Four-Jersey Xenophobia?

The ECHL will hold their annual All-Star Game in Boise, Idaho this season with the Idaho Steelheads serving as hosts to the rest of the league. The Steelheads have been a solid team for a long time so having them host the annual event makes sense despite their remote location to most of the ECHL teams. It will be their second time holding the event after being awarded the event back in 2007, and they become just the third team to host the event twice since 1988. This year's game, however, won't be the same as the 2007 one.

The ECHL has changed its all-star game formats several times since they added the event to their calendar in 1993. The first three games saw a traditional East-vs-West matchup. The 1996 game in Tallahassee saw the league pit the Northern Conference against the Southern Conference before the 1997 game switched to the hosts playing the ECHL All-Stars. Three different formats over five years is a bit of a head-scratcher, but we're not even close to being done with format changes. The good news is that some last longer than others.

1998 was the first time we saw a Canada-vs-USA all-star game format in Lafayette, Louisiana before the league swapped the format back to the Northern Conference-Southern Conference format in 1999 in Biloxi, Mississippi. That format would last until 2004 when the league went back to East-vs-West matchup, and that was shelved in 2005 when the ECHL switched to a National Conference versus America

In 2011, 2013, 2015, and 2017, the ECHL went back to the host team playing the ECHL All-Stars while there was no All-Star Game played in 2012, 2014, or 2016. I'm not sure these gap years make any sense for the ECHL, but that's how the ECHL operated for seven seasons. In 2018, they went to the four-division tournament format in Fishers, Indiana, and 2019 saw the ECHL All-Stars play "Team Fins" in Toledo, Ohio. 2020 went back to an East-vs-West format, and 2021 saw the game cancelled due to COVID as Jacksonville did not get to host.

2022 would see the game arrive in Jacksonville as the ECHL All-Stars played the Icemen before the ECHL went back to a modified four-team tournament in 2023 that saw the Norfolk Admirals split into two squads - the Cruisers and Destroyers - while the other two teams were the Eastern Conference and Western Conference All-Stars. 2024 saw the ECHL All-Stars battle the Ghost Pirates in Savannah, Georgia while 2025's game was cancelled in favour of the ECHL Winter Classic played between the Kalamazoo Wings and Toledo Walleye.

2026's game in Allen, Texas saw Team Stars and Team Stripes battle in the ECHL All-Star Game where the Allen Americans' players were mixed in with the ECHL All-Stars on both sides in a unique twist. And that leads to Wednesday's announcement of the ECHL returning to the Canada-vs-USA all-star game format in Boise next season which, when you consider some of the past recent all-stars, makes very little sense when you read that "United States-born ECHL All-Stars will take on Canadian-born ECHL All-Stars over a two-day format" in Idaho.

Where does that leave Swedish-born, Fort Wayne Komets goaltender Samuel Jonsson or Russian-born, Calgary Wranglers goaltender Arsenii Sergeev or Finnish-born, Hamilton Hammers goaltender Henrik Tikkanen who all were all-stars in 2026? Three of four goalies in last season's ECHL All-Star Game were neither Canadian nor American, and none of them will be able to play in this season's event because of where they were born? How is this even being discussed?

I get that the vast majority of ECHL All-Star selections are players who were born in Canada or the US, but Russian-born Max Andreev tied for tenth in league scoring last season with Maine. Russian-born Nikita Sedov was the second-highest scoring defender in the ECHL's regular season last year, and Hungarian-born Kristof Papp had 20 goals and 46 points for Norfolk. None of those players made the All-Star Game last season, but they won't be invited this year based on the format no matter how many goals or points they score.

I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that Swedish-born, Augusta Lynx forward Jonas Poling of the Southern Conference was the ECHL All-Star Game MVP in 2001 and that Russian-born, Huntington Blizzard forward Andrei Bashkirov was the ECHL All-Star Game MVP in 1997. I know they can switch formats after next season's game once again, but switching back to a format when the game is more international than ever makes zero sense from a hockey business standpoint.

