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

Clarence Campbell

Expand Messages
  • mhdibiase
    It s important to remember that in any sport the commissioner is always hired to represent the interests of the owners. After all they re the ones that hired
    Message 1 of 9 , Dec 28, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      It's important to remember that in any sport the commissioner is
      always hired to represent the interests of the owners. After all
      they're the ones that hired him and pay his salary. The needs of the
      players and the fans are secondary or tertiary or ancillary depending
      on the interests involved.

      He provided stability to the structure of the NHL in some ways but
      was a product of being a creature of the owners. I have a question
      for the membership what were Campbell's views in 1957-1958 when the
      players were trying to form a union? Did he make any public
      expressions of opinion on the subject?

      Other sports have had the same problem with regards to commissioners.
      I can only think of one sports commissioner who refused to toady to
      ownership and served the fans interests: Happy Chandler in baseball
      when he allowed the Dodgers to sign Jackie Robinson.

      Talking about the Flyers, what's interesting is that the Flyers have
      the second best winning percentage after Montreal but have only won
      two Stanley Cups (their last being in 1975). That's a sad comment on
      the state of the NHL playoff system. That's why I hate the present
      NHL playoff system.

      Matt
    • Jim Dornberger
      Matt, How about No. 5 - Buffalo and No. 9 - St Louis Blues with NO Cups! Jim ... the ... depending ... commissioners. ... have ... on
      Message 2 of 9 , Dec 29, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Matt,

        How about No. 5 - Buffalo and No. 9 - St Louis Blues with NO Cups!

        Jim

        --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, "mhdibiase" <mhdibiase@y...> wrote:
        >
        > It's important to remember that in any sport the commissioner is
        > always hired to represent the interests of the owners. After all
        > they're the ones that hired him and pay his salary. The needs of
        the
        > players and the fans are secondary or tertiary or ancillary
        depending
        > on the interests involved.
        >
        > He provided stability to the structure of the NHL in some ways but
        > was a product of being a creature of the owners. I have a question
        > for the membership what were Campbell's views in 1957-1958 when the
        > players were trying to form a union? Did he make any public
        > expressions of opinion on the subject?
        >
        > Other sports have had the same problem with regards to
        commissioners.
        > I can only think of one sports commissioner who refused to toady to
        > ownership and served the fans interests: Happy Chandler in baseball
        > when he allowed the Dodgers to sign Jackie Robinson.
        >
        > Talking about the Flyers, what's interesting is that the Flyers
        have
        > the second best winning percentage after Montreal but have only won
        > two Stanley Cups (their last being in 1975). That's a sad comment
        on
        > the state of the NHL playoff system. That's why I hate the present
        > NHL playoff system.
        >
        > Matt
        >
      • mhdibiase
        Dear Jim: Agreed. My sympathies to the two franchises. That s why I hate the present playoff system. Matt ... but ... question ... the ... to ... baseball ...
        Message 3 of 9 , Dec 29, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Jim:

          Agreed. My sympathies to the two franchises. That's why I hate the
          present playoff system.

          Matt

          --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Dornberger" <jpdornberger@c...>
          wrote:
          >
          > Matt,
          >
          > How about No. 5 - Buffalo and No. 9 - St Louis Blues with NO Cups!
          >
          > Jim
          >
          > --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, "mhdibiase" <mhdibiase@y...> wrote:
          > >
          > > It's important to remember that in any sport the commissioner is
          > > always hired to represent the interests of the owners. After all
          > > they're the ones that hired him and pay his salary. The needs of
          > the
          > > players and the fans are secondary or tertiary or ancillary
          > depending
          > > on the interests involved.
          > >
          > > He provided stability to the structure of the NHL in some ways
          but
          > > was a product of being a creature of the owners. I have a
          question
          > > for the membership what were Campbell's views in 1957-1958 when
          the
          > > players were trying to form a union? Did he make any public
          > > expressions of opinion on the subject?
          > >
          > > Other sports have had the same problem with regards to
          > commissioners.
          > > I can only think of one sports commissioner who refused to toady
          to
          > > ownership and served the fans interests: Happy Chandler in
          baseball
          > > when he allowed the Dodgers to sign Jackie Robinson.
          > >
          > > Talking about the Flyers, what's interesting is that the Flyers
          > have
          > > the second best winning percentage after Montreal but have only
          won
          > > two Stanley Cups (their last being in 1975). That's a sad comment
          > on
          > > the state of the NHL playoff system. That's why I hate the
          present
          > > NHL playoff system.
          > >
          > > Matt
          > >
          >
        • John Serrati
          I am intrigued by people s negative comments concerning the playoff systems used in the 1970s through to today. Can people go further? What specifically are
          Message 4 of 9 , Dec 30, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            I am intrigued by people's negative comments concerning the playoff
            systems used in the 1970s through to today. Can people go
            further? What specifically are your gripes? What would you propose
            as an alternative? I am interested to hear.

            John



            Dr John Serrati
            Assistant Prof. of Classics and History
            John Abbott College
            Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec
            H9X 3L9
            Canada

            (514) 457-6610 ext. 5992
          • Morey Holzman
            I hate this excuse, especially for people in authority. Anyone with true ethics and morals either changes the system and risk getting fired, or quits. No one
            Message 5 of 9 , Dec 30, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              I hate this excuse, especially for people in authority. Anyone with
              true ethics and morals either changes the system and risk getting
              fired, or quits.

              No one told Campbell he had to stay on the job for 30 years.

