View Single Post
11-13-2012, 09:02 PM
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 4,973
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
to argue that losing a team in a non traditional market ( like the spos or the Griz) is not a PR failure of epic proportions. MLB and the NBA decided that those two markets could not support the teams that were there. No one shed a tear when Atlanta all but washed their hands of the Thrashers and they move back to the PEG. How is it okay that the owners of the thrashers walking away from the team is not a PR disaster, but the inability to find a buyer for the yotes or the fiasco that is developing in columbus is something to be avoided at all costs ?

The yotes are an embarassment not because the market cannot support a team but because the NHL itself couldn't make a go of it even after extorting the CoG with that ridiculous arena management subsidy.
"Non-traditional" market is a phrase that exists only in the NHL.

Simply put, the media that covers MLB and the NBA has no agenda towards the success or failure of the Grizzlies, Raptors, Expos or Blue Jays. James Naismith who invented basketball was Canadian.

All four of those teams were expansion teams, and the US media viewed the expansion of the sport into Canada as an imperialistic inevitabilty. The American way of life spreading... like democracy and capitalism... (We tend to be egotistical jerks that way).

The media has not treated hockey the same way. And I am not making a Canada-USA distinction with the media here. The US was full of media skeptics, quick to jump on the "hockey in the desert?" train (because controversy sells in the media, and it's an easier approach to take than to hit the pavement, ask people, talk to economists and do your homework. It's a classic talking heads move... there's no downside if you're wrong).

The Grizzlies and Expos were not cases of "BASKETBALL failed in Vancouver" or "Canadians don't like baseball." It was merely "The Expos were poorly managed and that franchise relocated, like the Washington Senators, Milwaukee Braves, Brooklyn Dodgers, New York Giants, Philadelphia As, etc.

That can happen in Winnipeg, Quebec, Cleveland, Minnesota, Hartford, Kansas City and Denver -- and it did -- and it was not an indictment on the sport.

It happened in Atlanta. Like you said, no one shed a tear. There were plenty of "the Atlanta hockey experient failed again" stories when the Thrashers moved.

But if PHX and FLA were to move on the heels of Atlanta's relocation, it's an epidemic. It's "The NHL's southern experiment failed. Hockey isn't popular"

Honestly, I think the NHL is super interested in expanding to 32 teams, so that they can steer Phoenix towards Houston. If the Coyotes move within the South, you cut off a lot of those "Southern Hockey failed" stories, because Houston's chances with an NHL team would be compared to Dallas (favorable, since Dallas was killing it before Hicks bought Liverpool).

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote