HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Accepting NHL´s offer could be a disaster for PA

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-15-2004, 10:49 AM
  #1
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,942
vCash: 500
Accepting NHL´s offer could be a disaster for PA

From my point of view its seems like the NHL´s offer could turn into a disaster for the players if they accept it.

First of all, a young player have no leverge whats so ever when it comes to negotiating contracts. I agree that arbitration is inflationary spiral but with this offer they would have no leverege unless they are Iginla caliber or 30 y/o. The way I see it seems likely that the talent pool overall in the NHL will drop considerably.(not dramatic but it will notice) Allot of players will get payed better in Russia for example. NHL will still attract the real stars and these players will get payed really well. Teams who never givesin in contract negotiations and keeps there lesser skilled players really low paid or lets them hold out will be successful. Its the teams who will be able to do this who will be able to attract the great players. This if anything would be a evil spiral that will hurt the players tremendously.

Second, with gauranteed contracts and a small window for teams in the cap between $38.6 million and $34.6 million will make the transfer market crazy. Players will be wheeled and dealt all over the place all the time. If a important player goes down it will be impossible to replace them.

As a result of the small cap window the majority of contracts will be really short. I wouldn´t be suprised if we started seeing 3 month and 6 month contracts out there for role players. If you combine this with the likely scenario of having a huge % of the players paid around 800K to 1500K is a tremendous blow for the PA.

Bettman is holding the game of hockey, the fans and the players hostage and playing with really high stakes. He is gambling with the entire american market. His track record in the NHL is terrible. Still this guys gets a standing ovation in hockeys home country Canada. Unbelivable. The fact that the majority of fans and media in Canada is supporting Bettman just because it would make Ottawa and Edmonton more competetive makes me sick... Well what do I know. I am only a hockey fanatic from sweden. Lets give bettman another standing ovation!

Ola is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 11:03 AM
  #2
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,917
vCash: 500
Personally

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola
From my point of view its seems like the NHL´s offer could turn into a disaster for the players if they accept it.

First of all, a young player have no leverge whats so ever when it comes to negotiating contracts. I agree that arbitration is inflationary spiral but with this offer they would have no leverege unless they are Iginla caliber or 30 y/o. The way I see it seems likely that the talent pool overall in the NHL will drop considerably.(not dramatic but it will notice) Allot of players will get payed better in Russia for example. NHL will still attract the real stars and these players will get payed really well. Teams who never givesin in contract negotiations and keeps there lesser skilled players really low paid or lets them hold out will be successful. Its the teams who will be able to do this who will be able to attract the great players. This if anything would be a evil spiral that will hurt the players tremendously.

Second, with gauranteed contracts and a small window for teams in the cap between $38.6 million and $34.6 million will make the transfer market crazy. Players will be wheeled and dealt all over the place all the time. If a important player goes down it will be impossible to replace them.

As a result of the small cap window the majority of contracts will be really short. I wouldn´t be suprised if we started seeing 3 month and 6 month contracts out there for role players. If you combine this with the likely scenario of having a huge % of the players paid around 800K to 1500K is a tremendous blow for the PA.

Bettman is holding the game of hockey, the fans and the players hostage and playing with really high stakes. He is gambling with the entire american market. His track record in the NHL is terrible. Still this guys gets a standing ovation in hockeys home country Canada. Unbelivable. The fact that the majority of fans and media in Canada is supporting Bettman just because it would make Ottawa and Edmonton more competetive makes me sick... Well what do I know. I am only a hockey fanatic from sweden. Lets give bettman another standing ovation!
I don't think that a young player coming into the league should have ANY leverage. I also believe that the amount of years (4) is to short, especially when you consider that they will have the UFA age lowered. I think the league offered 30? that will probably be negotiated to a more reasonable number of say 28.

The NHL has always been a league that had more player movement than the other leagues so that's not a concern. As for the small gap between floor and ceiling, that's something that will be negotiated to widen as well. Something more along the lines of 33-41 million seems like a much mroe fair gap between the 2.

