Another season, another year dear readers.
Like the Habs, Lions in Winter has changed a lot since the spring of 2007. No more posts about Kovalev (well not daily ones anyway), less arguments about goalies. Like the Habs, LIW needs to keep refreshing its lineup to keep up with the demands of new seasons.
Over the summer, with the site ticking over, we got to thinking about how we could manage to cover the Canadiens in the way that loyal readers have come to expect (and enjoy?). I feel that in blogging as with hockey, a veteran will find most success in admitting to the changes that are happening (where’d that speed go?), develop the skills that remain more fully and find those to help fill the skill gap. The veteran bloggers here all have increasing demands on time as we progress to different stages of life and the hours that were once spent developing ideas for posts seem fewer and farther between. As you know, we added the unforgiving and insightful views of Ian Vitro last season, but the task, even for three still looked daunting.
And so the decision. Allow the blog to follow the inevitable path of change or do something about it. We all decided to do something about it.
It sounded easy enough.
With that the LIW scouting department opened up a search for the elusive power blogger. Someone with strong writing, insight and enough energy to mesh tightly with some gritty veterans. It was during this search that I started following one of the new up-and-comers onto the Habs blogging scene – Big T on the Habs.
After reading a lot of sense from June on, I knew I had found the prospect LIW was after when his late July rendering on the Josh Gorges situation came online. It was at once an answer to those who brayed about the stinginess of the contract and a thoughtful compliment to Gorges. If this contract had gone to arbitration, this was the case you’d have wanted to present.
After getting over the panicky feeling that I needed to contact him that day, lest lose the chance to collaborate to another site’s GM, I consulted with the LIW braintrust. From there, the wheels were set in motion and an agreement to collaborate between Big T and LIW was reached.
At LIW we are very excited at the prospect of the new season with a new team. I am certain that all you readers will thoroughly enjoy the chance to get into the head of Big T.
Without further ado, I give you Big T. I asked him a few questions to help get you acquainted. I also recommend reading his back-catalogue at Big T on the Habs:
Why are you a Habs fan?
I've always believed that unless you're guided to cheer for a certain team, you usually end up cheering for the team that wins the first game you watch. The first game I watched on TV that I really remembered ended in a 3-3 tie between our beloved Habs and yes, the enemy Boston Bruins and I'll surprise you by saying that for almost a full year, I cheered for both the Bruins and Habs almost equally. I was too young to understand the rivalry or its history and didn't realize that cheering for both Adams division rivals couldn't be maintained long-term.
Needless to say, I realized my grave error in judgment and quickly understood just how much hatred one can have for those that wear the black and YELLOW (yes, I said yellow not gold). I now hate the Bruins more than any of our rivals (including the Leafs whose futility over the last decade has helped them slip to a close second).
What makes you want to blog about the Habs?
Amongst my friends I was always the one with a more analytical mindset and more often than not the voice of reason during heated debates regarding our beloved Habs. I've always enjoyed writing and when my profession took me away from that and shifted me more towards numbers, I figured writing a blog would be the perfect outlet to share my thoughts with the easily excitable but extremely astute Habs fans.
So join me in welcoming our newest teammate and your newest debating partner. You can look forward to some new pieces from him the next few days.
Showing posts with label blog. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blog. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 04, 2011
Monday, March 07, 2011
New Point of View
It's really only well after you've create a monster like Lions in Winter that you begin to realise the appetite the site has for time, energy and original ideas.
To help fill these demands and to help the site thrive, we've been lucky enough to add a new contributor: Ian Vitro.
Ian Vitro is a long-time reader and frequent commenter for this site, both on- and offline:
His opinions are strong and well-founded, just the way we like them. We think that together this now three-headed blog will continue to generate new ideas and views to challenge the mainstream and stimulate the always vigorous discussion.
Expect his first piece today.
To help fill these demands and to help the site thrive, we've been lucky enough to add a new contributor: Ian Vitro.
Ian Vitro is a long-time reader and frequent commenter for this site, both on- and offline:
Born and raised over the Ontario border, a father from Montreal instilled good values - like a great love for hockey in general and the Habs in particular. Old enough to have fond memories of our last Cup run, but young enough to have had to fight to stay up and watch the games in LA. Likes the Habs and malt whisky; hates just about everything else.
