In a World of TOs, There Are Still Team Players

Everyone in the sports world has had their say on Terrell Owens. There would seem to be precious little new to add.

Clearly, most elite athletes, professional or amateur, need a healthy dose of self-confidence, even when they play a “team” sport.

A touch of arrogance is rarely applauded, but is generally accepted by most fans and observers, if it goes hand-in-hand with achievement and excellence.

In recent years it is not uncommon in football, for example, to see a player beat his chest and point to the skies triumphantly after a fairly routine defensive play, something that would never have happened in the days of Johnny Unitas and Bart Starr.

Fair enough. Times change, and players are uninhibited in many ways, including in the way in which they express themselves publicly.

A player such as Owens has simply taken all this to the extreme, as he has continued to criticize teammates publicly and promote himself unnecessarily.

In short, he is the opposite, it would seem, of the consummate team player.

This makes the recent success (perhaps short-term in nature) of Edmonton Eskimo quarterback Jason Maas all the more refreshing. Maas is a modern-day Frank Reich, the Buffalo Bills super-sub back up who would lead team, usually very successfully, when Jim Kelly was hurt or slumping. Reich was a classy individual, who accepted his low-profile status on a high-profile team without rancor.

For his part, Mass was an excellent signal-caller for the Eskimos, before Ricky Ray returned from a short stint in the NFL to reclaim his old job.

Maas bided his time, as Ray first played well, then struggled down the stretch in the 2005 season. Maas said nothing to create a disruption.

When Ray was under-performing during the semi-final game against Calgary, Maas stepped in and performed admirably.

Afterwards, he was gracious in victory, and refused to second-guess his coach.

Would Maas like to be the number 1 guy? Of course. Competitive athletes want to play.

But those who understand team sports know it is vitally important to try hard to set certain feelings — as natural as they are — aside, and work to keep the interests of the team first.
As salaries in professional sports have grown out of all proportion in the last twenty-five years, perspective has often been lost.

Who would have thought the golfing world would provide us with some of that lost perspective? It’s often been suggested that golfers are interested in talking about golf, and not much else. That’s a generalization, to be sure. No doubt many golfers have a range of interests, and a social conscience, too.But it is often difficult for some individuals who have achieved success in sport to keep things in perspective.

When Tiger Woods found headlines for slamming his clubs in frustration during an event in Shanghai in November of 2005, a fellow golfer, 23-year old Nick Dougherty, spoke publicly about perspective. “What I’ve learned to appreciate is that lots of people who tune into golf at the end of the day in the office would give anything to be playing in this event, with Tiger Woods in the field. Professional sportsmen can often forget how fortunate they are…”

An interesting — and revealing — comment from a young man who has evidently maintained a sense of balance, despite his having attained professional “success” at such a young age.

Many fellow athletes would do well to reflect on his comments.

Looking in the Mirror

Many people — media commentators, fans, baseball executives — have been all over Rafael Palmeiro, a fine player for many years dating back to the 1980’s. Palmeiro is a Hall-of-Famer, or at least was, until his suspension for apparent steroid use.

The outrage seems to stem from the fact that he was ‘caught’ for using steroids and had said he didn’t take steroids, including during a rather earnest appearance before Congress.

Every athlete — in every sport— who has ever been ‘caught’ denies using steroids. It’s what they do. From weightlifters to cyclists to football players, they deny.

One might say, “Nobody likes a cheater”. Well, we actually seem to LOVE cheaters. How many guys on the line with Ben Johnson at the 1988 Olympics were really ‘clean’?

Yet they all got lots of attention, fame and money— at least the medal “winners”. We preferred to pretend they were all clean, and only Johnson was guilty— because he was indeed ‘caught’.

Do any of us now believe that all those runners were clean? How many of them were later in their careers “caught”, but with little fanfare? If media reports over the years are accurate, everyone from that ’88 race has since been connected in some way with performance-enhancing drug usage.

Does anyone believe those baseball players who hit mammoth home runs throughout the last 10 or more years were just eating their Wheaties?

The more pertinent question may be why no one cared then, even though everyone knew something was up?

Nobody wanted to acknowledge the truth, despite very public admissions of steroid use from former stars like Ken Caminiti and before him football great Lyle Alzado.

Sports administrators, the media, fans, all knew there was a serious issue.

We chose to want to believe that all was fine.

Or was it simply “OK” because baseball, in its infinite wisdom, chose to make steroid usage “illegal” only recently, though virtually all other sports and amateur/Olympic athletes were at least theoretically at risk of punishment if they got caught?

