View Single Post
12-26-2012, 12:21 PM
Registered User
turcotte8's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,871
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
That's simply false. More popularity equals more revenues, in the NHL's case it's been for the big market teams. The smaller market teams are left with a mess, which is why we are in this position today.

The thought that you can plant hockey anywhere and the game will organically grow is so inheritantly flawed that the NHL will never be healthy until its led by a commissioner who doesn't possess delusions of grandeur
I understand the league has too many teams in place that won't work and I'm all for contraction and/or franchises moving.

The point I was making was that owners should be trying to make the game more popular (which would include relocating/contraction) and as a result of that they would be making more money because the league would be healthier.

They seem to think that cutting costs is the answer and instead of trying to fix the league they are worrying too much about player costs when that isn't the solution to the problem just a temporary band aid.

turcotte8 is offline