View Single Post
Old
11-24-2004, 08:53 PM
  #50
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,312
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digger12
Very well said, but I would be careful about throwing all Canadian hockey fans in the same pro-owner liferaft.

At least by my experience on this business of hockey board, the most vocal hawkish/anti-Bettman/anti-owner/anti-small market sentiments aren't from the American markets, they're from Canadian fans of Canadian teams (particularly the Sens and Canucks) that have Stanley cup aspirations. Quite interesting actually.
Anti small market? Oh you must mean because of Tom saying let them fold if they cant compete in the big leagues. I think you misunderstand. For me anyway, the brilliantly conceived CBA that Bettman and Goodenow crafted last time was the saviour of small markets, if they could learn to think long term, instead of 30 minute sitcom attention span.

The reason I so support the philsophical principle behind the last CBA was because of how it favoured small markets ability to develop a championship hockey team the right way. The long way. The only way.

Perhaps their is a self interest of Sens and Canucks fans here. We see that we have used the CBA properly, and now we have an opportunity to continue using it to become the next Colorado. There is no reason either of our teams couldnt do that. We may never do it. But we can the possibilty exists. After following the plan for 10 years, you tank the rug out from under us at the last minute. Its not fair. Edmonton can just as easily do it. They made more money than Ottawa last year.

Go ahead, save the owners $200mil, but dont radically change the philisophical underpinnings of the current strategic brilliance of a CBA that Bettman and Goodenow created last time.

thinkwild is online now