Jump to content

Did Bettman force the Preds to break off talks with Balsillie?


IceCap

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I'll be honest....this is probably the second time ever, in the five years this board has been open, that JKR has ever defended Bettman. You can go right ahead and look up all his posts.

Not from what I've seen. To me it seems like JKR has defended Bettman to the point that it becomes unreasonable. Whether he likes playing devils advocate or he simply believes in Bettman's general plan for the NHL is a mystery to me, but I have definitely seen a pro-Bettman stance in regard to him and his views on the NHL commissioner.

And he's right. If Balsillie really wanted to show the NHL that the Predators are not successful and deserve to move, he should have signed that exclusivity agreement and bought the team and just let the fans (or lack thereof) show they don't deserve it. Then, when that happens, he's welcome to sell all the tickets he wants elsewhere. He was too reluctant to do so because he is aware that Nashville has a reasonable chance of making the minimum attendance stipulations. But the fact that he made his motives known without any compassion of the people of Nashville is very unhanded and made the people of Nashville, even those who didn't even care about the Predators until last week, more ambitious to prove him wrong.

Here's the problem with that plan. The ticket sails would have been inaccurate. He would have bought the team, Nashville would have been stirred into a "Save the Pens!" frenzy, and the minimum attendance would have been met. Then the team would have been locked into Nashville. At that point the "We saved the Preds!" euphoria would have worn off, and coupled with a worse Preds team then last year, attendance per game would have sank to disappointing levels. At that point Balsillle couldn't have moved the team because of a hyped season ticket sale at the start of the season. He would have been locked into Nashville with poor attendance. I wouldn't want to put up with that headache either. Anyone looking at the situation realistically can see Nashville is a failed NHL market. Last season's attendance proves that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

In Nashville, he didn't even want to face the idea that he would have to keep the team there. It was Hamilton or bust.

As it should have been. As covered above, keeping the team in Nashville longer then was necessary would have created even more legal headaches, despite the same dismal attendance.

I find there seems to be a much larger anti-Bettman bias amongst the hockey community as a whole than anyone would be willing to admit. He is blamed for a hell of a lot more than he can be. It's a real shame. I'd have a beer with him, and I don't even like hair.

Really? I see the opposite. As I see it Bettman deserves every ounce of blame thrust upon him. I feel there's a larger Bettman-apologist mindset then anyone is willing to admit.

Whether its people who are defending him because they get their jollies playing devil's advocate (as I feel is the case with you), people who like to go against the grain because it's "cool", or people who share Bettman's misguided plan for the NHL, there is definitely large body of people willing to defend Gary Bettman, regardless of what he does to the game of hockey at its highest possible level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If true, I would like to give Bettman a highfive.

If Balsilly ever owns a team in this league it will be a very sad day. Get that scumbag away from my sport.

Yes, it'll be a sad day when we actually get an owner who's passionate for the game and makes it possible for thousands upon thousands of dedicated hockey fans to see a home game live :rolleyes:

....away from my sport.

Please. Hockey was and is Canada's game. We exported it, and we play it better then anyone in the world. At the most hockey is an international game, but it is anything but an American game. And by no means is it a Floridian game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Bettman is anti-Canadian, if he was Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa would no longer exist as teams. By all accounts he worked hard to save them.
Forgive me if I don't share your outlook on the matter. When the Pens were talking to KC Bettman went out of his way to make sure the team stayed in Pittsburgh, despite the fact that KC offered a deal that any owner in their right mind would take.

When it was leaked that Liepold signed a letter of intent to sell to Balsille Bettman came out and said "the Predators aren't going anywhere."

When the Oilers were almost moved to Houston where was the zeal we see in Bettman today to keep the franchise in Edmonton? Where was this zeal when the Sens filed for bankruptcy? Make no mistake about it, Bettman fought tooth and nail to keep the Pens in Pittsburgh and the Preds in Nashville. I don't recall this zeal on his part to keep the Oilers in Edmonton or the Sens in Ottawa. I think the only reason he didn't push for those teams to head south was because he knew at the time he would have been crucified by the hockey media, and quite possibly the general sports media in the States as well (as the NHL was still somewhat relevant at the time). Essentially Bettman sat quietly in the background in regards to the Sens and Oilers. He didn't fight for those cities to keep their teams as he has done with Preds or as he did with the Pens.

