Penguins Get Arena Deal Done

[yh]

Quite the educated and enlightened conclusion. Look at a map sometime. KC is 200 miles from St. Louis. Apples and Oranges, amigo.

KC and St. Louis are opposites. Mainly opposite sides of the state. By gojetgo logic, Penn doesn't need two teams. Neither does NY, California. Oh and Canada, they just need one.

Plus, Yale and I need to be fiercer rivals. Blues/Penguins, rivals in the making.

God, that would be awesome.

Shalom.

Now you're putting words in my mouth. I didn't say that every state should have only one team. But cities in the same state/province tend to be similar. Not always, but often. The hockey markets of Calgary and Edmonton are very similar, despite the fact that they are farther apart than KC and StL. Economics aside, I think the hockey support in Pittsburgh and Philly are also pretty similar. It's about geography. Some areas of the country like hockey and some like other sports. NASCAR, golf, WNBA, women's tennis, arena football - all sports that do better than hockey on TV and in attendance in most US markets.

Shalom.

KC and St. Louis are great sports towns. KC would do fine with the NHL because it would be the only big-time winter sports attraction, especially between January and April. The problem with KC's spotty hockey history has more to do with ownership and management deficiencies. It sure looks like the Pens' present ownership is doing what it can to right its ship and there can be little dispute they've got a good hockey guy at the helm. So long as they show a commitment to building a strong team they will get support. I think the Blues' woes at the gate will start to abate now that the new owners are making visible efforts to improve the product. Ditto the situation in KC with the Royals (well, except the part about new owners). It's cornball but somewhat true to refer to Missouri as the Show-Me state. If you show the fans you're committed to winning, you'll get a nice base of loyal fans through thick and thin. With the Blues under new and apparently energized ownership I feel quite confident that Missouri can maintain dual NHL citizenship on its respective shores.

[Viper]

Had the city and state similarly refused to fund the Pirates' and Steelers' new buildings, their refusal to do the same for the Pens would have been understandable. But once they set the precedent of funding PNC Park and Heinz Field, not funding a new Pens arena tells me that TPTB simply don't care whether or not the Pens stick around. As for Gary Bettman, I'm sure he'd prefer to keep the team in Pittsburgh but he doesn't strike me as the type of commissioner who would let them remain a lame-duck team for years on end, a la the Expos in Montreal. At some point he'll either fish or cut bait, and I strongly suspect that point is coming soon.

As for their new name, I always thought "Knights" would be a cool nickname for a hockey team in KC. On the other hand, it would work better if the team were to be playing on the Kansas side of the border (Kansas City, Kansas often goes by its initials KCK, and the KC Knights would have the same initials), but Sprint Center is in Missouri.

Edited to add: On the other other hand, the old Kansas City Kings also had the initials KCK and they played in Kemper Arena, which was on the Missouri side (albeit just barely, IIRC). So I guess the Knights nickname would work just fine there too.

[gojetsgo]

Never understood the "butts in the seats" argument. Sports attendance has always been, and always will be TICKETS DISTRIBUTED. If you're saying Winnipeg announced "butts in the seats" rather than tickets distributed like every other professional sports team in the world - you're mistaken.

If teams announced "butts in the seats" numbers, the Red Wings would be near the bottom of the league - even though they sell out every game.

And even Canadian teams give away tickets - a friend of mine just got free tickets to a Senators game. So don't think that all 15,000 seats would be sold tickets.

Also, the reason Minnesota has such better attendance now than it did then is because they're in St. Paul now. Not Minneapolis. People in St. Paul refused to go to Minneapolis to watch the North Stars so they boycotted the team.

Even if a team in Winnipeg did sell out every game, they would still struggle to make a profit because they would be hard pressed to get the corporate support other markets are capable of. Which is why a larger arena would be even more important. They would have to balance out the poor corporate support with great fan support - which they are plenty capable of doing, but a 15,000 seat arena might be too small to do that.

Nashville has a similar problem. They don't have the corporate support other teams have and they've basically been living completely off fan support. But Nashville actually has a good team - Winnipeg might not be so lucky if their team struggles like the old one did.

But atleast the Canadian dollar is doing better these days so that will give a team in Winnipeg a bit of an advantage over the old Jets.

