I always thought that the moves into markets like Phoenix and Tampa Bay, particularly when those moves came at the expense of real hockey cities like Minneapolis and Winnipeg, was a huge mistake. It worked fine when the economy was booming, but now that the bubble is burst and the owners have burned all of those expansion fee dollars, the NHL is left with a league with too few popular players scattered over too many cities. There will either be a massive labor war or a culling of the weak-sister franchises.
Tampa Bay was an expansion team. The main problem with the NHL is not that teams were relocated from "Traditional Hockey markets" Their attendance on average is higher than Winnipeg, Hartford, Northstars and Quebec ever were. The main problem with the NHL is that the owners and players have allowed the Salaries to grow beyond their budget. Even the star players are admitting that.
The attendence were similar, it's just that the new cities were larger, so the teams could charge more money for tickets, and still get 15- 20 thousand to show up.But in winnipeg and quebec city, the fans were more passonate about the teams, and the teams were part of the community. umlike the expansion cities in the southen US
Quebec and Winnipeg sold out every seat. If they had mroe they would sell them too. Tampa Bay has what 21K seats- one of the biggest Arenas in the NHL? They rarely sell out. When comparing attendance in the big 4 I think % of capacity means more than total attendance. There are too many other factors to take into account when looking at total gross attendance.
Do your research. Quebec and Winnipeg did not sell out every seat. If the those fans are so passionate as every hockey purist claims, there should have been scalpers making a hefty profit of those hot tickets. Here's your attendance history http://www.hockeyresearch.com/mfoster/business/attendance.html Here's Winnipeg's attendance by year with their "passionate" fans. 1980: 13284 1981: 13265 1982: 13382 1983: 12889 1984: 12400 1985: 12994 1986: 13620 1987: 13594 1988: 12681 1989: 12816 1990: 13106 1991: 12931 1992: 12931 1993: 13550 1994: 13297 1995: 13013 1996: 11316 What I find amusing is that when a Canadian or "traditional american market" team is not doing well at the gate, it's because the fans are sending upper management a message that the teams sucks. Yet when the same thing happes in Tampa, Florida and Nashville, it's because Hockey doesn't work in the South. I don't hear anyone complaining about Dallas. Teams win, and attendance woes mysteriously disappear. Quoting El Jefe, "Self-styled hockey purists who would have no NHL teams outside of Canada, the Northeast, and the Midwest can suck it." Will everyone please wake up ane realize that the NHL is not in trouble due to the fact that they relocated those teams. They're in trouble because owners and players let salaries escalate beyond their budget. And that has nothing to do with where teams are playing. What would had happened if Bettman Salary cap of $16 million had been instituted back in '94? Additonally, Tampa has a capacity of 19,500, Calgary's is about 20,000. The Flames hardly sell out either, I guess we should move them back to Atlanta.
lets not also forget the exchange rates when dealing with canadian players. they earn canadian dollars, but have to pay the salaries in american, thats a huge difference.
Only if the rate is continuing to change. A sandwhich that costs US$2 in Detroit is not CN$2 in Toronto, it's CN$3. Likewise a US$50 hockey ticket is CN$75. As long as the exchange rate is flat, the canadian/american dollar stuff is bogus. Now someone who bought a Canadian team back when the exchange rate was 85:100 has definitely been hurt. One of the big differences is that teams/salaries are taxed differently in the US and Canada. But then I know the western Canada teams charge a tax on visiting players and teams. A tax which is remitted back to the home teams. It's quite controversial.
Because I don't believe that point makes any difference. The only % of capacity that matters is 100%. A non-sellout is a non-sellout.
This is largely true, but still an oversimplification. The Phoenix Coyotes, who've never been in the same class as Detroit and Colorado, but still a perennial playoff team, saw attendance fall more than 15 percent between '98-99 and last season. The LA Kings, who are about on par with Phoenix in terms of on-ice success, have always played to several thousand empty seats a night. Now, it is clear that there's a distinct correlation between winning percentage and attendance. But it's also clear that there are markets that have taken to hockey (Columbus, for example) and markets that don't seem to be able to support even a winning team (Los Angeles, Phoenix). Winning may be everything, but in terms of attendance, it's not the only thing.
I believe that Phoenix hasn't made the playoffs since 2000, that and there are many seats in that arena with obstructed views.
Phoenix made the playoffs last year, you probably forgot as most did because they were the first team bounced. Also, I think Calgary's arena now seats around 17,500. I'll check when I get home tonight and throw up the figure. The Saddledome got remodeled sometime in the 90s.
