View Single Post
07-31-2013, 06:22 PM
Riptide's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,274
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
The funny part is directly after the 2005 lockout, those low-revenue teams were Chicago, Washington and Pittsburgh. The pro-relocation crowd hardly talked about them. A couple loaded drafts later, they're leading their conferences and doing well in revenue.
No, I fully recognize that you can't always move the guy on the bottom. Because there'll always be someone at the bottom. That said, it might be time to end the NHLs experiment in the desert. The idea is that as long as the system can help them (ie subsidize them), then you accept that and move on. The issue becomes, well what happens when the subsidizing isn't enough?

These markets need to spend money to 'grow the game' locally. So that in 5-10 years, these kids with some money are now fans of hockey in general, and hopefully fans of your team. And then over a 10-20 year period, while you may not be a power house like Toronto, you could at least be a team that with help, is competitive, and can break even/post a profit. However, not every market will be able to do this. And unfortunately for Phoenix fans, they may be one such market. But hey, as long as the owner(s) are willing to take losses and keep them there, then it's not my problem.

As for more NHL teams... would love to see it happen. Would also love to have another team near Vancouver.

"Itís not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, itís as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."
Riptide is offline