They Shoot. They Score.

The NHL held its second New Year's Winter Classic outdoor game in as many years yesterday. The Detroit Red Wings defeated the Chicago Blackhawks 6-4 in front of more that 40,000 fans at Wrigley Field.

Talk about an event going off without a hitch! Everything about the game was just about perfect. All of the decisions the league had control over (the teams involved, the venue) turned out to be right on the dot, and the things that no one has any control over (i.e., the weather) cooperated as well. By all accounts the ice conditions were excellent, and the absence of any snow on the rink (picturesque as it was last year) permitted the pace of play to be much higher than it was during the last Winter Classic in Buffalo. Scoring was commensurately higher--let's face it, ten goals is better than two, when it comes to holding the interest of the casual fan. Could even a player as gifted as Pavel Datsyuk have produced a goal quite this beautiful in last year's ice conditions? Almost certainly not.

Perhaps it's just the afterglow of the event's success, but I no longer have any reservations about making this an annual event, as I did last year. The Winter Classic represents an opportunity for the sport of ice hockey to step up and genuinely be in the spotlight for one day a year. (And yes, I do think it is possibly to effectively compete with that traditional sporting occupant of New Year's Day, college football...certainly as long as the NCAA adheres to its current, absurd method of determining a champion, which dooms all New Year's bowl games to being meaningless exhibitions). The fact that its occurrence on the calendar (provided it is always held on New Year's, as it should be) is set far in advance will allow people to plan events around it, as they do for the Super Bowl. I had a few friends over for last year's game and a few more over for this year's game, and I hope to make it an annual tradition.

With the fatalism of a long-time NHL fan, of course, my thoughts immediately turn to an obvious question: How will the league screw this up? Certainly the very worst move the NHL could make would be to stage some sort of exhibition game--such as the NHL All-Star Game--as its annual outdoor event, rather than a meaningful regular-season game. As I've mentioned in this space before, the All-Star Game is inevitably an intrinsically flawed event, and in my opinion ought to be phased for something better, anyway. (Both this year and last year, non-hockey fans have asked me, with respect to the Winter Classic, "Does this game count?" When I respond in the affirmative, their interest level immediately goes up...you can see it in their faces.)

I've heard some talk from some quarters about doing precisely what I opposed in the last paragraph, but as near as I can tell there is no movement in the league's front offices for any such thing. More worrisome to me is the potential for the game to be staged someplace that doesn't have genuine, honest-to-goodness winter on 1 January...such as Ross McKeon's suggestion, in the sidebar to this article, that an outdoor game be played in Las Vegas. "No doubt, the players and fans would enjoy the Sin City setting," McKeon writes.

Um...sorry, wrong. I am in general a big advocate of Sun Belt hockey (I root for a team from California, for crying out loud) and I don't have an ideological opposition to playing hockey in climates with no natural ice, as do some hockey fundamentalists. But much like a Green Bay Packers game from Lambeau Field in December, the aesthetic that comes with the "Winter" part of the Winter Classic provides much of the appeal, especially for the casual fan. As much as the snow mucked up play in Buffalo last year, it was unquestionably positive from an aesthetic point of view. So places like Boston, New York, Montreal, and (ahem) the Twin Cities of Minneapolis-St. Paul should all be candidates for the next several years. Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Tampa Bay? Not so much. Maybe, if the event truly becomes well-established over the next decade or so...maybe then you consider putting it someplace warm, just to mix things up a bit. Until then, though, let's keep it cold.

On the Subject of Outdoor Hockey

If any single event can be said to have inspired me to actually log on to blogspot and create this thing, I would say it was the NHL's "Winter Classic" game played on New Year's Day. This is not to say that I felt the need to run out and create a blog specifically about this particular topic--however, it's been a controversial event in hockey circles, and it made me realize I have some things to say about the sport.

