2012-2013 Lockout Discussion Thread
View Single Post
09-02-2012, 03:18 PM
A guy with a bass
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Originally Posted by
Don't you understand that the problem is that marginal markets don't or can't support teams in bad times? Is this rocket science? Right after expansion or when a team is going well is
the right time to judge if the city can support a team. Anyone can support a winning team. But with 30 teams each team only wins an average of once every 30 years. 54 year droughts will become commonplace. Hockey is far less popular than other sports in most of the US. Only the most stalwart cities can last. Less than 15 years ago people were crowing about how good of a franchise Dallas was. Now they had a hard time giving the team away.
Most cities don't support losing teams, financially, whether they are large market, traditional markets or not. Do you remember what Boston was like for the NHL just a few years ago? What about Chicago? Pittsburgh? Buffalo? Any of the small market Canadian teams when their dollar wasn't as high as it is now? It's a fair bit of revisionist history to saying that Dallas struggled to find an owner. What Dallas struggled to do was find an owner that past the far more discriminating and restrictive standards of the NHL BoG compared to previous eras. You can't blame the BoG, but Dallas was never really in danger.
What it sounds like you want is a group of teams that are like the Red Wings, Rangers, Leafs or Canadiens. Teams that make a boatload of money no matter the circumstance. That's simply not going to happen. Ever.
Besides, rocket science is actually quite a bit more straight forward than the business practices of large companies, which includes major professional sports teams.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Tawnos