Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
We all want to see women's hockey in the Olympics. And we want (and expect) Canada to dominate.
So here's the thing: a women's pro league is good for the game. But it probably isn't economically viable on its own. That means it needs support.
And who are the benefactors of its success?
1) fans of the Olympics and the game
2) the NHL, because a women's league likely increases interest from female fans
So stop with the 'it needs to be self-sustaining' argument - because it isn't. Ask yourself (you as a fan of the game, as well as all of the stewards of the game, including the NHL) is women's hockey a good thing?
If the answer to that is yes (and IMO, it most definitely is), then support it and help find a way to make it work.
|
Sorry. I'm going to have to disagree with you.
If it needs to be subsidized simply to exist then it isnt going to work.
Its the same reason the NHL told the Olympics to go pound sand, because they're not going to pay for someone else's toys and the prospect of 'growing the game' be it in China, overseas or anywhere else isnt outstripping the cost of the subsidy.
The NHL is a small-time league in the world of professional sports. They cant be subsidizing another league.
Would paying for women's hockey generate significant revenue relative to its costs? Ever? It seems like a long shot.
And I dont want to demean or dismiss women's hockey, but if they want the same rights and pay as men then they're going to have to come up with a way to sell the same amount of tickets and generate the same amount of revenue.