Ill-informed Hockey Geography Rant



I pay virtually no attention to pro hockey, what with not being Canadian and all. But I have as much right to an uninformed opinion as anyone else so here goes.



In tonight's big game the Tampa Bay Lightning defeated the Montreal Canadiens. There are so many things wrong with that statement.



First of all, nicknames should be plural, not conceptual. The only pro sports nicknames that should not end in an S are those ending in X (as in Sox). I'll give college a little more leeway. Fighting Irish is at least plural, but I never felt right about Crimson Tide.



But the bigger issue here, and this needs to be enshined in the Canadian constitution as soon as possible:



No hockey team should be located in any city in which it is never even theoretically possible to play hockey out of doors at some time in the year. The line should follow roughly the last Ice Age glaciation of 12,000 years ago.



Chicago? Fine. Philadelphia? Borderline. Denver? Well, the mountains make it OK but remember the Avalance is really the Quebec Nordiques.



But Atlanta? TAMPA BAY?!? MIAMI????



PHOENIX? What, do they use cacti for nets? What is Arizona doing with Winnipeg's team?



I blame this all on the trade that sent Gretzky from Edmonton to the LA Kings back in the late 80s. Then the Minnesota NORTH Stars move to Dallas and became the Stars, and Minnesota, which loves its hockey so much it should be annexed to Canada, wound up with an expansion team with a stupid non-plural name.



A semi-related issue is that the Stanley Cup finals end in June. I don't know if they play hockey in Australia, but if they do that's where hockey should be played in June.



This situation can only be resolved by a return to old-time hockey...