The Universal Cynic

Welcome to The Universal Cynic's fugue state.

Long story short: As we wait for the union negotiations between the PA and the NHL owners to come to a full stop (in any way, shape or form), I figured it would be a good idea to crank the old girl up in the interim. I want this to be a safe space to discuss what's going on in the League -- albeit with less vitriol than you're used to.

My official stance on the matter: I refuse to take sides, and there are a number of reasons for my position. Firstly, I work for the League, so it benefits me for it to be functioning. Secondly, I live with someone who is well versed in union negotiations. The chess game that takes place between the two sides makes it virtually impossible to side with someone. There is no black or white -- only shades of grey. I understand others will pick a camp and attempt to explain their reasons why to me. That's their prerogative. I am not in a position to back one party, regardless.

What I will say is this: It's very difficult to watch others casually discuss the situation with such negativity. A great number of them will be permitted to work -- after all, someone needs to cover the situation, should the League choose to lock out the players. My first year with the Ottawa Sun was the lockout season, and while I was initially concerned, I quickly discovered that there was much to discuss. However, I am in a new situation with the League -- one that solely provides coverage of the games and events themselves. No League on the ice equals no work for me. Anyone who has suddenly found themselves out of work and with very little information to go upon in regards to a return, can surely sympathize. The entire situation has already been very stressful, and indeed, emotional for me. I want to go back to work.

As we move forward, I'll continue to decide how to use this space -- and of course, we can continue to discuss our favourite topics, like bloggers, media and the continued head-bashing.

If there's anything you like to see/talk about, let me know. In the meantime ... welcome back, cynics.

If you follow me on Twitter, you know that I'm taking over as the Ottawa correspondent for NHL.com. So, what does this mean? Well, first off, I'm part of the media again (you can stop laughing at any time). But it also means that the blog can't continue in its current form, for obvious reasons.

After giving it some thought, I've decided to use this space to write about my experiences in returning to the press box, media itself, and everything that goes along with it. I have no intention of being a (expletive)-disturber; I have to see/work alongside some of these people. I just thought I'd give a view of what it's like to return to the other side of the fence, through my eyes. I don't know how often I'll get to update over here -- I'll try to keep it regular (famous last words). In the meantime, any Senators-related stories of mine will be found on NHL.com.

Hopefully you dig the new view. If not, bugger off. See? I'm still TUC.

[Ed. Note: The following is an extremely long post. Consider yourself warned.]


By "you", I actually mean "me". Who am I? Other than the writer of this blog, I'm a sports columnist with a major Canadian daily in the Nation's Capital. At 28 years old, I'm the youngest sportswriter in Ottawa-Gatineau. I'm female. But most importantly (at least in respect to this post), I'm a person who legitimately cares about hockey and its relevance -- however debatable -- as a major league sport.

Unfortunately, none of this currently means a lick to the National Hockey League, because it's become blatantly obvious they would rather take a frozen puck to the uvula than grant me accreditation to the Stanley Cup Finals. And for the life of me, I can't figure out why.

Here's a synopsis of last week's events: I was told by my editor at Sun Media that accreditations for the Finals would be extremely hard to come by (hardly a surprising revelation). Traditionally, accreditation request forms have a set number of spots. Sun Media had already accounted for all spots in Anaheim and Ottawa -- which I was fully expecting. After all, they had to tend to their employees first, whereas I am a contracted writer.

At the encouragement of others and after informing my editor I was planning to do so, I approached the NHL on my own behalf to see if anything could be accomplished, even if it was only to obtain a practice pass. I sent e-mails to practically every major media relations member. I called the league offices in New York and Toronto. Every one of my calls and missives went unanswered.

Again, I knew the chances were slim, particularly with Game 1 creeping up on the 28th, but I figured I had nothing to lose. Meanwhile on Friday, William Houston of The Globe And Mail published this piece, detailing the lack of accreditation requests from both U.S. and Canadian outlets. Here are some clips:

When the Stanley Cup final starts Monday in Anaheim, most of the leading newspapers in the United States will be busy doing something else.

They certainly won't be sending reporters to Canada to cover the games in Ottawa, where connections are difficult and fares expensive.

"It's Disneyland against Parliament," one U.S. sportswriter said about the Senators-Ducks series. "Not only is it impossible to get directly from one place to another, but it takes a great deal of time and money.

"If I'm a sports editor, I say forget about it. I can spend my money on something better.

That mirrors the view of Newsday sports editor Hank Winnicki, who says the New York Yankees and Mets take priority at this time of year. "There's so much going on in New York that we have to throw everything we have at the big story," he said.