Excuse my ignorance, I don't remember a time where the Flames were on the cusp of relocation.

Well my point with Edmonton was that he and the league allowed a large ownership group for Edmonton in order to keep the team there. He and the league did work to save Edmonton. They could have easily let them move to Houston (which is a much larger market) and not give the local group a shot. I had read something a few weeks ago about a similar ownership structure in Calgary and that it was in place to help keep the team there. I could be wrong about that. I can't remember exactly where I read it. If I come across it again I'll let you know.

No doubt Nashville is a great sports town, and if the general sports fan in the area came out to support the Preds then the franchise's future would be secure. That, however, hasn't been the case. They couldn't even get bandwaggoners to fill the arena during a season when they finished 3rd overall in the league, and challenged the mighty Detroit Red Wings for the regular season Western Conference crown. Not enough of those average Joe fans in Nashville care about hockey enough to support the Preds. Essentially because the Balsille deal was over before it began the whole "save the Preds!" movement ended before it could begin. No doubt the Preds will start the season with excellent attendance, but once the season gets underway with a team inferior to last year's, attendance will again slip to disappointing levels, and the team will again have to give away thousands of free tickets just so the Summit Center doesn't appear empty. NHL hockey failed in Nashville, so why not move them to Hamilton where they will be appreciated? Why keep them in a city that does not appreciate them, even when they are among the NHL's elite clubs? How much more money should be thrown into the bottomless pit of NHL hockey in Nashville?

From what I have read and heard (because I'm not claiming to be an expert) 13,000+ average ticket sales mostly with the average fan buying tickets for a market that size is pretty decent. Hardly any market in todays professional sports can survive without substantial corporate support because they are the ones that can buy up a large chunk of seats (as well as luxury boxes). Again from what I have read and heard from Nashville is that the current ownership has done a poor job of marketing to and has alienated local corporations. Maybe new ownership, who is willing to give a good faith effort, can change that. I do think the team needs a bit more team. 10 years with limited success and a year wipe out because of a lockout isn't much. And let's not overstate the Preds on ice success the have never made it past the first round, they were an 8 seed in 2004 then the lockout (which hurt) and then they were a 4 seed and a 4 seed losing each time. In today's sports world playoff success is what matter most and regular season success means little. The Predators have won a grand total of 4 playoff games in their history.

And one more thing to note is the Predators are just a piece when it comes to the business in Nashville. The Preds owner, whoever it is, also controls the arena and gains revenue from non-hockey events. So while the Predators on paper could be losing money the owner could be making an overall profit. This is I suspect is the case with many teams even well established (The Rangers and MSG/Cablevision). While it is a bit off from the topic of hockey in Nashville it is a factor in the team sale and potential ownership.

No doubt it's told from the point of view of Balsille's camp. I ask you this, however; how many times has Gary Bettman shoved his point of view regarding the NHL down our throats?

The point of view, however, really doesn't matter. What matters is the security of the NHL. The Preds can't stay in NHL and continue to stay a stable franchise at the same time. Hamilton will great and treat the team as heroes. Nashville barley acknowledges their existence.

I have to ask however, if you are not against a seventh Canadian team (which Hamilton is currently the only realistic location in Canada at the moment) then why have you argued against the establishment of that seventh team in Canada?

BTW, I acknowledge you don't care who your team is playing, and I don't really blame you either. But recognize how much Canadians mean to the NHL and the game of hockey, and how much the NHL and the game of hockey means to Canada. Down where you are it's just an other sport. Up here, it almost exceeds the simple status of a sport. It's part of our national identity.

And considering how many of our teams have headed south of the border (including Hamilton's only NHL franchise to date) you can't blame us for wanting to see a team move in the opposite direction.

What do you mean by security of the NHL? Regardless of what happens here the NHL the league is nowhere even close to folding or even losing a team (by that I mean from going from 30 to 29). And I am not against a 7th Canadian team. I just don't want to see any team move. The league IMO opinion is better off if teams don't move it creates a more stable league and more entertaining as more rivalries start to develop. I think every possible attempt to make it in a market should be exhausted before a team moves. From what I can tell of the Nashville situation that is not the case. I wouldn't mind if Hamilton got a team through expansion. That said unfortunately I don't think it will happen because of the Leafs territorial rights (and that's the part where I am playing a little bit devils advocate). I fully recognize the importance of hockey in Canada.

