| Author |
 Topic  |
|
ThorntonisTHEMAN
PickupHockey Pro
499 Posts |
 Posted - 02/15/2008 : 10:18:46
|
Antroman, I completely agree that there should be fewer teams in the NHL. Yet Mr. Bettman is talking about expanding again? to regions like Kansis City? Give me a break! I also think that there should not be points awarded for an overtime loss. A loss is a loss. You shouldn't get points for it! In no other sports leagues do you get points for a loss! But that's my little rant for the day.
I do still think that the salary cap is a good idea, for the fact that it creates parity in the league and also ensure that players aren't getting crazy big contracts (baseball example: A Rod, Johan Santana etc.).
So i conclude, if Mr. Bettman would take away the point-for-a-loss, make fewer teams, and allow another team in SOuthern Ontario, I would become a huge fan of his! 
however, the chances of any of these happening are slim to none
"I'm not dumb enough to be a goalie."
Brett Hull. |
 |
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2008 : 13:36:45
|
Well, historically there have been a few short dictators .
Many things have been said here so rather than go on too much with obvious complaints about Mr. B, I'll just give my overall answer to this question.
I think if were to approach this question by giving a rating to the NHL from 1 to 10, I would say if pre-93 was an 8, post 93 is about a 4.
Of course one would have to break pre-93 down further, but I express it this way to make the point that, though I agree that things are not all Bonaparte Bettman’s fault, no matter where you want to place the blame things have gone down DRASTICALLY in his era (reference to Bonaparte is just for you Antro - I think of Bettman more as just a guy who has mismanaged some major things - you can choose the appropriate politician to compare him to).
Although I am objective enough to recognize that part of what I say above relates to me holding onto my love for things of yesteryear, I think that even putting that aside, one could say that the NHL in the 70s and 80s and early 90s, even with its relative lack of parity, was in a significantly better state for the fans pre-93 than it is today (not in terms of the quality of play or player of course, but in terms of a good and interesting product, and by that I mean product of HOCKEY, not product in terms of being able to also listen to music blasting in your ears and watching commercials on a big screen during the game, etc). And for what it is worth, my sense from the younger generation today is that they are more dissatisfied with the game than we were twenty, thirty years ago.
Parity may have been gained but the expansion mistake alone easily outweighs any positive thing which parity has brought to the NHL. Put simply, I guess I'd rather have the pre-parity problem of four or five teams holding an advantage over others than have a league with so many teams (about 20 would be way better). I won’t go on about Nashville, etc. except to say that the fact that Bettman, or anyone, would even consider further expansion (to a place like Kansas no less) is pretty telling of the sad state of direction at the moment.
|
|
|
|
Antroman
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
537 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2008 : 20:34:54
|
| Bravo Mr. Thornton......Great post and I humbly agree with you. |
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 06:23:11
|
Fewer teams in the NHL? EEEK, no!
I don't normally like to make my replies long, so cutting how i feel down...
Less teams = less games = less hockey we get to watch.
Sure, we may see more 'stacked' teams, by having less teams. As we'd only have room for the more elite of the NHL, but i'd still prefer seeing more games in the run of a year. :)
Perhaps not the reasoning you were looking for as to why i prefer more teams, but it's just how I feel.
-- But, I am content where they are now. I do not support a new team in Kansas, or the likes. 30 is a good a number. |
Edited by - irvine on 03/24/2008 06:25:20 |
|
|
|
Guest6006
( )
|
Posted - 09/14/2009 : 18:35:49
|
why quote:
Originally posted by PuckNuts
I highlighted your comment, so if you are saying something different I am really sorry...
You can hate Bettman all you want, but that does not mean I have to hate him. In fact I think that he has been the best leader the NHL has ever seen, and If you don't like it that is your problem, and you have to deal with it...
[img]http://www.maldesigns.ca/top%2050%20since%201967%20banner.jpg[/img]
why is he the best leader Ive heard Beans proclaim his love of him and how its not his fault the league isnt as good as in 93 its the owners his bosses. questions ;
1 How many times do you think you call the owners of the 30 teams into a meeting.
2 How often would 30 memmbers of anything agree.
3. Who submits proposals and develops agendas and for that matter calls the meetings.
4. How many individual owners do you need to get together to challenge the nhl as it is a seperate entity from the owners.(see nhl sues rangers web site , nhl possible lawsuit vs leafs.
