Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogbert
Counterpoint - The NHL's ownership group is made up of super-rich, mostly conservative men. The Flames' owners essentially threatened to move the team unless the city voted for the political candidate they backed. If the Flames' owners were allowed to follow through on that threat, then other pro sports owners could pull the same stunt with their own franchises in order to get their own guys into the levels of government that affect them, and point to Calgary as an example of what might happen if the city's voters don't do as they're told. That might be worth the revenue decrease to them.
|
That’s plausible. It seems unlikely to me that sports franchise owners would play hardball with their customer base like that though. At the end of the day it’s a business, while nfl teams could probably get away with it due to the economics of that league, I don’t believe the nhl is in the same boat. Hockey is still very much a fringe sport in most of the US and can’t risk alienating their fan base like that. While emotional attachment to teams will maintain support, every fan has their limit to how much crap they’ll put up with from their team.
Nothing the team has done to this point in the negotiation process has been shocking to me. Remember when the oilers were moving to Seattle if they didn’t get a new building? Or the Pens to Hamilton? The best way for a franchise to get the best deal possible on a building is to scare their fan base into believing without public funding for a new arena the team will leave. When you think about it, what else could a group of billionaires possibly use as leverage to convince people to pay for something they could easily afford to pay for themselves?