And you come across as an arrogant jackass that cannot abide by someone who disagrees with you and (even more) commits the unpardonable offense of challenging your positions. Of course, people sometimes come across differently on the web than they are in real life, so maybe you are not such an annoying guy face to face. Who knows?
Nothing personal. I appreciate your opinion as to how I come across to you. Fortunately for me, your opinion carries zero weight.
I HAD looked it up when I originally asked, and could not find data that fully supports your theory. In some cases it is correct, and in other cases not. I accordingly gave you the opportunity to substantiate your position. To be frank, I would have liked to get a link to more historical attendance figures and thought you might have some.
Since you demonstrated little credibility in the past on NHL business topics, and since you take such offense to providing a link, I can only conclude that you are making it up to bolster your agenda. Why would anyone conclude differently, based on your response?
Edit: I see above that you responded with a link above. Presumably you could have done so before, unless you were talking out of your a** initially and my question spurred you to find evidence (which I believe is more likely the case). If that is not the case and you had a link when you replied to me, and simply declined to provide it, what is the matter with you, sir?
Fair enough -- you seem to dispute practically everything I say rather tersely and don't seem to concede things I thought wouldn't really be in dispute. I'll assume you're truly a "show me" person and that's all you mean.
You're right, NHL historical attendance is tougher to find than I thought it would be, other than reviewing Sporting News's, which won't give you averages, at least not very easily. Ancedotal evidence is only anecdotal. The "Kenn" site is good for NHL averages, but for some reason doesn't go back very far with some teams, even Original Six teams.
I did some more quickie research to put numbers on the anecdotes. I count six cities that had both NBA and NHL teams during the period 1970 to 1990 -- Boston, Chicago, Detroit, New York, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia. I noted numbers for that period in five year intervals, 1969-70, 1974-75, 1979-80, etc.
Unfortunately, only one city has easily accessable data for every data point -- Philadelphia. The Flyers win easily, at every date: 13,372 to 8,210 in 1970; 17,077 to 7,237 in 1975; 17,077 to 11,701 in 1980, 16,951 to 13,965 in 1985; 17,407 to 14,017 in 1990.
Here are the basketball numbers for every city, in chronological order. They strike me as self-evidently bested by hockey everywhere but Los Angeles, and maybe New York in the early 70s. Remember that where teams share buildings a hockey sell out will be several hundred fans less than a basketball sellout (not that basketball was ever in danger of selling out practically everywhere until the 1990 data point.)
Boston (coming off winning ten or so titles before 1970 and a couple more in the mid-70s):
7,504; 11,680; 14,545; 14,896; 14,916
We have Bruins figures for the last three and they aren't as good: 12,366; 13,257; 14,314. The Celts and Bruins sold out the season in 1990; Celts win 1980 and 1985; Bruins almost certainly win 1970 and 1975.
Chicago:
10,050; 10,704; 8,868; 11,887; 18,404.
Blackhawks also sold out the building in 1990. Landslide Blackhawks each of the other 4, though no certain data.
Detroit:
4,412; 7,492; 8,128; 16,867; 21,454
Red Wings sold out JLA in 1990, 19,531. Pistons may have won in 1985. Detroit's lucky they didn't lose the team in the 70s with those embarrassing figures.
New York (probably the most beloved team in MSG history was the 1970 Knicks):
18,566; 18,566; 12,405; 11,154; 17,815.
Rangers in 1990: 16,238. Less than Knicks. No data but Rangers almost certainly way ahead in '80 and '85. Knicks sold out the building in '70 and '75; Rangers must have been close, but unproven.
Los Angeles:
13,086; 11,567; 14,217; 14,941; 17,378.
Kings were 15,707 in 1990, less than the Lakers.
Just for fun, I looked at Buffalo which had teams in both leagues in the 2 70s data points. Sabres in a landslide -- 9721 to 4977 in 1970; 15668 to 11397 in 1975. Basketball left Buffalo in the 70s; hockey continues to thrive in 2007.
Washington/Baltimore had teams in both leagues most of the data time, but I didn't bother.
I think the initial point that NBA attendance really didn't catch up to hockey until some time in the late 80s/early 90s is a solid one, but everyone can draw their own conclusions. There's no question, IMHO, that hockey has lost serious ground to basketball since the early 70s.