Hockey Violence and the NHL's "Image Problem"

The mainstream media has moved on, busying itself with new outrages and fresher scandals. But among hockey fans and writers, the fallout from the Todd Bertuzzi affair continues.

Bertuzzi’s primitive turn has revived a healthy debate over hockey violence, the NHL’s tolerance of it, the role of fighting, the culture of the sport and the safety of players.

As a sidebar, it also inspired a new round of fretting over hockey’s “image,” especially its profile across the United States.

The game took an unprecedented public relations hit when Vancouver's all-star power forward assaulted Steve Moore of the Colorado Avalanche. America’s media turned its full fury on the NHL, casting thunderbolts from anchor desks and editorial pages. Bertuzzi’s attack was denounced as sickening and vile - though this did not prevent television networks from replaying it over and over. Outraged commentators railed against hockey as a breeding ground for thugs, and labelled it a dysfunctional ghetto sport appealing to only the most bloodthirsty of Neanderthal minds.

Most of it didn’t feel like genuine outrage, just the professional indignation any media pundit can work up at a moment’s notice, the way an actor summons tears on demand. And much of it came from opinion leaders who had not previously distinguished themselves as hockey analysts. Watching the average Fox News blowhard or CNN anchor struggling with the story, you had to wonder if any of them would know Todd Bertuzzi from Sweeney Todd.

But the damage is done, and the hockey community grieves for the game’s poor standing in the American heartland. Coverage of the coverage is especially thorough in Canada, where “What do Americans think?” is an ongoing media obsession. In one example, a Toronto Globe and Mail columnist quoted a Florida radio host: “All we can hope for is Tampa Bay winning the Stanley Cup, the league shutting down next year, and Canadians going to hell.”

(The radio jock failed to specify whether Canadians like Vincent Lecavalier, Brad Richards and Martin St. Louis should be spared damnation, as Tampa Bay cannot win the Stanley Cup without them. It might also be noted that any league which runs afoul of the lunatics who dominate sports talk radio must be doing something right.)

Paltry American television ratings are noted as further cause for alarm. Most of us don’t even know what a “ratings point” is. But the miniscule numbers imply that the target audience for sports – fat guys sitting on couches in places like Des Moines and Wichita – do not want hockey. They want hoops, football, NASCAR and bowling. They might go for Survivor or American Idol, or anything featuring half-naked women. But not hockey.

All this, we are told, is terribly detrimental to the game. Excepting dedicated pockets of fans in the Northeast and Midwest, America ignores hockey. Now Todd Bertuzzi comes along, single-handedly torpedoing efforts to boost the NHL’s profile and improve its image. This is disastrous. To thrive in the future, the NHL must have more fans buying more tickets and supporting more teams. This is vital to the health of the game.

Vital to the health of whose game, exactly? The one played by the owners of NHL teams. It is their long-held credo that the road to Shangri-La is paved with fat guys in Des Moines.

But what would a more successful NHL mean for the rest of us? Probably higher ticket prices, higher players’ salaries, more expansion, larger gaps between the poorest and wealthiest teams, and greater opportunity for general managers to make spendthrift fools of themselves.

Let’s assume for a moment that hockey’s image problems continue. It’s popularity stagnates and the NHL makes no further inroads with the American public. What’s the worst that could happen?

A few teams fold, which is bad news for a handful of players who lose their jobs, and for the 1,200 or so hockey fans in Miami and Nashville.

Some of the millionaires who own NHL teams lose money.

Some other millionaires do not make as much money as they would like.

The average player’s salary stalls at its current level, around $1.8 million.

There might be less hockey on television. This is a doubtful forecast, given that North America is spilling over with sports television networks, all of which have countless hours of airtime to fill.

Assorted media gasbags and self-styled morality cops continue to assume that hockey is barbaric, and its fans are knuckle-dragging troglodytes.

As a hockey fan, do you think you can endure such calamities? If so, go back to enjoying your favourite sport and forget about the NHL’s public image. The league’s fortunes will ebb and flow. Newspapers, at their convenience, will continue to issue warnings of a “game in crisis.” An extended labor dispute might force the cancellation of next season.

But hockey isn’t going anywhere. “Bigger and Better!” is the officially sanctioned NHL business agenda, and there is no reason whatsoever for the rest of us to buy into it.