. The only people that Engelland's contract takes money from is other players.

[Radio]

I think it's just in vogue to boo him now, people don't really know why, they just do it because others are always doing it.

[bubbsy]

i agree.

not sure i'd agree with everything that's happened during his tenure, but the NHL is a better/stronger league today than it was a decade ago or when he first started. I think some of his shrewd/tough decisions were vital to that.

for a league to go through the amount of change with how teams are built (financially), bringing level playing round to 30 teams with the cap, but also changing the foundations of the on ice game itself in 2004 was huge and not sure how many leagues would be brave enough to change so much that quickly.

i have a lot of respect for bettman, despite the weird aura he has about him.

[Resolute 14]

It's been en vogue since he was hired, really. A lot of the decisions made by he and the board early in his tenure messed with the 'tradition' of the game and really pissed off a fair number of xenophobes.

Northern teams moved south and the league expanded south. Bettman gets blamed for both, even though both processes had begun before his arrival.

Divisions were renamed from the "traditional" Norris/Smythe/Adams/Patrick. I hated this one too, but it is funny to note that the NHL used geographical named divisions from the 1920s-1940s, and again from 1967 until the mid-70s.

The 1994-95 lockout coming less than two years into his tenure.

Creating a feedback loop on all of this is the fact that he appeared to be as much of a "non-hockey guy" as one can get: A Jewish American basketball executive comes in and completely destroys the tradition of Canada's sport. He's been booed since the mid 90s. But I think it was the 04-05 lockout that caused him to really begin to embrace his role as the villain.

[Tyler]

Hater's gonna hate, but Gary's the man

[Daradon]

I do give a big 'mehhhh' when I hear people applaud him about how he's grown the league though, or the new TV contracts. I really don't believe he's done any better than anyone else would have in the same circumstance. The expansion was a crap shoot for a lot of the teams, and I think it hurt the overall league and definitely the fan experience for a while.

And as for the TV contracts, well, that's just the price tag attached to sports now. Live sports is a huge content draw for the new communications industry that no one could have predicted years ago. The fact that technology changed and live sports have become more important than ever has absolutely nothing to do with Gary. Hockey, as the next big team sport in North America, was poised to fill that gap anyway.

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by Daradon

I really don't believe he's done any better than anyone else would have in the same circumstance.

Wow. Overstatement of the century. Give the guy a BIT of credit.

[FireGilbert]

Commissioners are always disliked but I think Bettman coming from the NBA made it worse. Some fans have always been suspicious of him trying to change hockey to be more like basketball so they can get a big US TV deal.

I don't mind the booing though. Hating Bettman is the one unifying force that fans from all teams can agree on.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Tyler

Wow. Overstatement of the century. Give the guy a BIT of credit.

I don't think your using that word correctly here... But I know what you mean. Still I stand by it. The game was growing regardless of what he did, and the most recent surge is all because of technology changes and networks battling for new live media. Content is the name of the game now and live content, like sports, is at a premium because people can't fast forward through live TV. Far better for the sponsors.

To be completely honest, I really wonder if someone may have done better. Maybe you disagree, I know many do, but as was posted above by Locke I think, it was surprising a LA-NYR final wasn't bigger. There have been a few situations like that. Sure you can't hit a home run everytime, but I really wonder how much of the growth is Gary and how much was just the natural growth of the league, and the new emergence of money in sports.

It's an unwinnable argument for me, as you can't really go back, it's impossible to surmise how someone else would have done. But there are many examples to show that the growth of the game had other (in my opinion more important) factors to it than just the management of the league.

I agree totally about the 05 lockout though. That's a feather for sure.