We now choose to berate Palmeiro, when there are likely dozens and dozens of athletes in all the major sports who have simply not been “caught”.

Baseball czar Bud Selig now triumphantly talks of dealing with this issue, when he was part of a clique that ignored the issue for years— when it served the purposes of promoting baseball after the devastating strike of 1994.

There are no football players on steroids in the NFL? In the NCAA?

C’mon.

The Palmeiro situation again gives us an excuse to dance around the real issues, and focus almost exclusively on him. Like Ben Johnson before him, the only difference between Palmeiro and the countless other athletes — professional and “amateur” — who used or still use performance-enhancing drugs is that they got caught. The real hypocrisy rests perhaps not with Rafael Palmeiro, but with the rest of us.

Questions Regarding the Lifting of the Bertuzzi Suspension

The unseemly haste with which Hockey Canada invited Todd Bertuzzi to participate in the recent Team Canada Olympic orientation camp in Western Canada struck many observers as at best ironic and, at worst, crass.

At that camp, how ironic was it to see Canadian players wearing Team Canada practice jerseys with the “STOP” patch on the back of their jerseys? (The STOP patch was designed to remind youth-level hockey players never to hit an opposing player from behind, because of the high risk of injury.)

Ironic, in that Hockey Canada administrators have been preaching to young players and coaches for years (and rightly so) about the very real dangers of hitting opposing players from behind.

Yet Todd Bertuzzi, the perpetrator of one of the most blatant and dangerous “hits from behind” in hockey history, was invited to play for Team Canada within minutes of his suspension being lifted.

With this as a backdrop, there are some basic questions that either have not been asked as people debate this issue, or have not been adequately answered.

- If Todd Bertuzzi was not an NHL “superstar”, would his suspension have been more severe?

- Why are some ‘fans’ actually applauding Todd Bertuzzi? (Because he is back playing? Because he said he was sorry? Because he is a star player?)

- Yes, Todd Bertuzzi has said he is “sorry” for his actions. Did we expect him to say he wasn’t sorry?

- Bertuzzi says he has had sleepless nights. How many sleepless nights has Steve Moore likely experienced?

- How much, if any, subtle or not so subtle persuasion — or outright lobbying — occurred involving Team Canada officials and the NHL?

- Bertuzzi has said he believes in forgiveness and second chances. Is it easier to “believe” in those things when you are the one who caused harm to someone else?

- What would Bertuzzi be saying now if he was the individual who was physically handicapped because of the cowardly actions of another player?

- Bertuzzi has said he just wants to “get back to playing”, essentially ignoring Steve Moore’s current reality. (Moore is unable to play hockey.) But how would Bertuzzi feel if he lost his livelihood not just for 17 months, but for the rest of his life, as is likely the case with Steve Moore, if someone had jumped him from behind?

- Even if Steve Moore were to somehow regain the physical and emotional strength required to play at the NHL level, what NHL club would sign him, given the obvious politics involved?

- How many people have noticed how NHL stars, including Avalanche players who were teammates of Steve Moore, have fallen into line publicly, stating their support of and for Bertuzzi?

- Why are some of these star players talking as though Steve Moore is “doing better”, when in fact Moore and his representatives are saying he still faces a monumental struggle ahead? Where is the evidence he is doing better? Or is that just a line some players are using in public to try to make this go away?

- If any of us were in Steve Moore’s shoes, how would we feel watching Todd Bertuzzi play and earn millions of dollars, while our career was likely over and we still couldn’t do ‘normal’ daily tasks comfortably?

- Why is the hockey community seeming to shun Steve Moore?

- How are young Canadian children now supposed to react to those “It’s just a game” ads from Hockey Canada that have been appearing for so long? Is the message that the values supported in those public service announcements should apply to parents and youth, but not to NHL superstars?

Terrell, Terrell, Terrell...

The Philadelphia Eagles took a ‘risk’ last season by bringing in Terrell Owens.

It’s important to note that the Eagles are an organization that does not like — or look for — controversy.

From a communications perspective, Andy Reid adopts what is often referred to as a “vanilla” approach. He is generally accessible, polite, responsive— but says absolutely nothing that could lead to a media frenzy.

Every week he starts his Monday post-game press conferences by saying he “looks forward to the challenge” of playing whatever team the Eagles are scheduled to play next.

When asked how a certain player is doing, he will say, “He’s doing a nice job”. He uses the word ‘nice’ frequently.

That said, he is an outstanding football coach, who made a decision just over a year ago that trading for Owens, an All-Pro wide receiver, could help his team get over the hump. Three years in a row the Eagles went to the NFC championship game, and three times they came away without a championship.

