Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
I would be in favor of that. Sadly, the NHLPA would not. This is not on the table, and the league has no controls over this right now, nor has plans to do this, so discussing it is irrelevant.
Yes, the league is stating that the team is in a situation where it is not viable in the long term. This is very reminiscent of the 1990's all over again. The warning signs were there, but were ignored. The warning signs are here too, but people are ignoring them. The current facilities are not capable of sustaining the revenues required by the current NHL economic landscape. The current facilities are not up to league standard for player training and maintenance. The things that will attract the best talent is missing. That needs to be resolved if we want to continue watching a competitive hockey team.
|
Then your sad tale of the league, city and flames working together to save the team has no relavence. The flames and NHL are holding the relocation gun to our heads and hoping the city cracks. Bettmen is here to ensure that the flames owners don't cut a deal that would set a precedent for lower support. He is actively working against the cities interests. So this situation is not analogous.
The flames ranking in league revenues begs to differ that they can't sustain revenues. If we are 25th in the league in revenues let's have this conversation.