Contraction Is NHL's Best Option
A few years ago, "contraction" became a swear word in Minnesota and surrounding states. When Bud Selig put the Twins on the chopping block, we were outraged. And we should have been. But the NHL is not Major League Baseball and for hockey, contraction is the only option.
From 1990-2000, the NHL expanded from 21 teams to 30. Several of those were in southern states. The NHL misread the possibility down south and is paying for it now. ESPN.com reports that "at least 10 teams stand to lose money when their local revenues (ticket sales and broadcast sales) and their share of meager league-wide national revenues are stacked up against payrolls above $30 million, especially in a lockout-depressed environment." Included in that list of teams are Atlanta, Carolina, Florida, Nashville and Phoenix. Every one of these teams was a southern experiment that didn't pan out. It's time to get rid of them. It's time to realize that hockey is a regional sport. Rather than expanding to the southern United States, it would make sense to expand north, further into Canada where the sport is popular.
Even some teams in the Midwest need to go. The Chicago Blackhawks are the worst franchise in professional sports and Columbus loses money every season. Those two teams, and every franchise to the south, should be contracted or moved north. Michael Leeds, a sports economics professor at Temple University, tells ESPN.com, "...since (the hockey fan) is a casual fan instead of a die-hard fan..." Leeds may be an expert in the economics of sports, but he evidently knows nothing about its fans.
Hockey's fan base is more "die-hard" than any other sport. The problem the NHL is running into is that it's also a regional sport. If kids can't grow up playing it on the outdoor ponds and rinks, it just doesn't catch on. It's like putting a professional surfing team in Minnesota. Hockey fans in the northern U.S. and Canada are die-hard. The NHL just needs to put the teams where the fans are. If they do that, salary-cap issues may still hang around, but they won't cancel an entire season.
From 1990-2000, the NHL expanded from 21 teams to 30. Several of those were in southern states. The NHL misread the possibility down south and is paying for it now. ESPN.com reports that "at least 10 teams stand to lose money when their local revenues (ticket sales and broadcast sales) and their share of meager league-wide national revenues are stacked up against payrolls above $30 million, especially in a lockout-depressed environment." Included in that list of teams are Atlanta, Carolina, Florida, Nashville and Phoenix. Every one of these teams was a southern experiment that didn't pan out. It's time to get rid of them. It's time to realize that hockey is a regional sport. Rather than expanding to the southern United States, it would make sense to expand north, further into Canada where the sport is popular.
Even some teams in the Midwest need to go. The Chicago Blackhawks are the worst franchise in professional sports and Columbus loses money every season. Those two teams, and every franchise to the south, should be contracted or moved north. Michael Leeds, a sports economics professor at Temple University, tells ESPN.com, "...since (the hockey fan) is a casual fan instead of a die-hard fan..." Leeds may be an expert in the economics of sports, but he evidently knows nothing about its fans.
Hockey's fan base is more "die-hard" than any other sport. The problem the NHL is running into is that it's also a regional sport. If kids can't grow up playing it on the outdoor ponds and rinks, it just doesn't catch on. It's like putting a professional surfing team in Minnesota. Hockey fans in the northern U.S. and Canada are die-hard. The NHL just needs to put the teams where the fans are. If they do that, salary-cap issues may still hang around, but they won't cancel an entire season.
posted by Joe Siple | 12:30 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home