Another "Southern Belt Is A Failure" Article

[puckhead103*]

don't see tampa bay on the list..

he ties the failure of southern markets to a weak CBA that was supposed to help all teams to reach profitability..

The NHL's failing teams, all of them American and almost all in the Sunbelt, suffer from a very simple problem: they don't have enough fans. And the few fans they have will only show up if ticket prices remain low. This matters because the NHL is an attendance business; the name of the game is putting bums in seats. NHL teams earn almost all of their revenues in their home arena. Unlike the NBA, Major League Baseball and the NFL, the NHL does not have a giant U.S. national television contract. In the NFL, roughly half of the average team's revenue comes from its share of the national TV pot. Teams in weak markets -Green Bay and Jacksonville, for example -can survive and even prosper.

In the NHL, in contrast, the average team earns about 10 cents of every dollar from national TV. It has to earn the other 90 cents itself, mostly by selling tickets. NHL teams ultimately prosper or fail depending on the level of fan interest in their home market. And throughout the U.S., and especially in the Sunbelt, the level of interest in hockey is low. Really, really low.

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/setting+Sunbelt+hockey/4828961/story.html#ixzz1NIRDzwZw[/QUOTE]

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/setting+Sunbelt+hockey/4828961/story.html

Click to read more...

 

[blamebettman*]

Terrific article! And the absolute unvarnished truth!

 

[Oscar Acosta]

I don't see what the problem is, it's true. They didn't mention Tampa Bay and Carolina because they're doing okay, why would they mention them in a story about places where hockey isn't that popular?

If that's elitist, so be it.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I don't see what the problem is

I'd say, on a really fundamental level, there's a difference between "the sun is setting on Sunbelt franchises" and "the sun is setting on sunbelt hockey". You'd think after all these years that people would understand that hockey is growing in the south.

 

[htpwn]

Another poster complaining about the Canadian media

 

[CorbeauNoir]

Definitely biased, which should surprise noone. The widespread complaining about these pro/con sunbelt fluff pieces reeks of sour grapes, though. Personally I find it easier to just ignore them altogether, the titles of these kinds of articles make their content more than obvious.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Another poster complaining about the Canadian media

The Canadian ELITIST Media.

Give them their due. They worked hard for their elite status.

 

[RandR]

I agree with the first half of the article at least... it is simply telling it like it is.

The second half gets into debatable suggestions and conclusions. For example, it sounds like a recipe for over-expansion if the league ever acted on the belief that they could support 12 teams in Canada on a long-term basis, including 2 in Vancouver. To ensure stability, you want to be able to ride through any negative risks, such as fluctuations in the Canadian dollar, downturns in the economy, or collective bargaining agreements that don't go completely as planned. Things may not go back to the days were some were claiming even the Montreal Canadians to be in jeopardy, but let's not get forget how cyclical these things often are.

Southern Ontario can support two teams, and Montreal and Vancouver can each support a second NHL team. These are all better locations than Winnipeg, which is why RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie on three occasions tried to buy a failing American team and move it to Hamilton.

Uh, the reason why Balsillie wanted to move a team to Hamilton is because he and his company are based near there.

 

[Winnipeg Jets]

Nice title, champ.

For the most part I agree with the article.

 

[headsigh]

Isn't this the same guy saying Canada should have 12 NHL franchises?

Should I really care what he has to say? He's preaching to the choir anyway.

 

[Kirikanoir]

I'd say, on a really fundamental level, there's a difference between "the sun is setting on Sunbelt franchises" and "the sun is setting on sunbelt hockey".

Frankly a lot of this Canadian Elitist media complaints come across as wanting to shoot the messenger because you don`t like the message they are delivering.

You'd think after all these years that people would understand that hockey is growing in the south.

Well hockey may be growing in the South, but the question that needs to be addressed is, is interest in NHL hockey growing in the South enough to support these struggling teams.

 

[Killion]

Most of his assertions are correct, however, in suggesting Vancouver could support a 2nd team, which IMO it cannot, I find myself then questioning the rest of his hypothesis'. The Mowat Report suggests Southern Ontario could support not one but 2 more teams. This too I have a problem with. Food for thought, though I wouldnt call it "elitist".

 

[Duke749]

I assume when they say that we "don't have enough fans", that they mean we don't have enough idiot fans willing to through money at a team that doesn't know what winning actually is and to owners that have been trying to sabotage the team.

That one paragraph is the only one that seems to be off-base. They ignore the problems in Atlanta and then later on try and compare the TV viewing of these bad teams to Toronto. I mean really? Toronto? No ****.

Funny how they say sunbelt yet mention Columbus. Guess they need a map.

What I don't understand more then anything is why hockey fans have to be so split in this sport. We're all fans of the same sport and all love it. Just because you're from a place where ponds and lakes don't freeze over in the winter doesn't mean you like it less then someone who is. It's just stupid.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Frankly a lot of this Canadian Elitist media complaints come across as wanting to shoot the messenger because you don`t like the message they are delivering.

