Quote:
Originally Posted by DiracSpike
No kidding, it’s an easy sales pitch at that. Hey NHL owners/board of governors/whomever, here’s two scenarios for you.
Scenario A: Keep a team in a small Canadian hockey market that would watch hockey on Rogers whether or not they had a team. They play in the oldest building in the league that’s keeping them from earning money in lockstep with all the other franchises, and their city council recently ####ed you over by tearing up a good faith deal after the fact.
Scenario B: Gain new exposure in a novel market that is also the fourth biggest in the US where they play in a modern building and are owned by a guy with gobs of money that would be one of the richest owners in the league. They also create a ready made rivalry with Dallas that can get all Texans, the second largest state, interested in hockey. On top of all that you get a bonus of hundreds of millions of dollars in relocation fees.
Gee, that’s a tough one I wonder which one they’ll go with. I almost want it to happen to see the reaction of all the deluded masses that think there’s something special about Calgary that we can keep a team while backing out on a needed arena deal.
|
How long does the novelty of having a hockey team in Houston last? Maybe the only people interested are Canadian ex-pats or Canadians who have a long layover. Nobody will pay to watch a Houston hockey team on TV.