Still, I can't picture Crosby in any uniform other than a Pens uniform. Hopefully they stay in Pitt. The Penguins fans need to start being more active. Mario is just doing this to hopefully get a rise out of the government and the fans to hopefully get something going as far as a new arena. Unfortunately, time is running out.

I think you're missing the point.

It's true, every team, including the old Jets announced tickets distributed. And it's also true that you can occaisionally get free tickets to games in Canada and some other hockey-mad US markets (although I've never gotten free Oilers tickets in the 2 years I've lived in Edmonton).

What I'm talking about is the HUGE discrepancy between the announced attendances and number of butts in the seats in markets such as Phoenix, St. Louis, Florida, Tampa, Miami, and Raleigh (before, after, and during the cup run) to name but a few. Look for it on TV - is it possible that everyone is in the bathroom at once?

You have to use common sense when thinking about this situation:

1. Hockey is a gate driven business. Period.

2. When the announced attendance is 13,000 and there are only 9,000 people in the building that means that AT LEAST 4,000 tickets, and probably more, were given away. It also means that 4,000 people didn't even bother to show up to watch the free hockey game - that says a lot about the hockey market right there.

3. Those give-away tickets were bought up by small, medium, and (mostly) large businesses. Hello corporate support!.

4. These corporations pay peanuts for tickets when they buy them by the hundreds. That means that the team gets nowhere near their average ticket prices in revenue - they'll get $9 a ticket instead of $40.

5. Less revenue = bad business. (duh)

For the most part, the people who run these teams aren't stupid. They give tickets away for two very good reasons: 1 - People aren't going to buy tickets anyway, so they might as well get some money for them. 2 - They need people in the seats, especially in the lower bowl to prevent their team from looking absolutely minor league-ish on national TV and in front of their own fans and players.

Ask someone in any Canadian city about their experiences in trying to get hockey tickets. The Oilers are the hottest ticket in Edmonton 41+ nights a year, and the same is true in the other 5 Canadian hockey cities and some US cities too. Now ask someone in Miami or Atlanta about how hard it is to get hockey tickets. They might ask, "We have a hockey team?"

When you sell 14,500 tickets at high prices and giving 500 away to corporations, that's one thing. Giving away a third or half of your tickets away for next to nothing is bad business and it's the reason many NHL teams are struggling financially despite posting such great attendances.

[HedleyLamarr]

Ask someone in any Canadian city about their experiences in trying to get hockey tickets. The Oilers are the hottest ticket in Edmonton 41+ nights a year, and the same is true in the other 5 Canadian hockey cities and some US cities too. Now ask someone in Miami or Atlanta about how hard it is to get hockey tickets. They might ask, "We have a hockey team?"

You should stick with subjects you know something about.

1. The only reason the Flames left Atlanta is because the Atlanta owner's real-estate business went belly-up, and he needed to sell the team to pay off his debts. A Calgary businessman approached him, bought the team, and moved the team to his hometown. It wasn't a lack of interest that the Flames left Atlanta.

2. Atlanta has grown exponentially since 1980. A great deal of the population boom is because of the Northern transplants.

3. Metro Atlanta has had two NHL and two minor-league hockey teams since 1972.

4. The Thrashers attendance (as well as many other Southern teams) is higher than that of Original-Six franchises Boston and Chicago.

It's these kinds of ignorant quotes some Canadians make that lead me to not sympathize with their "plight" of not having an NHL team in their respective cities. Winnipeg lost their team for a reason. If Winnipeg only drew an average of 13K in a market where hockey can't grow, why shouldn't have they moved to a place, like Phoenix, where they can draw 13K per game in a city where the sport can grow exponentially, both in the arena and in the community? Yes, Phoenix is going to lose money now, but long-term, once their natural fan-base grows, will be a profitting market. Ten years isn't enough time to grow that natural fan-base.

Kansas City is a market where the sport can grow. Seattle is a market where the sport can grow. Houston is a market where the sport can grow. Winnipeg's and Hamilton's hockey market won't grow much bigger should they be granted NHL teams.

[Ez Street]

Bravo, Hedley.

I'd also like to add...

There are rumours out of Pittsburgh that Mario was in KC yesterday looking at the Sprint Center.

I have yet to find anything online that confirms this.

[gojetsgo]

Ten years isn't enough time to grow that natural fan-base.

Just how long are people supposed to wait? I think that everyone can agree that 10 years is a decent amount of time to grow a fan base. The NHL has left places where they HAVE fans to go to places where they don't but there is potential. This argument about growing the game has some merit, but it shouldn't be the only consideration.

People should also consider the fact that the Coyotes have to compete with the MLB during the first 2 months and the NBA and NFL during most of their season. As far as popularity, these sports blow hockey out of the water.

Sure, with a metro area of a few million, there is plenty of potential. But will that potential be realized? If it doesn't work in 10 years, will it work in 20? Is that really a reasonable length of time to spend "growing" a fan base before the team stops losing money?

[youcan'tseeme]

Ten years isn't enough time to grow that natural fan-base.

Just how long are people supposed to wait? I think that everyone can agree that 10 years is a decent amount of time to grow a fan base. The NHL has left places where they HAVE fans to go to places where they don't but there is potential. This argument about growing the game has some merit, but it shouldn't be the only consideration.

People should also consider the fact that the Coyotes have to compete with the MLB during the first 2 months and the NBA and NFL during most of their season. As far as popularity, these sports blow hockey out of the water.

Sure, with a metro area of a few million, there is plenty of potential. But will that potential be realized? If it doesn't work in 10 years, will it work in 20? Is that really a reasonable length of time to spend "growing" a fan base before the team stops losing money?

exactly, Bettmen is almost 2 patient, these people don't like hockey, near as much as they do, MLB, NBA, NFL, NASCAR, and even Arena Football. They have all these sports their already and hockey's just another one, if you can't get tickets to one of the others.

i feel the main problem with southern teams is this. the kids. kids in canada gorw up watching, hockey, in thw inter we go out on the pond adn play pick-up, so what'sa kid in Miami gonna do in the middle of the winter when the heat and dolphins are taking up the air time? is he gonna go out a play some pick-up on the pond or the rink in his backyard? no cause the climate won't allow him to, is he gonna go in a hockey arena where the tempurature is below 0 when he could be out swimming in the 30 degree weather no he's not. people and these states can rearely grow up with the game, which is why they have bad attendence/support.

I'm not saying I don't want any southern teams, but when half the markets in your league are incapable of producing ice in the heart of winter their taking away from cities, like Winnipeg, Quebec city, Seattle , Portland, Des Moines adn opther Northern cities. Hockey's a season sport and that's the biggest problem.

[HedleyLamarr]

Ten years isn't enough time to grow that natural fan-base.

Just how long are people supposed to wait? I think that everyone can agree that 10 years is a decent amount of time to grow a fan base. The NHL has left places where they HAVE fans to go to places where they don't but there is potential. This argument about growing the game has some merit, but it shouldn't be the only consideration.

People should also consider the fact that the Coyotes have to compete with the MLB during the first 2 months and the NBA and NFL during most of their season. As far as popularity, these sports blow hockey out of the water.

Sure, with a metro area of a few million, there is plenty of potential. But will that potential be realized? If it doesn't work in 10 years, will it work in 20? Is that really a reasonable length of time to spend "growing" a fan base before the team stops losing money?

At least 15 years.

When I mentioned "natural fan-base", I'm referring to the fans that have no other alligence to other teams. The kids, the teenagers.....these are the folks the Sun Belt teams have to market towards. These kids' parents are hockey fans, but they've had/still have their partial alligence to the team they grew up watching.

Also, youth hockey tends to grow tremendously in these Southern NHL markets. More kids are getting exposed to the game. Atlanta is slowly becoming a hockey city. Attendance has been increasing for the past three seasons. Then you look at San Jose, Dallas, Tampa Bay, Nashville....these teams routinely sellout their games.

Growing natural fan-bases is generational...it doesn't just happen overnight.

[IceCap]

Growing natural fan-bases is generational...it doesn't just happen overnight.

I agree you can't just put a hockey team in the middle of the Sun Belt and expect fans to come flocking in over night. Still, there has to be a cut off point, a point where if there still isn't an interest in the game, then it's time to head up north, or to an other Sun Belt city with better potential. I think you're right about 15 years, but after that, if you're still not drawing fans, it's time to pack up and find a new home.

Atlanta, Dallas, San Jose, and Carolina are shinning (no pun intended) examples of NHL taking hold in the Sun Belt. These teams are draw well, and have a solid, loyal fan base. Tampa Bay is steadily on their way to that, maybe as soon as a year or two.

I'm still not sold on Nashville, as attendance has only really gone up since they've been competitive. They could go either way.