While I do believe that the Owners need to better police themselves, the flip side to that coin is that even with the 24% rollback in salaries, the players are making way to much money.

pld459666 is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 11:09 AM
  #3
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,701
vCash: 500
Quote:
the flip side to that coin is that even with the 24% rollback in salaries, the players are making way to much money.
BS, complete BS. roll back 24% and you have the players share of revenues right about where the league wants it. that's not "making way too much money"

wtf

Levitate is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 11:16 AM
  #4
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,917
vCash: 500
It's my opinion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate
BS, complete BS. roll back 24% and you have the players share of revenues right about where the league wants it. that's not "making way too much money"

wtf
not anything that the league may have said.

I don't believe that Jagr is worth 8 million or Holik is worth 6 million.

A 35% rollback across the board would be a good start in my opinion

pld459666 is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 11:19 AM
  #5
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,701
vCash: 500
they're worth that much if that's what the market can sustain.

Levitate is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 11:19 AM
  #6
Leetchie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Hillsborough, NJ
Posts: 892
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Leetchie
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666
not anything that the league may have said.

I don't believe that Jagr is worth 8 million or Holik is worth 6 million.

A 35% rollback across the board would be a good start in my opinion

What would you say if your employer said to you, "Well, we're losing money, so we're going to ask you to take a 35% paycut in order for us to continue doing business. In fact, we also have to take away some of your benefits as well."?

Regardless if I was overpaid or not, the contract we signed is a contract. It's guaranteed money. You should be glad I'm willing to roll it back 24%, let alone 35%.

As it is, players are seeing less than HALF of their paycheck (after taxes and the 24% rollback). What's next, 70% rollback?

Leetchie is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 11:27 AM
  #7
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,917
vCash: 500
I'd be pissed, but if I were making

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leetchie
What would you say if your employer said to you, "Well, we're losing money, so we're going to ask you to take a 35% paycut in order for us to continue doing business. In fact, we also have to take away some of your benefits as well."?

Regardless if I was overpaid or not, the contract we signed is a contract. It's guaranteed money. You should be glad I'm willing to roll it back 24%, let alone 35%.

As it is, players are seeing less than HALF of their paycheck (after taxes and the 24% rollback). What's next, 70% rollback?
11 million in an industry that clearly cannot support that salary, I'd be thankful that I can still make 7 million.

If I liken it to my current industry, if I wanted to stay in this firld I would say I'd take the pay cut. If i wanted to make the same amount that I am making now I would find another firld to do so. If there was no other forum in which I could ply my trade and make the 11 million, I would accept the 7 million and be thankful that I still have the ability to earn such an absurd salary.

pld459666 is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 11:31 AM
  #8
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,917
vCash: 500
I answered the question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leetchie
What would you say if your employer said to you, "Well, we're losing money, so we're going to ask you to take a 35% paycut in order for us to continue doing business. In fact, we also have to take away some of your benefits as well."?

Regardless if I was overpaid or not, the contract we signed is a contract. It's guaranteed money. You should be glad I'm willing to roll it back 24%, let alone 35%.

As it is, players are seeing less than HALF of their paycheck (after taxes and the 24% rollback). What's next, 70% rollback?
but to compare me to any professional athelete is comparing apples to cabbages

I personally would flip burgers to make ends meet if I had to. I have no shame in doin what ever it take to pay the bills. No shame at all.

pld459666 is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 12:12 PM
  #9
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,473
vCash: 500
Pld..

what's worth? Worth is what a team will pay you, which is often based on what the fans and sponsors will pay you. It's not an absolute term.

Fletch is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 12:20 PM
  #10
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
History tells the fans and the players one thing

like any employer, the owner will look to screw the employee any time they get the chance. By that I mean name the last time a owner payed a player what they were trully worth when they, the owner, had the leverage? Let's look at Holik as an example. It has been widely discussed that Holik asked for around $4.5 to $5M a season from the devils during the final year of his contract. The devils decided to play a game of chicken, they lost. Their last offer of $8M per was bested by 2 clubs, the Leafs and the Rangers. Now is a checking center worth $8M, no. So the question is, if the Devils went up to $8M while couldn't they agree to the $5M when he was still under contract?

