If the current team does that for you, fantastic. But if you're feeling the vibe changed in the last 5 years, it's a direct result of a team sliding further and further from their peak.
I, and I know many others, want a manger that says, "It was an amazing run, but it's time to retool for the next one. We'll do everything we can to get back to being a Cup contender and that might mean some difficult years. But know every decision is with that singular goal in mind."
This is, has always been, and will always continue to be the argument.
The pro-tank people are perfectly willing, on the front end, for the team to suck for x years for the purpose of possibly getting back to an acceptable (to them) level of play at some future time. Their willingness to endure a tank that lasts longer than 3 years is debatable at best, and in the middle of said tank there are absolutely going to be defections, but whatever.
IMO, there's no actual evidence a tank does much beyond marginally improve the chance of a teams ceiling to be higher, and is rather more likely to just add x years of being really bad to a bunch of years of being in the middle of the pack.
In the teams opinion, they have wanted to:
-Make a bunch of money each year by being competitive in the real sense of the word, not the gerrymandered sense of the word used here wherein one must be a contender to be competitive.
Check.
-Make around a half billion dollars from the city in free money by remaining good enough to have leverage to extract such from the typically stupid legislators who hand out such largesse while vital services circle their own drains.
Check.
-Not take a galactically cynical pile of poo on everyone with half a functioning brain by quitting on anything remotely resembling a winning team .000001 seconds into the aforementioned new arena, doing tremendous damage to their brand.
In progress.
It is entirely possible that the team will stink in spite of their best efforts to not stink. It is also entirely possible that the team will stink and their protestations of trying to not stink are abject lies told specifically to gull people, namely the likewise aforementioned stupid legislators who, after being so resoundingly exposed as stupid might try something retributive via legislation, to the teams harm.
For many people, being a fan of a team that is at least trying to win and be competitive in the real sense is enough. Maybe not for most fans here, who seem to believe in a notion perilously near 'Cup or bust', but those hyperexaggerated levels of expectation are not reflected either across the specific fandom of the Wings, or other pro teams in Detroit, or with pro teams generally, or even in ~95% of competitive teams, pro and otherwise.
Instead what we have is this:
"Nobody wants to see a rebuild," Holland said. "They want to see us in the playoffs. For those people that believe tanking... there are no guarantees."
Nobody wants a rebuild? Heh. Nobody. Nobody? OK. Ooooook. By the way, that quote comes from an article titled: Ken Holland's vision for Detroit Red Wings at odds with fans'
Well, obviously.
Look,
of course there are people who want to tank. Holland's language is a combination of typical PR speak along with some goofy rhetorical devices, and almost certainly at least a sprinkling of outright lies.
Where "you guys" and "those guys" will constantly fail to find intellectual common ground is that "you guys" are already disheartened and p'd off. To "you guys" there's no real downside to a tank because even if it fails you won't dislike what the team is doing any more than you already do. So, if the Wings fire Holland and hire some other schlomo under whom a tank is attempted and fails to accomplish your goal, an eventuality approaching something near 90+%, you'll just switch out Holland's name for Herr Schlomo and demand he be fired next. Nothing really changes. Your level of 'entertainment' remains constant, and effectively zero. I mean, we saw precisely this with the 'Fire Babcock' nonsense. Blashill arrives, and after a (very) short honeymoon? Fire Blashill. Lather, rinse, repeat.
On the other hand, for "those guys", the ones who actually derive either entertainment or profit from the team by being fans with less exalted expectations or those entrusted with actual financial goals, there are most assuredly downsides to a tank. A tanking team is typically wholly unpalatable to watch, and the impact to profit numbers can be immediate and substantial.
This issue gets chewed over endlessly because "you guys" are a strong majority here and demand "those guys" agree with you, and if they don't they are pro-Holland shills, contrarians, they don't want the team to win, are stinky doo doo heads of the lowest order, et cetera.
Enh. It's stuff to keep the boards going along during a time of limited topics, obviously, but it's largely just an instance of a large group of people talking past a small group of people.