Quote:
Originally Posted by Joborule
I don't think they had the ownership they've required though to propser. The way the organization is managed from the top down is extremely important. A recent example of going from a bad owner to a good one is the Blackhawks. The fanbase was jaded against the previous owner whom apparently managed the team in an odd way in some ways. When his son took over, the fanbase has regain confidence in the ownership. Granted that happen around the same time they get Towes and Kane along with other good players to move away from the lower tier of teams to a Stanley Cup winner within a couple years. So winning ultimately brought the fans back, but that comes from good ownership that wants to build a winning club. Coyotes ownership in the past didn't seem to have the same desire and as a result lost the attention of the market due to poor ice play for a lengthy period.
|
While I don't disagree with the overall concept there is a significant difference between the Coyotes, who have had 15 years in Phoenix, versus the Blackhawks, who have been in the NHL since 1926. Also, to drive the grass roots message home: you can actually go play hockey in Chicago.
So while it may have helped the Coyotes if they were managed properly and if they had a winning team there is also something to be said for trying to grow hockey as a sport in the communities that the NHL wants to set up shop in. If it Coyotes ended up losing something like $300 million then maybe one could argue that if they had spent $100 million to develop hockey in Phoenix then maybe they would have had enough fans to not lose the other $200 million in running the team.