The ECHL can pat themselves on the back for the jerseys shown in the lede photo all they want, but it makes no sense to exclude good players who simply were born outside North American borders. According to their release on Wednesday about the event,

"The United States jerseys for the skills competition are a dark blue base featuring a star design and lighter blue highlights with USA prominently in the middle while Canada's jerseys are a dark red base, with a maple leaf and Canada displayed in a brighter red. The shoulders of both jerseys will include the All-Star Classic logo and the participant's team logo."

The jerseys have a fun element to them for the skills competition and they'll likely get a pile of bids during the jersey auction that will follow, but, as a foreign-born player, it's hard to see just those two countries celebrated in a league that features players from numerous countries. The league, however, will double-down in the game with another set of Canada and USA jerseys that are uniquely ECHL.

"... both teams will wear retro-inspired jerseys. The United States jerseys are a cream base with red stripes and blue shoulders, with the USA letters inside a shield on a red star. Canada's jerseys are a red base with white stripes, with a red maple leaf featured inside a white shield. Similar to the skills jerseys, the shoulders of both jerseys will include the All-Star Classic logo and the participant's team logo."

I'm generally not a fan of these jerseys in most years, and it seems the Skills Competition jerseys are superior to the actual All-Star Game jerseys based on the image above. With the very limited scope of this event in pitting Canadian all-stars against American all-stars, I understand why design options may be limited. This is just another reason why the format of the 2027 ECHL All-Star Game is a mistake.

I'm not rating jerseys that exclude good players based on where they were born. If hockey is supposed to be working to be more inclusive of all people, pitching the idea of United States-born ECHL All-Stars against Canadian-born ECHL All-Stars is incredibly xenophobic. I know that likely wasn't the intention here, but that's the path the ECHL has chosen to follow for its 2027 ECHL All-Star Game in Boise.

Until next time, keep your sticks on the ice!

I'll Read The Recaps

Congratualtions to the city of Buffalo and the Buffalo Sabres on hosting the 2026 NHL Entry Draft. I'm not watching the event tonight because I'm working, but let's be honest in saying that it's hardly "must-see TV". Yes, there will always be a few surprises, but the analyses of these players have been happening since they were twelve. There's nothing new to know about these players, so it's strictly up to the teams to make the selections they want.

It was no surprise when Gavin McKenna went first-overall to the Toronto Maple Leafs followed by San Jose selecting Ivar Stenberg with the second pick. Caleb Malhotra was chosen by Vancouver with the third pick and will play for his dad at some point, and Buffalo may have shocked a number of people by choosing defender Daxon Rudolph with the fourth-overall pick. It's not earth-shattering.

Rudolph's selection kicked off a run of defenders as Alberts Smits went fifth-overall to the New York Rangers, Carson Carels went to Calgary with th sixth pick, and Chase Reid "fell" to Seattle at seventh-overall. The key with all these defenceman choices is that none of them will likely step in and pull a Matthew Schaefer next season. Don't get me wrong: they're good, but I just don't see it.

There were many people hoping that the Winnipeg Jets would have the potential to choose a game-breaking centreman with the eighth pick, and Viggo Björck could turn into that player. No one will question his work ethic nor his drive to be better, and there's hope that he adds a few inches in height as a late-bloomer. Again, I don't see Björck being in Winnipeg unless he's playing with the Moose for a season or two, so the Jets need him to take big steps next season with Djurgårdens IF in order to speed up his route to the NHL club.

As a side note, can we speed this entire ordeal up? The NHL dragged its rear end through another first six picks as each team seemingly got 20 minutes to figure out who they were going to choose when they already had known for days who was going to be picked. Why does it take so bloody long for NHL teams to make selections? Why does the NHL drag this out to clawing-my-eyes-out lengths?

Anyway, the draft will continue tomorrow with Rounds Two through Seven. I may watch a little of it while I do some chores around the house, but it's not must-watch for me at any time. Give me the recap and I'll be fine. Nothing matters until these players reach the NHL.

Until next time, keep your sticks on the ice!

The Hockey Show - Episode 718

The Hockey Show, Canada's only campus-produced radio show that strictly talks hockey, is back tonight at the UMFM studios where we're one day away from the NHL Entry Draft in Buffalo, New York. Since we rarely talk about mock drafts and who should be selected by which team, don't expect anything like that tonight. Instead, we have some topics that need discussing and we'll even be joined by a special guest for the show! Tonight should be fun with stories, news, and laughs all going down on The Hockey Show at 5:30pm CT!

