hockeytown9321 said:
Its really a strech to blame people who have no interest in the game for its problems. Is Bettman supposed to call them up and say "you should watch hockey",a nd then they do? I can see the response: "hey, I never thought of that, thanks."
Maybe they should have realized there were hundreds of millions of people not watching before expanding to the places those people live. And I highly doubt those hundreds of millions are going to decide after a 2 year lockout that they want to watch. Thats just me though, all I care about is the Red Wings.
You made mention that the NFL gets a HUGE TV Deal. I said it wasn't Gary's fault for not having people watch.
You do know that for him to get the 60 Million he GOT in the first place he promised to get teams into MORE American markets. That was a huge selling point. May have been a partial down fall to the league but it's a totally different issue.
You can't tell whose NOT going to watch. It was a chain reaction.
In 1993 the NHL was looking good, the CBA seemed to be nice and fine (obviously loopholes and things that were over looked are now clear to almost everyone).
So you have owners wanting teams, but it takes a few years to get TV deals, arenas, and such. If that wasn't the case I bet we'd of had 37 teams. What ended up happening is that you move into Florida, and Tampa and it starts off decent. It starts to look good!
Then you have more teams move into other cities and it looks good. Then, with only 16 of 30 teams making the post season, you have to show the *new markets* that you want to win, you also can't lockout and risk losing those markets (hence the resigning of the CBA twice)
So now you have too many markets because too many owners saw a GOOD league at one time and invested the expansion fees. Now owners are telling the fans to stick through a few years because any team takes time to grow. So Florida makes it to the Cup Finals, and when they get there (using a system that other teams lacking talent could use and tweak and make the game boring, and using the system due to the lack of talent to support 30 teams) they rolled over and died. Then they never recovered, the new fans they had wanted a winner every year, other new teams to the league wanted to do what Florida did and stay on top, they wanted to keep the fans, and be competitive, so they offered one or two major names (major names to those markets) some larger then "normal" contracts.....then salary increases a little more, then you see first round picks start to get better, you see Carolina needing a "superstar" and offer Federov a TON of money. Salaries continue to climb because Scott Mellanby makes 2.3 Million a season then Shanny wants 4 a season, then Forsberg is twice the player Shanny is (in his mind, and the mind of his agent) so he demands 10 Million, and Kayria wants 10 Million.
All the while the teams that REALLY can afford this are happy, they don't care, where as teams like Edmonton, and Washington are either forced to make a move that they hope pans out (Jagr) or go belly up.
IF all was perfect then there would of been 30 strong teams with amazing talent, but the pool was very very thin, so players that didn't deserve 1.2, 2.6, 3.3 Million GOT 3.3 Million. The talent was spread thin, because at one point in the early 90's the NHL was a STRONG league, it was exciting and there where Millionaires who wanted a peice of the pie, and the idea that the more markets you go to, the more people you get to watch (assuming the talent level was there) and the TV contract would then follow suit and then BAM everyone would be like an NFL team.
But that didn't happen, there is really no way of knowing that it was going to happen this.
I'm sorry it did. The NHLPA these days seem to be fine with 200 players losing jobs and 5 teams folding. The NHL seems to think that the talent level is getting there and 30 NHL Teams can survive. Both.....in theroy are TRUE. Both COULD work, but both can also fail.
I could go over how it could fail, or gain. But I won't.