I believe taxes are the biggest reason for the disparity between Canadian and Stateside teams. Around the time when the Grizzlies moved to Memphis, there was an article somewhere that showed the percentages of revenue that went to respective governments. Under the NBA structure (which is easily better than baseball or hockey), taxes essentially ate the entire margin for the owners. Add declining attendance and a marginal local TV stream, and it was atrocious. Also, lots of municipalities (not just Canada) are starting to collect their taxes on visiting athletes. There were a spate of articles about this after the A-Rod deal, as I recall. Apparently, localities always had a right to that money, but the hassle in collecting it wasn't worth it. However, your .0185 share of a 25 million dollar salary from a three game homestand is a cool half-million.
According to ballparks.com, Le Colisee seats 15,750. The Winnipeg Arena seats 15,393. Using the figures that JMU Soccer pulled up, the Jets "sold out" the Winnipeg Arena at the following percentages of capacity: 1980: 86.3 1981: 86.18 1982: 86.94 1983: 83.73 1984: 80.56 1985: 84.41 1986: 88.48 1987: 88.31 1988: 82.38 1989: 83.26 1990: 85.14 1991: 84.01 1992: 84.01 1993: 88.03 1994: 86.38 1995: 84.54 1996: 73.51 And Phoenix? According to the same site, America West Arena seats 16,210 for hockey. 1997: 96.26 1998: 95.03 1999: 95.92 2000: 92.48 2001: 87.75 2002: 81.19 Shall we do the same comparison between Denver and Quebec City? I'll spare you the numbers, but suffice to say that Denver fans have filled McNichols Arena and the Pepsi Center much fuller than the "passionate" Quebec fans filled Le Colisee. And for the record, Raleigh fans have filled the RBC Center better than Hartford fans filled the Civic Center. And Dallas fans have filled Reunion Arena and the American Airlines Center better than Minnesota fans filled the Met Center. JMU Soccer is right. The problem with the NHL isn't the southward migration of teams, it's the ridiculous salaries paid to players that are completely out of line with league revenues. And chief amongst the culprits in the escalation of salaries would be the Rangers. Color me shocked that you'd rather blame Dallas and Phoenix and Denver than the idiots running your team.
18159 is the largest crowd in Calgary this season. I can't find the exact number of seating capacity, but it can't be more than that since it was NYE vs. Montreal.
Woo- slow down. I never said teams like Dallas and Denver were the problem. Teams like Nashville, Atlanta, Florida are the problem. As I said before just looking at gross attendance numbers is not the answer to the problem. There are so many factors to look at- "The Honeymoon Period" see Phoenix and Nashville, "The New Building Period", etc. Taking a a 4 or 5 year snipet of attendance with a new team in a new city, against a team that was on the verge of being moved is not so scientific. If the RBC center was built in Hartford, then it would still be the Whalers there. No one in Hartford was willing to pay NHL prices for a seat in a mall. You put an AHL team in there and woila, it is doing much better. Hartford and Winnipeg were horrible, horrible buildings. Even the LeColise was pretty poor. The problem goes deeper than teams like Buffalo and Ottawa goin Chpt 11, it is overexpansion to the wrong places. The talent level has been diluted so teams can play in Corporate Playhouses in Atlanta and Miami. Contraction is the only answer.
Why is it the North Stars couldn't draw flies with a Cup Final Team, and the Wild can with a borderline playoff team?
Like I said, those teams win, and all their problems go away. Well, that's not the NHL's fault is it? IF the arenas were so bad that the fans didn't want to come to games, and the cities weren't willing to build new arenas, what's the point of the league staying there? Yeah, we can't watch dynasties blow away every other mediocre team in the league like the 80's. Talent dillusion is a myth, the fall of the Berlin wall and the emergence of the American player has been enough to fill the void. What will contraction do? It will lop off two teams, but how will that solve the leagues finances? It will just put more high salaried players on fewer teams. Contraction is not the answer, a bargaining agreement that makes better economic sense is.
I hope adam sees this as he'll be able to provide more than I could, but I have to believe stable ownership played/plays a role. It's my understanding that Minny fans were tired of being dicked around by incompetent ownershipe that changed every other year.
Also recall, that during that '90-'91 season, the Northstars, were near the bottom of the regular season standings, but due to the fact that only 5 teams missed the playoffs and that the horrid Maple Leafs were in the same division, they were able to make the playoffs. And in the playoffs a hot goalie (Jon Casey) can make you go far. Notice that during the next year, average attendance rose by almost 6000. At the time when the moved to Dallas, the team had had one winning season in the last 8.