5. so why do the owners sue themselves or call themselves to meet bettman(ie tampa owners) arent they in charge. Can you imagine calling your boss and telling them to get their act together.
6. What kind of fairy land do you live in. If bettman isnt responsible for the problems in the game he also isnt part of the soloution after 16 yrs.
7. everyone post arguements vs him what is the positves the best man for the job has brought to the game (besides salary cap) thta cost the fans league a year of hockey.
8. What did you do during the strike (being as your owners couldnt give you hockey) I watched and played hockey Because hockey is CANADAS GAME NOT THE OWNERS OR THE NHLS GAME |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2009 : 18:48:09
|
Hockey may be Canada's game, but the NHL is the Owners Game.
If Bettman was doing such a horrible job those 30 owners would have fired him a long time ago. The problem with that the NHL has made many of those Owners very rich. They won't do anything to Bettman as long as they money is still coming in.
However, if Balsillie wins, Bettman can not come back from that. Wonder who would take the job next?? Sometimes, it better the devil you know.
And I would love to answer some of the latest questions, but I have to be able to understand them first. Grammer and clarity go a long way. |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2009 : 08:27:26
|
Did Bettman improve the game or just manage the league during a period of sports revenue growth. Cause his gains during the 90's to now dont compare to the MLB, NBA or NFL growth. So cause he was the manager during a growth period we are going to hang a sign around his neck, calling him the almighty savior.
He was running the show during Winnipeg and Quebec downfall. He approved Atlanta, Nashville, Dallas, Florida, Tampa, Minnesota, Columbus, Carolina and Anahiem. Some people will point to some of those teams and see a few former cup winners. All these teams will rank at the low end of revenue and most are currently on bad finacial footing. Dallas and Anaheim are the 2 most likely to regain solid finacial footing because of prior success and solid fan support, if they regain success for the on the ice product. Minnesota, having had a prior team is doing ok and Columbus draws revenue from Canadian fan support due to close proximity to Canada.
Toronto, New York Rangers and Detroit would have had similar success without him. Edmonton, Calgary and Ottawa owe him for the reprieve earlier this decade, but he was at the helm when the NHL almost collaped the canadian game. I remember thinking even Vancouver and Montreal may not have been able to afford a team, not to long ago and that Toronto might have been the only Canadian team to survive.
I wont forgive him for the retraction of the Canadian game for the benifit of growth in the states in bad markets area's. He may have 2 short term success story's in the states for 10 bad ones.
I may not agree with Basillie's tactic's and I dont care if Hamilton gets a team (There is probably a more deserving market in canada) but on principal I support him because Bettman and the NHL board of governers, against conventional wisdom, will not put a team in a market with growth potential in Canada. This is not an arguement which supports him being the best manager the NHL has ever had. |
Edited by - JOSHUACANADA on 09/16/2009 08:28:43 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2009 : 12:03:26
|
Joshua, if you are going to make posts such as this, it would be nice to see the facts. I am refering to the increase in revenues the NHL has seen and your comment that the other pro league have seen the same or bigger. The NHL went from $400 million in 93 to over $2.2 billion 13 years later.
I would love to see the numbers on the other sports leagues. Maybe I am wrong, but other than maybe football, I would say the numbers are not even close. Basketball has had nothing but image issues and talk about teams relocating. That sport has gone from nearly owning the non-football Sunday sports to being distant competition. And baseball with the steroid era has also seen a drop.
I am not saying the NHL makes more money, but as a % of growth. The NHL more than quintupled their revenues. That's unheard of.
|
|
|
|
Guest4405
( )
|
Posted - 09/16/2009 : 14:52:39
|
"And I would love to answer some of the latest questions, but I have to be able to understand them first. Grammer and clarity go a long way." - Beans15
OK Beans, I've seen you preach proper grammAr (by the way, that is the correct spelling of the word), and coherent phrasing when in fact you have had many sloppy posts riddled with misspelled words. If you truly want to answer the questions, just give a litte effort towards understanding what is being written (God knows I've done so with your posts). I believe you have mentioned once before on this site the whole idiom of a certain stove-top appliance calling another black. |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2009 : 15:10:20
|
http://www.plunkettresearch.com/Industries/Sports/SportsStatistics/tabid/273/Default.aspx
There is a link which directly correlate income for the sports in comparisons. I have no way of providing info for 1993 as most sports did not disclose and most numbers would be estimates. I was surprised as to the closeness of NBA and the NHL but currently an NBA team is worth 172% as much as a NHL team with similar attendance numbers and earns more than twice as much annually.