In addition to Newsday, newspapers not attending the Cup final will include the Washington Post, New York Post, Newark Star-Ledger, Dallas Morning News, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, St. Louis Post-Dispatch and St. Petersburg Times. The New York Times won't commit past coverage of Game 1.

Even in the big regional hockey markets they're staying away. The Buffalo News gave it thumbs down. The St. Paul Pioneer Press won't attend. Minneapolis Star Tribune coverage will be limited to blogs filed by its beat writer from the first game to the third.

The two big Chicago dailies, the Tribune and Sun-Times, have been absent from the Stanley Cup final for years. And, in Hockeytown USA, both the Detroit Free Press and Detroit News are taking a pass.


...

The visiting contingent to Ottawa this spring won't be much larger. Those accredited for the final include USA Today, The Boston Globe, New York Daily News, the two Philadelphia papers, the Inquirer and Daily News and Los Angeles Times.

In Canada, there may also be fewer newspapers covering the final. The Sun Media chain will use Ottawa Sun coverage for its newspapers, with the Edmonton Sun's Terry Jones also filing columns. The CanWest chain will rely heavily on Ottawa Citizen coverage.

Initially I was buoyed by this admission, but I immediately became concerned by the attention paid to the absence of U.S. outlets. I thought perhaps this news could ironically work against me, due to the fact I was a Canadian writer -- I may be viewed as a surplus. My concerns were fortified when a friend (also in the business) sent this note:

I heard from one Professional Hockey Writers' Association member who said that the NHL is giving a lot of perfectly legitimate media people a very difficult time (for reasons that defy any sort of logic). The suspicion is that the NHL is desperately seeking the American media's heavy hitters (and hence to have to play it safe and keep spots open). Good luck with that, Commissioner Bettman.

Picture it: The NHL -- the high school boy, out of step with the rest of the cliques but desperate to seek validation, hungers for the attention of the most popular girl in school (the American media). She ignores him and regularly mocks him in front of anyone who will listen. Meanwhile, the girl with genuine interest (the Canadian media) might be plain and a bit of an oddball. But she legitimately cares about him, and yet he delivers the cold shoulder. This argument was solidified most recently by the league's incessant kowtowing to NBC during the playoffs -- who infamously demonstrated their gratitude by cutting the Sens-Sabres OT coverage in favour of the Preakness Stakes.

It sounds like original outline for Dawson's Creek -- except our Dawson in this case seems to forget that Joey Potter finally threw in the towel after chasing him for years, and ended up with Pacey Witter in the end...who could be represented by, I dunno... Mixed Martial Arts?

Fast-forward to Sunday morning. 3:21 A.M. EDT, to be precise. The following e-mail from the NHL arrives in my inbox:

Dear Mr. Nicks,

We do not credential freelance writers. Sorry.

Thank you for your interest.


Two incorrect statements in a three-line e-mail: 1) My gender (fabulous attention to detail from someone who is paid to observe such minutiae) and 2) The claim that the NHL doesn't offer credentials to freelance writers.

How do I know this?

It might have something to do with the credential for the '05 Entry Draft hanging in my office. The first post-lockout, closed-door draft featuring the one and only pseudo-deity known as Sidney Crosby. The new face of the NHL, live and in the flesh. I was there, and my position was no different than it is today. Again, I was warned that I would be hard-pressed to get in...but I did.

At the time, words couldn't express how excited I was at the opportunity. When I received word of my accreditation approval, I was in Las Vegas. I cut my trip short and grabbed the first red-eye back to Ottawa to prepare. I did it because I cared about the draft. I cared about the NHL.

And that's what makes this whole accreditation denial all the more perplexing. The NHL, contrary to its own toffee-nosed belief, is not operating from a position of power. It can't afford to treat any media regardless of stature in such an indifferent (and borderline insolent) manner, when its significance on the North American sporting stage is shrinking at a drastic rate. This league shouldn't be "thanking" people for their interest -- they should be tripping over themselves to express their gratitude. The NHL has so few in its corner; so few who are willing to step up and cover the sport, in a feeble attempt to provide it with some dignity. In spite of this, they continue to chase the big fish -- the American media -- whom they couldn't land if they waded for days while sporting bait-laden underwear. Meanwhile here I sit in Ottawa, after the niceties, formalities and e-mails forced me to check my ego at the door. I wanted them to know that the NHL was more than relevant to me. I wanted them to know it would be an extreme pleasure to cover their event. But apparently, that's not what they want. Go figure.