I'm not really sure what the point of posting this is. Back in 2003 the Sens were bankrupt, and relocation was a very real possibility. While I hope Ottawa forever keeps the Senators, if they had to move I would rather them move to Hamilton or any other Canadian city then move south of the border.

I was just pointing out where I got the info about Ballsillie's lawyer submitting a bid for the Sens from. My overall point was that he wants a team to move to Hamilton no matter where it is from wither Canada or the States.

Not from what I've seen. To me it seems like JKR has defended Bettman to the point that it becomes unreasonable. Whether he likes playing devils advocate or he simply believes in Bettman's general plan for the NHL is a mystery to me, but I have definitely seen a pro-Bettman stance in regard to him and his views on the NHL commissioner.

More recently I have warmed up to Bettman as I have actually looked at what he has done instead of just spew the old lines against him. Over all if you look at my post I have grown up a bit over the last 5 years (and will continue to do so). He does have some serious failures though such as marketing the game (hasn't been aggressive enough) and the lockouts. Plus the on ice stuff and the playoff format change which put him on the wrong foot to begin with. He didn't hold the owners together in the first one which caused the second. Overall though the league is in better shape than it was before him. The league is actually on national network TV now unlike before and such. That said it probably is time for a change just because he has no chance of winning over the hockey public. I know he works for the owners but he is the face of the the league management and that could use a change.

Really? I see the opposite. As I see it Bettman deserves every ounce of blame thrust upon him. I feel there's a larger Bettman-apologist mindset then anyone is willing to admit.

Whether its people who are defending him because they get their jollies playing devil's advocate (as I feel is the case with you), people who like to go against the grain because it's "cool", or people who share Bettman's misguided plan for the NHL, there is definitely large body of people willing to defend Gary Bettman, regardless of what he does to the game of hockey at its highest possible level.

There certainly is a large anti-Bettman force among the hockey public. Let's face it he's been booed from pretty much from day 1 and wasn't given much of a chance. Part of it is because he is from New York and a bigger part is he used to work in the NBA (lending to the famous conspiracy theories).

Please. Hockey was and is Canada's game. We exported it, and we play it better then anyone in the world. At the most hockey is an international game, but it is anything but an American game. And by no means is it a Floridian game.

I think you missed some sarcasm that was supposed to make a point.

You demonstrated one of the problems with nationalism in sports (and I'm talking about all sports). It often lends itself to an one is better than the other. While I love the place the game has in Canada and the league should promote that a bit more it does have a negative side (as most everything) and this is it. It also isn't just a Canadian thing in regards to hockey it can also be attributed on why hockey some outright hate the sport in the States (you can see this with soccer also).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If true, I would like to give Bettman a highfive.

If Balsilly ever owns a team in this league it will be a very sad day. Get that scumbag away from my sport.

<_< Yeah, god forbid we get a passionate hockey fan with deep pockets as an NHL owner. What were we thinking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why? Because Gary Bettman doesn't give a rat's ass about Canada, Canadian hockey, or Canadian fans.

This is the main reason why I generally just skip over your posts. You seem to think that every point you don't agree with is a dig against Canada. If you're going to fire shots, don't hide in your flag when people fire back shots that oppose your own.

Simply put, Bettman had to stick up for Nashville because it's good form. As long as Nashville has a team, Bettman's job as Commissioner is to stick up for them and defend them just as much as every other team in the league.

Has Nashville been given enough time to determine if they're a legit hockey market? Most people will say "No". Nine years (really, only 8 years plus the locked-out season) isn't a long enough time frame for any team in any market in any sport.

The Predators have had only one really good season, but for the most part, have not played good hockey for most of their existance. It took a Cup-winning team for the Lightning to start selling out each and every game, and that took 12 seasons. The Predators haen't been able to benefit from a good playoff run like the Lightning and Hurricanes have. Regular season success won't boost attendance as much as a long playoff run will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please. Hockey was and is Canada's game. We exported it, and we play it better then anyone in the world. At the most hockey is an international game, but it is anything but an American game. And by no means is it a Floridian game.