In 2004, with Owens in the line up, the Eagles offense soared. Owens and Donavan McNabb seemed to share a kinship of sorts, which was interesting as Owens had spent an inordinate amount of time publicly trashing his previous quarterback, Jeff Garcia.

The comments ignored the fact that Garcia was a tough, durable quarterback who had played quite well with the 49’ers.

Just not, apparently, up to Owens’ standards.

So Owens, in his early days with the Eagles, had the world by the tail. By all accounts he was engaging with the media, the fans and teammates.

The honeymoon was on.

When he went down with a serious injury late last season, many predicted the Eagles would falter.

Yet they charged through the playoffs without Owens, capturing the NFC title along the way, before Owens made an unexpected comeback to star in the Super Bowl loss to the Patriots.

Fast forward to this past spring, and Owens wanted to renegotiate his contract, after completing only 1 year of a 7-year deal.

Meantime, he had made comments in the off-season that were highly derogatory about his ‘pal’, McNabb. He remarked that he wasn’t “the player who got tired” at the end of the Super Bowl.

Another example of, “I’m great, someone else is the problem…”.

The Eagles don’t renegotiate contracts, so he reported to camp unhappy — only to be tossed out by Reid after a series of interpersonal issues arose.

Can Owens return to the team a happy man? A “team” player?

No.

That possibility left long ago. He has made it clear by trashing McNabb on several occasions, just as he trashed Garcia before him. The pattern is there.

Reports suggest he has ignored most of his teammates this summer at training camp. He has evidently snapped at coaches. He has played up to the media — when he wanted to— to get his message out and made it clear he will not be happy unless he gets a new deal, or a new team.

The point?

The biggest issue in professional sports today is attitude. The attitude of too many athletes is slowly eroding fan interest.

Oh, there will always be a love of sports. But more and more, many fans are tuning out, as the apathy over the NHL lockout demonstrated.

Steroids may be the biggest health issue in sports — an issue that smacks of hypocrisy on so many levels it requires a separate commentary. But too many athletes are grossly overpaid, and until we — fans, athletes, owners, agents, media — step back and start re-thinking some basic values, we will have more and more individuals like Owens who are wonderfully talented individuals, but are the last guys most people would want as a teammate.

It’s funny how things seemed to go swimmingly last season with Owens and the Eagles. But that is often the way when an often-disgruntled athlete starts “fresh” with a new team. Everyone wants to give the impression that all is well.

Unfortunately, old behavior patterns — like old habits — die hard.

It’s easy to be a “good teammate” when you have the world by the tail. The truly classy individuals— the ones who at least try to fight the instinct to simply be about themselves — are those that work hard every day, sign a contract and live by it, make those around you better, and try to act with at least a degree of humility.

It doesn’t mean you can’t be your own person. It doesn’t mean you lack integrity. It just means that, in part, you at least acknowledge you are not bigger than the game you play, and not more important than the people around you.

Simon and Garfunkel asked where Joe DiMaggio had gone. Some of us are still looking for the modern-day equivalent of Jean Beliveau: an elegant, talented athlete who respected fans, teammates, the media, and the game.

Class Lasts

Long before I became an advisor, I, like many reading this, was a sports “fan”.

My “era” was the 60’s. There very certain athletes I admired, usually because of their attitude and work ethic. Jim Taylor, the Hall-of Fame Packers’ fullback known for his fierce determination and Dave Keon of the Maple Leafs, who lacked size but played with speed, brains and diligence night after night are two who stood out for me.

Taylor endured unbelievable physical abuse during the 1962 Championship game against Sam Huff and the New York Giants on a frozen field in bitter cold. Keon played a lead role in 4 Stanley Cup triumphs for the Leafs.

But perhaps oddly, I also latched on to a golfer as someone I looked up to.

Arnold Palmer.

Palmer had the fearless kind of attitude you simply did not associate with golf in those days. But he oozed charisma, long before I knew what that word meant.

He had peaked in the late 50’s and early 60’s. By the time I was a long-distance member of “Arnie’s Army”, he was still a force, but was not winning as frequently as he once had.

(The 1966 U.S. Open was particularly painful for me. Palmer misplayed a 7-stroke lead with 9 holes to play, and lost to Billy Casper the next day in a playoff. He lost the lead largely because he refused to “play it safe”. He never won a major again.)

As I write this, Palmer is now 75, long past his physical prime.

But he still stands out as an ambassador for golf, and for sports.