Tonight, Teebz and Jason welcome Jenna Thompson back to the show! Jenna's been itching to chat about hockey, so we'll let the former co-host back into the studio to discuss the enormous expansion price tag if an owner wants to set up an NHL franchise in Houston, USHL expansion locations and who will be backing these teams, the ECHL's New Mexico Goatheads now have an identity, and there has to be a discussion about Mike Babcock's new job with the Edmonton Oilers. It's going to be a show with some opinions, some disagreements, some emotions, and lots of chatter between our three hosts, so make sure you're ready to go tonight for The Hockey Show at 5:30pm CT on one of 101.5 FM, Channel 718 on MTS TV, or via UMFM.com!

If you live outside Winnipeg and want to listen, we have options! The UMFM website's streaming player works well if you want to listen online. We also recommend Radio Garden if you need an easy-to-use online stream. If you're more of an app person, we recommend you use the TuneIn app found on the App Store or Google Play Store.

If you have questions, you can email all show queries and comments to hockeyshow@umfm.com! Tweet me anytime with questions you may have by hitting me up at @TeebzHBIC on Twitter! I'm here to listen to you, so make your voice heard! And because both Teebz and Jason are on the butterfly app where things are less noisy, you can find Teebz here and Jason here on Bluesky!

Tonight, Teebz, Jason, and Jenna will chat about insane costs, lots of expansion, seed money, new jerseys, new coaches, morality in sports, and much more exclusively on 101.5 UMFM and on the UMFM.com web stream!

Until next time, keep your sticks on the ice!

A Delicate Balancing Act

Television is the one medium where live sports does well when it comes to viewers and advertising revenue. The NFL, for example, saw its media partners generate a combined $5.87 billion in revenue with $5.19 billion of that total coming from television. The NHL likes to remind everyone of their successes on television when it comes to money and viewers whenever it can, but what about the smaller leagues? Do they do as well as everyone else? That might be a question worth examining after reading Mick Hatten's article on St. Cloud Live today.

Hatten's article takes a look at the relationship that the NCAA's St. Cloud State has with television with respect to fans attending games in-person. The first line of his article reads, "St. Cloud State University Athletic Director Holly Schreiner is trying to find the right balance for the TV coverage of the school's men's hockey program," and that's an interesting premise coming out of the State of Hockey if the Huskies are struggling to attract and retain in-arena fans.

There's no doubt that NCAA hockey teams makes money off their streaming services, but there is a major asterisk on the totals they generate. League members received a combined $1.19 million in profit from NCHC TV, via Sidearm, during the 2025 fiscal year, but $704,705.50 went to the University of North Dakota. In fact, they dwarf everyone else COMBINED in the top-ten school revenues by nearly $217,000, so let's be brutally honest and say that UND benefits almost exclusively from NCHC TV. No other program hit six-digits in revenue in 2025, and 59.2% of all streaming revenue went to UND.

With costs escalating across all facets of hockey, NCAA teams have to be mindful of generating revenue in order to help offset their budgeted amounts of money they receive from their respective schools. Having fans in seats helps to sell concessions, merchandise, and parking which, in turn, helps those teams. But if games are available via streaming and television platforms, the convenience often outweighs the effort it takes to head out to the hockey game.

"Do you lose more than you gain if you get rid of it?" Schreiner asked Hatten rhetorically. "That's a hard one. We know that the university does a great service through Husky Productions and what these students can do and put out a broadcast that is so high quality.

"It's going to be hard to say that we're not going to do that live," she continued. "I think they deserve to have that on live TV. But maybe it's too good of a job. That's a good problem to have. In a perfect world, we have it broadcast live, lots of viewership and yet we have a nice, full crowd every weekend."

The NHCH also seems to recognize that only one team has a solid revenue stream combined with solid attendance as North Dakota led both categories, causing NCHC Commissioner Heather Weems to tell Brad Elliott Schlossman of the Grand Forks Herald in April that "the league will hire a consultant to help schools navigate their options".