Best I can do to satisfy your stats machine. Enjoy. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2009 : 15:17:51
|
Alright, Mr. Guest I will take my own medicine. I did not spell a word correctly. So, for my punishment, I will answer your questions. Although, even with perfect grammar and spelling, you will fail to see my points. (by the way, I did not spell check the questions. I copied them directly from the original post)
1 How many times do you think you call the owners of the 30 teams into a meeting.
They are called the Board of Governor's Meetings. They happen periodically through the year and occasionally emergency meetings are called as well.
What's the points??
2 How often would 30 memmbers of anything agree.
Speaking of spelling. The point of the Board of Governors is that they don't all have to agree. They all have an equal vote and majority (or a specified % based on the NHL Constitution) is required to make decisions. By the way, you might to research and find out how many votes Bettman gets.
3. Who submits proposals and develops agendas and for that matter calls the meetings.
This is actually a really good question. I am sure that Bettman does have some kind of say in what the agenda is and I am sure he has an opportunity to address the Board at each meeting. He kind of has to, he's the commish.
4. How many individual owners do you need to get together to challenge the nhl as it is a separate entity from the owners.(see nhl sues rangers web site , nhl possible lawsuit vs leafs.
This question I really don't understand. The Owners is exactly what the NHL is. They are not a separate entity. I will look into these "lawsuits" and try to better understand things.
5. so why do the owners sue themselves or call themselves to meet bettman(ie tampa owners) arent they in charge. Can you imagine calling your boss and telling them to get their act together.
The owners don't sue themselves. Not that I am aware of anyway. And the TB thing had to do with multiple owners both trying to make decisions against one another. Bettman did step in and rightfully so. That is Bettman, acting as a Commissioner and acting on behalf of all the owners on league operations. I am completely appalled. The man was doing his job.
6. What kind of fairy land do you live in. If bettman isnt responsible for the problems in the game he also isnt part of the soloution after 16 yrs
I didn't get the memo that said Edmonton is now known as Fairyland. I never said that Bettman was 100% blameless in anything. However, the huge misconception is that he is a decision maker. He is, but very limited. He can't make overall league decisions without the support of the Board. For anything you dislike about the game and blame Bettman for, you have to blame the 30 owners as well.
7. everyone post arguements vs him what is the positves the best man for the job has brought to the game (besides salary cap) thta cost the fans league a year of hockey.
Again, I really don't understand this question. However, if you are blaming Bettman for the lock out, you can blame the players just as much. They refused to sign and held out for demands. They are as much to blame as anyone.
8. What did you do during the strike (being as your owners couldnt give you hockey) I watched and played hockey Because hockey is CANADAS GAME NOT THE OWNERS OR THE NHLS GAME
I did many different things that winter. Watching NHL hockey was not one of them. And I blame the players and owners equally in that. Bettman was the middle man between the two groups much like Goodnow. Both were acting based on the wishes of their employers. Both were doing their jobs.
Man, am I ever glad I don't get such negative attention for doing my job.
And let's be clear, Hockey is not Canada's game either. Lacrosse is Canada's National Sport.
And really, I fail to understand the rationale behind any of these questions. They prove absolutely nothing for the NHL being better or worse under Gary Bettman. |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2009 : 15:20:31
|
I just picked this tid bit from the wikipedia on Major Professional sports
Quote
Women's National Basketball Association
The Women's National Basketball Association (WNBA) is the longest-running professional women's sport league in history. Since beginning play in 1997, the WNBA has mostly attracted attention as a niche league. In recent years, however, the WNBA has made steps forward. In 2007, the league signed a television deal with ESPN that would run from 2009-2016. This deal would be the first to ever pay rights fees to women's teams.
As of 2009, the WNBA gets more viewers on national television broadcasts (413,000) [2] than MLS (253,000) [3] and the NHL (310,732) [4]
So let me get this straight WNBA gets Broadcasting revenue (NHL doesn't) and draws a larger televised audience. Yep Bettman is earning his keep. |
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2009 : 17:23:38
|
Is the NHL better because of Gary Bettman? Is that the question being asked?
