As I groggily sifted through my inbox early last Tuesday, skimming and deleting most emails without much thought, I came upon one message from my brother-in-law, and proud Pittsburgh native, Dave, and opened the attached file that read:
Hos·sa (HO sah)
–noun.
1. one who switches allegiance.
2. one who changes to the opposite party, faction or team.
3. a professional ice hockey player who betrays his team for another.
–slang
1. a “jagoff.”
Synonyms: traitor, turncoat
Origin: [Pittsburghese, from English, from Slovak, from Latin]
It was the sign Dave had constructed to take with him to game 3 of the Stanley Cup Finals that night and he was proudly sharing it (in fairness to Dave, it was all done in good fun and I don’t believe he even took his masterpiece to the game). For those unfamiliar with the turncoat to whom the sign refers, here is a quick history lesson.
At the trade deadline of the 2007–2008 NHL season, the Atlanta Thrashers traded forward Marian Hossa to the Pittsburgh Penguins. Hossa played just 12 regular season games with the Penguins but led the team in scoring in their playoffs run to the Stanley Cup Finals where they lost to the Detroit Red Wings in six games. Following the season, Hossa became a free agent and Pittsburgh reportedly offered him a lucrative five year contract at an average of $7 million per season to return to the Pens. Hossa strung the negotiations along as he fielded offers from other teams including a reported multi year offer from the Edmonton Oilers at an average of $9 million per season. Finally, on July 1, Hossa signed a one year contract with the Red Wings for $7.45 million, an amount greater than the annual average of Pittsburgh’s offer, but for fewer years and both shorter and less money than the Oilers’ offer. At the time of Hossa’s signing with Detroit he explained his choice saying, “It was a really tough decision for me to make. When I compared the two teams, I felt like I would have a little better of a chance to win the Cup in Detroit. I know I could get more money somewhere else but I was looking for best chance to win Stanley Cup and I think Detroit is that destination. It wasn’t easy to turn that money away but it’s how I decide.” (sic)
Naturally, the move drew the befuddled ire of Pittsburgh fans. It was injurious enough to lose a key player to the team that had just de-feathered the Penguins in the finals. Adding insult to injury was the notion that Hossa had taken a smaller overall contract because in his estimation it gave him a greater opportunity to win—simply put, Hossa believed the Red Wings were a better team than the Penguins.
The scenario certainly makes for good theater; dramatic side stories such as this give the media snappy vignettes to run during their series coverage and sports radio was essentially invented for these situations. And although Dave’s sign was put together as a joke and in good fun, it does seem there is a genuine underlying bitterness toward Hossa in Pittsburgh as evidenced by the way he has been lustily booed every time he touches the puck during Penguins home games.
In contemplating the Hossa situation, the hypocrisy of sports fans (all of us, not just the Pittsburgh variety) really becomes quite stark. When players hit the free agent market and simply pursue the biggest contract regardless of other factors, we heckle them with spiffy nicknames like Pay-Rod (although I fully approve of any and all forms of A-Rod mockery) and scornfully hurl fake dollar bills at them from the stands. We decry their indifference to winning when they “sell out” by signing with a lesser team. And whenever a player leaves of his own accord, we love to question that player’s loyalty to us—the paying fans and the city as a whole.
So how is it fair to assail a guy like Hossa who fielded offers, picked the one that was likely the smallest in terms of total contract size and then honestly explained his decision by stating that it was indeed all about his desire to win? Is that not exactly what we claim to want from professional athletes—accountability and desiring winning over money?
Ah yes, but where is the loyalty?! There is certainly something to be said for loyalty, but this really only should apply to players who have played the majority of their best years with a single franchise and have been supported faithfully by both the organization and the fans through good times and bad. David Ortiz is a prime example of this. If he somehow rediscovers his swing and then willfully leaves Boston for another team, Red Sox fans would have a legitimate “loyalty” beef after they stood by him through the lowest point of his career. In the case of Hossa, he owed nothing to the Penguins or their fans after playing hard and well in his short time there. Had he faltered, it is presumable the team would not have made him an offer and the fans would have been pleased or at least indifferent in seeing him leave. Loyalty is a two way street and it is only to be expected after a legitimate “relationship” has developed between the city and the player (think Ortiz, Derek Jeter, Peyton Manning or Jerome Bettis).
As the Stanley Cup Finals conclude tonight or Friday, Marian Hossa will either be justified in his assessment that his best shot at winning a Cup was with the Red Wings* or Pittsburgh fans’ celebrations will be a little bit more gleeful knowing that the Penguins not only claimed the Cup but proved Hossa wrong as well. It makes for good drama but perhaps even more interesting will be watching the reactions of Detroit fans should Hossa opt to sign with yet another team when he again becomes a free agent this offseason. If he does, it is probably safe to bet that Red Wings fans will be the ones hypocritically chastising Hossa as a traitorous “jagoff” next year.

You can bet this guy would buy a Sidney Crosby jersey tomorrow if the Red Wings acquired him.
*It can be argued in a closely matched series that even should Detroit win, perhaps Hossa still would have won a Cup as a Penguin when his absence from the Red Wings and his presence on the Penguins is taken into account. Either way, it’s fair to assume the teams are perhaps more evenly matched than Hossa might have assumed when making his decision.