This attitude is precisely the reason why I root for American teams. It's also more than likely the same reason why Americans don't want to watch the sport because Canadians make American fans feel as if they don't deserve a team. ("You guys can't even sell out a game, while we haven't had an empty seat since the stone age!" "How pathetic is that that you hold your Stanley Cup victories in a parking lot!" "You guys don't even have ice in the winter time, you don't deserve a hockey team!" "You wouldn't even be selling out if it wasn't for all those celebrities who just want to be seen!") Well, if you make them feel inferior, you're gonna turn them off the game.

--Roger "Time?" Clemente.

champssig2.png
Follow me on Twitter if you care: @Animal_Clans.

My opinion may or may not be the same as yours. The choice is up to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why? Because Gary Bettman doesn't give a rat's ass about Canada, Canadian hockey, or Canadian fans.

This is the main reason why I generally just skip over your posts. You seem to think that every point you don't agree with is a dig against Canada. If you're going to fire shots, don't hide in your flag when people fire back shots that oppose your own.

Quoted because this bears repeating by someone who agrees with Icecap but thinks his arguements suck.

Simply put, Bettman had to stick up for Nashville because it's good form. As long as Nashville has a team, Bettman's job as Commissioner is to stick up for them and defend them just as much as every other team in the league.

Actually, it's Bettman's job to stick up for the best interest of the owners. If an owner has a team and wants to sell it to the highest bidder dis-ir-regardless of the bidder's location and intentions, Bettman shouldn't be stepping in and telling the owner to take a lesser bid. If the BoG doesn't want the guy, they won't approve him, but they did approve Balsillie once so there's not much reason to think they wouldn't again. So we have an owner who wants to sell to a guy who will pay him a lot of money and the rest of the BoG will approve it, then Bettman really has no reason to step in. It's not his job to protect the markets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we have an owner who wants to sell to a guy who will pay him a lot of money and the rest of the BoG will approve it, then Bettman really has no reason to step in. It's not his job to protect the markets.

What Bettman should do as a commissioner and what he actually does are two different things. When he wants a team to move, he facilitates the process and has even put roadblocks in front of those trying to keep the team, as he did with the potential ownership group in Winnipeg in the mid-90s. When he doesn't want a team to move, he puts roadblocks in front of those trying to move the team, as he did with Balsillie in Pittsburgh.

His motivation:

1. Taking a team out of Nashville and putting them in Hamilton reduces the NHL's American "footprint" which lowers the league's status as one of the major sports in the US.

2. Moving the team means that Bettman is admitting he made a mistake in putting that franchise there in the first place.

It is quite obvious that Bettman has a master plan for the league, and he has his hand in every transaction, trying to realize that plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why? Because Gary Bettman doesn't give a rat's ass about Canada, Canadian hockey, or Canadian fans.

This is the main reason why I generally just skip over your posts. You seem to think that every point you don't agree with is a dig against Canada. If you're going to fire shots, don't hide in your flag when people fire back shots that oppose your own.

Interesting, because I usually ignore your posts because they amount to nothing more then you rapping yourself in an American flag (or is it Confederate, I lost track when you said gun ownership should be mandatory) to take pot-shots at teams in traditional markets, be them Canadian or American. For someone who criticizes fans of traditional teams as snobbish, pretentious, etc.... you present the same attitude in regards to teams in the Sun Belt and California. Replace "Canada" with "Southern USA" and "Maple Leafs" with "Thrashers" and our arguments are pretty similar.

This would have to be the only time I've accused people who disagree with me as taking a stab against Canada, and I only do so because of the nature of the argument, and the positions people have taken. The owner of the Preds has lost $70 million. He wants to sell. The highest bidder is Jim Balsille, who also wants to move the team to Hamilton. Bettman then forces Liepold, the Preds owner, to break off discussions with Balsille, but then turns around and encourages Liepold to talk to the KC group, who's bid is significantly less then Balsillie's. So obviously Bettman's motivations here aren't fore keeping the team in Nashville, and they aren't concerned with getting Liepold the best offer for the team. Bettman knows that the team will be sold, he's just doing all he can to keep them out of Canada. So that takes care of Gary.

As for you, JKR, and any other individual simply discussing the team's situation, the reasoning's the same. Liepold looking to sell to the KC group seems a-ok by your book, but selling the team to Balsille, who wants to move the team to Hamilton, is bad. So what exactly am I suppose to read into that? As for you in particular, I just need to pair the already-mentioned reasoning with the fact that you've said the NHL needs to make sure the SC finals are always between to American teams, and I get the picture of someone who isn't exactly fond of Canada, at least when it comes to the game of hockey. So it's more then simply me accusing anyone who disagrees with me of being "anti-Canadian." It's the very nature of the argument. Whether you intend it or not, by arguing against a team in Hamilton, and certainly arguing for an all American SC Finals from know to the end of time, paints you as someone who dislikes Canada.

And as someone who takes a great sense of pride in my nationality, I'll call you out on it. If you don't think I love my country, I do. And I'm not going to allow you to attack it, then plead innocent when you're called out on it.

Simply put, Bettman had to stick up for Nashville because it's good form. As long as Nashville has a team, Bettman's job as Commissioner is to stick up for them and defend them just as much as every other team in the league.

No, as Yzerfan pointed out (even if the PM function of this board slipped his mind), Bettman's job is to stick up for the owners, who hired him in the first place. If an owner wants to sell his team to the highest bidder, Bettman's job to support that, or at the least not get involved. Regardless of the potential new owner's future plans.

Has Nashville been given enough time to determine if they're a legit hockey market? Most people will say "No". Nine years (really, only 8 years plus the locked-out season) isn't a long enough time frame for any team in any market in any sport.

The Predators have had only one really good season, but for the most part, have not played good hockey for most of their existance. It took a Cup-winning team for the Lightning to start selling out each and every game, and that took 12 seasons. The Predators haen't been able to benefit from a good playoff run like the Lightning and Hurricanes have. Regular season success won't boost attendance as much as a long playoff run will.

You're not exactly right when it comes to the Lightning. They were selling out all the way up to their Stanley Cup run. The Preds couldn't even fill their arena during the best season in franchise history, coming within points of winning the President's Trophy. That proves beyond a doubt that the city is a failed NHL market. We didn't need the standard 10-15 years to see that Nashville was a dud.

But I'll play along. The Preds have 8 seasons under their belt. How much longer should the NHL flush money down the toilet in Tennessee before you're ready to admit the obvious? And when that day comes you'll probably be all for a team in KC, and for giving Hamilton the finger, before pulling out the "MY girlfriend in Canadian, how can I hate Canada?!?!?!" line :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please. Hockey was and is Canada's game. We exported it, and we play it better then anyone in the world. At the most hockey is an international game, but it is anything but an American game. And by no means is it a Floridian game.

This attitude is precisely the reason why I root for American teams. It's also more than likely the same reason why Americans don't want to watch the sport because Canadians make American fans feel as if they don't deserve a team. ("You guys can't even sell out a game, while we haven't had an empty seat since the stone age!" "How pathetic is that that you hold your Stanley Cup victories in a parking lot!" "You guys don't even have ice in the winter time, you don't deserve a hockey team!" "You wouldn't even be selling out if it wasn't for all those celebrities who just want to be seen!") Well, if you make them feel inferior, you're gonna turn them off the game.

--Roger "Time?" Clemente.

Really? I thought you rooted for American teams because you got your jollies trying to get people to look at you weird. But eh, you know why you do things more then anyone else, so I'll take your word for it.

It does bring up an interesting point though. Does this mean that you have zero pride in your country just because most people in it do? Man, you must always get a little disappointed every time you come across the end to the War of 1812.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please. Hockey was and is Canada's game. We exported it, and we play it better then anyone in the world. At the most hockey is an international game, but it is anything but an American game. And by no means is it a Floridian game.

TBL%20Players%20ring%204web.jpg

tbl_scchamp_logo.jpg

My first and only contribution to this topic.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please. Hockey was and is Canada's game. We exported it, and we play it better then anyone in the world. At the most hockey is an international game, but it is anything but an American game. And by no means is it a Floridian game.

