Really, Sports Illustrated?

Really, Sports Illustrated? 

Now, we all know that Sports Illustrated and ESPN aren't exactly the friendliest to the NHL and hockey in general. But this headline is just insulting. 

First off, three months ago, the NHL was NOT dead. It was just starting to recover from a (unnecessary) lockout. But arenas were sold out for opening day games. People still wanted to see hockey. To say the NHL was dead is an exaggeration. Sure, losing half a season takes away from the excitement, but even though fans swore they wouldn't come back, they did. 

Secondly, the game has always mattered. Maybe not to you, SI, but to all of us fans, players, and coaches, it will always matter. There could be a work stoppage every time a CBA expires but it will still matter to us. Just because it isn't a big enough sport to make it into your magazine half the time does not mean that it isn't big enough to impact lives. 

And finally, what about the streak makes hockey all of a sudden a "must-see"? It was just that - a streak. Sure, it was record breaking. But when the '11-'12 Wings won 23 games in a row at home and broke that record, where was their cover? How about the '92-'93 Penguins 17 game overall winning streak? (they got a cover the season before for the Stanley Cup, to be fair) And what about the '79-'80 Flyers undefeated streak (25 wins and 10 ties)? No cover for that either.

The Blackhawks did not make hockey a "must-see" by themselves. Hockey is a must-see because of the dedication of the players and the passion of the fans. Hockey is a must-see because of the energy in your home team's arena, when you're singing your team's goal song. Hockey is a must-see because it's a great sport, not because of the Blackhawks.