[Rumour] Chris Johnston: Lindholm is interested in staying

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It's possible that the Flames feel like they can't survive a prolonged period of being a bottom feeder. That a tank would see them competitive again - but they'd be in Houston by that time.

The Flames averaged 100% attendance from 2013-2016 when the team picked 6th overall, 4th overall, and 6th overall in 4 seasons.

Only recently since covid have the Flames had struggles selling out, particularly last season for a particularly dull team without much to cheer for.

So the Flames would be foolish to think it at this point. Personally, I think Flames fans are pretty smart and are more likely to tune out a team that finished 14-18th every year.

[howard_the_duck]

You don't need to be a playoff team to have a marketable product for your fanbase. The sizzle of promise and potential, especially for homegrown players, is still a draw.

In fact, fan sentiment has never been higher for a rebuild, and there's very little attachment to the current crop of core players that were mostly acquired via trade or free agency.

Flamesnation polled over 500 fans that expressed distaste for the current direction of the team, with 90% saying they'd support a rebuild.

So no, I don't buy that heading toward a rebuild would crater attendance long-term and we'd suddenly be at risk of moving. Especially with a new arena on the horizon. IMO, that's a lazy ownership narrative that is not grounded in the reality that this is still a hockey-starved Canadian market that, above all else, wants to see a Stanley Cup.

[GreenLantern2814]

^^^conversely, you don’t need to be a Stanley Cup contender to generate interest either.

Just be interesting.

They have spent money on good players. I don’t know how much true top end talent they have, but they don’t have a bottom feeding roster.

They’re spending to the cap and trying to retain the best centre they’ve had since Nieuwendyk.

It’s not how I’d do it, but it is a direction.

Put your best foot forward. Work with what you have. Fight.

Enjoy it for what it is.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Hackey

From a fan perspective I think Canadians are passionate and knowledgeable there isn't an issue. From a financial standpoint that is entirely their call. You'd think if you built a really strong team that should provide a solid decade of positive financials. But I think a team should be either sacrificing the present for the future or the future for the present if your priority is winning it all. Right now I feel like they don't want to do either. Which again is their choice but I think it mostly gives you half results or makes things extra difficult to achieve more than average results.

"You'd think if you built a really strong team that should provide a solid decade of positive financials."

It's not easy to do this and most teams aren't able to do it. I'm sure every person in management and ownership would say that they've been trying to build a really strong team. You might disagree with their strategy or their execution, but I don't think you can turn that into a "they're not trying" leap of logic, just because the results haven't been there.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The Flames averaged 100% attendance from 2013-2016 when the team picked 6th overall, 4th overall, and 6th overall in 4 seasons.

Only recently since covid have the Flames had struggles selling out, particularly last season for a particularly dull team without much to cheer for.

So the Flames would be foolish to think it at this point. Personally, I think Flames fans are pretty smart and are more likely to tune out a team that finished 14-18th every year.

I don’t think that average attendance is accurate plus it was heavily weighted by corporate sears which were empty a lot (meaning no concessions or parking revenue). And you seem to forget the Flames almost moved in the 90s.

Also, regular season attendance pays the bills. Post season pays the owners.

[Ashasx]

well if that average attendance is inaccurate then today's average attendance is inaccurate. It's the only apples to apples we have.

The Flames almost moved in the 90s under very different economic circumstances. The Flames organization today is likely valued close to $1 billion.

I'd be interested in season ticket renewal numbers to see how they compare to the 2014 off-season.

[Press Level]

It doesn't help that the Dome is a dump. As an entertainment venue, by 2023 standards, it leaves a lot to be desired. I think that "casual" fans are far more likely to show up to watch a mediocre team if the experience of going to the game is modern and fun.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

well if that average attendance is inaccurate then today's average attendance is inaccurate. It's the only apples to apples we have.

The Flames almost moved in the 90s under very different economic circumstances. The Flames organization today is likely valued close to $1 billion.

Value =/= profit and loss in a year or even three years.

The Flames lowest attendance was in the 5 or so years leading up to their surprise 04 run. The years they didn’t make the POs. After that the Flames were a winning team more often than not. And the attendance gained from the 04 run lasted a long time.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

You don't need to be a playoff team to have a marketable product for your fanbase. The sizzle of promise and potential, especially for homegrown players, is still a draw.

In fact, fan sentiment has never been higher for a rebuild, and there's very little attachment to the current crop of core players that were mostly acquired via trade or free agency.