Phoenix, Anaheim, and Florida are the exact opposite of the Dallas/San Jose/Atlanta/Carolina crowd. I would say these teams (FLA, PHX, ANA) are on the clock; develop a solid fan base, or try somewhere else.

I mean Anaheim is the best team in the league right now and they can't sell out. That's a sign that things are bad.

When I mentioned "natural fan-base", I'm referring to the fans that have no other alligence to other teams. The kids, the teenagers.....these are the folks the Sun Belt teams have to market towards. These kids' parents are hockey fans, but they've had/still have their partial alligence to the team they grew up watching.

This potential fan base you speak of is not exclusive to Sun Belt cities.

Look at Hamilton. You say their fan base would be unable to grow. I disagree.

Look at it this way. The parents of this "natural fan-base" in Hamilton, like their Sun Belt counterparts, will have an allegiance to the team they grew up watching (the Leafs in Hamilton's case). You say the Sun Belt teams can overcome this, that the natural fan base, will grow. Why can't a city like Hamilton do that? They have the kids, the teenagers just like the Sun Belt cities, and like those down south, the ones in Hamilton are capable of creating that strong and loyal fan base that a team would need.

Factor in the fact that more young people in Hamilton are already exposed to hockey then their southern counterparts, and the fact that Leafs tickets are near impossible to get, and I would say Hamilton has just as much potential, if not more, then a Sun Belt team has in growing a "natural fan-base."

[jkrdevil]

Growing natural fan-bases is generational...it doesn't just happen overnight.

I agree you can't just put a hockey team in the middle of the Sun Belt and expect fans to come flocking in over night. Still, there has to be a cut off point, a point where if there still isn't an interest in the game, then it's time to head up north, or to an other Sun Belt city with better potential. I think you're right about 15 years, but after that, if you're still not drawing fans, it's time to pack up and find a new home.

Atlanta, Dallas, San Jose, and Carolina are shinning (no pun intended) examples of NHL taking hold in the Sun Belt. These teams are draw well, and have a solid, loyal fan base. Tampa Bay is steadily on their way to that, maybe as soon as a year or two.

I'm still not sold on Nashville, as attendance has only really gone up since they've been competitive. They could go either way.

Phoenix, Anaheim, and Florida are the exact opposite of the Dallas/San Jose/Atlanta/Carolina crowd. I would say these teams (FLA, PHX, ANA) are on the clock; develop a solid fan base, or try somewhere else.

I mean Anaheim is the best team in the league right now and they can't sell out. That's a sign that things are bad.

When I mentioned "natural fan-base", I'm referring to the fans that have no other alligence to other teams. The kids, the teenagers.....these are the folks the Sun Belt teams have to market towards. These kids' parents are hockey fans, but they've had/still have their partial alligence to the team they grew up watching.

This potential fan base you speak of is not exclusive to Sun Belt cities.

Look at Hamilton. You say their fan base would be unable to grow. I disagree.

Look at it this way. The parents of this "natural fan-base" in Hamilton, like their Sun Belt counterparts, will have an allegiance to the team they grew up watching (the Leafs in Hamilton's case). You say the Sun Belt teams can overcome this, that the natural fan base, will grow. Why can't a city like Hamilton do that? They have the kids, the teenagers just like the Sun Belt cities, and like those down south, the ones in Hamilton are capable of creating that strong and loyal fan base that a team would need.

Factor in the fact that more young people in Hamilton are already exposed to hockey then their southern counterparts, and the fact that Leafs tickets are near impossible to get, and I would say Hamilton has just as much potential, if not more, then a Sun Belt team has in growing a "natural fan-base."

You just hit the key difference; people in Hamilton are already hockey fans. It's not about growing a fan base for an individual team it's about growing it for the sport in general. Even without a team in Hamilton there is a hockey fanbase in Hamilton and is already producing players. No extra fans of the sport are gained it is just people who switched their allegiances from the Leafs to a new team. However if you place a more southern team and couple that with grassroot efforts to get more children playing it you grow more fans of the sport and get players to come out of areas where they might not have even started to play the game if an NHL team wasn't placed there.