TBL%20Players%20ring%204web.jpg

tbl_scchamp_logo.jpg

My first and only contribution to this topic.

And all the current Canadian teams put together have 43 of those. 53 if you count the current Sens team as a continuation of the original. Lets not even get into the Cups won by teams that are no longer with us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"You guys can't even sell out a game, while we haven't had an empty seat since the stone age!"

Well, it is impressive what the Maple Leafs and Canadiens do with some of the best fanbases in North American sports.

"How pathetic is that that you hold your Stanley Cup victories in a parking lot!"

Incredibly pathetic.

"You guys don't even have ice in the winter time, you don't deserve a hockey team!"

Usually true.

"You wouldn't even be selling out if it wasn't for all those celebrities who just want to be seen!"

I don't know about that one, though.

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please. Hockey was and is Canada's game. We exported it, and we play it better then anyone in the world. At the most hockey is an international game, but it is anything but an American game. And by no means is it a Floridian game.

This attitude is precisely the reason why I root for American teams. It's also more than likely the same reason why Americans don't want to watch the sport because Canadians make American fans feel as if they don't deserve a team. ("You guys can't even sell out a game, while we haven't had an empty seat since the stone age!" "How pathetic is that that you hold your Stanley Cup victories in a parking lot!" "You guys don't even have ice in the winter time, you don't deserve a hockey team!" "You wouldn't even be selling out if it wasn't for all those celebrities who just want to be seen!") Well, if you make them feel inferior, you're gonna turn them off the game.

--Roger "Time?" Clemente.

Really? I thought you rooted for American teams because you got your jollies trying to get people to look at you weird. But eh, you know why you do things more then anyone else, so I'll take your word for it.

It does bring up an interesting point though. Does this mean that you have zero pride in your country just because most people in it do? Man, you must always get a little disappointed every time you come across the end to the War of 1812.

I find it intriguing that you decided to base your entire response on just the first sentence of my reply. You didn't even acknowledge the rest of my argument.

In case you were wondering, I actively root for Team Canada in all international competitions and take pride in their accomplishments. The problem I have is with Canadian hockey fans who feel, because we've created the game and are the most successful at it, we consider ourselves ultimately superior to anyone else who wants to get in on the game and treat those fans like dirt when they can't compete with us. Give them a break. Espcially in a place like Nashville, which is just getting their feet wet when it comes to hockey. And if we chase all the American fans away, you're left with much much fewer people to win arguments against.

--Roger "Time?" Clemente.

champssig2.png
Follow me on Twitter if you care: @Animal_Clans.

My opinion may or may not be the same as yours. The choice is up to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This would have to be the only time I've accused people who disagree with me as taking a stab against Canada, and I only do so because of the nature of the argument, and the positions people have taken. The owner of the Preds has lost $70 million. He wants to sell. The highest bidder is Jim Balsille, who also wants to move the team to Hamilton. Bettman then forces Liepold, the Preds owner, to break off discussions with Balsille, but then turns around and encourages Liepold to talk to the KC group, who's bid is significantly less then Balsillie's. So obviously Bettman's motivations here aren't fore keeping the team in Nashville, and they aren't concerned with getting Liepold the best offer for the team. Bettman knows that the team will be sold, he's just doing all he can to keep them out of Canada. So that takes care of Gary.

As for you, JKR, and any other individual simply discussing the team's situation, the reasoning's the same. Liepold looking to sell to the KC group seems a-ok by your book, but selling the team to Balsille, who wants to move the team to Hamilton, is bad. So what exactly am I suppose to read into that? As for you in particular, I just need to pair the already-mentioned reasoning with the fact that you've said the NHL needs to make sure the SC finals are always between to American teams, and I get the picture of someone who isn't exactly fond of Canada, at least when it comes to the game of hockey. So it's more then simply me accusing anyone who disagrees with me of being "anti-Canadian." It's the very nature of the argument. Whether you intend it or not, by arguing against a team in Hamilton, and certainly arguing for an all American SC Finals from know to the end of time, paints you as someone who dislikes Canada.