"I'd expect in the next six to nine months, we'll go through the process with the consultant and we'll have an announcement in the spring or the late winter," Weems told Schlossman at that time. Obviously, there won't be any changes made for the 2026-27 season based on Weems' timeline, and any chamges recommended will still need some time to be implemented. For St. Cloud State who averaged just 3561 fans per game last season, that's valuable time where they can make their own changes to bring more fans to games.

"I think anyone who was at games this year would look at us and say that butts in seats weren't good," Schreiner admitted. "But I go back to streaming... that's a hard conversation to have. When it's 20-below zero, or even just zero, and you can watch a stream from home — what's the incentive to come and be here in person? That's the one thing that we're working on this summer."

The one thing that always puts people in seats is winning hockey. St. Cloud State was 9-14-1 in-conference and 16-19-1 overall. That's not winning hockey when one considers they missed the playoffs, so making the trek to see the Huskies play when there's a likely chance that they'll lose doesn't make for a fun night out in the dead of winter. However, as an illustration, consider the following:

• 2025-26: 9-14-1 (7th in NCHC attendance - 3658)
• 2024-25: 7-16-1 (9th - 3046)
• 2023-24: 11-9-4 (6th - 3540)
• 2022-23: 12-9-3 (6th - 4206)
• 2021-22: 10-10-4 (6th - 3981)
• 2020-21: 15-9-0 (4th - 404**)
• 2019-20: 10-12-2 (6th - 3981)
• 2018-19: 19-2-3 (6th - 4260)
• 2017-18: 16-4-4 (7th - 3995)

Aside from the pandemic-affected numbers in 2020-21, St. Cloud State has flirted with 4000 fans per game every season including when they finished atop the NCHC standings in both 2017-18 and 2018-19. The recent drop could be due to having another professional team in the state in the PWHL's Minnesota Frost who could affect St. Cloud State's attendance if people living closer to Minneapolis/St. Paul opt to spend their hockey dollars there. Again, it's a balance.

St. Cloud State has seen nearly 550 fans stop buying tickets since 2023, and that has to be concerning. Is that due to games being availabl e via streaming services and/or television? I'm not so sure that those two things are correlated unless there's some sort of examination where viewers are going up for the televised games, but Schreiner's asking that question based on the empty seats she sees.

"Does having our games televised live help us or hurt us?" she asked. "At the same time, we get sponsorships that advertise during that time that we otherwise won't have without that partnership. Being on TV, we have great viewership in the Twin Cities metro areas. It's hard to say you want to give that up. Yet there are days when you see almost no one at a game and I say, 'Let's get rid of that opportunity.' That's a hard one. I'm not sure what the right answer is."

Therein lies the problem: the right answer isn't clearly evident. We heard the same argument about UMFM's radio broadcasts taking money out of the pocket of the Manitoba Bisons due to how good our production was compared to what was being streamed. That was part of the reason that the Bisons walked away from renewing the contract with UMFM. They'll never reveal their numbers, but I can't imagine that their Canada West TV numbers went up once they ditched the radio broadcast. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

So how do schools balance putting people in seats with the need for television exposure? Again, there is no eas answer. A winning culture combined with high standards and a pedigree of developing high-end talent would help. There are no big-name CHL players headed to St. Cloud State this fall to play hockey, so the Huskies won't have a must-see player on their roster. I'm not saying that will solve their attendance problems in one season, but it would be a good start.

Schreiner is aware of the changing sports landscape regarding how people watch, telling Hatten, "I think the way sports are now, it has shifted who our target audience is. Youth hockey parents are never free on weekends. We've been brainstorming a bunch of different things. Whether it's getting more season tickets sold, or whether it's single-game tickets from promotions to the way we advertise and see our information. It all needs to be looked at differently."

Schreiner is entirely right with her last sentence as attending games is more of an experience now than just being the game. Vegas has their elaborate productions before every game. Nashville has intermission concerts with well-known musicians and bands. Carolina does the tailgating experience before games. Each of these unique attractions help to sell the hockey experience, and this is what St. Cloud State has to tap into: find something fun and unique they can build on. Once they have that, winning hockey brings people back.

