View Single Post
Old
11-06-2012, 05:20 PM
  #31
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,252
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Revenue sharing should only go to teams that deserve it, like Nashville. That's a well run business that needs help now but with a realistic shot at making everyone money later.

The Islanders shouldn't get revenue sharing, they're a terribly run business that deserves to lose money.

I have no idea what you can tie revenue sharing to that reflects how well run your team is.
Actually for the last couple of days I was thinking if there was some other metric that could be used for good stewardship, and I could never think of any. its going to have to be revenue or at least rate of change of revenues, it would punish teams at the bottom and at the top.

As bad as the isles have been, lets see how it shakes out in brooklyn. I dont think that it will be the answer to all of their problems but the new arena most likely wont hurt, and its not like they can trade the owner.

If the isles cant make a run of it in one of the worlds most populous sports cities with a brand spanking new arena, then it might be time to re-evaluate the competence of ownership. A bad lease/building can sink a ship no matter how well it is run.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote