Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

47321RE: [hockhist] Bettman must be removed.

Expand Messages
  • William Underwood
    Feb 1, 2005
      >But going back to my point look what the CFL did. They brought in Tom
      Wright - the former head of Adidas to run their league. He was and is a
      football fan but more importantly he is a good business person. He
      related to the other owners as business people first and foremost and
      got the league operating as a business. It has been over a year so far
      and the CFL is doing better then ever. The fans accept him as he has a
      proven track record in business and clearly loves the CFL and the sport.
      But that in no way detracts from his job of running the business which
      is known as the Canadian >Football League. The players respect him for
      the same reasons.

      And the CFL has a lower profile than the NHL, the players are not
      millionaires and the owners not nearly as wealthy as the NHL...hell you
      have publicly owned teams in the CFL. I submit that they are MUCH more
      pliable lot. The NHL owners do not want a guy that is going to lead them
      by the nose. They are a powerful lot that don't like that sort of
      treatment.

      It is the same in baseball which is why they have a fellow owner as
      commish and in football where you have a Tagliabue today not a Rozelle.
      And when hoops brings a new man in, it won't be a Stern this time.

      The CFL is more at the scale that leagues were when they wanted/allowed
      powerful commissioners. An odd thing happens when you get into billions
      not millions as revenue...the owners no longer wan to follow, they want
      to lead. The CFL is still only in the millions--they are a business,
      much closer to minor pro sport where commissioners still an exert some
      power than the billion dollar sports.

      >Bill, as I have said the NHL has tried other ways of running their
      business except the most obvious - hire a business person who, yes,
      loves hockey, but will operate the league much like GE, Exxon, Ford,
      etc. For people who disagree just keep in mind the NHL is a business -
      not a sport. The job of teams is maximize return to the owners and
      shareholders - not win championships. If winning helps add to the bottom
      line then so be it. But most teams will not "blow the budget" to win.
      (Case in point - the Toronto >Maple Leafs.)


      The hitch is that you don't have shareholders par se. There are wealthy
      individual owners here and corporations for whom hockey is a ancillary
      division. WINNING is what accomplishes two things:

      1-In a league with little TV revenue it is your key profit stream. No
      playoffs equals little profit.
      2-These entities get involved as a vanity issue or for PR. Losing is bad
      PR and bad for the ego.

      You can go on all you want about it being a business like any other one
      but it really isn't. The dynamics of involvement and motivation are all
      very different.




      ----- Original Message -----
      From: William Underwood
      To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 8:41 PM
      Subject: RE: [hockhist] Bettman must be removed.


      The CFL has a TV contract because they get TV ratings in their market,
      the NHL does not. You'd need a magician or miracle worker to change
      that
      in the US. No matter who you had as a commissioner they will not get a
      better deal from the US networks, in fact they are lucky to have the
      one
      that they just signed. And it isn't going to get better, ESPN is
      actually getting BETTER ratings WITHOUT hockey this year!

      The problem with hiring a businessman from outside of sport is two
      fold.
      One, he is generally an exec who is used to people jumping when he
      talks
      as opposed to having to walk on egg shells, beg, and plead billionaire
      egos.
      The secret to Peter Rozelle's success was simple. He was a PR guy who
      understood how to glad hand. He could get a guy out on the golf course
      and push and idea that he had been diametrically opposed to and by the
      ninth hole have the guy parroting Pet's plan and him saying "gee
      George
      that is a GREAT idea YOU had, why don't we both introduce it at the
      next
      meeting." He could charm an opponent. He also was from a football
      background, He KNEW these guys and the way the sport worked. What
      fears
      had to be alleviated and there were quite a few in the early national
      TV
      deal era. But Pete had seen it from his days with the Rams in the
      early
      TV days. This brings us to point two. Sports are a unique industry.
      The
      motivations for involvement in them differ (ego versus bottom line),
      the
      concept of profit differs (often it is to show a loss or create
      ancillary revenues) and behavior is different. Hell, what non sports
      business could get into the mess that the NHL is in now? You have
      millionaire employees with egos to match being dealt with by
      billionaire
      egos on the other side. The employee is an important part of the
      product, he is the part that creates the identity. You also have an
      odd
      cartel here that you are governing. One where your success comes at
      the
      price of a partner's success yet you Are partners who the overall body
      needs BOTH to be healthy for it to be healthy. Yet the end consumer
      never understand this. They demand only success from the local
      "branch"
      and you must satisfy this. It is a conflict of interest between the
      good
      of the league (all clubs) versus the health of the individual bodies
      each of whom play an active role in governing the whole.

      If you brought in an exec from the outside world he would either storm
      out of the meeting in an ego filed rage after 24 hours screaming "THEY
      WON'T LISTEN". Or he would leave in a straight jacket after a year
      babbling "they don't behave logically...it all makes no sense."
      Insiders
      understand two things these guys don't. One you work for the OWNERS
      not
      the other way around. IF you want to get anything done you need the
      charisma of a JFK and patience of the Dali Lama. You can charm them
      but
      you can NEVER force them. Even if you think that what they want ifs
      the
      stupidest thing that you have ever heard! The only thing that you can
      do
      is politic, use power when and where you HAVE to and are allowed to,
      and
      hope for the best. Two, you are entering into a business that is not
      illogical. But rather it has its own logic that has come from
      experience. Big money has brought a new era but the same basic forces
      are at work. Clubs must win to maximize interest and profit and they
      will do anything they can to do so. It may involve harming another
      lodge
      member, it may mean skirting but not breaking the rules or it may mean
      taking a gamble that proves unwise. The decision points are different
      from normal business. These are secondary holdings but as secondary
      holding they are not only easier to gamble with but also easier to
      drop...the consumer in this industry is unique, they subscribe to a
      drama that is completely unscripted...the producer is a person who
      invested largely for ego or PR...the product itself is in part the
      labor. It is a complex dance that is hard to master not unlike high
      ballet being tough for your average slam dancer to master. It is full
      of
      contradictions and is in a transitional era. The outsider can find it
      baffling!

      And the very fact that many want a person with a background in the
      game
      is a unique feature too! The END USER actually is disturbed by the CEO
      lacking it. What other business features this? Who screamed first
      about
      Bettman's background? The FAN. Keep in mind what "fan" is short
      for..."fanatic". What other product calls its end user "fanatics"? And
      only a fanatic would care about the CEO being a member of the
      industry.
      Why do they do that? It comes back to why they are "fanatics" they
      share
      a devotion to a product that they like to perceive that the CEO
      shares.

      The fact is Bettman actually broke a mold in sports. He was hired from
      another sport to be commish of a league. Uberoth and Vincent were from
      other sports backgrounds but not other leagues. And in the end perhaps
      the biggest rap on Bettman is "he doesn't understand he is not one of
      us...a hockey nut."

      What hockey can do but hasn't is look at the successful leagues within
      their own sport top find a commish, Never once in the modern era have
      they brought in an AHL prez or the head of the CHL or any other top
      league that ahs shown he can actually RUN a hockey league and do it
      well
      over time! Maybe the next time around the answer to this issue is
      right
      under their noses quite literally...guys who have handles every crisis
      drill with grace, presided over successful leagues in the industry
      itself, have done things right and know the league. They are more
      likely
      to find a good commish that way than any other. Then again maybe the
      exercise in the modern era is to NOT have a truly strong commish.
      Perhaps the money is just too big for owners to want to allow a man
      too
      much power...David Stern may be the last of a breed.



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




      To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to
      hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • Show all 14 messages in this topic