1997 expansion approval
View Single Post
12-27-2012, 03:33 PM
Join Date: Jun 2006
Originally Posted by
Those long time rivalries are good for the game. As a fan, if there was ever a home and home series I'd travel to watch, it would be Pittsburgh/Philly, or perhaps Pittsburgh/Washington. But Pens/Philly would be my first choice.
Good for the game or good for the fans of those teams, who are accustomed to those rivalries? I say it's time to put those fans to the test and see if all they are are fans of rivalries or fans of hockey. In many instances, it's certain teams that fans everywhere would like to see their team competing with; but Columbus fans, for instance, don't get much opportunity to see the Blue Jackets play their closest geographic opponent, Pittsburgh, not even if Columbus were to be put in the East because the Blue Jackets would almost certainly be slotted into the Southeast.
Or take Vancouver; if it's supposed to be such a strong market, then give the Canucks the Pacific and we'll see if the fans still attend as many games. And then Dallas can have an alignment which not only makes more sense to the Stars fans but also doesn't mean games being televised late at night.
The League did a great job of growing itself, IMO, but it has certainly put or allowed many franchises to be in a situation of swim or drown, with no lifejacket.... 'Here, here's a franchise for your city, but it's not our problem how poorly the ownership manages the franchise, and you take whatever alignment grouping we feel like fitting you into, because we're not disrupting established teams.'
Last edited by MoreOrr: 12-27-2012 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by MoreOrr