re div and conf names in article apr ramsey cs laurentian ca maynard ramsey cs laurentian ca roger maynard writes evan pritchard writes i think that you are incorrect roger patrick smythe and adams all played or coached in the league before becoming front office types hence they did help build the league although they were not great players themselves punch imlach s contributions as a coach and gm were far greater than those of the above combined should we name a division or trophy after him owner vs player contributions deleted are we going to honour those who contributed to the league s evolution or are we going to honour those who contributed to the glory of the sport itself stuff deleted the money issue is irrelevant to the point that we would agree on and that is it is the players that are what make the game great and not the people who put them on the ice as i recall the author of the original article that started the thread claimed that he disliked the changing of the names for a variety of reasons roger on one front you flamed him rather severely on the grounds that his was a jingoistic rant but you also supported the name changing on the grounds that the current names are inappropriate because of the individuals they represent fwiw i do not think the flaming was warranted nor do i think you enhanced what credibility you have with it at all just an observation however that aside the real question is whether you like the idea of changing the names based on the reasons given for it making it easier for the casual fan or whether you like the idea of unique divisional names based on individuals who do deserve the honour imo the latter is a nice and unique touch that differs from other sports in addition i do not think that changing divisional names will have an effect on the number of people that are interested in hockey so it s a pointless exercise anyway if the current names are inappropriate then that is a separate issue not central to the original article something to consider additionally is whether or not players like orr who contributed to the glory of the sport would have been able to do so without an organized professional league to play in in this case honouring builders of the league as opposed to builders of the sport becomes a chicken and egg type question although it was the chicken exactly true naming divisions and trophies after smythe and the bunch is the same kind of nepotism that put stein in the hall of fame i have always thought that this was nonsense dunno if the stein comparison is justifiable since it doesn t look as though his unanimous acceptance to the hall will hold up dchhabra stpl ists ca