If anyone answers yes then they are sadly mistaken. There are couple of ways to measure whether or not the NHL is better and neither of them have to do with Gary Bettman.
The first as mentioned is from a business perspective from 93 as previously posted. This had nothing to do with Gary Bettman and everything to do with immense growth in the North American economy. In fact since the mild recession in (not a real recession) in 91 the global economy experienced unprecedented growth and when people make the money they spend the money. Businesses everywhere enjoyed tremendous growth and profits. The NHL being no different.
The second is the NHL is better because of the post lockout style of play. Again this had nothing to do with Bettman. Most of the games rules were adopted from Shannahans committee of players who gave the recommendation to the league. In my opinion they made Bettman look good, but the players did the work.
Lets look at what Bettman did to improve the league. He started franchises in several key markets to bring the game to hockey craving fans in the USA. His hopes were to show off this game of ours and bring in huge dollars from TV contracts. Where did he chose? Miami, Tampa Bay, Phoenix, Atlanta, Nashville, Columbus. Are any of these franchises making the league better from a profitable business perspective? NO. Did they bring in that huge TV contract? NO. Are they barely surviving? Yes. Are the Pheonix Coyotes now the joke of every major sports team because of the way Bettman does business? Yes.
I could go on and on but the conclusion is simply that the NHL is better since 93 both from the business and from a product side. But Gary Bettman was just in the right place at the right time. Heck even Beans could have made the NHL look as good during the same period! LOL, sorry Beans, not a jab, just kiddin around. |
Edited by - Porkchop73 on 09/16/2009 17:26:08 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2009 : 21:04:26
|
Ok Mr Chop, I have just one single question.
If I prove that the NHL had a higher increase in overall revenue by percentage compared to the other 4 major sports, does that not disprove the theory that the "overall North American Economy" was the reason for the NHL success??
If mean, for example. If I prove that the NFL was making $3 billion a year and in 2009 they were making $6.2 billion they basically doubled their revenues. (Hypothetical, I don't have the actual numbers yet).
And again, Mr Chop, your entire arguement about what Bettman did is completely off base. Bettman can not do any of the things you listed. He does not decide to add franchises or where they would be. He suggested, the Board decided.
Blame should be put in the right place, and that's the owners. They make the calls, they make the decisions.
(I'll get to work on the revenue information for the different sports in the past 15-20 years.) |
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 09/17/2009 : 04:02:14
|
Beans, you will not be able to prove anything with revenue or profits by comparing. The NFL, NBA, and MLB were already making more from there potential market and less room to make more profits. I am also sure that if you start pulling the revenues, you will see that 45% of league profits came from Canadian teams. So any growth can be contributed to economic growth, specifically in Canada where our economy outgrew the american economy tenfold. Hence we were not as hard hit with the recession as the americans. It was not the NHLs BOG foray into the weak markets that provided increases revenues, it was the economy, just ask any business owner in North America and they increased revenue and profits also.
OK so the board of Governers does Bettmans dirty work for him. Look at what they are doing in Pheonix at Bettmans bidding. Lovely job at improving the game!!! |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/17/2009 : 08:09:15
|
Well, sometimes I might not be able to recognize it immediately, I do eventually figure out when I am talking to a brick wall. Some opinions are just impossible to sway.
No disrespect intended by that. I have certain opinions that don't get swayed either. I guess what my point is that Bettman is not the only person involved with NHL decisions. He steers the ship, no question, but the owners tell him how fast and what direction to drive. Anything good that has happened in the NHL since he start does not matter. He gets zero credit for anything that's good (increased revenues, increased value in organization, increased attendance, etc) that is all factors of the economy.
But every single thing that is wrong with the game is specifically tied to Gary Bettman. That is an ignorant, narrow minded view in my opinion. There are literally hundreds of people involved in driving the NHL.
And in the end, I don't think that anyone could have really done much better than Bettman has. Maybe a little, but the NHL is not much different today with Bettman because it's still the owners that are the power.