What brought this to mind was an article I read recently by Marino Parascenzo for PGA.com

Parenzsco wrote of being one of a number of reporters who had to approach Palmer late in his career, after shooting in the 80’s during a round at the Masters, where Palmer once was king— having won the tournament four times.

As the story goes, one of the writers said to Palmer, “Arnie, we hate to have to talk to you at a time like this…”

Palmer’s reply?

“Fellas, we talked when times were good. We’ll talk when times are bad.”

The “lesson” for many of today’s athletes is clear and obvious. And there is, in this instance, no need to “name name’s” of those modern-day athletes who should follow Palmer’s example.

Too often athletes are only too happy to revel in their accolades, but are surly at best when times are difficult.

Palmer has been, throughout his career, a picture of consistency and class.

If you are a young athlete, looking for a role-medal or someone to emulate, consider Palmer.

I’ve written in the past about individuals such as Jean Beliveau. Palmer falls into this category.

As I often remind my clients in the sports field: How do you want to be remembered in 20 years?

If anything, individuals such as Beliveau and Palmer are remembered even more fondly know, 30 years and more past their prime, than then they were in their hey-day.

Something to remember for young athletes forging a career— and for older athletes, before it’s too late.

It's all about Larry

What is perhaps most noteworthy about the media furor surrounding Larry Brown’s tasteless need to be wanted yet again — in the middle of his current team still contending for an NBA championship— is that the media hasn’t chased this type of story down more often in the past.

The media — including NBA Hall-of-Famer Bill Walton — have argued strenuously that Brown is hypocritical at best in this scenario. The man who constantly preaches about “doing things the right way” is certainly multi-tasking — negotiating by day to become the top man with the Cleveland Cavaliers, while coaching the defending champion Pistons by night.

Who knew that being paid millions of dollars a year to coach wasn’t a full-time job?

The fact that Brown has been disingenuous with the media, given only evasive non-answers, only makes things worse— and will appear even more so when he is indeed announced as the new boss of the Cavaliers within the next few days, or as soon as the Pistons are eliminated.

The media will have made this all up, right? It will just be coincidence if (when?) Brown ends up with the Cavaliers?

This latest escapade paints Brown as someone chronically in need of adulation, of being chased, of being wanted and needed— and at a higher and higher salary, of course, after he has already earned millions upon millions in the game.

All of which might be acceptable— even to his media friends— if it weren’t for the fact that he has been chasing his next job while still being paid handsomely to do a pretty important job right now.

All that said, this happens all the time in sports.

Before the current coach of the Michigan State football Spartans took the MSU job a couple of years back, word was that his then players found out about his new appointment while on the sidelines of a Bowl game, no less.

He must have forgot to tell his players first, before the media found out.

No doubt one of this fellow’s first speeches to his new bright-eyed college players was about dedication, commitment — and loyalty.

All these values — and words— only seem to matter to players, coaches or executives, until the opportunity to “better” themselves (or in the case of executives, their team) comes along, even if they are still under contract.

How many times do we see a General Manager fire a baseball field manager or hockey Head Coach, and within hours, if not minutes, announce the new manager or coach?

This means, in plain English, that the negotiations were already not only underway, but that a deal was signed, sealed and agreed upon— before the current field boss had even been given his pink slip.

This happens all the time, and virtually no one says a word. No one stands up and says, “hey, wait a minute. You mean you, as a GM, actually hired another guy when you had not even shown the professional courtesy — and intestinal fortitude — to tell your current guy he was gone?”

No one seems to care. It’s an accepted part of how things are done in sports.

When players openly speculate in mid-season of about their impending free agent status…when GM’s play ‘hire the new guy before we axe the old guy’… when NFL stars demand to renegotiate one year into a 7-year contract, should we be surprised that ego-driven individuals feel, for some reason, the urgent need to set themselves up for their next gig before they have even finished with what they owe their employer in their current post?

Does anyone remember Mike Keenan, the summer after he had coached the Rangers to their first Stanley Cup in 40 years, back in ’94? Oh, we all heard about contract technicalities that were supposedly not lived up to, making Keenan a “free agent”, at least in his own mind.

Yet he was suspended by the NHL hierarchy, so something was amiss.

But Keenan was nonetheless gone — gone, gone, gone, some would suggest before he had even finished coaching in the playoffs that year with New York.

When do these kinds of suspicious negotiations take place? Does anyone have qualms of conscience in these circumstances?

Evidently not.

The only surprise, as I said at the outset, is that the media has chosen the Larry Brown case to make such a fuss.

The truth is, it happens all the time.