Flamesnation polled over 500 fans that expressed distaste for the current direction of the team, with 90% saying they'd support a rebuild.

So no, I don't buy that heading toward a rebuild would crater attendance long-term and we'd suddenly be at risk of moving. Especially with a new arena on the horizon. IMO, that's a lazy ownership narrative that is not grounded in the reality that this is still a hockey-starved Canadian market that, above all else, wants to see a Stanley Cup.

I would support a rebuild and still watch the games, listen to the podcasts, and post on this forum but I am not spending any money on watching that team go out there and try and lose. That is me though. I waited to get my season tickets until the Gaudreau extension kicked in and I bailed when they lost to the Oilers.

I do think trying to have the best roster possible for a new building makes sense and they are not on that path and likely could have been in a much better spot for that to occur had they decided to tear it down after Gaudreau walked and Tkachuk forced the team to move on

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Value =/= profit and loss in a year or even three years.

Right, but it is a certainty that the Flames are in the black if you add up the delta in organization value and net income (loss) over the last 3 years.

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by Hackey

I just personally feel they half ass it. Which at the end of the day it's their team they can run it however they want. But to me the results tell the story. It's like someone saying they want to lose weight and they exercise every day but eat like crap still. You might get some results, but you're not maximizing your results. You want to lose weight, but you're not willing to fully make the sacrifice, so you get average results. So if you truly want something you have to be all in. I feel they have one foot in and one foot out. We're going to get younger and try to get better at the same time. Very difficult to do that.

Not to pick on you specifically but I see this all the time. There is a big difference between "not trying" and having a different vision of how to achieve a particular result. Or are you suggesting that people in the organization are actually not trying as hard as they could?

Most fans don't realize, or do realize and don't care, that sports franchises have a number of objectives that don't always align. The most obvious of these are profitability and competitive success. Sure if you're making the playoffs and winning a few rounds every year you will see financial success, but it's only a very few franchises that can legitimately do this for decades at a time. The question becomes how to still achieve the required level of profitability when on-ice success is not there. This engages complex decisions like paying high-end talent, trading for the future, or even "tanking". There are a number of different ways to get from Point A to Point B in this respect, and almost none of them involve simply "trying harder" or just "caring more" about winning a Cup.

We can talk all day long about differing visions and I think there's a big segment of the fan base (myself included) that thinks that ownership/management has had a myopic view of how to achieve long-term success. That seems, to some degree, to be related to profitability, which is frustrating for fans.

But I don't think saying the team "doesn't care" about winning a Cup is accurate or all that productive for the discussions.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Value =/= profit and loss in a year or even three years.

The Flames lowest attendance was in the 5 or so years leading up to their surprise 04 run. The years they didn’t make the POs. After that the Flames were a winning team more often than not. And the attendance gained from the 04 run lasted a long time.

Having been a season ticket holder from 97-15 I can say that in the late 90’s people bought season tickets because it was a community good. In the non-salary cap era with the Canadian dollar at 70 cents anyone with a brain knee the Flames could not compete. Each off-season the Flames traded away an expensive piece for slightly less expensive pieces in an effort to remain competitive. It is a completely different scenario now. If you are a fan and understand the cap system you know that the Flames could rebuild and potentially have a Stanley Cup calibre team in the future. That was never ever a realistic hope before the cap.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Having been a season ticket holder from 97-15 I can say that in the late 90’s people bought season tickets because it was a community good. In the non-salary cap era with the Canadian dollar at 70 cents anyone with a brain knee the Flames could not compete. Each off-season the Flames traded away an expensive piece for slightly less expensive pieces in an effort to remain competitive. It is a completely different scenario now. If you are a fan and understand the cap system you know that the Flames could rebuild and potentially have a Stanley Cup calibre team in the future. That was never ever a realistic hope before the cap.

The Flames competed for the Cup the season before the cap came in.

Plus, I'd argue the present cap structure makes it possible for the Flames to get into the POs on the regular, but makes it hard to get or retain the best players available. When everyone has the same limits, the attractive cities from a lifestyle and tax perspective win out. The cap just changed, to some extent, who the haves and have nots are. Detroit out, TB/Vegas in.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

Not to pick on you specifically but I see this all the time. There is a big difference between "not trying" and having a different vision of how to achieve a particular result. Or are you suggesting that people in the organization are actually not trying as hard as they could?

Most fans don't realize, or do realize and don't care, that sports franchises have a number of objectives that don't always align. The most obvious of these are profitability and competitive success.

