Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

52624Re: NHL Doesn't Trust Jim Balsillie

Expand Messages
  • William Underwood
    Aug 2, 2009
      You don't need millions of Americans to "switch".just x number of CANADIANS
      who want their cities to have teams and resent Bettman. The Washington Post
      columnist is right.about the US.not Canada! And the idea is a CANADIAN
      dominated league. The goal in the US would be sheerly to get the more like
      10000 fans in the weak markets to dip to 5000 not because of another league
      to watch but rather they don't want to watch their pathetic mess of a
      franchise! The marketing is directed toward CANADA for the PRECISE reason
      that this is a topic.the NHL has teams where as the columnist accurately
      points out here are few to no fans but doesn't where there are fans.Canadian
      fans don't need hockey laced with NHL stars to come out and see it.ask any
      Leaf fan! :-) Why would customers pay for it? Because it is a chance for
      Quebec, Hamilton, Winnipeg et al to see high level hockey. Because it is a
      league that is CANADIAN and does not forget the game's roots or most loyal
      fans. And because each dollar spent on it is a way to stick it to Gary
      Bettman who has for ten years derided them if not in words but by action. It
      is a chance for Canada to have what every top Euro nation has , a league to
      call its own. And it is a chance to say "bleep off Gary, we will show you
      the price for not letting us in your league and you had better think again."



      You are underestimating this stuff. Remember CFL fans in Canada do not rally
      around the NFL. The Bills were rather disappointed in Toronto. They thought
      "well CFL is not even really big league ball anymore so of we come
      Torontonians and Canadians of every sort will scream hallaleaujah!" They
      didn't. Why? Say what we want about the CFL, it is CANADIAN and has that
      CANADIAN content which apparently means something. I'm actually surprised at
      the number of emails that I have gotten off line saying "great idea"..



      And calling it an "IHL" is WAY off base! The "I" was always a league that
      was essentially a league with mixed identity.most of it wanted to stay minor
      pro a FEW teams wanted better.they only had a few players of bona fide NHL
      caliber.the KHL has already done better than that! They would get the odd
      hold out to play but leave as soon as the hold out ended and the very odd
      good young Euro.it never really became anything more than a very good AAA
      league. A league with this sort of ownership and goals would take more god
      players. The IHL's budget for most clubs was always miniscule. This would
      not be the ghost of the IHL but the WHA and actually much more formidable
      with wealthy foreign allies and not feeling the need that the WHA did, to go
      into what were either weak US markets or US markets with not enough room for
      another hockey team.



      Finally if they go messing with your weakest team Bettman BETTER lose
      sleep.how many people will pay to see a loser in the newer cities? How many
      will stick with instability? All you have to do is to push already weak
      teams that bit farther toward the cliff.



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 14 messages in this topic