Which league would do better in the long run, NHL or Players
View Single Post
12-09-2012, 02:41 PM
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Originally Posted by
There are 29 owners and its something like 10 are billionaires. (according to forbes)
If you brought in replacement players people will not pay the same gate, and the NHL has to know this. I know I wouldn't I don't spend money on Jr hockey or minor hockey, and if those guys came up, no shot I would pay for my ST anymore. Franchise values would drop quite a bit too.
You are going to have NHL teams drawing 3-4K a game with replacement players, people want the best if you are going to charge NHL prices. If there was a prolonged period of replacement players there would be several teams that fold. People barley pay for NHL talent in certain cities, there not going to come out and droves for a 25 year old that was could never make it. Over long haul more and more players (especially the stars) will just go over to KHL since they will pay the top 10-15 guys Millions.
I quoted billionaires figuring most NHL owners weren't literally billionaires but that was the term the person I quoted was using.
I don't disagree with most of what you're saying - I don't think replacement players or a new players' league will ever, ever happen. My point is that the players starting a new league (as opposed to going to the KHL or others) is totally unreasonable and the idea that there are rich people out there who will gladly throw players the startup for such a venture is insane.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by haveandare