His opinions are strong and well-founded, just the way we like them. We think that together this now three-headed blog will continue to generate new ideas and views to challenge the mainstream and stimulate the always vigorous discussion.
Expect his first piece today.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Canadiens Coverage
When Did The Zoo Become A Jungle?
Not that long ago, I used to catch my Canadiens games on Saturday nights, my statistics in the Tuesday Gazette and my coverage in a couple of daily pieces from September to May. Back then, players called the Montreal Canadiens media frenzy a zoo.
If that's so, what is it now? The jungle?
Thankfully I can watch all games without a pinwheel and a media guide to find the coverage. And, I'll be honest, I like being able to regulate how much coverage I take in – which I can easily do, because there's far more than I would ever want or need.
I'm sure it's the same for all of you. It's a good time to be a fan and voracious consumer of sporting and other news.
On the whole, I think the expanded coverage has been a good thing. More is said about games, more is analyzed, more is recorded. Blanket statements like "Kovalev had a terrible season" are harder to make with the evidence to refute such generalizations.
But as an observer of events, I'm wondering if many (indeed any) players would take the same view. And if not, would being coerced into an untenable situation like this play out in the results, the fatigue we've seen...
A bridge too far?
On December 8, 2008, the Canadiens opened a state-of-art practice facility in Brossard, with beautiful ice, gyms, spa-like facilities, the works. But don't be fooled, Little George (that's Gillett) didn't bankroll this facility solely to help the team be more competitive, he planned this facility to benefit the organization (i.e., his bank balance) as well.
The way he would turn it to moneymaker was by integrating Canadiens practice into the Canadiens hype machine. Cleverly, the design of the facility included a viewing gallery. It wasn't long before it also became the place to stage a daily press conference and loose reporters on the dressing room.
Since the practice facility opened the Habs went 26-24-6 in 2008-09, 0-4-0 in the playoffs and now 25-25-5 in 2009-10 for a 51-53-5 record (or if you prefer 51-58). It's worth noting that the pre-Brossard Habs from 2008-09 were a rather rosier 15-6-5, defending Eastern conference champions and looked to be heading in the right direction.
It would be foolish to put down all the woes of the team to increased media scrutiny. But in certain cases it may be more feasible. We can think for instance of players who don't seem to like the camera as much, who don't seem to thrive with extra eyes and ears on them. Koivu comes to mind, several of the summer departed. I'll just pick one player from a hat, though: Carey Price.
Since Brossard, it has been 10-12-6 in 2008-09, 0-4-0 in the playoffs, and 11-17-4 in 2009-10. For those who don't read Allan Walsh, that'd be 21-33-10 (or 21-43). Remarkable when you think of his Calder trophy challenge and his 13-4-4 record before his every move was simultaneously tracked by 60 iphones from the southshore. Don't think wins count for anything? Fine, I'll do it your way. 3.15 and 0.895 in 2008-09, 4.11 and 0.878 in the playoffs, and 2.73 and 0.913 in 2009-10. Contrast that with 2.36 and 0.920 in 21 starts.
Carey's not unlike other Habs players in that he laps up the media when it's winning times. But when there's losses, he does get that noticeable "What the hell do you think I'll say?" look about him. He's not alone in the dressing room, but his case is most easily illustrated in numbers. A retroactive analysis proves little, so treat as food for thought. Just interesting that someone who doesn't seem to like the excessive coverage might be affected in the one area of his undertakings that the majority of his fans actually care about.
Today's story
I bring all this up because as I was reading the morning rounds, the story that dominated on the off day in this losing run was the Markov v. Price ten-word exchange.
I didn't need the new reports coming out to understand that people working to common goals often disagree. I didn't even need Pat Hickey's piece to know this has a precedent in the Montreal Canadiens locker room. I've been on teams, I've been a member of society, I think anyone who has knows how much value to put in strong words after an emotional fall.
But be it boredom, the stretch for anything to talk about, the loss of perspective, this became the big story of the moment.
TSN who dips in and out of Canadiens coverage only when things go wrong enough to interest their Toronto following followed up their initial story on the word-of-mouth report of rift with this story. The hug, of course, as meaningless as the initial words. The look to the media...