This type of thing happens all the time. Look at the NY Yankees and Bernie Williams. They ended up overpaying because they also allowed him to hit the open market and teams raised the price.

Do any fans, or owners for that matter, actually think that players love to uproot their families? Did you enjoy stability in your family life growing up (disfunctional democrats need no reply, we all know the answer)?

BADDMAN is determined to have it his way or no way, even at the expense of doing great harm to the game. This is the classic case of an out of control egomaniac who has to have it his way. The only way to settle this is his way, there are no other alternatives in his world.

But pray tell, who negotiated these last 2 bad CBA's?

ATLANTARANGER* is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 12:43 PM
  #11
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,805
vCash: 500
The last 2 CBA's were not a problem becuase of expansion

Owners greedily drank up the millions that they made on all of expansion that Bettman did. However, now when there is no more expansion and when the majority of the expansion markets are proving to be collosal mistakes, all of a sudden there are issues.
Again, I do not understand the mentality that players must be responsible for the owners' spending habits.

True Blue is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 01:26 PM
  #12
Chief
Registered User
 
Chief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NY, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666
I don't believe that Jagr is worth 8 million or Holik is worth 6 million.
But is Sather worth $5 mill a year?

Players aren't the only ones getting paid "too much" in hockey.

In the end, I have no problem with the better players getting paid whatever someone is willing to pay them because they are the one's I want to see when I go to a game. If you're telling me that Atlanta is coming to town and they will be without Kovalchuk and Heatley, then I've got almost no interest in checking them out. Calgary's coming to town without Iginla? No thanks. And so on...

If there's one complaint I have about player salaries, it's with the guys who aren't stars and the younger players' entry level salaries. Does Jason Doig really deserve $750,000? Does Wayne Primeau deserve to be a millionaire? Has Jamie Lundmark done anything to deserve $1 million+ per year for the last few years?

Chief is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 01:41 PM
  #13
Chief
Registered User
 
Chief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NY, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
Owners greedily drank up the millions that they made on all of expansion that Bettman did. However, now when there is no more expansion and when the majority of the expansion markets are proving to be collosal mistakes, all of a sudden there are issues.
Again, I do not understand the mentality that players must be responsible for the owners' spending habits.
Although I tend to agree with you with regard to the players' role in salaries, you can't overlook the fact that the union and the players were on board with all the expansion because it meant a lot of new jobs for players. I have no problem with the players feeling some of the sting of failed expansion.

That said, I think people are too quick to call expansion teams failures. It takes time to build something and I think it's too soon to say if some expansion markets will succeed. There are plenty of "established" teams that are doing a worse job than some of the expansion teams. For example, if I'm not mistaken, Columbus was a better draw at the gate last year than either Chicago or Boston.

Chief is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 01:53 PM
  #14
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 14,210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
Owners greedily drank up the millions that they made on all of expansion that Bettman did. However, now when there is no more expansion and when the majority of the expansion markets are proving to be collosal mistakes, all of a sudden there are issues.
Again, I do not understand the mentality that players must be responsible for the owners' spending habits.
Collossal mistakes? Where the hell did you get that idea? Look, the expansion teams that have had the most problems (being Florida, Ottawa and Anaheim) have all suffered more from poor management/ownership than from poor markets. Who the hell could try to argue that Ottawa is a bad market anyway? And on the other hand, Tampa Bay, San Jose, Atlanta, and Nashville have all been drawing pretty well. Dallas, another non-traditional market, has done the same.

The problem here is not market, it's management and success. The Panthers, Ducks and Hurricanes have all had single years of great success followed by years of no success. Not a recipe for prosperity. Fans become disillusioned when they have a team that does what those teams did. The Coyotes have never been good enough to drudge up a LOT of interest in a new market. The years they had success with Roenick and Burke there, they drew very well. But it wasn't big enough or long enough.

The problem isn't over-expansion, it's poor management. We've had 13 expansion teams including teams moving from one place to another. NINE of them are doing fine for the time being. 4 of them are struggling... hardly what I would call a majority.