How so? These issues are debated endlessly on the BoH board, articles like this are hardly the "messenger".

Well hockey may be growing in the South, but the question that needs to be addressed is, is interest in NHL hockey growing in the South enough to support these struggling teams.

And that question can be addressed without the "hockey is OUR sport!" sensationalism.

 

[Brodie]

Yeah, whenever someone lumps Columbus in with the "sunbelt" or "the south", I tune out. Invest in a map.

 

[Skarjak]

I haven't seen a single good argument in this thread against what the author states.

Cut the ad hominem attacks. Why exactly is this article so bad?

 

[tp71]

Funny how they say sunbelt yet mention Columbus. Guess they need a map.

To be fair the article did say "almost all in the Sunbelt". Meaning there are others, like Columbus, that aren't in the sunbelt.

 

[Whiplash27]

Vancouver and Montreal cannot support a second team. What person from Montreal would follow a second team instead of their beloved Canadiens with a history that can only be rivaled by the NY Yankees in North American professional sports.

However, on most other points, the author is correct. I think that they could definitely have a team in Quebec and possibly even southern Ontario/Toronto. I wouldn't say that the amount of troubled teams in the US are overly high. Atlanta, Phoenix, Columbus, and Miami are your main culprits. Could even throw in the Islanders. I think there should only be one Floridian hockey team (Tampa). Additionally, although I know some won't like it, I think there's only room for two NY/NJ hockey teams. Either the Isles or the Devils are going to have to go at some point.

Honestly, Columbus just boggles my mind. I think if they ever put together a solid team, their popularity will soar.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

I haven't seen a single good argument in this thread against what the author states.

Cut the ad hominem attacks. Why exactly is this article so bad?

Mainly because he leaves out the benefits of sunbelt expansion.

For example, there is the massive growth rates that are seen in Texas (1100%), California (600%), North Carolina (500%) and Florida (300%) since 1990.

In addition, he ignores the "success stories", such as San Jose, Tampa Bay and Carolina.

I personally have no problem with it, as everything his rant outlines is valid (outside the reasons that the Thrashers have failed). It's just that it is inordinately biased.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I haven't seen a single good argument in this thread against what the author states.

Cut the ad hominem attacks. Why exactly is this article so bad?

Again, equating "support for the local NHL franchise" with "interest in hockey" is a fallacy.

 

[BPD]

Vancouver and Montreal cannot support a second team. What person from Montreal would follow a second team instead of their beloved Canadiens with a history that can only be rivaled by the NY Yankees in North American professional sports.

However, on most other points, the author is correct. I think that they could definitely have a team in Quebec and possibly even southern Ontario/Toronto. I wouldn't say that the amount of troubled teams in the US are overly high. Atlanta, Phoenix, Columbus, and Miami are your main culprits. Could even throw in the Islanders. I think there should only be one Floridian hockey team (Tampa). Additionally, although I know some won't like it, I think there's only room for two NY/NJ hockey teams. Either the Isles or the Devils are going to have to go at some point.

To be honest, both the Devils and the Isles have strong fanbases willing to pay. The Rangers fanbase is just that much bigger and that much more willing to pay.

 

[Whiplash27]

To be honest, both the Devils and the Isles have strong fanbases willing to pay. The Rangers fanbase is just that much bigger and that much more willing to pay.

Both still have trouble filling their arenas. The Devils have been one of the most consistent franchises in the past 20 years. The Isles have been mostly down, but they're in the pits (of course their arena is a dump). Combining both franchise's fanbases would yield a strong and highly profitable franchise. If it wasn't for both teams' lucrative TV deals they'd possibly both be in the same boat as some of these other teams.

 

[Brodie]

To be fair the article did say "almost all in the Sunbelt". Meaning there are others, like Columbus, that aren't in the sunbelt.

I interpreted that to refer specifically to the Islanders since he kept mentioning Columbus by name with a bunch of other Sunbelt teams. He wouldn't be the first member of the Canadian media to think the team named after Union soldiers was somehow in the South.

 

[Duke749]

I interpreted that to refer specifically to the Islanders since he kept mentioning Columbus by name with a bunch of other Sunbelt teams. He wouldn't be the first member of the Canadian media to think the team named after Union soldiers was somehow in the South.

Well, there is a Columbus Georgia; And a Columbus South Carolina too I believe. Probably quite a few out there. I can see how they would get confused.

 

[BPD]

Both still have trouble filling their arenas. The Devils have been one of the most consistent franchises in the past 20 years. The Isles have been mostly down, but they're in the pits (of course their arena is a dump). Combining both franchise's fanbases would yield a strong and highly profitable franchise. If it wasn't for both teams' lucrative TV deals they'd possibly both be in the same boat as some of these other teams.

All I'm saying is that I don't think either team is nearly as poor off as, say Phoenix. When the Isles are good again and they're selling out their new arena....

You know what I'm getting at here.