Paul Wozniak said:It's funny how winning influences attendance, isn't it?
Plus having a super star on the team
Paul Wozniak said:It's funny how winning influences attendance, isn't it?
Plus having a super star on the team
why? Too simple of a question for you to answer? Why place teams in areas where the support is nil? To say "yeah we're here"? Since you feel the NHL should be in Houston...using that theory lets put a NBA team in Anchorage Alaska and Missoula Montana. Lets put a MLB team in Boise, Idaho or Tupelo, Mississippi. Why? To say "yeah we're here"Your qustion is, in fact, undeserving of an answer, because it pre-suposes facts that simply are not true.
If we define a hockey area as a place with HS hockey, then what about Pittsburgh? What about LA? What about Dallas? Etc.
Let's try to put it in simple terms, hopefully one even you can understand:Your qustion is, in fact, undeserving of an answer, because it pre-suposes facts that simply are not true.
If we define a hockey area as a place with HS hockey, then what about Pittsburgh? What about LA? What about Dallas? Etc.
It is called growing a sport. Making it national.
Or, you can just go back to Canada, and be a non-entity in the USA on a national basis.
Let's try to put it in simple terms, hopefully one even you can understand:
You're the owner of the Atlanta NHL franchise. You've done the right thing to try to grow and expand the sport, but your team is bleeding cash. You can't get the community support you need and you can't seem to turn things around on the ice. Another city shows interest in having you move there and will give to a sweetheart deal to do so.
Are you saying that as the owner of this troubled franchise, can you in all honesty say you would take one for the league and keep the team in Atlanta??
Your bolded point above would make sense if the league hadn't already tried expanding to these areas. They have, and for some it hasn't worked. Time now to move to where they're wanted.
JAG72 said:Winning does more for attendance than a super star.
But with the superstar you win more games than without.
JAG72 said:I agree to a point. Having a superstar does not make a winning team. Just look at my Blue Jackets.
I remain glad none of you people had the ear of winners like Walter O'Malley, Pete Rozelle, or Lamar Hunt.
Do you remember the NHL's national position prior to the recent national expansions? The NHL was not a national sport. It was not on national TV. It was not covered nationally at all.
True, Sid's first year was horrible till he got better players and coach around him.
JAG72 said:I keep waiting for the same thing out of Nash.
I remain glad none of you people had the ear of winners like Walter O'Malley, Pete Rozelle, or Lamar Hunt.
Do you remember the NHL's national position prior to the recent national expansions? The NHL was not a national sport. It was not on national TV. It was not covered nationally at all.