Thread: KHL Expansion
View Single Post
Old
10-14-2012, 09:06 AM
  #154
SoundAndFury
Registered User
 
SoundAndFury's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicente View Post
But what is fair? Atm no other Russian team would have ever in the future the chance to become Russian champion than those who are right now in KHL.
If there would be a team capable of challenging for the Russian championship it would be inducted into KHL and it's as simple as that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Faterson View Post
Why? There's nothing fairer than that. It's much fairer to be included in an elite league based on one's performance rather than based on the thickness of one's wallet, isn't it? I don't think you're being convincing if you simply deny a statement without providing any explanation.

Also, while I agree that Russian hockey dominates in terms of Europe, the current proportion within the KHL in terms of countries (20-1-1-1-1-1-1), heavily favouring Russian teams, is hardly sustainable in the long term if the KHL is truly to become an international league, rather than "ex-Russian league with a few foreign guest teams thrown into the Russian mix". So, I have read some Czech detractors of the KHL term it the "Soviet league". If the KHL wants to get rid of such monikers, the proportion of Russian vs. non-Russian (and non-ex-USSR) teams within the KHL will need to change. Right now, it's 24-2 using the latter criterion.

It's true there's hardly ever complete fairness in sports, or otherwise the majority of the teams in the NHL would be Canadian, not US. But, it might be beneficial at least to strive to attain as much just parity as possible.
First of all, KHL Expansion plan reportedly is to have as many as 64 teams in the league so if there is any team capable of at least surviving in the KHL they will be inducted into KHL without relegating someone. At this stage of league's developement promoting/relegating someone doesn't make any sense.

Secondly, what you are stating is just your understanding of what's fair and fairness in general. We have to face the fact that long term money is the most important thing in sports. It enables team to remain competitive (and at the same time league which consists of the teams).

Team, when being inducted into the league, makes commitment to invest money and remain competitve. How it would be fair to not give them a time to develope a fanbase, infrostructure and so on and relegate them somewhere and promote some team which performed well against much weaker opposition with no chance to develop into really cometetive KHL team?

Like your example with Oilers. It's up and coming team which is still in the rebuilding mode in one of the best markets in the league. One of the few teams in the NHL that are actually profitable even while they are basement dwellers. Now this team has a chance to develop and in let's say 5 years be a legit Stanley Cup contender. If they were relegated their best players would request trades, fanbase would get smaller, hockey in general would lose fans to other sports (well ok, Edmonton is not the place for that to happen but in f.e. Boston it would be a massive blow). How would that be fair?

In fact I really have hard time writing this post because your "fair" proposition is wrong in so many ways and so many things would have to be changed for "fairness" sake which at the end of the day is not fair at all. That's why I chose just to deny your statement without any explanation earlier.


Last edited by SoundAndFury: 10-14-2012 at 12:06 PM.
SoundAndFury is offline