At least TSN only reported it. Michel Bergeron seems to be personally offended that a player who sees fit enough to question, even ridicule nightly on another inane tabloid gossip session would turn around and mock him and his gang. Habs Inside/Out did the usual upgrade on RDS and provided some pro journalism, but did Dave Stubbs really need to tweet every other ten seconds from Brossard? Finally, the fact that the most professional reporter in the scrum (that'd be Arpon Basu) is also airing his personal frustration on this matter (albeit about a different element of the debacle) is more striking.
It was these reports that made me think things were getting out of hand.
The players on the Canadiens were already among the most scrutinized in the league before twitter ever existed, and before every day had a press conference. But they've been asked to take on even more. I for one think Komisarek mooing, Price engaging in mock hugs – this is all fair play. What's more, I think players should be allowed to opt out of the jungle whenever they feel like doing so. I know some think it's some kind of right to have every question answered whenever they come asking, but I disagree. The players are there to play hockey, and god forbid practice playing hockey, not to be story generators for reporters looking to fill more air time and columns of type than should ever be afforded to a sporting endeavour.
I think it's high time the Habs take a look at limiting the ridiculous practice of opening their training facility to everyone. Now that George "I finance my debts with sports teams" Gillett is gone, I think there's a window to do it.
Again, this is only me, I wanted to know what you (some of the most sensible and loyal fans of the Habs) think:
Has it gone too far?
Could this be hurting the team?
Is this why we don't have a captain?
Do we need twitter updates by the minute from Canadiens practices?
Do we really benefit from seeing our idols behind the doors that used to be pretty much closed?
If that's so, what is it now? The jungle?
Thankfully I can watch all games without a pinwheel and a media guide to find the coverage. And, I'll be honest, I like being able to regulate how much coverage I take in – which I can easily do, because there's far more than I would ever want or need.
I'm sure it's the same for all of you. It's a good time to be a fan and voracious consumer of sporting and other news.
On the whole, I think the expanded coverage has been a good thing. More is said about games, more is analyzed, more is recorded. Blanket statements like "Kovalev had a terrible season" are harder to make with the evidence to refute such generalizations.
But as an observer of events, I'm wondering if many (indeed any) players would take the same view. And if not, would being coerced into an untenable situation like this play out in the results, the fatigue we've seen...
A bridge too far?
On December 8, 2008, the Canadiens opened a state-of-art practice facility in Brossard, with beautiful ice, gyms, spa-like facilities, the works. But don't be fooled, Little George (that's Gillett) didn't bankroll this facility solely to help the team be more competitive, he planned this facility to benefit the organization (i.e., his bank balance) as well.
The way he would turn it to moneymaker was by integrating Canadiens practice into the Canadiens hype machine. Cleverly, the design of the facility included a viewing gallery. It wasn't long before it also became the place to stage a daily press conference and loose reporters on the dressing room.
Since the practice facility opened the Habs went 26-24-6 in 2008-09, 0-4-0 in the playoffs and now 25-25-5 in 2009-10 for a 51-53-5 record (or if you prefer 51-58). It's worth noting that the pre-Brossard Habs from 2008-09 were a rather rosier 15-6-5, defending Eastern conference champions and looked to be heading in the right direction.
It would be foolish to put down all the woes of the team to increased media scrutiny. But in certain cases it may be more feasible. We can think for instance of players who don't seem to like the camera as much, who don't seem to thrive with extra eyes and ears on them. Koivu comes to mind, several of the summer departed. I'll just pick one player from a hat, though: Carey Price.
Since Brossard, it has been 10-12-6 in 2008-09, 0-4-0 in the playoffs, and 11-17-4 in 2009-10. For those who don't read Allan Walsh, that'd be 21-33-10 (or 21-43). Remarkable when you think of his Calder trophy challenge and his 13-4-4 record before his every move was simultaneously tracked by 60 iphones from the southshore. Don't think wins count for anything? Fine, I'll do it your way. 3.15 and 0.895 in 2008-09, 4.11 and 0.878 in the playoffs, and 2.73 and 0.913 in 2009-10. Contrast that with 2.36 and 0.920 in 21 starts.
Carey's not unlike other Habs players in that he laps up the media when it's winning times. But when there's losses, he does get that noticeable "What the hell do you think I'll say?" look about him. He's not alone in the dressing room, but his case is most easily illustrated in numbers. A retroactive analysis proves little, so treat as food for thought. Just interesting that someone who doesn't seem to like the excessive coverage might be affected in the one area of his undertakings that the majority of his fans actually care about.
Today's story
I bring all this up because as I was reading the morning rounds, the story that dominated on the off day in this losing run was the Markov v. Price ten-word exchange.
I didn't need the new reports coming out to understand that people working to common goals often disagree. I didn't even need Pat Hickey's piece to know this has a precedent in the Montreal Canadiens locker room. I've been on teams, I've been a member of society, I think anyone who has knows how much value to put in strong words after an emotional fall.
But be it boredom, the stretch for anything to talk about, the loss of perspective, this became the big story of the moment.
TSN who dips in and out of Canadiens coverage only when things go wrong enough to interest their Toronto following followed up their initial story on the word-of-mouth report of rift with this story. The hug, of course, as meaningless as the initial words. The look to the media...
That Price then looked up at the media seats at the Montreal Canadiens practice facility made it clear the gesture was in response to a report this week of a confrontation between the two in the club's dressing room.... perhaps most significant of all.
At least TSN only reported it. Michel Bergeron seems to be personally offended that a player who sees fit enough to question, even ridicule nightly on another inane tabloid gossip session would turn around and mock him and his gang. Habs Inside/Out did the usual upgrade on RDS and provided some pro journalism, but did Dave Stubbs really need to tweet every other ten seconds from Brossard? Finally, the fact that the most professional reporter in the scrum (that'd be Arpon Basu) is also airing his personal frustration on this matter (albeit about a different element of the debacle) is more striking.
It was these reports that made me think things were getting out of hand.
The players on the Canadiens were already among the most scrutinized in the league before twitter ever existed, and before every day had a press conference. But they've been asked to take on even more. I for one think Komisarek mooing, Price engaging in mock hugs – this is all fair play. What's more, I think players should be allowed to opt out of the jungle whenever they feel like doing so. I know some think it's some kind of right to have every question answered whenever they come asking, but I disagree. The players are there to play hockey, and god forbid practice playing hockey, not to be story generators for reporters looking to fill more air time and columns of type than should ever be afforded to a sporting endeavour.
I think it's high time the Habs take a look at limiting the ridiculous practice of opening their training facility to everyone. Now that George "I finance my debts with sports teams" Gillett is gone, I think there's a window to do it.
Again, this is only me, I wanted to know what you (some of the most sensible and loyal fans of the Habs) think:
Has it gone too far?
Could this be hurting the team?
Is this why we don't have a captain?
Do we need twitter updates by the minute from Canadiens practices?
Do we really benefit from seeing our idols behind the doors that used to be pretty much closed?
Friday, October 24, 2008
Blogging the NHL
Habs Inside/Out A Rare Ally Among Mainstream Media
Blogging the NHL
Habs Inside/Out A Rare Ally Among Mainstream Media
More than a week late on this one, but you'll have to forgive my oversight. A wedding and a wonderful winning streak had come in the way of this article and the blogsite.
As I often try to do when I notice conflict and contrast in hockey and its loyal media, I wanted to write a piece about two recent stories I had come across. The first, and most encouraging, was this one from Habs Inside/Out about adding new bloggers to the site and the second was this one from Puck Daddy about the Oilers losing a blogger.
I'll begin with the latter...
Blogger booted
It was during the Oilers first game of the season that blogger Dave Berry of Covered in Oil was accosted by press (gang) guys and asked to cease his blogging activities from the Oilers pressbox. I won't recount the whole story, but if you want to read the drama, read on at Dave's last entries here and here.
The fact that I neither read nor particularly have any inclination to read live blogs while I'm watching a game is neither here nor there. The fact of the matter is, the Oilers have overstepped the mark on this occasion. Berry was doing nothing to contravene any oath he had taken or any law of society. He merely ticked off the brass, at which point they had to invent a set of rules which they would then go on to impose for all of 24 hours.
Their battle, as has been pointed by many a commentator, is rather futile. Anyone watching on TV, at the game with a blackberry or even still in the pressbox can easily live blog negative thoughts about the team if they want to. Covered in Oil, even, is still up and running, and will probably just replace Dave by someone else at some point.
What's more, even though the content was largely negative, how many people did the Oilers think this material was reaching. Judging by their comments, its probably only in the low thousands.
No, all the Oilers have ended up doing in this mixed up situation is anger a lot of very very vocal people. The story of the incident has been picked up by every hockey blogger under the sun (it must have if I'm in on it too) and every corner of the hockey playing universe. In terms of PR for the organisation, it was a -10 – I didn't read a single article taking the Oilers side here.
For me, as interesting as the saga was, what intrigued me more was who ratted Mr. Berry out in the first place.It must have been:
a) someone reading the blog that night (especially because it emerged the problem was content)
b) someone who doesn't like the idea of live blogging
c) someone who had contact with the Edmonton Oilers press guys
As big and popular as blogging is, I think it's a stretch to believe that anyone to do with the hockey team operation or ownership would be reading snide remarks instead of watching their team. This leads me to believe that it was either another blogger or someone from the traditional media.
Now, I thought that bloggers stuck together. And all the response in this case leads me to believe that is true, even though Berry did try to drag a couple of peers down with him belatedly.
So, that leaves the big bad media. Berry, a member of both fraternities himself, even expressed that were he not blogging he'd have had nothing to do while waiting for his quotes anyway. That throws the "too busy working" alibi right out the window. Yeah, I think the Edmonton media landed a scoring low here.
After all, there is a certain implicit agreement in the "I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine" arrangement between bloggers and media who work together. In the case of the Oilers organisation, it went to the extreme - the blogger was dissing his team and those "scratching his back". They decided to tell Mommy and Daddy.
Gosh, the media really do have their knickers in a twist over this new-fangled blogging thing, don't they...
... Well not all of them actually.
The progressive team @ Habs Inside/Out
Though I don't always agree with their take on matters involving hockey, I have to hand it to the boys from the Gazette and the blog they have nurtured over the past two seasons. I think they deserve acknowledgment for their efforts here.
For one thing the blog is done in the right spirit. It neither takes itself too seriously, nor does it take hockey too seriously. It simply provides an addendum to all the material that is published in its parent publication, the Montreal Gazette. This hasn't stopped the main page and Mike Boone's blog from being the most complete, up-to-date and reliable source for Canadiens material (in English, I should qualify).
The other thing the blog has done right has been to embrace the bloggers. I can't say that I have personally experienced their favour on too many occasions (there was a recent link attributed to another blog), but I still laud them for interacting and even linking with bloggers like Robert L, TC Denault, the Four Habs Fans and others. The step they have taken to formalise this relationship by serialising some of these authors on their Other Wing page, is either ahead of the times or right with them, depending where you're from. And the manner in which they interact with the bloggers does them credit too.
Habs fans should count themselves very lucky to have these guys. And, when you think about it, English Habs fans are the luckiest of all – with probably the most intense and disproportionate amount of coverage of any team in the NHL (given the size of our group).
So, in general, can bloggers and the media get along?
I think they can. Other than Habs Inside/Out, I think that there are countless examples showing that they can. In Long Island they fraternise, and in Washington they get along too. Thankfully Edmonton is one of a few teams who tread a more archaic path.
Personally, I don't think Tobalev or I would have any problem getting along with any of the professional Habs media (though as I said, we would have plenty to debate and disagree about – hockeywise).
Incidentally, I also wonder whether co-habitating is the right approach for everyone at the end of the day. I think the root of blogging and what makes it powerful and compelling is its independent nature. On this occasion, I tend to agree with Matt (the Flames fan) at Battle of Alberta, when he says:
It is certainly a dilemma that some lucky bloggers get to deal with. It's still all theoretical to me.
In any case, I am thankful I support Montreal, where the door to the halls of media discussion has been left wide open with a sign saying "Welcome bloggers".
As I often try to do when I notice conflict and contrast in hockey and its loyal media, I wanted to write a piece about two recent stories I had come across. The first, and most encouraging, was this one from Habs Inside/Out about adding new bloggers to the site and the second was this one from Puck Daddy about the Oilers losing a blogger.
I'll begin with the latter...
Blogger booted
It was during the Oilers first game of the season that blogger Dave Berry of Covered in Oil was accosted by press (gang) guys and asked to cease his blogging activities from the Oilers pressbox. I won't recount the whole story, but if you want to read the drama, read on at Dave's last entries here and here.