As much as it seems sensible that abandoning television and streaming services would drive people back to the rink, I'd argue the opposite is never truer than before, and the Chicago Blackhawks are the perfect example of how not being on television hurt their attendance at games. Of course, playing winning hockey helped, but, as the old saying goes, "the worst thing about being talked about is not being talked about." I can't tell St. Cloud State what to do nor do I have a crystal ball to tell the future, but abandoning video media would be the wrong direction to take if they want to sell tickets.

As I said off the top, it's a delicate balancing act for teams.

Until next time, keep your sticks on the ice!

It's Hard To Like You

Over the last number of months, it has become increasingly hard for me to justify my enjoyment watching hockey when the game seems to have gone morally corrupt. There are other problems that bother me as well like the valuation of NHL teams and league broadcast rights, the constant need to monetize every facet of its business, and the lack of player safety from the Department of Player Safety, but the last few months have really tested the ol' moral compass when it comes to trying to be a fan of the game.

We hear how the NHL has never been in a better place financially and how all its 32 teams and markets are succeeding, and I'm not here to contest that. After all, I don't have the depth of knowledge about their financials nor their market research to know more than what I can piece together from news articles. Instead, I want to look at the Edmonton Oilers' announcement where they hired Mike Babcock, his response to questions at the press conference, and how this example plus a few others should make the lede image more relevant.

The Edmonton Oilers made it official today when they introduced the nineteenth head coach of the Edmonton Oilers as 63 year-old Mike Babcock. From a hockey perspective, one should have many questions as to why the Oilers would hitch their wagon to a coach who hasn't done a lot of winning over more than a decade, but I want to take hockey out of it for a second to ask about why the Oilers felt they needed this specific man to guide their players to bigger wins.

While I fully get that the NHL and, by proxy, the NHLPA cleared him of wrongdoing during his time in Columbus, there is still a pattern of malignant narcissism, player humiliation, and unpunished bullying Babcock has shown over his years in hockey. From Johan Franzen and Chris Chelios to Frankie Corrado and Jason Spezza to Mike Modano and Mike Commodore, there are corroborated stories from across hockey that should serve as evidence for reasons not to employ Mike Babcock. Yet the Oilers chose to ignore all of these red flags.

Mike Babcock had a chance to say all the right things today at his press conference regarding his resignation in Columbus. When asked about the issues in Columbus, he said, "I hadn't benched anybody, I hadn't talked to anybody, I hadn't sat anybody out, and it was evident that we weren't together as a staff right from the get-go. My wife gave me a call, and she said it's time to get out of there. I've been retired, I was pretty good at it. I got back to being retired."

He said nothing about the allegations that he invaded players' privacy by reviewing private photos on their personal cellphones. He said nothing about learning from that experience and understanding boundaries. He said nothing about his "unorthodox" method of getting to know players. Mike Babcock's answer about his time in Columbus was "it wasn't a good fit". I have no idea how the NHL cleared him of the allegations, but it seems very evident that Mike Babcock feels he did nothing wrong during his 78-day coaching stint in Ohio.

Not only did he make it clear that he did nothing wrong in Columbus, he doubled-down on his ability to "tell the truth" to players as "a good human", saying, "A lot of times being hard on people is confused with telling the truth.... Sometimes the truth is hard. No matter what happens when you coach, when you scratch people, when you sit them, when they're at the end of their career and you don't play them, it's hard for them for sure. You try to do that as respectfully as you can. Why? Because you think you're a good human and that's the right thing to do. Sometimes it's not perceived that way."

This is a man who healthy-scratched newly-acquired Jason Spezza of the Toronto Maple Leafs in the first game of the season against Ottawa with his family and, reportedly, his hospitalized father in attendance. This is a man who healthy-scracthed Mike Modano, who signed with his hometown Red Wings, in the final games of the season, preventing him from hitting 1500 NHL games. This is a man who scratched Chris Chelios in a Winter Classic between Chicago and Detroit. None of those players deserved that kind of treatment.

It's one thing to scratch an underperforming player late in the season when it comes to needing points for playoff spots. It's another to scratch respected veteran players from opening night games, outdoor games, and milestone games. Normally, one would look at those opportunities to make someone's life a little more special and grant those moments. Not Mike Babcock, though. That's "telling the truth".

