| |
VIEWPOINT: SCOTT OAKEQ
& A
Each week, Sports Online will turn the tables on Scott Oake,
who's used to peppering others with questions.
What will the new NHL look like when the hockey
season resumes?
The NHL won't look the same.
We know the business of the game will be forever radically altered.
There will be a huge movement and turnover of players.
In Canada, one of the most eagerly anticipated NHL dates is trade
deadline day. Once the NHL is open for business it will be "trade
deadline day" every day for about a month. So watching general managers
assemble teams within the salary cap limits will be interesting in
itself.
But, in the long run, none of this will matter if the on-ice product
isn't better. Heading into the lockout, most hardcore hockey people
would have agreed business wasn't the NHL's only problem.
The game has been given over to mind numbing, stifling defence. "Play
them even and try to win it 1-0 in the 59th minute" is the philosophy
of too many teams.
This has to change and the NHL has an opportunity now to relaunch
in a meaningful way.
The shootout means there will be no more ties but the 65 minutes preceding
the shootout is the primary concern.
Things like tag-up offside and reducing the size of goaltenders equipment
will help but I think there is one rule change that has the potential
to effect greater change than any other and that's the removal of
the red line.
Let's face it: many nights in the NHL the game dies in the neutral
zone. Allowing passes from blue-line to blue-line would mean players
could get through the neutral zone with speed.
There would be more breakaways and odd man rushes.
The entertainment value of the game would increase and isn't this
the object of the exercise? The goal should be to have fans feeling
like they don't know how they ever did without the NHL for a season.
I hope that's how it turns out.
You've worked at some great Summer Games (Sydney, Barcelona)
and some awful ones (Atlanta). In your opinion, what are crucial elements
of staging a successful Olympics?
I've been fortunate to cover 10 Olympic Games beginning with Montreal
in 1976 (I was only 10 years old at the time).
Almost 30 years later, Olympic Stadium tells us one of the most crucial
elements of staging a successful Olympics is not to burden taxpayers
with an enormous debt.
However, it's hard not to with the Olympic Games having become such
an expensive proposition.
The 2004 Athens games were said to have cost anywhere from $8-$10
billion US so Greece will be paying for a long time.
Just this morning, on the heels of London being awarded the 2012 Games,
I read a quote from a Londoner who didn't back his city's bid because,
at over 4 billion pounds, the Games would cost as much or more than
it cost to go to war in Iraq.
Some would argue the Olympic Games are a much more worthy project
but the point is they are out of control financially.
Hopefully, IOC Chairman Jacques Rogge can follow through on his objective
of reducing the cost of the Games.
I would say, on a personal level, two things that make any Olympics
a success are good transportation and effective but not oppressive
security.
In Atlanta, I spent a lot of time on buses going in the wrong direction
and when we got there we had to endure at least two security checkpoints.
Just getting to the venue was the hardest part of the day. (Also witnessing
Russ Anber's sandwiches being seized by security each day became a
burden but that's another story!)
I thought Athens, for all the predictions of the failure of those
Games, was good on both counts.
Sports Illustrated ranked Lance Armstrong as No. 25 in its
list of America's all-time revolutionary athletes. Should Lance be
on this list? Muhammad Ali is, of course, No. 1 by the way.
If you check the multitude of "25 Greatest Athletes" lists Lance Armstrong
is on some and not on others.
This has to do with cycling being a fringe sport in the minds of a
lot of Americans who wouldn't know the Tour De France from a tour
of the local mall.
This is unfortunate because all Armstrong has done is win cycling's
toughest test of endurance six times and he threatens now to win it
a seventh.
He is one of the greatest cyclists ever and that should qualify him
for any list. However, his selection as one of America's all-time
revolutionary athletes shouldn't incite any debate whatsoever.
I'm assuming revolutionary, in this case, means someone who's made
a difference.
Armstrong was diagnosed with testicular cancer in 1996. It spread
to his brain and still he conquered it. The Lance Armstrong Foundation,
which works to improve the lives of those battling cancer, has raised
$85 million US.
Lance Armstrong has made a difference. How can anyone say he doesn't
belong on the list?
Lightning-round questions:
Danica Patrick: Hype or real deal?
Real
What was your first reaction when you saw Karla Homolka's television
interview this week?
How lucky she is to be alive while three of her victims can't say
the same.
Will Khari Jones sign with a CFL team this week?
If not this week then soon.
|
 |
|
Scott began his career by volunteering at the university radio station during three years of pre-med. studies at Memorial University in St. John's, Nfld. After two summers working at CBC-St. John's in radio and television, he was hired full-time in 1974. Since then, Oake has covered the Olympic Winter and Summer Games and the Commonwealth Games as a commentator for wrestling, hockey, alpine skiing, swimming, rowing, diving, boxing and athletics.
FULL
BIO
|