For those who missed the event and the reportage around it, here's the skinny: over the course of the last week of 2007, an outdoor hockey rink was constructed in the middle of Ralph Wilson Stadium in Orchard Park, New York, where the NFL's Buffalo Bills play their home games. On January 1st, the Buffalo Sabres hosted the Pittsburgh Penguins in a full-scale, regular-season NHL hockey game. It was not an all-star game or otherwise an exhibition of any kind--it was worth points in the standings just like every other game. The game was broadcast live in Canada and in the United States (on NBC). Over 71,000 fans attended. The game was tied 1-1 at the end of regulation and was eventually won by Pittsburgh in a shootout, with the game-winning goal being netted by twenty-year-old Penguin center Sidney Crosby, the young phenom who has been proclaimed across the continent as the savior of a league in dreadful need of a savior. Upon scoring the goal Crosby leaped into the air with joy as pure as the snow that was at that moment falling onto the ice, rushing to celebrate with his teammates.

It was fabulous television. The entertainment media has reported this week that NBC achieved the best ratings for a regular-season hockey game in over a decade. Few, if any, of the raucous crowd left before the end. In the aftermath of the event, most in the sports media had nothing but praise, declaring that the long-suffering NHL had finally scored a major publicity victory. Calls have gone out for more outdoor games to be played, starting next year. It was a total success.

Wasn't it?

Well...remember that snow? The stuff that was falling from the sky as Crosby scored his shootout winner, providing me with a lovely metaphor for emotional purity? It fell for most of the game, occasionally turning to sleet, and it did more than provide NBC with postcard-perfect televised moments. It affected the play of the game. And not in a good way.

As pretty and atmospheric as the snow was, it really gummed up the works. The puck refused to glide over the ice, and had to be shoved from player to player. In addition, despite heroic effort it was clear the ice crew was having some trouble with the playing surface--the game had to be stopped frequently for rather lengthy repairs, disturbing the rhythm of play.

The irony is that this game, which, it has become apparent, really was a hit for both the fans in the stands and those watching on TV, didn't remotely display the NHL game at its best. The players were game and worked their hardest--I wouldn't dream of disparaging the spirit or effort of either team--but they were forced by conditions to play a very slow, deliberate game.

Last night in Carolina, Atlanta Thrashers wing Ilya Kovalchuk scored a brilliant, unassisted, end-to-end-goal, basically beating every Carolina Hurricane on the ice single-handedly. Could he have scored a similar goal in Buffalo on Tuesday? I seriously doubt it. To me, Kovalchuk's goal is representative of NHL hockey at its best.

Far more important than the issue of quality of play, however, is the issue of safety. Several observers have noted that the snow on the ice obliged the players to skate with their eyes on the puck, because the conditions for stickhandling were so poor. Hockey players are taught very early on to skate with their heads up, as doing anything else leaves them extremely vulnerable to being absolutely clobbered. And then there is the quality of the ice...as well as the event went, what would we be saying right now if any player, let alone someone of Crosby's marquee value, had gone down with a season-ending knee injury because they hit a rut in the ice?

For all this, though, I am not ready to go on record as being against any further outdoor games, as are a vocal minority of hockey observers. Because it was a joy to watch. In the run-up to the game, I was very excited and intrigued. I invited some friends of mine, who aren't really big hockey fans, over to watch the game, and I think they enjoyed it. With all the criticism the league (justified) and the sport (not so justified, IMHO) have taken in the last decade, how can any hockey fan turn their back on 70,000 screaming fans and the best TV audience since 1996? I know I can't.

So let's say that I want to want more outdoor games. But I still need some convincing. The quality-of-play issue I can deal with...I can accept a game that never gets out of first gear if it brings with it 70,000 crazy fans on hand, an interesting setting, and a TV audience that is having a blast. I'm much more concerned about the safety...I would feel awful if a player suffered a serious injury because of a marketing stunt gone awry.

Perhaps the success of this event will motivate some serious, creative thinking about how to make an outdoor ice sheet of as high quality as those in NHL buildings. Engineering is an amazing thing, and nothing is impossible.