This is a man who verbally assaulted Red Wings legend John Franzen on a daily basis, according to teammates, to the point where his mental health was affected. This is a man who told Anaheim's Tony Mårtensson that he was scratched before a game against Colorado and made him change out of his hockey gear in the shower. This is a man who made former Maple Leafs forward Daniel Winnik hate hockey. Somehow, the Oilers weren't worried about any of this.

All of this was known, though, so this goes higher than just Stan Bowman making a terrible decision. Daryl Katz, Jeff Jackson, Bill Scott, and Justin Mahe all would have known Mike Babcock was on Bowman's short list to replace Kris Knoblauch, and the players such as Connor McDavid, Leon Draisaitl, Zach Hyman, and Ryan Nugent-Hopkins all apparently gave their sign-offs on this hiring as well. The fact that no one took a stand morally about hiring a known bully tells me that the Oilers put personal gain over their moral consciences.

The Oilers have Connor Ingram penciled in as one of their goalies right now, and he's been a prominent voice and advocate for players' mental health. Ingram's coach is now a guy who plunged Johan Franzen into deeper mental health anguish through his bullying, so did Connor Ingram agree to this hiring? Did anyone even ask him because I'd think his opinion is pretty strong in this subject.

Oilers defenceman Spencer Stastney nearly retired in 2024 after battling "anxiety and depression" that kept him out of Nashville's lineup for most of the 2024-25 season. Again, Mike Babcock bullied Johan Franzen while he was suffering from anxiety and depression, so should we be worried about a Spencer Stastney giveaway ending his career? Does Babcock even know who Spencer Stastney is?

The NHL doesn't seem to care about the behaviours of people off the ice, but this isn't new. We've seen incidents come to light elsewhere, and it doesn't seem to matter to the NHL if it prevents one of its teams from winning hockey games. Winning is all that matters.

The Vegas Golden Knights employed a goaltender this season and beyond that would be radioactive for most other businesses. Having sexual assault and rape allegations would significantly limit one's job possibilities, yet this one person landed in the crease in Las Vegas where he competed for the Stanley Cup. People will say he was acquitted which is true, but would you morally want him working next to you knowing the text messages about what he allegedly did?

Let's not pretend that this hasn't happened before either. NHL teams employed all of Scott Stevens, Dino Ciccarelli, Geoff Courtnall, and Neil Sheehy long after their allegations of sexual assault where the jury voted not to indict them. While none of these four men were found guilty, it sends a strong message to everyone that crimes be damned as long as teams win with these players in their lineups.

The public outcry over the Boston Bruins signing Mitchell Miller gave me hope that we might be turning a corner. Miller was involved "in multiple racial bullying incidents with a special needs student in Sylvania, Ohio" while in high school, resulting in him being charged with assault and a violation of the Ohio Safe Schools Act. Somehow, Bruins GM Don Sweeney thought it was a good idea to sign Miller before they changed their minds seven days later.

At the time of Miller's release, NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman said of Miller, "... what he did as a 14-year-old is reprehensible, unacceptable," so explain to me why is it "reprehensible" and "unacceptable" for a 14 year-old, but not a 63 year-old man?

I guess the bigger question here is "what does it take?" when it comes to finding your morality. If you were calling previous employers about a potential hiring and all of them said he was a bully and a narcissist, would you hire him? What if they said he had been alleged to have been part of a sexual assault or rape? How about a vehicular homicide conviction? How about a guy who organized a murder? Maybe domestic abuse is more to your liking for potential hires?

While Craig MacTavish and Mike Danton served time in prison for their crimes, the rest did not. Don't mistake this as a comparison of which crime was worse - all of them are bad. The fact that Mike Babcock is allowed to coach after showing zero regard and zero remorse for what he did is proof that the NHL is only concerned with "do as I say" rather than leading by example. At some point, there has to be a line drawn when it comes to giving these people a pass just because they're involved with hockey. I may have reached that line today.

If winning hockey games matters more than being a morally good person or team, I'd rather go 0-84 next season. Sports are supposed to be an escape from our daily lives, but they appear to also be an escape from the rules that govern society. What's right isn't always popular, but it was evident that not many people wanted Mike Babcock back in the NHL except the Edmonton Oilers' front office.

It's hard to like the NHL when the people running it suck so much.

Until next time, keep your sticks on the ice!