The Disconnect Grows

For those who have a sense of sports history who are over, say, 40, the response of the Indiana Pacers fans to Reggie Miller in his last game against the Pistons in the playoffs this spring was at least a little heartwarming.

The ‘disconnect’ between many professional athletes and the public seems to grown by the day, and the issue is not as simple as the ‘revelations’ (as though we didn’t know) steroids in baseball. It has been building for years and goes much deeper than that.

Why is there a disconnect? Well, the reasons are many and everyone reading this could add their own thoughts and plug in a reason or two.

Among many other things, we don’t see many athletes retire with the same team they started with, especially after 18 seasons.

There aren’t many Bill Russells’ left in basketball, as there are few Al Kalines’ in baseball or Jean Beliveaus’ in hockey — individuals who played the game at such a high level, and left the game with their reputation unsoiled and their dignity intact after playing their entire (lengthy) careers in one city.

The lack of “loyalty” to one’s team is not itself in itself to kill the traditional bond between athlete and player. And there have always been some players who didn’t much care about the fans.

But many other factors have crept into sport as well.

NHL players, for example, are fighting a battle to salvage a gravy train that should have — in the minds of most fans — been shut down years ago.

NBA players seem destined for a similar fate, apparently unhappy (at least the most powerful agents in the sport are) at the mere thought that if NBA owners had their way, ridiculously-long guaranteed contracts might be a thing of the past.

I mean, who wouldn’t want 18 million dollars a year for 7 years, instead of ‘only’ 5, for example.

Yes, the tongue is planted firmly in my cheek as I write this.

It’s also hard to miss the daily reports of “unhappiness” around the NFL. Edgerrin James skips mandatory mini-camp with the Colts, displeased with the fact that he can only earn 8 million dollars this coming season because he was placed under the team’s ‘restrictive’ franchise tag.

Granted, it is hard to plan for your family’s financial future when your team won’t give you all the millions you want for as many years as you want.

There’s the tongue again.

Eagles’ receiver Terrell Owens — while demanding to have his contract re-worked only one year into a seven-year deal he gladly signed — is quoted as saying he is concerned about feeding his family.

These examples of — what can we call it, politely?— a lack of perspective are obviously way to many to number here.

But the fans are left numb.

I wasn’t quite born when Joe Dimmagio retired in 1951, and I don’t doubt he tried to make as much money as he could, but somehow, players such as he, Mantle, Berra, Ford and many other Yankee greats were closer to the hearts of the fans of yesteryear than today’s Arod-style one-man corporations are.

Until some athletes stop thinking about getting more and more, and agents stop demanding more and more, and ownership stops capitulating constantly to ridiculous demands, the disconnect will grow.

No hockey, who cares?

No baseball. We all survived.

No basketball next season. We’ll get used to it.

No football in a couple of years?

Hey, replacement players worked the last time, in the 1980’s. The players quickly realized the sports world could and would go on without them.
What player, in which sport, is going to be a real leader and show the fans that athletes are not only about making millions and forever wanting more and more?

Yes indeed, Joe, where have you gone?

"The Survey Says..."

Sometimes it takes a good old-fashioned public opinion poll to tell us what we already know.

ESPN The Magazine (February 28/’05 issue) released the results of its annual research into the behaviours and attitudes of sporting fans, and presented some fairly significant observations.

Oh, some of the ‘findings” aren’t really findings, rather some pretty obvious stuff. We are told, for example that more and more fans care about the affordability of ticket prices to major league sporting events. This makes sense. Who wants to pay more, rather than less? We all realize that it is getting more and more difficult — in many cases impossible — for the “average” person to bring his kids to a pro game, especially when you factor in parking, food, etc.

But this is where something else of interest jumps out of the survey: “People care less about championships and more about honest ownership, strong coaching and players who give their best effort and act like pros.”

The magazine suggests this makes sense, especially in light of incessant steroid talk, for example, in the media and calls it “a fundamental shift in the relationship between the fans and teams”.

The Magazine quotes the President of the company that has conducted the annual surveys, who says, “ In the past, fans wanted their teams to ‘just win, baby’. But in 2004, we got to the point where it isn’t just about winning. It’s doing the right thing, with the kind of players you get and how you treat the community.”

Not that the surveyed opinions of a relatively few fans “proves” anything, but it’s hard not to feel that fans have grown disaffected by a lot of what has gone on in professional sports in recent years. Arrests and drug-use are so common it’s not something most fans seem to pay that much attention to. The NFL, for example, faces this “image” challenge on occasion, and still sells out every Sunday.

But fans, I sense, are increasingly turned off by the attitudes of many of today’s growing list of multi-millionaire athletes. Though fans have indeed helped create the problem — most of them innocently enough— many of those same fans seem to finally be reaching their limits when it comes to athletes who are disconnected from the very people who help pay their enormous salaries.

The NHL dispute certainly seems to validate this: The players clearly have never gained public sympathy, despite a highly unsympathetic opposition in NHL owners.

Who knew the disenchantment of hockey fans ran so deep? Clearly it was there, ready to burst, triggered finally by the realization that millionaires and billionaires couldn’t decide how to cut up the cash.

Basketball, it says here, will face its own very real problems with fans, especially if the Association and players determine a lockout is needed to ultimately find an equitable economic agreement.

Baseball fans will soon realize, if they haven’t already, that the home-run races that brought so many of them back to the strike-damaged game in the mid 1990’s was spurred by steroids, and steroids alone. We wanted to tell ourselves it wasn’t so, and no matter who denies what now, the fans know.

Greed kills so many things. And it shows itself in many ways. The whining for more and more money. The willingness to do and try anything to get bigger, faster, stronger.

Fans are slowly letting athletes know that they, the fans, want something different. But only when players are hit in the pocketbook — that is, when fans stop paying to go to or watch games on TV — will there be a real change where fans want to see it most: attitude.

Can NHL players not see why they have lost the fans?

It’s clear that the (apparent/pending?) official “cancellation” of the long-dead NHL season has had the same effect as the old line about ‘hitting yourself on the head with a hammer, because it feels so good to stop’.

The average person doesn’t generally care about labor disputes at the best of times — unless the dispute impacts them personally.

But even fewer people are impacted — or much care — it seems, when wealthy athletes take on even-wealthier owners.

This said, our commentary of last fall (October-November) touched on many of the possible reasons why, at the time, the players seemed to be losing the public relations battle. The reasons were — and are — many.

The irony is, of course, that professional hockey players by and large are the most “liked” of all professional athletes. They are closest to the fans, most accessible to the media, and so on.

This dispute has killed most, if not all, of that goodwill. But in truth, the erosion started many years ago.

Do fans support the owners? Of course not. No one cheers for billionaires or asks for their autograph, Donald Trump aside. Forget the logic of either side’s position in terms of “cost certainty” versus a free-market system. Does anyone “care” about NHL owners, other than their ability to put teams on the ice so that those who are interested can watch?

Let’s be clear: The owners have made their share of mistakes, from an optics perspective. Telling the players in a meeting a recently that they (the players) are essentially “just” employees while spouting in public about wanting a “partnership” didn’t fool anyone, especially the players.

But that said, here are some things to consider as the season is over, but the dispute rages on.

- Why are NHL superstars — including a number who earn millions of dollars a year and have for many years — taking away the jobs of players who make a few thousand dollars a year playing in the United Hockey League, the “lowest” level of professional hockey in North America? What does the average hockey fan think about that, one wonders?

- How many times have fans heard a player ‘spokesman’ say, “Hey, the owners caused this problem”? The ‘problem’ they refer to created many more jobs for players, at salaries that are astronomical by the standards of the average person.

- For those media player-apologists who say, “well fans are just envious. Those fans who say they’d play in the NHL for less aren’t good enough to play in the NHL. Of course they’d play for less.” And these apologists add, when asked why doctors make so little compared with pro athletes, for example, “Well, no one pays to watch doctors operate”. Interesting. So the fact that people are willing to pay to watch an entertainer means the entertainer should make millions upon millions? (Even if they don’t show up for work, like Alonzo Mourning?) Odd logic. What about the “value” of someone who can save a life, versus the “entertainer”?

- One prominent player spoke out a while ago with an unveiled warning for any “replacement” player that would play next season in the “new” NHL. Hmmm. The fact that hundreds of NHL’ers have flocked to Europe and have taken jobs away from individuals who certainly needed them much more to “feed their families” is acceptable, but a “replacement” player struggling to make ends meet who would love to play in the NHL for one day should feel as though he is doing something unethical? And should fear for his physical safety? And this while NHL’ers play in Europe, the AHL, CHL and UHL, not to mention senior hockey in Canada?

- The classiest player in the history of pro hockey, Jean Beliveau, a thoughtful man respected throughout the hockey world, says the league needs a cap to survive, that he doesn’t support the players in this dispute. A prominent member of the player’s bargaining team refuted Beliveau’s claims. Who would you believe?

- What have other ex-players had to say? Well, Phil Esposito says for the first time he does not support the players. Nor does Darryl Sittler, the ex-Maple Lea Hall-of-Famer. Patrick Roy said some time back that the league needs a cap to ensure the viability of franchises throughout the league. The Players Association no longer has a hold on those individuals.

