To be fair, I only got a snipet of the topic du jour on Sirius XM NHL Homeice this morning. But from what I gathered, Micheal Buble made comments about not buying NHL products to boycott the current lockout.
The pundit remarked if fans stopped buying into the NHL, as in merchandise and other things, then we aren't really hurting the league for the lockout. Fans would just be hurting the little guy who makes the stuff. He was told as much by a person that wrote him a letter urging fans not to boycott merchandise sold by the NHL because it would put the little guy out of work.
My problem with the statement is the guy who wrote the letter should have sent it to the owners instead. The little guy has no future as long as the lockout looms for the NHL. But the fans didn't lockout players or failed to negotiate a deal, the owners and the players did. If you want me to support the little guy, put pressure where it is needed, not on fans but on your owners, players and the National Hockey League.
If a fan doesn't show interest on the league because they are not playing, can you fault them for not buying merchandise even just "to support the little guy"? I don't think merchandisers can whine to fans for wanting to boycott a league because they refuse to put a product on the ice for fans. Their beef lies with some one else.
I don't have a problem with fans who wish to boycott the leagues' merchandise. The lockout already has affected the little guy, but not by the fault of those who do not buy a jersey for Christmas this year. I feel for the little guy, I really do. But I'm not the one who cancelled the season.
Stepping off soap box.