Nothing But Meaningful Games On The Schedule

I have a new pet peeve -- when late season games are referred to as "meaningless."

Does the borderline-NHLer whose contract is up at the end of the year think the game is meaningless? Do coaches tell players who get injured in these matches, "Sorry you got hurt in this meaningless game, kid?" Was it meaningless when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? And if a game is meaningless, why should fans shell out $75 to attend it?

Now the National Hockey League itself is using the word to describe the last two games of the Carolina Hurricanes' season (yes, I know it's an AP story and it can be found elsewhere, but work with me here). Ask the Tampa Bay Lightning if tomorrow night's Carolina/Atlanta game is meaningless, as they sit just one point behind a Thrasher team with whom they will conclude the season on Saturday. For that matter, ask the defending Champs if they want to finish behind the Florida Panthers in the standings.

I recognize that "meaningless" is used as reporter short-hand for "having no playoff implications for the team(s) for which we are using this word," but the fact of the matter is that this description of a game does a disservice to the athletes being asked to compete in them and to the fans being asked to attend them. You want meaningless? How about a hockey writer's account of a game between two non-playoff teams.

No games are meaningless, not even tonight's game between L.A. and Phoenix. There are, after all, ping-pong balls on the line.