View Single Post
Old
11-29-2012, 10:26 AM
  #8
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
 
Gump Hasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 8,405
vCash: 1200
Quote:
Originally Posted by CerebralGenesis View Post
You lead with, "Past performance is not at all indicative of future results" and then say how the USD will essentially suck forever because it is and has. What happens when it becomes more ideal to move a team to Milwaukee instead of Winnipeg? Moving them willy nilly should be avoided.
Well, no, that isn't what I said, at all. What I said was that past performance of the Canadian dollar doesn't necessarily dictate future results. What I essentially also said was that the economic outlook of the two nations is growing increasingly divergent. I said that moving a few under-performing teams to the region better equipped to support them is probably the prudent course to take. Not sure how you extrapolated anything beyond that.

Quote:
"Unfilled demand" because it is in Canada is a not an argument I'm a buyer of either, unfortunately.
You are free to ignore evidence that some of the poorly performing US franchises would be better off located elsewhere all you wish. The anecdotal evidence however is that Southern Ontario and Quebec are both under-served and historic hockey markets. The relative financial performance of Winnipeg versus Atlanta for example underscores that relocating teams to the above markets would prove a financial boon for the league. Another team in the GTA would be a financial home run, as would QC to a somewhat lesser extent.

Quote:
But I think I would like a 32 team league once they make the split to 4 superconferences and I don't think the talent pool will be that greatly affected.
I'm sure fans of the under-performing US markets would prefer that, as they could use even more cash generated elsewhere (expansion fees) to continue to underwrite the folly of teams located in markets that probably couldn't survive in the NHL otherwise.

Gump Hasek is offline