Originally Posted by SCMom
The US sports market is very small compared to the rest of the world sports. American football has gained popularity in recent years, but it can't hold a candle to soccer, cricket, rugby...sports that most Americans could care less about, but the rest of the world enjoys thoroughly. Hockey isn't the most popular sport in the US, but it is more popular worldwide than American football. I could give a hoot though if it ever becomes more popular and than American football though. IMO, football is becoming too watered down.
So me saying that hockey has a variety of international players (which is actually ethnic diversity) is equivalent to the NBA having players from different cities? I don't get that statement at all.
You said diversity would make it more interesting for you. I still don't understand what kind of diversity you are talking about. Are you talking about racial, ethnic, player position...what? If it's racial, well there are some players of different race that play the game...but they are usually American or Canadian. Ethnicly, there's boatloads of players from different ethnic backgrounds. Position...well, you can't really change that without completely changing the game.
I take offense to you thinking I'm spoiled as a hockey fan. I became a fan at an early age (about 5..1985) and yes, Mario was on the team then, but they still stunk (for the most part). And being 5, I didn't really know the difference...it was just exciting to me. And being a fan when Rico Fata was the best player isn't spoiled at all.
And it is interesting to me for all teams. I enjoy watching all games. I love the sport more than I love any one player. I'd be a fan if there were no Lemieux or Crosby. Pittsburgh was just blessed to get two great players in one generation.
Again, if you don't like it, that's fine...but you still haven't quite explained the whole diversity thing.
To put it simply, I was talking about the US market and US TV market...simple. I was actually thinking about what could help the NHL...not the sport of hockey worldwide. Sometimes I think things are obvious as far as context of conversation and they are not to some people.(nature of the internet).
One could argue each city/state has its own flavor and that may be diverse for some and not for others. The same way when you watch hockey it screams diversity to you, it doesn't for me. It looks like we are going to agree to disagree on the diversity but I'll say this, sometimes certain cultural differences between one white group and another might come out (cooking, heritage parade, etc) but it is not always evident while watching a hockey match. It would be the same as having 15 different African countries all black all doing basketball and saying it is super diverse. Sure when it comes to customs, cooking, language, etc, it will be very diverse. I guess the answer to your question of what I'm talking about is "visually diverse". So for example, a Hispanic, a Middle Easterner, an (East) Indian might all be considered Caucasian but they may be "visually diverse". I don't want to have to sit down with each and have an interview to go over their backgrounds to appreciate the diversity.
My concept is simple. There is a group of people that already love it and watch. If there is a group of people like me who would find it more interesting if it were diverse then automatically the viewership numbers increase unless people from your group drop out once it becomes more diverse. So the question then becomes how many would find it more interesting if it had more diversity? It's useless to debate among hockey fans. That group has already been filtered. It is the non-fans that should discuss whether they would find it more interesting or not