- One of the NHL players who is now playing in the United Hockey League was quoted as saying the NHL doesn’t care about small market teams. In the same breath, the same individual reportedly told reporters, according to various accounts, that the league should get rid of a number of teams. Interesting concept. Except, from an NHLPA perspective, that approach would take out say, 100 jobs from the association. Yet the star players are supposedly fighting for — and speak for — the “little guy” who may never play in the league again?

- Here is a question that should be mulled over. Do we expect owners to save the game, to save the season because they love hockey? In reality, these are individual business leaders, or large corporations. Whether they like or love the game is not the point. They are involved in hockey as an investment, or as a sideline, perhaps, maybe even as a bit of a “toy”. But they expect to make a profit, not lose money constantly. The players are the ones who have a “passion” for the game, and many believe it is up to them to “save” the game.

- Those who own NHL franchises, each and every owner, made their fortunes in businesses totally unrelated to professional hockey. They could walk away from hockey today and still make millions in their original chosen fields. How many players will be able to maintain their hockey income in other walks of life? So the fans may wonder, who really needs whom more?

- If we ever do reach a point where “replacement” players are signed to play in the NHL, will fans pay to watch? Likely, yes. Fans have spoken loudly throughout this protracted dispute. They are tired of mega-million dollar athletes in an industry that can’t afford it. If the owners sign players with drive, with some flair, with a passion to play because they really love playing and not for the money, people absolutely will show up.

- Have players offered to share in the losses the owners may experience in the future? Would that not make them true “partners”?

One thing is abundantly clear. The players prefer to make far, far less in other leagues right now, and even perhaps under a “new” NHL at some point in the future, than they would under a salary cap they feel would be imposed upon them against their will. It is an admirable stance — if one believes it is one based on some kind of ethical principle. As a matter of practical decision-making, it is harder for the average person to understand.

Some observers still seem baffled by the fact that there is no uproar in Canada because there is no hockey.

Well, perhaps the majority of fans held their noses these past 10 years, while salaries rose ridiculously and average-ability pro players took home millions. Fans held their noses because they like watching hockey, long ago having established loyalties to certain teams or players.

But slowly, they held in their anger, their frustration, not because they envy the players, but simply because the players’ expectations and sense of entitlement has grown absurdly out of the realm of what is acceptable to many “average” people.

For their part, the owners have finally, like an overly permissive parent, finally put their foot down. The players don’t like it.

The fans are saying “too bad”.

Those same fans hold the final key to all this, and the players, more than the owners, will have to win back the fans, if they ever get the chance.

It's So Hard to Leave Town on Top

It’s been interesting, to say the least, to see the Vince Carter saga unfold in recent months.

Just a few short seasons ago, Carter was the high-flying, Michael Jordan-in waiting fledgling “superstar” of the once-woeful NBA Toronto Raptors.

Carter was seen as a player with unlimited talent, an ever-present smile; a nice guy, almost too good to be true.

But time wore on. Holes in Carter’s game—and attitude—appeared to surface.

He didn’t play much defense, as Jordan himself noted at one point when asked about Carter. Carter started to accumulate a series of injuries which kept him hobbling—or on the sidelines—for lengthy periods of time. He seemed to spend an unusual amount of time wincing and lying on the floor during games and not getting up.

He didn’t present as a leader, either. Fans began to wonder why he kibitzed so much with opposing players, and hugged opposing players so often before, and after, games even after games in which the Raptors got hammered.

Eventually, as media and public criticism grew, his friendly approach with the media turned sour.

His answers become less patient. He went public in his demand for a trade, and by the time he left Toronto, he was gone with a whimper, not a bang. Few seemed to notice, or much care.

In terms of how athletes present themselves, how they come across, how they are seen by the media and the public, it is reasonable to ask: what went so wrong for someone who could have “owned” the city of Toronto?

The short answer is, there is no easy answer. Oh, one certainly has a sense that many factors went into the Carter situation beyond his control: too many coaches in too short a time, teammates of limited ability, a fan base that perhaps expected too much.

But some players deal with those things well, and maintain their work ethic on the playing field and a positive demeanor off it.

In the Toronto sports market alone, similar breakdowns have not been uncommon. You could go back to the 70’s and 80’s, when one time Leaf Captain and heroes, Dave Keon and Darryl Sittler, both left town unceremoniously (though most observers simply blamed then team-owner Harold Ballard).

But let’s move to more current times.