And the slight about Phoenix, I think there are some words out of place. It's Bettman doing the bidding for the owners, not the owners doing Bettman's bidding. We are talking about 30+ multimillionaires. If they didn't like what they were getting out of Bettman, he would be gone. It's Joe Public that think they can run the NHL when we (including myself) don't have a sniff. We can all look at things in hindsight and based on our opinions. |
|
|
|
Guest8954
( )
|
Posted - 09/17/2009 : 11:01:38
|
| This was the best forum I have ever read. All this about dictators and the blame game and profits certainly was interesting to read. I'm amazed how much more looks the Womens Basketball League gets in the states as opposed to the NHL. But I'm going to have to agree with beans in saying that it is not Bettman's fault. The owners are greedy and if they are making money, they don't see a reason to change it. On a side note, I am pretty pissed about all the advertisements at hockey games. I got a Canucks towel at the nucks-hawks game 1 past palyoffs and it had like 15-20 companies on it, wasn't very nice. Then I saw someone waving their 1994 towel (dream big bud) and it had no company logo's what-so-ever on it, way nicer. |
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 09/17/2009 : 14:22:29
|
Mr. Beans I do not recall saying that everything wrong in the NHL is Bettmans fault and I do not take any offense to good debate. Your brick wall is harder to knock down then mine! No disrespect intended.
But I will stand by the fact the improvements since 93 are not direct result of Bettman and the moves made by Bettman and the BOG did not improve the game either.
I also think in another topic somewhere in these forums that I agreed with you that Bettman will always be the commish as long as the league makes money and that he is not at fault for every wrong doing in the NHL.
I am simply saying that the statement that Bettman is directly responsible for the revenue growth since 93 is very untrue. I could have put a hotdog stand on the side of the road in Coronation Alberta and made huge profits in the same period of time.
No disrespect but I do not know how you cannot correlate the growth in the North American economy with the growth in the NHL. It has nothing to do with Bettman, nothing at all.
I do not know why you hold Bettman in such high regard. His actions in the Pheonix situation would have him fired with any major company in North America. He is making his business look like a mickey mouse outfit. Even all the other major sports leagues have backed away from his silly game.
I will back down only if Bettman can somehow turn the situation in Phoenix into something that makes the NHL shine like it should. That will be proof positive that Bettman is as good you think. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/17/2009 : 14:39:02
|
Mr Chop, my comments were not directed at you personally. At least after the initial paragraph they were not directed at you. I know your comments on Bettman. I was trying to say that I am giving up on trying to sway your opinion as it's a pointless exercise. I would be like you trying to tell me that Mario Lemieux was a better player than Wayne Gretzky. You would be wasting your time.
Here's my argument. There are various different sports teams have multiple pro league represented. However, the NHL has had higher grow since Bettman's arrival in those same markets. Sure, the economy was good, but the NHL got a bigger piece of the pie than the other sports (percentage increase wise). The argument that the other leagues had a bigger piece of the pie before so they couldn't climb as high even further solidifies what the NHL (not Bettman only, but the entire NHL) has done. The guy before Bettman didn't have a big piece of the pie so Bettman's NHL went out and got it.
And seriously, I never intended to sound like I was personally attacking you. In looking back in my post I can see how one could see that. I was trying to say that the average Anti-Bettman opinion blames Bettman for every negative thing in the NHL. However, I offer my apology to you as I never intended to paint you with that same brush.You and I do agree on many things and we disagree on many things. However, your opinion is one I respect on this site and I never intended on showing any disrespect.
|
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 09/17/2009 : 14:45:30
|
Beans. Ok I get your arguement against most, if not all of our post against you defense of Bettman. Your saying the little man is not responsible for the decisions that have been made which have cause irreversable damage to the current NHL product and Struggling franchises south of the border and the failed franchises in Canada. At the same time you want to give him a trophy as the best manager for all of the positive things he has done for the league.
You cannot compliment him for all things, and defend him by saying all bad things were not his fault.(it was the board of governers) Its either all him or he is a figure head make up your mind. He either governs this league or he is a spokesman.
My point to why he is partially if not majority of the problem was if I suggested a course of action as the manager and my owner said no I want to use this really stupid course of action, I quit. He has held his job for 16 years because he always says yes sir or suggest the course of action with which the NHL's path has been on.
8-10 owners right now are not doing good financially. Why have they not said Bettman fix our problems. Because he cant he doesn't know how. Guy's like Basillie have been suggesting a successful business plan for years now, and have run into the brick wall which is Bettman and his staff who are guiding owners to not accept possible smart business plans and partners. |
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 09/17/2009 : 17:04:24
|
Beans, no apologies necessary and I did not take it as an attack, nor did I mean my post to be an attack on you, we have just run into this topic again and we always agree to disagree on Bettman.
