nyr7andcounting said:
But Edmonton isn't going to gain any NEW fans because it's all of the sudden financially competative with the Rangers. The same goes for Calgary, Vancouver, Montreal, Ottawa. Those teams are pretty much as big as they are going to get in those markets and those teams have been competative anyway. They are already getting the most revenue they can out of their markets...the only way they are going to get more is a national TV deal and that depends on the game on the ice not off of it.
How can you say that? Carolina went to the finals a few years ago, is their market any stronger now? You seem to miss the point that if all goes well and every team is competative for players that means they'll make the playoffs roughly every other year. 30 teams, 16 spots. There are exceptions of course, but if you look at Carolina's last 4 years that's about what they are going to look for under the new CBA. Playoffs, finals, miss, miss. 2 out of 4 years in the playoffs. Did that grow the Carolina market?
As you said, they are selling out, so the fans seem to be sticking around fine so far. They might be a little more competative, but how much more money are they going to make if they are already selling out?
That has a negative affect on the owners pockets, not on the league. The most important thing for the league is to have an exciting game on the ice, and as I said getting a new CBA is ONLY about money. There won't be any renaissance of any kind until the NHL improves the game on the ice.
I agree with you the game on the ice is extremely important, and maybe even the most important. But you are way underestimating what a level playing field means to each market. You only used Candian teams as your examples. And 3 of those teams would likely be moved, regardless of fan support without a new CBA. Add the fact that Montreal can't even sell out their building anymore because fans have become jaded after seeing their once proud franshise being reduced to a feeder team.
Your Carolina example is a great one, but for my side of the argument. They did great business when they were successful. Believe it or not, there was a hockey buzz in Carolina that year. Fans there know full well that there is no hope of competing year after year because they just don't have the cash to compete and lost interest. Sure, there might be one lucky year once in a while, but you can forget about going to the playoffs every year like Toronto, Detroit, Dallas, Philladelphia, Coloarado, etc.
You can have the greatest game in the world, but if your home team has no chance of competing then fans lose interest. E.g. Baseball in Toronto and Montreal. MLB is as exciting as it's ever been but that doesn't help markets that have no hope. Fans stay away no matter how good the game is. I used to love the Jays but I have no interest in rooting for a minor league feeder team so I hardly watch them anymore.
Fans don't need to win a cup every year, but they demand a fair shot. That's what this CBA gives all 30 teams. And I think you are underestimating how important that is. Every team will only be 2-3 years away from making a serious run at a cup if they are managed right. That's exciting for fans in every market. There is something very unappealing about an unfair league. It turns fans off. I know it turns me off baseball. The NFL is a very fair league and their CBA and salary cap in particular is it's main strength as far as I'm concerned.
I'm in total agreement about the game itself being extremely important, but it doesn't make much difference how exciting the sport is if your team has no chance to compete year after year. The CBA is equallly important in my books.