The fact that I neither read nor particularly have any inclination to read live blogs while I'm watching a game is neither here nor there. The fact of the matter is, the Oilers have overstepped the mark on this occasion. Berry was doing nothing to contravene any oath he had taken or any law of society. He merely ticked off the brass, at which point they had to invent a set of rules which they would then go on to impose for all of 24 hours.
Their battle, as has been pointed by many a commentator, is rather futile. Anyone watching on TV, at the game with a blackberry or even still in the pressbox can easily live blog negative thoughts about the team if they want to. Covered in Oil, even, is still up and running, and will probably just replace Dave by someone else at some point.
What's more, even though the content was largely negative, how many people did the Oilers think this material was reaching. Judging by their comments, its probably only in the low thousands.
No, all the Oilers have ended up doing in this mixed up situation is anger a lot of very very vocal people. The story of the incident has been picked up by every hockey blogger under the sun (it must have if I'm in on it too) and every corner of the hockey playing universe. In terms of PR for the organisation, it was a -10 – I didn't read a single article taking the Oilers side here.
For me, as interesting as the saga was, what intrigued me more was who ratted Mr. Berry out in the first place.It must have been:
a) someone reading the blog that night (especially because it emerged the problem was content)
b) someone who doesn't like the idea of live blogging
c) someone who had contact with the Edmonton Oilers press guys
As big and popular as blogging is, I think it's a stretch to believe that anyone to do with the hockey team operation or ownership would be reading snide remarks instead of watching their team. This leads me to believe that it was either another blogger or someone from the traditional media.
Now, I thought that bloggers stuck together. And all the response in this case leads me to believe that is true, even though Berry did try to drag a couple of peers down with him belatedly.
So, that leaves the big bad media. Berry, a member of both fraternities himself, even expressed that were he not blogging he'd have had nothing to do while waiting for his quotes anyway. That throws the "too busy working" alibi right out the window. Yeah, I think the Edmonton media landed a scoring low here.
After all, there is a certain implicit agreement in the "I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine" arrangement between bloggers and media who work together. In the case of the Oilers organisation, it went to the extreme - the blogger was dissing his team and those "scratching his back". They decided to tell Mommy and Daddy.
Gosh, the media really do have their knickers in a twist over this new-fangled blogging thing, don't they...
... Well not all of them actually.
The progressive team @ Habs Inside/Out
Though I don't always agree with their take on matters involving hockey, I have to hand it to the boys from the Gazette and the blog they have nurtured over the past two seasons. I think they deserve acknowledgment for their efforts here.
For one thing the blog is done in the right spirit. It neither takes itself too seriously, nor does it take hockey too seriously. It simply provides an addendum to all the material that is published in its parent publication, the Montreal Gazette. This hasn't stopped the main page and Mike Boone's blog from being the most complete, up-to-date and reliable source for Canadiens material (in English, I should qualify).
The other thing the blog has done right has been to embrace the bloggers. I can't say that I have personally experienced their favour on too many occasions (there was a recent link attributed to another blog), but I still laud them for interacting and even linking with bloggers like Robert L, TC Denault, the Four Habs Fans and others. The step they have taken to formalise this relationship by serialising some of these authors on their Other Wing page, is either ahead of the times or right with them, depending where you're from. And the manner in which they interact with the bloggers does them credit too.
Habs fans should count themselves very lucky to have these guys. And, when you think about it, English Habs fans are the luckiest of all – with probably the most intense and disproportionate amount of coverage of any team in the NHL (given the size of our group).
So, in general, can bloggers and the media get along?
I think they can. Other than Habs Inside/Out, I think that there are countless examples showing that they can. In Long Island they fraternise, and in Washington they get along too. Thankfully Edmonton is one of a few teams who tread a more archaic path.
Personally, I don't think Tobalev or I would have any problem getting along with any of the professional Habs media (though as I said, we would have plenty to debate and disagree about – hockeywise).
Incidentally, I also wonder whether co-habitating is the right approach for everyone at the end of the day. I think the root of blogging and what makes it powerful and compelling is its independent nature. On this occasion, I tend to agree with Matt (the Flames fan) at Battle of Alberta, when he says:
There's a reason I've never attempted to contact the Flames organization, get a press pass, an interview, or the like. Actually, there's two reasons, the first of which is that I like this blog the way it is: it's personal, I don't owe anyone any favours, and I don't have to abide by anyone's rules and guidelines but my own.
It is certainly a dilemma that some lucky bloggers get to deal with. It's still all theoretical to me.