[harperdc]

of course I would say this, but I think people are underestimating Portland. There isn't a team in the northwest - and, given the atmosphere regarding the Sonics and the arena situation, I doubt one will get to Seattle before here - and the only major league game in town is the Blazers, so the city can hold a second big-league franchise. the Rose Garden is a great place to see a game, and there's a very big hockey fan base built through thirty odd years of having the Winterhawks.

too bad I don't think Paul Allen wants another team and, regardless, he'd probably buy it for Seattle anyways. Shame. Portland Penguins has got a certain ring to it...

[Luigi74]

The state didnt bend over backward to get the Steelers and Pirates new stadiums they bent over backwards to get the Eagles new stadium the Pittsburgh teams and Phillies where just along for the ride. Had the state not gone caved in and opened up the money for the new stadiums the Eagles would have moved for pretty much the same reasons the Browns did, the only reason the Steelers and Pirates got new stadiums is because the city would have revolted if only the Philly teams got new ones while the Pirates moved and the Steelers always having the threat of moving once Dan Rooney passed away.

[Bronxmet]

Ask someone in any Canadian city about their experiences in trying to get hockey tickets. The Oilers are the hottest ticket in Edmonton 41+ nights a year, and the same is true in the other 5 Canadian hockey cities and some US cities too. Now ask someone in Miami or Atlanta about how hard it is to get hockey tickets. They might ask, "We have a hockey team?"

You should stick with subjects you know something about.

1. The only reason the Flames left Atlanta is because the Atlanta owner's real-estate business went belly-up, and he needed to sell the team to pay off his debts. A Calgary businessman approached him, bought the team, and moved the team to his hometown. It wasn't a lack of interest that the Flames left Atlanta.

2. Atlanta has grown exponentially since 1980. A great deal of the population boom is because of the Northern transplants.

3. Metro Atlanta has had two NHL and two minor-league hockey teams since 1972.

4. The Thrashers attendance (as well as many other Southern teams) is higher than that of Original-Six franchises Boston and Chicago.

It's these kinds of ignorant quotes some Canadians make that lead me to not sympathize with their "plight" of not having an NHL team in their respective cities. Winnipeg lost their team for a reason. If Winnipeg only drew an average of 13K in a market where hockey can't grow, why shouldn't have they moved to a place, like Phoenix, where they can draw 13K per game in a city where the sport can grow exponentially, both in the arena and in the community? Yes, Phoenix is going to lose money now, but long-term, once their natural fan-base grows, will be a profitting market. Ten years isn't enough time to grow that natural fan-base.

Kansas City is a market where the sport can grow. Seattle is a market where the sport can grow. Houston is a market where the sport can grow. Winnipeg's and Hamilton's hockey market won't grow much bigger should they be granted NHL teams.

Look at what the Phoenix Suns did for their community. If the Suns did not exist, then Phoenix would not be a big city as it is today.

[Guest]

You're joking, right?

[IceCap]

Growing natural fan-bases is generational...it doesn't just happen overnight.

I agree you can't just put a hockey team in the middle of the Sun Belt and expect fans to come flocking in over night. Still, there has to be a cut off point, a point where if there still isn't an interest in the game, then it's time to head up north, or to an other Sun Belt city with better potential. I think you're right about 15 years, but after that, if you're still not drawing fans, it's time to pack up and find a new home.

Atlanta, Dallas, San Jose, and Carolina are shinning (no pun intended) examples of NHL taking hold in the Sun Belt. These teams are draw well, and have a solid, loyal fan base. Tampa Bay is steadily on their way to that, maybe as soon as a year or two.

I'm still not sold on Nashville, as attendance has only really gone up since they've been competitive. They could go either way.

Phoenix, Anaheim, and Florida are the exact opposite of the Dallas/San Jose/Atlanta/Carolina crowd. I would say these teams (FLA, PHX, ANA) are on the clock; develop a solid fan base, or try somewhere else.

I mean Anaheim is the best team in the league right now and they can't sell out. That's a sign that things are bad.

When I mentioned "natural fan-base", I'm referring to the fans that have no other alligence to other teams. The kids, the teenagers.....these are the folks the Sun Belt teams have to market towards. These kids' parents are hockey fans, but they've had/still have their partial alligence to the team they grew up watching.

This potential fan base you speak of is not exclusive to Sun Belt cities.

Look at Hamilton. You say their fan base would be unable to grow. I disagree.

