View Single Post
12-20-2012, 10:28 AM
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I would argue that the existing teams had some responsibility beyond pocketing the expansion fee to add teams that were set up for success, and not failure. And maybe the owners that bought into the expansion teams didn't do a very good job with due diligence or with understanding the pressure points of running NHL teams.

For starters, adding teams that quickly put a massive strain on talent supply levels. If you consider that an average player takes five years to develop, from the point he's drafted to being NHL-ready, what does it say to add that many teams in about a decade? Where were they going to get players? They have to build up development programs, farm teams, a draft record.... and do this while they're already operating as an NHL team.

If you then factor that it seems fans in newer US markets are mainly attracted by a record of winning (at least initially), how the heck were these teams going to compete at THAT level? They'd need a good 10-15 yrs just to become a regular old NHL team.
You're speaking out of a presumption that that expansion has failed. I think that that's a bit of a tough statement to defend. It's not like franchises have never had a tough road or needed to relocate before.

Dojji* is offline   Reply With Quote