Tawnos is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 02:18 PM
  #15
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos
Collossal mistakes? Where the hell did you get that idea? Look, the expansion teams that have had the most problems (being Florida, Ottawa and Anaheim) have all suffered more from poor management/ownership than from poor markets. Who the hell could try to argue that Ottawa is a bad market anyway? NINE of them are doing fine for the time being. 4 of them are struggling... hardly what I would call a majority.
I'm sorry, but I would not call Nashville, Florida, Tampa, Anaheim, & Atlanta as doing well. I would lump Carolina into that group becuase they were actuall moved into that market. I have been to games in Tampa as early as last year. The place is not filled. They got filled (almost) last year only becuase of the Cup run. The same way that the Carolina arena appeared to be full, but only during the finals. Tampa was one of the worst places to move to. Florida? Not only is one team in a state that could absolutely care less about hockey is not enough, but you need two?
Atlanta? I have spent a good deal of time in Hotlanta. Great place. However, about one of the absolute worst sports towns around. The care about Nascar #1, and then, MAYBE they spend some time on the Braves. A good friend of mine works for NAPA. So his company had a tickets to all the events. I have been to every single big sporting event in Atlanta. They could absolutely care less about the Hawks and Falcons. Have you actually been to a Trashers game? I have. Not much to speak of as far as attendance goes.
Anaheim? What one team in California is not enough? How well are the Kings doing? Well enough to say that the California market needs 3 teams?
Carolina is a joke and does not even deserved to be talked about.

"Fans become disillusioned when they have a team that does what those teams did. "

Fans did not suddenly become disillisioned. They came out to see a novelty in those towns and ONLY during the late round playoffs and Finals. As early as the beginning of next year, the arenas were empty again.

"The problem isn't over-expansion, it's poor management."

We'll just have to agree to disagree. Yes, poor management has plaqued the NHL. However, expanding into 9 new markets in 10 years was sheer lunacy. The NFL, which is infinently more popular than the NHL could ever dream of, would never do that. The NBA, at the height of it's popularity, would never do that. Problem is there are no less than 6 teams that play in markets that will NEVER allow them to be profitable becuase the majority of citizens in those towns do not even know that they have a hockey team. And even if they did, they could absolutely care less about it.

True Blue is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 02:55 PM
  #16
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 14,210
vCash: 500
Facts for 2004.

Tampa Bay's average attendance was higher than Edmonton's. Atlanta's average attendance was higher than Boston's. Anaheim's average attendance was higher than New Jersey's.

If you want to talk specifically sunbelt teams, we'll talk about Carolina, Florida, Tampa, Atlanta, Nashville, Dallas, Phoenix, Anaheim, San Jose, and Los Angeles. That's 10 teams. Of course, you failed to mention Dallas... who knows why. 6 of those teams had over 85% capacity last season (Dallas 99%; Los Angeles 98.6%; San Jose 90.5%; Tampa Bay 90.2%; Phoenix 89%; Anaheim 87.3%). Florida and Atlanta both broke the 80% mark... something that the New Jersey Devils failed to do. Nashville was at 77%... but given that this was their first year of any success at all, expect those numbers to go up when the NHL comes back. Carolina was at 65%.

The fact that Atlanta broke 80% despite never having had success is indicative of the potential of hockey in that city. Aside from their first season (novelty factor), Atlanta's attendance record has been increasing on a year to year basis.

Nashville had pretty high attendance rates in their first few years. Lack of success caused their numbers to slip... but as I said, the team is getting better, interest will be resparked.

I agree that Carolina is in some serious trouble. Florida in some. Anaheim in less. But we've seen this before... I stick to the disillusionment factor. That kind of thing has killed baseball in Montreal and Miami.

