Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutuu
We have a hard time attracting players without paying more. There's a distinction there. Being player friendly hasn't really gotten us anywhere, and it's kind of bs when we let the team facilities sink to bottom of the league, in my opinion negating any goodwill we have built up.
|
Jiri is right that Flames’ management have to be conscious of the market and its place in the league pecking order. But I agree with you that ownership haven’t really done their part in making Calgary the most attractive destination.
A couple years ago, the Athletic’s staff did a ranking/draft of NHL franchises. The interesting thing about it is the on-ice product was only part of the exercise. The elements they assessed and ranked were:
* Market
* Ownership
* Management
* Star player
No surprise, the Flames finished around 25th in most desirable market. Can’t do much about that. More concerning is they finished bottom-third in ownership. That just compounds the structural handicap the franchise faces.
Maybe things will turn around with the new arena. But the fact it’s going to open about a decade later than it should because of Edwards’ big-dog shenanigans has already hurt the franchise. Then there’s the word you hear that the team skimps on off-ice resources and facilities.
So yeah, owing to the market management has to try to be team-friendly to the on-ice talent. But ownership hasn’t held up its end of the deal.