Why is the NHL trying to infuriate the media, when people like myself are doing everything in their power to demonstrate that they're willing to pay positive attention to their league when virtually no one else will? Maybe if I were Linda Cohn, they'd let me in. Maybe if I insulted them regularly on satellite and terrestrial radio, they'd grant me a pass. Maybe I'll pretend not to care.

Or maybe I'll legitimately stop caring altogether. Right now, I'm convinced that's what the league wants.

Let me preface this by stating that I will feebly attempt to keep it from heading in a number of directions.

A conversation The Driver and I regularly have revolves around how 90% of sports media is incapable of holding our attention for extended periods. There are a lot of variables out there, and a great number of them get on our nerves (mine moreso than his): Poor structure, incessant rambling, "broadcaster behaviour" (i.e., delivering highlights in that snarky tone that's perceived to be hipper-than-thou), mind-numbing interviews, pathetic attempts at humour, Valley-laden hokeyness...trust me, I could go on for days. For the record, I know I'm not an aberration, because the readers perpetually register their feelings to me about this subject via email.

But honestly, here's my biggest issue: One of the largest problems with the NHL-covering media involves a blatant lack of balance. I find it falls into three main categories: 1) Media who know what they're talking about, but haven't quite grasped the lighter, hipper side of things; 2) Media who want be fresh and young, but allow substance to fall by the wayside and 3) Media who have no idea what they're talking about and completely lack any sense of comedic timing or flair.

I know what you're going to say -- "There's plenty of that sort of thing on the Internet." Oh really? There are very few and far between that can accomplish it. Some of the most revered NHL blogs that I'm aware of are also the driest. If you know of a site that you deem to be worthy, send me the link, and keep in mind I'm seeking out things that could give traditional media a run for their money.

In respect to television, I can understand what Sportsnet was thinking when they went for the massive makeover. The idea itself was good, but the execution was extremely poor. Now their highlight show has been reduced to fast-paced bits of fluff, and appears to be manned by eTalk's extra talent. The Inbox? What the hell is that all about? Thanks Sportsnet, but I'm well aware of how to operate YouTube.

(Aside: My favourite Inbox moment thus far: A woman by the name of Kylie Evans -- I'm not sure if she's secured Daru Dhillon's old job yet because she's not listed on the Sportsnet site -- did a bit last week on the most hated teams in sports. Some of the selections included the Leafs, the Yankees and "The University of Duke". Feel free to add that to the "Women are idiots and don't belong in sports media" ammo pile. Damn, that thing's getting huge.)

Personally, I think hockey-covering media is in a bit of a bind. On one hand, you have your hardcore stats guys, prickly historians and no-nonsense old-schoolers. They want the facts: Black and white. They want to know how many goals Marian Gaborik has scored on any Tuesday in January when there was at least 8.4 inches of snow outside of Xcel Energy Center. They want to talk about the 1972 Summit Series, and how the CBC had to audacity to whittle it down to only four hours for their miniseries. Anything outside of the game itself is irrelevant. That's for casual fans that don't really know or care about hockey.

(By the way, that's not an off-the-cuff insult. I've seen statements similar to that written on many a message board.)

On the other hand, you have a group of people that are interested in other dynamics of the game. They want to hear about the off-ice tales or interests, and about the inner workings of the team. But that isn't enough -- you have to take this information, and have it delivered by members of the media that have the ability to place a fresh spin on it. It can't be contrived, and it can't be forced. It's always been my opinion that this attribute can't be taught. You either have it or you don't. Frankly, there are a lot of people out there right now that are trying, and credit to them for their efforts...but they don't have it. Sites like Deadspin and Free Darko have this element down solid. But not everyone can accomplish this with such ease.

This second group of people (for the majority) have no issue with the "meat" of the game -- they want the league's news, highlights and stats just as much as anyone else -- but they'd also enjoy a little side dish of wit and fun...and what's really wrong with that?

Nothing...except that as of right now, there's truly not one place to obtain both elements presented in high quality. And I know that I can't be the only person that's desperate to find a little bit of balanced sports media, in the midst of dry deliveries and flat, predictable humour.

The "R" stands for redundant. The league inexplicably has taken to visiting fan message boards to advertise their games on NBC.

Guerilla marketing or a train wreck in progress? It took place on a Flyers board, so you can probably guess what happened. Check it out here.

(Thanks to Patrick Williams for bringing this to our attention.)

Check out this nice piece from Lynn Zinser of the New York Times -- it discusses some goalies' baffling mental behaviour of yore, and how those idiosyncrasies seem to be waning in the current NHL.