You say you've been to games, but these numbers don't lie. There is enough interest in most of these markets to draw fine if the teams can be successful. Once they are successful for a while (ie the Stars, the Sharks) then they'll be fine.

edit: those are all regular season numbers

Tawnos is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 03:11 PM
  #17
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
Under BADDMAN the league has moved into markets

Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
I'm sorry, but I would not call Nashville, Florida, Tampa, Anaheim, & Atlanta as doing well. I would lump Carolina into that group becuase they were actuall moved into that market. I have been to games in Tampa as early as last year. The place is not filled. They got filled (almost) last year only becuase of the Cup run. The same way that the Carolina arena appeared to be full, but only during the finals. Tampa was one of the worst places to move to. Florida? Not only is one team in a state that could absolutely care less about hockey is not enough, but you need two?
Atlanta? I have spent a good deal of time in Hotlanta. Great place. However, about one of the absolute worst sports towns around. The care about Nascar #1, and then, MAYBE they spend some time on the Braves. A good friend of mine works for NAPA. So his company had a tickets to all the events. I have been to every single big sporting event in Atlanta. They could absolutely care less about the Hawks and Falcons. Have you actually been to a Trashers game? I have. Not much to speak of as far as attendance goes.
Anaheim? What one team in California is not enough? How well are the Kings doing? Well enough to say that the California market needs 3 teams?
Carolina is a joke and does not even deserved to be talked about.

"Fans become disillusioned when they have a team that does what those teams did. "

Fans did not suddenly become disillisioned. They came out to see a novelty in those towns and ONLY during the late round playoffs and Finals. As early as the beginning of next year, the arenas were empty again.

"The problem isn't over-expansion, it's poor management."

We'll just have to agree to disagree. Yes, poor management has plaqued the NHL. However, expanding into 9 new markets in 10 years was sheer lunacy. The NFL, which is infinently more popular than the NHL could ever dream of, would never do that. The NBA, at the height of it's popularity, would never do that. Problem is there are no less than 6 teams that play in markets that will NEVER allow them to be profitable becuase the majority of citizens in those towns do not even know that they have a hockey team. And even if they did, they could absolutely care less about it.
where hockey was never really a main sport, not even on the minor league level. I live in atlanta and Atlanta is not a major league sports town, it is a college sports town. If the hawks and thrashers fell off the face of the earth no one here would even know that they are gone. The braves haven't produced and people feel so so about them. There is more traffic and tie ups when a college game or top high school games are going on. Heck, my son's H.S. Championship soccer game a few years age drew 10,000! H.S. soccer in football country!

I've gone to games in tampa, florida, carolina, atlanta when ever the rangers are in town and just because its the rangers they get some of their biggest attendance figures of the year. Look at carolina. There is DUKE, UNC Chapel Hill, WAKE FORREST, NC STATE, UNC Greensboro all within 30 miles! They think hockey is what you do when you skip school!

ATLANTARANGER* is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 03:30 PM
  #18
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos
Tampa Bay's average attendance was higher than Edmonton's. Atlanta's average attendance was higher than Boston's. Anaheim's average attendance was higher than New Jersey's.
I cannot comment on Boston or Edmonton. I have no idea about attendance there. However, New Jersey is (and has been) yet another not very well thought out market. Getting to the Meadowlands to see the Devils is a nightmare. And, the fact is no matter how well they do and how poorly the Rangers do, the Devils will always be second fiddle. Even in their own state. Shame really.

"If you want to talk specifically sunbelt teams, we'll talk about Carolina, Florida, Tampa, Atlanta, Nashville, Dallas, Phoenix, Anaheim, San Jose, and Los Angeles. That's 10 teams. Of course, you failed to mention Dallas... who knows why."

I did not mention Dallas because there is no need to do so. They are doing very well. I did not say that every expansion market was a disaster. Just most.

"The fact that Atlanta broke 80% despite never having had success is indicative of the potential of hockey in that city. Aside from their first season (novelty factor), Atlanta's attendance record has been increasing on a year to year basis."

You can contrive whatever numbers you want, I have probably been to more Trashers games than you have. I go to Hotlanta every year. Love the place. However, what you see on TV does not lie. You say what you want, but Atlanta is a horrible sports city. They could care less about the Trashers. Half of the friggin' town has no idea they even have a team. Want to tell me Atlanta is such a hot hockey market? Go ahead. However, there is a reason that their games appear to be devoid of fans when you watch them on tv. It is becuase the are.

"That kind of thing has killed baseball in Montreal and Miami."

Miami is not a great sports city. All they care about are the Dolphins and Miami U. What killed baseball in Montreal was the strike. Fans never forgave and never forgot. They just forgot about the Expos. The same thing is slowly happening to the Blue Jays in Toronto. Never the same since the strike ended the '94 season.

