News General News

By Nolan Thiessen

News broke on Friday that the Pinty’s Grand Slam of Curling was expanding to seven and then eight events over the next two seasons. The Slams have been on life support a few times since their inception, but it is safe to say that at the moment they are the healthiest they have ever been.

Soon after the announcement dropped the Twitterverse quickly began debating whether it was good for the game or a tragedy and a final death blow for the “smaller” tour events. Even before E.J. Harnden shouted me out on Twitter and asked for a full analysis the issue was percolating in my brain and ideas for this blog were taking shape.

The debate, as it often does in curling, swiftly took a turn towards the “elite” versus “mid-level”. There were cries of “the rich get richer” and “you’re killing the game, there will be nobody left to play”. I am not going to rehash my arguments on that debate here as my thoughts haven’t changed much since I wrote about 3,000 words on this topic for this website last year.

But I will say this, I really hope the vocal minority who don’t want our sport to evolve will stop complaining that someone is out to destroy their status quo and be open to change. Sitting back and saying “the way it used to be was better, you’re killing us” is a tough argument to uphold when the game used to be filled with poor ice conditions, minimal TV coverage and not exactly in shape “athletes”. Better ice, better shot making, increased TV exposure and players who put in hard work necessary to be world-class athletes and improve the sports’ image in the general public is an improvement and it is only going to continue, so get used to it.

In terms of Friday’s announcement, I will say first things first: more curling on TV is good for the game. Period, end of story. I highly doubt that anyone who truly cares about the game would dispute that increased airtime for the sport on the tube is bad for the game.

More games, more coverage, more exposure for not only team sponsors but also the sponsors of the GSOC can only grow the game. The value provided by this level of TV coverage for current and future corporate partners is good for our sport. Increasing sponsorship dollars can only happen when we as a sport can provide strong value to our corporate partners and increasing TV time by 40-50 percent can help do that.

These sponsorship increases, the elevated purses and the continuing support of Sport Canada funding can hopefully grow to a point that our sport can start to seem “lucrative”. Teams currently on tour with strong corporate partners are able to work less than full-time and still pay some bills, but nobody is currently putting three kids through college and paying the mortgage on their curling alone. Maybe one day we will get there and I think this announcement is a step in that direction.

Optimistically I hope increasing the rewards is attractive enough for the younger generation to give us a try. Having the Olympic dream as well as being lucrative financially should be enough to draw more interest in our sport, but maybe I’m biased! With the amount of options on TV these days for younger audiences to watch and also have the opportunity to try in most major centres, we have to ensure that curling takes up some of that prime real estate on TV or we will fall behind those that are.

Judging by the TV audiences the last few years for live curling, we are a long way from a saturation of the market for our game. If there is a point where our game is too much for fans then they will tell us, but let’s not stop until we get there.

The initial reaction from some is that the same teams will continue to populate the Grand Slams and the second level will trail further and further behind. As someone who was at the players’ summit in July at the Rogers offices in Toronto, I can tell you that idea was discussed and we as the “elite” know we have to protect that from happening.

The players were consulted and the theory is that an expansion of Grand Slam events provides more opportunity to play different formats and find ways for more teams to have a chance to play in one or two Grand Slams a year. Whether it be “winner of tour event X receives a funded trip to the next slam” or a “champions event” to open each season with winners of all of the prior year’s tour events receiving invites, there are options to get more teams on great ice, in great arenas, in front of great crowds and on TV. That ability to tie in the tour as a feeder system for the Grand Slams has to be realized for the growth of the game; it is of the utmost importance.

I have written in the past about the death of the tour spiel and I hope that this new methodology for filling Grand Slam events can help save some of these events from extinction. The chance to play in an event in Oakville, Ont., Basel, Switzerland, or Saint John, N.B., and win a spot in a Grand Slam will hopefully keep the entries flowing and the game of curling growing. I fail to see how a mid-level team could see someone that they compete with regularly in smaller events get an entry to a Grand Slam and not feel a tinge of envy and not want to be that team with that opportunity the next time around. If they don’t feel that then maybe they aren’t as competitive as they think they are.

In closing I will say this, and I am in no way an employee of Sportsnet, they just post some of my curling ramblings on their website, so this is just one man’s opinion. Everyone needs to remember that the Pinty’s Grand Slam of Curling is a Sportsnet media property that they want to see succeed. I hate to say it but Sportsnet is not in the business of fixing the game of curling. They are in the business of putting a product on TV that people want to watch and clearly by increasing the number of events they run then there is an appetite for our sport from viewers, so why would we fight that? It is up to us as players, administrators and fans of the game to ensure that the game grows.

If you feel passionately about curling and want it to succeed at the grassroots or elite level then do something about it, don’t just complain. I challenge everyone on social media that if you have a thought for a new format, a new way that you think more curlers can be included in these lucrative events, reach out and pass it along and try to make a difference. Don’t be happy to just sit back and complain, whether you believe it or not the “elite” don’t want to kill the game they want to make it better. So let’s start the debate and all be open to change.