Just so all is clear, I do not think that Bettman is a total idiot and I do think he is successful. Looking from the outside we can always say he could do a better job, its easy when we are not in his shoes and it is always easier to point out someones mistakes.
Your growth in the same markets as other leagues is valid as the revenues for teams like Boston, NYR and several real Hockey markets did grow more than the other sports.
However, I do not believe it was direct result of Gary Bettman.
And NEVER EVER would I say that Lemieux was better then Gretzky, I was just as big of Oil fan in the 80's as everyone else. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/17/2009 : 17:14:25
|
Ok Joshua, let's go along your logic for a second.
I am running the Beans Company for this really smart and funny guy. He trusts me to make many day to day decisions but I can't close down plants or open others without his ok. I make a plan and execute it to grow Beans Company. Unfortunately along the way a few plants get closed, other open, some are going amazing, and others are not doing that great. In the end, some 10 years later the organization increases it's revenues by more than 5 times what they were when I started. Many of the plants in the company are worth significantly more than they are worth before I started. There have been a couple of labour disputes, but overall the customers of the Beans Company are still buying the product. In fact, the Company has more customers today than before I started as well. There are some customers that think I should build plants closer to where there are and there is even a guy that would put up money to get those new plants going by moving one of the plants not making money. But, the other plant managers have real issues with with this guy and they all said no to him.
You want to know what happens to me?????
I get promoted.
My boss doesn't give two %&#$'s about the plants that closed or the guy who wants to move a plant. As long as the money is going into his pocket, he tells me to keep on doing what I am doing. He's getting richer, and that's his goal.
Like it or not, the NHL is the same thing. The owners own the team to make money. Most of them are doing ok. Why would they want to change that??
|
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2009 : 13:53:50
|
Well thats the problem then. Bettman is a Bean counter. To be honest I dont know much about bean counting or the coffee business.
Really, this is about sports franchises and potential fanbase and revenue based business which Is based in the Northern part of North America. I could suggest many business types which have there competition right next door and have no trouble surviving. For instance I am in the car business and my neighbor dealerships advertizing brings customers to my lot too. Does that mean competition makes my business stronger.
Im not basing this in other business plans, just the total lack of growth for our professional sport in the country which provides the majority of the talent, by an american accountant/ lawyer who does not understand the game or its fans. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2009 : 18:38:59
|
If the current NHL regime does not understand the fan base, why has league attendence increased every year since the lock out???
The quintupled revenues, where did they come from??? Don't say TV revenues because the NHL is easily the worst of any pro sport in that matter. It's merch and tickets.
And as much as you might not like it. As much as I don't like it, the NHL is not a sport. Not anymore. It is purely a business and without revenues and profits and the likes, the NHL is not even there.
You truly dislike it and truly want to do something about it. Stop supporting it and get all your friends to stop supporting it. |
|
|
|
Guest9109
( )
|
Posted - 09/18/2009 : 19:09:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by PENSFAN8771
2 Penguins cups before he took over, none since. end of story. Bad.
But in all seriousness, I feel that he has tried to make the NHL more "marketable" and has utterly failed while taking the game further and further away from pure hockey. He bumbled the lockout and cost the NHL countless fans and dollars. Hockey is now less marketable in the US than anytime in the past 4 decades and has lost its status as one of the big 4 sports. It's really sad what Bettman's actions and inactions have done to the NHL.
Also, I feel the league has inadequately marketed young talent besides Crosby. I love the kid and I think he is the best young player in the league, but he isn't the only good young player in the league.
Some playoff games not even close to capacity.
Defending Stanley Cup champions not increasing attendence when they travel.
Teams moving to "bigger" markets with fewer fans.
The glowing puck on FOX.
Hockey no longer on FOX, ESPN, or really any national outlet in the US except NBC a dozen times a year and VS, which only reaches a fraction of US households.
Locking in a long term VS deal that will keep hockey out of US living rooms for the forseeable future.
The list goes on and on and on . . .
It's not all Bettman's fault, but it's all happened since '93.
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2009 : 21:29:02
|
Seriously, when the NHL has increase revenues and attendence under Bettman with personalities like these, the guy has gotta be doing something right. I mean, this was the best the NHL had at the time and they both have the personality of a garden tool.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLmwElcaF7c&feature=related |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Gary Bettman - Is the NHL better? 