"You say you've been to games, but these numbers don't lie."

Not every one, but yeah, when I am in another sports city, I love to check out other teams, stadiums, and venues. I cannot get into a numbers debate, but I am telling you that NO ONE cares about the Trashers in Atlanta and NO ONE cares about neither the Panthers nor the 'Bolts in Florida. When I was there arenas were empty. Heck, my friends were able to walk up to the ticket window during the Finals and purchase tickets. What kind of a great hockey place is it when they cannot sell out the Stanley Cup Finals?

True Blue is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 03:32 PM
  #19
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATLANTARANGER
I live in atlanta and Atlanta is not a major league sports town, it is a college sports town. If the hawks and thrashers fell off the face of the earth no one here would even know that they are gone.
Maybe you should explain it to the guy who is trying to convince us of what kind of a terrific hockey market Atlanta is.

True Blue is offline  
Old
12-15-2004, 04:02 PM
  #20
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 14,210
vCash: 500
Stop twisting my words. I didn't say Atlanta is a "terrific" hockey city. I said the potential is there and for a 4 year old expansion team without any success, they're doing fine. There is nothing that screams failure in Atlanta. If Atlanta has no interest in hockey, then who were the 15,000+ fans per game that went?

I know the Devils situation... I was making a point. The Devils aren't considered a failure by anyone... yet these teams are drawing more than them. That's my point. As for Boston and Edmonton... again, my point was that those are both great hockey markets. Yet these so-called failures drew more than them... go figure.

The situation in Montreal is sad. Yes, the strike hurt... but combine that with two facts: A) The Expos were in first place when the strike hit and B) The Expos sold off most of their players after the strike and you have the disillusionment I was talking about. Somehow, you missed the point about the Marlins. When the Marlins won in 1997... interest was high. Following that season, they sold off most of their players and were terrible... creating disillusionment.

Also, Tampa held tickets in the Finals for walk ups and they sold out every game. And I've been to games in Sunrise where the Panthers play. There are plenty of people there. They just need success to garner interest.

Tawnos is offline  
Old
12-16-2004, 11:12 AM
  #21
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
In case you don't know this

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos
Stop twisting my words. I didn't say Atlanta is a "terrific" hockey city. I said the potential is there and for a 4 year old expansion team without any success, they're doing fine. There is nothing that screams failure in Atlanta. If Atlanta has no interest in hockey, then who were the 15,000+ fans per game that went?

I know the Devils situation... I was making a point. The Devils aren't considered a failure by anyone... yet these teams are drawing more than them. That's my point. As for Boston and Edmonton... again, my point was that those are both great hockey markets. Yet these so-called failures drew more than them... go figure.

The situation in Montreal is sad. Yes, the strike hurt... but combine that with two facts: A) The Expos were in first place when the strike hit and B) The Expos sold off most of their players after the strike and you have the disillusionment I was talking about. Somehow, you missed the point about the Marlins. When the Marlins won in 1997... interest was high. Following that season, they sold off most of their players and were terrible... creating disillusionment.

Also, Tampa held tickets in the Finals for walk ups and they sold out every game. And I've been to games in Sunrise where the Panthers play. There are plenty of people there. They just need success to garner interest.

there is a very large canadian population in Atlanta. Many Leaf, Canadien & Oiler & Flames fans attend when ever those teams are in town. They sellout the Ranger games because half the building is from NY. There are also a ton people from Chicago and Detroit!
That is like saying the Devils drew well tonight and then realize they played the Rangers! They average about 12,000 when you take out the people attending to see their favorite team from their home state.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline  
Old
12-16-2004, 02:11 PM
  #22
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 14,210
vCash: 500
Transplants often become fans. Look at all the Dodgers and Giants fans that became Mets fans in NY.

Perfect example, my grandfather... after being lifelong NY sports fan who moved to Florida... became a Marlins fan when he started by going to see the Mets or Dodgers play in Miami. Yeah, he started by going to just see his home team, but after a few years... he grew into a Marlins fan.

Tawnos is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:52 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.