              Morey

              --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, "mhdibiase" <mhdibiase@y...> wrote:
              >
              > It's important to remember that in any sport the commissioner is
              > always hired to represent the interests of the owners. After all
              > they're the ones that hired him and pay his salary. The needs of the
              > players and the fans are secondary or tertiary or ancillary
              depending
              > on the interests involved.
            • Lloyd Davis
              Cough, cough. We re using Campbell and ethics and morals in the same sentence? Did someone say SkyShops? ... -- Lloyd Davis Communications 304-115 Danforth
              Message 6 of 9 , Dec 30, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Cough, cough. We're using Campbell and "ethics and morals" in the same
                sentence? Did someone say SkyShops?


                on 12/30/05 2:39 PM, Morey Holzman at epenaltybox@... wrote:

                > Anyone with
                > true ethics and morals either changes the system and risk getting
                > fired, or quits.

                --
                Lloyd Davis Communications
                304-115 Danforth Ave., Toronto, ON M4K 1N2
                416 465 6999 /// 416 462 0230 (fax)
                ldavis@...
              • nieforth
                I was trying to avoid using that word. Joseph
                Message 7 of 9 , Dec 30, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  I was trying to avoid using that word.

                  Joseph

                  ------

                  > SkyShops
                • J.P. Martel
                  ... I was also surprised to read that, and had started doing some match even before you put your post. I looked at the teams that won the Stanley Cup since the
                  Message 8 of 9 , Dec 30, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, John Serrati <john.serrati@j...>
                    > wrote:
                    >
                    > I am intrigued by people's negative comments concerning the
                    > playoff systems used in the 1970s through to today. Can
                    > people go further? What specifically are your gripes?
                    > What would you propose as an alternative? I am interested
                    > to hear.

                    I was also surprised to read that, and had started doing some
                    match even before you put your post.

                    I looked at the teams that won the Stanley Cup since the beginning
                    of the NHL (I used the team that won the NHL championship for the
                    years that an NHL team didn't win the Cup, i.e. 1919 and 1925). I
                    didn't count last year obviously.

                    In those 87 seasons, the regular-season ranking of the Stanley
                    Cup winner was, on average, 2.29th place. The median was second
                    place. More specifically, in 61 of those 87 seasons, the Stanley
                    Cup winner had finished first or second in the regular season.
                    So I don't think that we can say that the regular season is
                    meaningless.

                    Looking at it differently, on average, the Stanley Cup winner had
                    finished the regular season with 92.84% of the points of the
                    regular season champion (the median is 96.77%). Only 10 times
                    (out of 87), did a team with less than 80% of the points of the
                    regular season champion win the Stanley Cup. And four of those
                    were above 79%.

                    The only serious anomaly is the 1938 Chicago Blackhawks, which
                    won the Stanley Cup despite finishing 6th out of 8 teams, and
                    with only 55.2% of the points of the first team. Then again,
                    we shouldn't pick on Chicago for winning too many Stanley Cups.

                    A couple of points about methodology: for the four split seasons
                    (1918 to 1921), I added the standings of both halves. And in case
                    of several teams getting the same number of points, I assumed
                    they were all equal (I did not use whichever tie breakers were
                    in effect at the time).

                    The figures look similar if you only count since the 1967 expansion.
                    Average rank of the Stanley Cup winner: 2.76th. Median: 2nd.
                    The Cup winner (since 1968) had on average 93.89% of the points
                    of the regular season champion (median 99.14%). In 23 of the
                    37 years, the Stanley Cup champion had finished first or second
                    in the regular season standings. Only four times had the Cup
                    winner finished the season with less than 80% of the points of
                    the regular season champion, and only once below 78%, and that
                    was the year of the first lock-out.

                    I guess the Flyers just had some bad luck, and of course one
                    missed offside.

                    So I would say that the playoff system is not so bad, especially
                    since it does provide excitement for the fans, however I am
                    dead set against the NHL project of adding four more teams per
                    conference next year, by adding a best-of-three first round
                    for teams ranked 5th to 12th. Now that I would hate.

                    J.-Patrice
                  • Michael Poplawski
                    ... Point taken, but I think the Flyers were closer in 1987 to winning a Cup than they were in 1980. They took 3 games from Edmonton that year, but only 2 from
                    Message 9 of 9 , Dec 31, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On 12/30/05, J.P. Martel <jpmartel_18@...> wrote:
                      > I guess the Flyers just had some bad luck, and of course one
                      > missed offside.

                      Point taken, but I think the Flyers were closer in 1987 to winning a
                      Cup than they were in 1980. They took 3 games from Edmonton that year,
                      but only 2 from the Islanders in 1980.

                      > So I would say that the playoff system is not so bad, especially
                      > since it does provide excitement for the fans, however I am
                      > dead set against the NHL project of adding four more teams per
                      > conference next year, by adding a best-of-three first round
                      > for teams ranked 5th to 12th. Now that I would hate.

                      I really have no problem with every pro team competing for the Stanley
                      Cup. I would invite minor pro and senior teams into the tournament if
                      I could.

                      The problem is that the NHL wants to mate a long playoff with a long
                      regular season, the only purpose of which is to determine playoff
                      qualifiers. The more teams that survive the regular season, the less
                      seriously anybody will take it.

                      Considering that the NHL plays during the World Championships every
                      year, and there is little in-season international hockey otherwise, I
                      have to wonder: how much is gained by playing 80+ games for qualifying
                      instead of about 60, which would make individual games more important
                      and keep the players healthier?

                      Answers that involve the word "money" and "statistics" don't count.

                      --
                      Mike Poplawski
                      Victoria, BC
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.