And as someone who takes a great sense of pride in my nationality, I'll call you out on it. If you don't think I love my country, I do. And I'm not going to allow you to attack it, then plead innocent when you're called out on it.

Simply put, Bettman had to stick up for Nashville because it's good form. As long as Nashville has a team, Bettman's job as Commissioner is to stick up for them and defend them just as much as every other team in the league.

No, as Yzerfan pointed out (even if the PM function of this board slipped his mind), Bettman's job is to stick up for the owners, who hired him in the first place. If an owner wants to sell his team to the highest bidder, Bettman's job to support that, or at the least not get involved. Regardless of the potential new owner's future plans.

Has Nashville been given enough time to determine if they're a legit hockey market? Most people will say "No". Nine years (really, only 8 years plus the locked-out season) isn't a long enough time frame for any team in any market in any sport.

The Predators have had only one really good season, but for the most part, have not played good hockey for most of their existance. It took a Cup-winning team for the Lightning to start selling out each and every game, and that took 12 seasons. The Predators haen't been able to benefit from a good playoff run like the Lightning and Hurricanes have. Regular season success won't boost attendance as much as a long playoff run will.

You're not exactly right when it comes to the Lightning. They were selling out all the way up to their Stanley Cup run. The Preds couldn't even fill their arena during the best season in franchise history, coming within points of winning the President's Trophy. That proves beyond a doubt that the city is a failed NHL market. We didn't need the standard 10-15 years to see that Nashville was a dud.

But I'll play along. The Preds have 8 seasons under their belt. How much longer should the NHL flush money down the toilet in Tennessee before you're ready to admit the obvious? And when that day comes you'll probably be all for a team in KC, and for giving Hamilton the finger, before pulling out the "MY girlfriend in Canadian, how can I hate Canada?!?!?!" line :rolleyes:

First off, let's address the bolded type: It's not even the first time this month you've accused board members of hating/bashing Canada. Short memory?

Now let's address the rest of your posts. Show me, with links, where I've said the following:

1. HedleyLamarr wants a team in Kansas City.

2. HedleyLamarr does not want a team in Hamilton/Ontario.

3. HedleyLamarr supports a move from Nashville to KC.

4. HedleyLamarr does not want Canadian teams playing in the Stanley Cup Final.

For the record, I've never taken a pro- or anti-Nashville stance throughout. But that will change right now. I would like for the Predators to stay in Nashville, just because I think it's minor league-ish for teams to move, or threaten to move, on what seems to be an almost-yearly basis. Multiple teams moved in the 90's, and at least four teams have had some degree of relocation talk this decade (Ottawa, Buffalo, and Pittsburgh because of their bankruptcy issues; and now Nashville). But if they have to move, I would support wherever those that have a decision to move the team feel the team has the best chance of surviving. Kansas City or Houston or Salt Lake City or Seattle or Portland might be a better financial location than Hamilton/Winnipeg/Halifax/Quebec City, but no one knows for sure. It isn't my job or decision to figure that crap out.

As for Tampa, you are incorrect once again. We'll look at the 2001-02 season, 2002-03 season, 2003-04 season, and 2005-06 season. In succession, these four seasons for Tampa were: missed playoffs; division champ and lost in 2nd round; division champ and Stanley Cup champ; and season after Cup title.

2001-02: 20th in attendance; 15,722 per game (79.6% capacity)

2002-03: 16th in attendance; 16,545 per game (83.7% capacity)

2003-04: 12th in attendance; 17,820 per game (90.2% capacity)

2005-06: 2nd in attendance; 20,509 per game (103.8% capacity)

Steady growth in attendance for sure, but to say Tampa was "selling out all the way" during their Cup-winning season is flat-out wrong. But Tampa definitely got a boost from winning the Cup, and got a partial boost from their previous season of reaching the Conference Semi-Finals for the first time in team history. It wasn't that long ago that Tampa was only filling 75% of their arena. Nashville, for what it's worth, has never fallen below 77%, and even picked up 7% after an erased season.