In any case, I am thankful I support Montreal, where the door to the halls of media discussion has been left wide open with a sign saying "Welcome bloggers".
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Why We Like The Blogosphere
Funny when you see it, but this article and linking blog remind me why I prefer the blogosphere:
Gazette article: Habs tickets sales go off without a hitch
Habs Inside/Out linker: Ticket sales go relatively well
I understand the pressures of advertising and sponsors and all the like – I deal with that in my real job. But, clearly the blog here gives the representative headline and the article in the Gazette is giving the company line. Interesting.
The tickets. To me, it sounds like a strange new system:
A little bit inequitable, to be sure. Especially when you hear the inevitable complaints of the people there right from the start who got randomly shafted for hours of wait.
It's a two-sided coin isn't it? Sure I want them to do well, but I also long for the days when I used to basically walk up and get a seat on the night of.
There is definitely something to be said for putting in some standing room areas like at the Forum. Now that was fun times...
Gazette article: Habs tickets sales go off without a hitch
Habs Inside/Out linker: Ticket sales go relatively well
I understand the pressures of advertising and sponsors and all the like – I deal with that in my real job. But, clearly the blog here gives the representative headline and the article in the Gazette is giving the company line. Interesting.
The tickets. To me, it sounds like a strange new system:
the system randomly places people waiting online in a purchase order...
A little bit inequitable, to be sure. Especially when you hear the inevitable complaints of the people there right from the start who got randomly shafted for hours of wait.
It's a two-sided coin isn't it? Sure I want them to do well, but I also long for the days when I used to basically walk up and get a seat on the night of.
There is definitely something to be said for putting in some standing room areas like at the Forum. Now that was fun times...
Saturday, December 01, 2007
On Game Posts
After a day away, I came home to find the blog in good order. Another game, another analysis by Tobalev. Never missed a game. Rarely unready for sun-up. Strangely though today a negative comment: Terrible analysis. Nothing more.
Now I agree with Tobalev (in his reply), we can't always be right, not even close. But to be fair, if it's a terrible analysis, let's discuss why...
A blog like this one is meant to generate discussion. That's when a blog is at its best for certain. And, on a few occasions it's been some good dicussion/disagreement. In fact, when we came up with the format, we were trying to force ourselves to make decisions (that people would agree or disagree with), as opposed to a prolonged ramble.
So, let's criticise away. Criticise the play of the game (I often disagree privately). Criticse the game puck. Criticise the dome team. Criticise the analysis. Criticise the comments. And let's have a good old debate. We love the debate, almost as much as the hockey.
Go Habs Go. Go Habs Fans Go.
Now I agree with Tobalev (in his reply), we can't always be right, not even close. But to be fair, if it's a terrible analysis, let's discuss why...
A blog like this one is meant to generate discussion. That's when a blog is at its best for certain. And, on a few occasions it's been some good dicussion/disagreement. In fact, when we came up with the format, we were trying to force ourselves to make decisions (that people would agree or disagree with), as opposed to a prolonged ramble.
So, let's criticise away. Criticise the play of the game (I often disagree privately). Criticse the game puck. Criticise the dome team. Criticise the analysis. Criticise the comments. And let's have a good old debate. We love the debate, almost as much as the hockey.
Go Habs Go. Go Habs Fans Go.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Ste. Flannelle
Good fun to be had on the Ste. Flanelle blog.
If you understand French, it's worth listening to their Radio shows. The one on the playoffs is good, and the one on Koivu had good bits as well.
If you understand French, it's worth listening to their Radio shows. The one on the playoffs is good, and the one on Koivu had good bits as well.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Does Eklund need Habs fans this badly?
I understand that the summer is a difficult time to blog. I do. And I understand that there must be demands on Eklund to keep up the traffic to his site. But, for a site I used to like and even defend relentlessly, I feel a little bit cheated lately.
The latest post may have been the straw that broke the donkey's back. Eklund's blog 30/07/07:
I mean, where does he come up with this stuff?
First of all, why is the Ryder signing shocking? Should I be shocked that Ryder signed a one year contract (again) for a raise over his last salary? I wasn't shocked, it's actually something along the lines of what I expected, given the Higgins and Komisarek and Plekanec contracts. A good job by Bob Gainey.