Aren't you effectively saying the same thing?

They have other objectives so they'll only try to build a winning team within the constraints of also meeting those other objectives.
That sounds like not trying to win as hard they could be; because it would conflict with the other objectives.

Essentially if the other objectives weren't priorities, they could try harder at building a winner.

[flambers]

Flames biggest challenge is their lack of direction, they seem to be a team forever stuck as a bubble team. Just good enough to maybe make the playoffs (some years or finish 17th to 20th )

Prospect depth is a organization weakness, this will be a problem that Conroy has to address

[Jay Random]

Right. They were totally a bubble team when they finished first in the conference in 2019, and again when they finished first in the division in 2022. Just good enough to maybe make the playoffs.

Yup, they just barely squeaked into the playoffs those two years, which is why nobody was disappointed they didn't go far.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by flambers

Flames biggest challenge is their lack of direction, they seem to be a team forever stuck as a bubble team. Just good enough to maybe make the playoffs (some years or finish 17th to 20th )

Prospect depth is a organization weakness, this will be a problem that Conroy has to address

Conroy has only been the GM for a few months. The Flames seemed to have a good draft, they didn't not move out any picks and added 1 in the Toffoli trade.

So far Conroy has made the team much younger and the prospect pool from what I have seen is ranked slightly higher than last year. Some of those gains come from Wolf though too.

The trade market hasn't been great for sellers either. Philly picked a direction and their prospect pool is much stronger than ours, but most of that comes from picks they had before the big sell off by Briere. Briere has put them in a spot that they should draft high and in a years time they could have a top 3 prospect pool in the league. But they aren't up a lot of picks, the retained salary and buyouts aren't great and they only have Farabee and Sanheim commited long term. They will be a good team to follow as they were a team that did what lots of fans wanted right when Conroy took over.

Conroy's next move will tell us alot, but it's been painful waiting to see what that next move is.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Right. They were totally a bubble team when they finished first in the conference in 2019, and again when they finished first in the division in 2022. Just good enough to maybe make the playoffs.

Yup, they just barely squeaked into the playoffs those two years, which is why nobody was disappointed they didn't go far.

Bigger picture, Flames were a bubble team 11 out of last 13 years.

Yes they had a really good season in 2018 - 2019.

16th
6th
20th
19th
2nd
20th
15th
26th
16th
27th
25th
17th
17th

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

The Flames competed for the Cup the season before the cap came in.

Plus, I'd argue the present cap structure makes it possible for the Flames to get into the POs on the regular, but makes it hard to get or retain the best players available. When everyone has the same limits, the attractive cities from a lifestyle and tax perspective win out. The cap just changed, to some extent, who the haves and have nots are. Detroit out, TB/Vegas in.

I quoted the wrong post by you, it was a comment in regard to the 90’s when you talked about how they almost moved. But yes, the Flames did go on a miracle run the year before the cap, a run that nobody thought they were going to be able to do. Nobody in the previous 5 seasons even thought they had a chance at competing for the playoffs, let alone go on a Stanley Cup run.

Fact of the matter is that the Flames have the same path to compete as they have always had, draft good young talent and keep it as long as they can. The other path they have is to sign guys to retirement contracts to play out their final years. But I agree, the Flames will never be a market that competes for elite 26 year old UFA talent barring some special circumstance like Bouwmeester wanting to play close to home.

My prediction is that if they limp along in some sort of competitive purgatory that that will be worse for ticket sales than a rebuild. I know at least 4 season ticket holders who still live in Calgary who cancelled this summer primarily because they did not want to see a repeat of 2010-2013.

[Rutuu]

Originally Posted by flambers

Bigger picture, Flames were a bubble team 11 out of last 13 years.

Yes they had a really good season in 2018 - 2019.

16th
6th
20th
19th
2nd
20th
15th
26th
16th
27th
25th
17th
17th

We need to change nothing about our approach, look at all the rebuilds that failed, the team will leave, at least we're not the Oilers, our ownership is great, what ownership doesn't have a say, we need a new building, it's the city's fault we don't have a new building, taxes are too high, so we can't get free agents, young rich millionaires want to play in the US, the weather holds us back from attracting free agents, draft picks have risk, 1st rounders don't always turn out, for every Pittsburgh there is a Buffalo, we just need to give our players time to gel and find chemistry, we need a new coach, size matters in the playoffs, just get in and anything can happen...