Look, I know you want a team in your backyard because you can't get Leafs tickets, but don't take your frustration out on folks that are able to attend NHL games on a regular basis, or dismiss their arguements and say they're bashing Canada. Get your head out of your rear, kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for you, JKR, and any other individual simply discussing the team's situation, the reasoning's the same. Liepold looking to sell to the KC group seems a-ok by your book, but selling the team to Balsille, who wants to move the team to Hamilton, is bad. So what exactly am I suppose to read into that? As for you in particular, I just need to pair the already-mentioned reasoning with the fact that you've said the NHL needs to make sure the SC finals are always between to American teams, and I get the picture of someone who isn't exactly fond of Canada, at least when it comes to the game of hockey. So it's more then simply me accusing anyone who disagrees with me of being "anti-Canadian." It's the very nature of the argument. Whether you intend it or not, by arguing against a team in Hamilton, and certainly arguing for an all American SC Finals from know to the end of time, paints you as someone who dislikes Canada.

And as someone who takes a great sense of pride in my nationality, I'll call you out on it. If you don't think I love my country, I do. And I'm not going to allow you to attack it, then plead innocent when you're called out on it.

From a league perspective (and I emphasize that) there is a bug difference between KC and Hamilton and that is KC is not within any teams territory. Teams territorial rights is a huge issue with a potential team in Hamilton. If one fails to recognize this their argument is fundamentally flawed and is doomed. Territorial rights are a big part of the basis of how North American sports leagues are operated. They are the one major reason why the leagues work as closed leagues and not open leagues like in Europe. When it comes to teams movement territorial rights are a huge obstacle. It's why the Expos were pretty much left to die in Montreal the last few years because MLB couldn't move the team to Washington right away because of the Orioles territorial rights. It was only when the O's go a huge payment as well as control of the Washington team television rights (which again is big money) that the Expos could then move to DC. In the case of Hamilton the city is well within the territorial rights the Toronto Maple Leafs and possible (depending on NHL by-laws) the Buffalo Sabres. Furthermore the Ballsillie camp has inferred in the past that they would challenge the leagues territory rules (i.e. bringing the Competition council). If you are an owner in the league that is frighting because that opens to flood gate on free team movement with little restriction. Because of that an ownership vote on Ballsillie would probably be close. Bettman probably indicated that to Liepold who made the decision to go elsewhere because if he continued and the deal with Ballsillie and the league nixed it the other offers for the team would drop. In that regard Bettman is doing his job and is acting on what is best for the owners as Yzerfan pointed out. The issue again has been from the beginning territorial rights and IMO has had nothing to do with Hamilton being in Canada. The only thing having to do with nation is how Balsillie has used the media to promote his objective (and has done quite well). As things have gone on he has made them more personal which at this point I don't think he would be granted a team regardless of location.

IMO again I think the team should stay in Nashville. I was just pointing out the league perspective on the difference between KC and Hamilton.

That out of the way this is the last I have on this in regards to your post on this issue. It is clear you can't have a reasonable discussion on this subject without resorting to name calling. I just wanted to make this one last point on what the major issue is since you directly asked. Now go ahead and call me anti-Canadian, however if I'm anti-Canadian for just pointing out this issue I guess the Ontario teachers are also anti-Canadian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I think Canadians should be very proud of their players that have helped their teams win the Stanley Cup MORE than where the team is located. Look at Anaheim, they have more Canadians on their roster than any other team when they won the Stanley Cup. Tampa had some pretty good Canadians on their roster, Lecavailier, St Louis. Would I love to see more NHL teams in Canada, absolutely, whether it be Winnipeg, Hamilton or Quebec City, but I am far more concerned about the quality of players we produce and how we develop them, because that's where our (Canadians) source of pride comes from.

I saw, I came, I left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I think Canadians should be very proud of their players that have helped their teams win the Stanley Cup MORE than where the team is located. Look at Anaheim, they have more Canadians on their roster than any other team when they won the Stanley Cup. Tampa had some pretty good Canadians on their roster, Lecavailier, St Louis. Would I love to see more NHL teams in Canada, absolutely, whether it be Winnipeg, Hamilton or Quebec City, but I am far more concerned about the quality of players we produce and how we develop them, because that's where our (Canadians) source of pride comes from.

I concur.

champssig2.png
Follow me on Twitter if you care: @Animal_Clans.

My opinion may or may not be the same as yours. The choice is up to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.