Second, how does signing a player that you would have had to sign to a one-year contract the very next day on arbitrator's terms so clearly send a message (other than duh?!?)? Clearly it doesn't. It sends one message. Ryder will play for the Habs this year at an affordable rate.
But, all that aside, I was willing to forgive his exuberance. That was until the kicker:
Ryder should have been a 3-4 year deal? Why? Players and GMs negotiate contracts based on salary, terms and length. It's all part of the bargaining. How can one say that a player should be on a 3-4 year contract? I happen to think the one-year option is quite a good one, as it gives both player and team a chance to re-evaluate. In my opinion, Bob Gainey was more likely to have promised a longer-term deal if Mike produces this year again, than what Eklund suggests.
Besides, how could signing Ryder to 3-4 years at 3.5 million prevent us from signing Lecavalier? Vincent is a centre, and may actually need a winger one day. If Koivu was signed for one year, then it might be a different story, but this Ryder signing does not send any hidden messages.
So why suggest it does? Perhaps to whip up some hysteria among a large group of people who actually care about hockey in the summer (Habs fans). Ever since I heard the suggestion made, I've noticed that Eklund does include Habs rumours on most days. He needs our traffic more than we need his rumours.
I'll still read the site, of course, because I'm hooked. But, I just wanted to voice my cynicism. I wonder how everyone else feels about his site nowadays.
Just a quick note, while I'm on the topic of Eklund. I recently stumbled onto a parody site written by Peklund. It's a funny read, but the funniest thing these day is how closely it resembles an Eklund blog. Obviously that's the point, but I still find it funny. Mr. Peklund also quotes Habs and Leafs rumours daily as a jibe against Eklund's ridiculous tangential speculations like the one I commented on today. Give it a read. It's good fun.
The latest post may have been the straw that broke the donkey's back. Eklund's blog 30/07/07:
The Ryder signing is a shocking one to me but it sends a clear message that I did ponder. It was not until this morning that I received confirmation on that message. LeCavalier and the Habs are on a collision course that could start as early as this year's trade deadline
I mean, where does he come up with this stuff?
First of all, why is the Ryder signing shocking? Should I be shocked that Ryder signed a one year contract (again) for a raise over his last salary? I wasn't shocked, it's actually something along the lines of what I expected, given the Higgins and Komisarek and Plekanec contracts. A good job by Bob Gainey.
Second, how does signing a player that you would have had to sign to a one-year contract the very next day on arbitrator's terms so clearly send a message (other than duh?!?)? Clearly it doesn't. It sends one message. Ryder will play for the Habs this year at an affordable rate.
But, all that aside, I was willing to forgive his exuberance. That was until the kicker:
Enter Ryder, who should have been a 3 or 4 year deal at around 3.5. The Habs yesterday avoided arbitration, but did make Ryder a one year player and gave themselves a chance to make Vinny a "lifer" at some point in the next 2 years...
Ryder should have been a 3-4 year deal? Why? Players and GMs negotiate contracts based on salary, terms and length. It's all part of the bargaining. How can one say that a player should be on a 3-4 year contract? I happen to think the one-year option is quite a good one, as it gives both player and team a chance to re-evaluate. In my opinion, Bob Gainey was more likely to have promised a longer-term deal if Mike produces this year again, than what Eklund suggests.
Besides, how could signing Ryder to 3-4 years at 3.5 million prevent us from signing Lecavalier? Vincent is a centre, and may actually need a winger one day. If Koivu was signed for one year, then it might be a different story, but this Ryder signing does not send any hidden messages.
So why suggest it does? Perhaps to whip up some hysteria among a large group of people who actually care about hockey in the summer (Habs fans). Ever since I heard the suggestion made, I've noticed that Eklund does include Habs rumours on most days. He needs our traffic more than we need his rumours.
I'll still read the site, of course, because I'm hooked. But, I just wanted to voice my cynicism. I wonder how everyone else feels about his site nowadays.
Just a quick note, while I'm on the topic of Eklund. I recently stumbled onto a parody site written by Peklund. It's a funny read, but the funniest thing these day is how closely it resembles an Eklund blog. Obviously that's the point, but I still find it funny. Mr. Peklund also quotes Habs and Leafs rumours daily as a jibe against Eklund's ridiculous tangential speculations like the one I commented on today. Give it a read. It's good fun.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)