Damon Stoudamire was “Mighty Mouse” to Toronto fans when the virtually unknown rookie appeared on the scene in the Raptors inaugural season in the mid 1990’s. Stoudamire was not the most engaging off-court player, but his determination and small stature made him a fan favorite.

Within three seasons, he was unhappy and finally, traded.

Roberto Alomar was perhaps the most loved of all Blue Jays players. He was the most talented second baseman the Jays had ever had, and perhaps the most talented in baseball period, for many years.

He was the heart and soul of the club, and helped get them over the playoff hump by hammering a Dennis Eckersley pitch in Oakland for a home run that turned around a critical playoff series for the Jays, the one that got them over the hurdle into their first World Series.

But after leading them to those two World series wins, and long before the sad “spitting” incident (he spat on an umpire over a disputed call and something the umpire said to him) while a member of the Orioles/Indians, his popularity in Toronto waned.

For example, he was seen as being more interested in preserving his .300 batting average than in playing the last game of the 1995 regular season. No Ted Williams there. (Williams played the last game of the 1941 season, putting his .400 batting average at risk.)

Something had been lost, and when he left as a free agent, he was seen as yet another unhappy player leaving town.

He had some good seasons with Baltimore and Cleveland, but his start never shone as brightly nor was he ever again as popular as he once was in Toronto.

Rare it is that an athlete can play out his career with the same team and leave on a high note, still popular with his teammates and the fans.

Even Joe Montana had to leave San Francisco, as did Jerry Rice. Salary cap issues were part of those departures, to be sure. But there was also a disconnect with the fans and/or the organization that seemed to emerge over time.

Alex Rodriguez was adored in Seattle, and will never be as loved again, as he seeks respect and an elusive championship (to go with a 250 million dollar contract).

The examples are too many of once-loved athletes leaving town with their reputations tarnished, albeit in most cases with a lot of cash in their pockets.

Thankfully, there are still examples of athletes who made it and lasted in a particular market. Wendell Clark with the Leafs could be seen in that light, though even he, too, was criticized by Ballard.

Steve Yzerman has lasted 20 years in Detroit, appreciated by fans and the organization alike.

But unlike the days of Rocket Richard and Jean Beliveau, who left the game and their team as revered heroes, it doesn’t happen very often anymore.

With the NHL lockout still on as of late January, 2005, there remains a huge disconnect between fans and many pro athletes. Oh, fans still go to games, but the dynamic has certainly shifted as salaries have risen astronomically in the last ten years in all sports— and especially since the hockey and baseball work stoppages of the mid-1990’s.

The current lockout has shown without doubt that fans have grown increasingly weary of athletes who many fans see, fair or not, as greedy and unappreciative of what they have.

It was revealing to read a quote from a former NFL player, signed just 10 days before the Super Bowl to play for the Eagles against the Patriots.

The Eagles lost starting tight end Chad Lewis to a serious injury, and the club signed a fellow who has not played in two seasons to fill in for the one game.

The individual, Jeff Thomasson, now works for a company in New Jersey. He has evidently taken vacation-time to play with the Eagles.

His comment upon signing?

"I’m probably the luckiest guy in the world. (But) When I get back, I'll have to work a year straight without vacation," he was quoted as saying. "I'll probably make more during vacation (away from his regular job while playing one game for the Eagles) than my annual salary. Now I know how hard it is to earn a buck in the real world. I worked a lot of hours."

Interesting comment indeed. “Now I know how hard it is to earn a buck in the real world.”

Few of us standing on the sidelines of the professional sporting world would dare risk the physical demands— much less have the talent— to play in the NFL or NHL, for example. We know instinctively that it is very demanding work — work which requires training, years of dedication and a unique level of talent and toughness.

So there is a built-in respect for those athletes on our part. They do something we can’t do, and because they are “entertainers”, and people pay to see them work, they are paid handsomely for their work.

But perhaps what fans are looking is respect back from the players, the recognition that athletes are not the only ones that work hard for their money. The recognition, the acknowledgement that the “average” person works every day in “the real world” as Thomason put it.

And that it is those “average” people who very directly help pay for the astronomical salaries earned by athletes.

The negative feelings the fans have obviously pent up over the past many years might be diffused somewhat, if they felt players really respected the fans.

Fans may be more patient or forgiving with a Vince Carter, or any number of other athletes.

But it needs to be a two-way street.

It will be interesting to see how NHL players will react to the public when the lockout ends— if it ever ends.

It appears as though Jeff Thomason is one athlete who did not know what he had until it was gone — someone who needed to get out into the “real world” to see the light.

Will others?