Look at it this way. The parents of this "natural fan-base" in Hamilton, like their Sun Belt counterparts, will have an allegiance to the team they grew up watching (the Leafs in Hamilton's case). You say the Sun Belt teams can overcome this, that the natural fan base, will grow. Why can't a city like Hamilton do that? They have the kids, the teenagers just like the Sun Belt cities, and like those down south, the ones in Hamilton are capable of creating that strong and loyal fan base that a team would need.

Factor in the fact that more young people in Hamilton are already exposed to hockey then their southern counterparts, and the fact that Leafs tickets are near impossible to get, and I would say Hamilton has just as much potential, if not more, then a Sun Belt team has in growing a "natural fan-base."

You just hit the key difference; people in Hamilton are already hockey fans. It's not about growing a fan base for an individual team it's about growing it for the sport in general. Even without a team in Hamilton there is a hockey fanbase in Hamilton and is already producing players. No extra fans of the sport are gained it is just people who switched their allegiances from the Leafs to a new team. However if you place a more southern team and couple that with grassroot efforts to get more children playing it you grow more fans of the sport and get players to come out of areas where they might not have even started to play the game if an NHL team wasn't placed there.

Growing the game's fan base is all well and good, but it just doesn't work in some cases. So it would make sense to keep the Sun Belt teams that have grown themselves a fan base in their respective cities, and send those that have bombed into guaranteed markets like Hamilton.

[Ez Street]

All in all, I think Kc has the highest percentage of landing the team.

When you got all these connections to the situation, it's hard to ignore.

AEG's boy Tim Leiwike, sits on the NHL Board of Governors. AEG gets 23 million if they land an NHL at the Sprint Center.

Add that to the already existing connections between Mario, Luc, and Boots.

What other town (sans Pittsburgh), has the inside track to land a team?

Like I said, when Mario pulled the team from the market, that told me he was done with Pittsburgh. He's made some sort of deal and is ironing it out. When the NHL came out and gave a blessing for the team to examine relocation, that evenmore sealed it for me.

Maybe it's not KC. But I doubt it's Pittsburgh.

Just a game of connect the dots. And I didn't even need Pee Wee Herman.

[BBTV]

Had the city and state similarly refused to fund the Pirates' and Steelers' new buildings, their refusal to do the same for the Pens would have been understandable. But once they set the precedent of funding PNC Park and Heinz Field, not funding a new Pens arena tells me that TPTB simply don't care whether or not the Pens stick around.

The city / state refused to fund the Flyers new arena, so Ed Snider, recognizing the huge money-making opportunity, built it himself. The Sixers, unwilling to be tenants in someone else's arena again, were set to move to a new arena in Camden NJ, until they came to their senses and signed on with the Flyers. Then Snider's company "merged" with Comcast, acquired the Sixers, and that's where we are now. (actually, I can't remember if the Comcast acquisition was after the Sixers agreed to play in the Flyers arena, or the reason they agreed.)

As someone else mentioned, the Pirates and Steelers were pretty much tied to the Eagles deal, with the Phillies in a "me too" role. It has nothing to do with anyone caring or not caring about the Pens. It makes no sense to not "want" them around, unless it is going to cost people money that just can't be recouped. I'm sure they care plenty, it just doesn't make financial sense.

And awarding a license to a gaming company that needed what was essentially a bribe probably wasn't a great idea either, especially considering their track record. We'll get the rest of the story in January though.

[budbowl77]

I hope they stay in Pittsburgh. its just that simple. We can argue facts and figures say why this team failed or that team failed but that fact is Pittsburgh won the Stanley Cup, the supremacy of Hockey. there names are forever inscribed on Lord Stanleys grail. that alone should be reason enough why they should stay in Pittsburgh. Call me crazy, but as a Hockey purist thats where they belong

[IceCap]

I hope they stay in Pittsburgh. its just that simple. We can argue facts and figures say why this team failed or that team failed but that fact is Pittsburgh won the Stanley Cup, the supremacy of Hockey. there names are forever inscribed on Lord Stanleys grail. that alone should be reason enough why they should stay in Pittsburgh. Call me crazy, but as a Hockey purist thats where they belong

I certanly understand where you're coming from, and to an extent I agree, but it's really not that simple. I mean where are the Seattle Metros or the Montréal Wanderers and Montréal Maroons? Winning a cup does not mean a team is untouchable. If it did the Red Wings would still be in Victoria.

[Guest]

There's a difference between a team that won a Cup in 1915 or whenever and 1992.