[Rumour] Chris Johnston: Lindholm is interested in staying

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

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.

As long as they can is tough, as I said, in this market.

Again, attendance was lowest during the years they sucked the most - late 90s to 2004. That didn’t go unnoticed, nor did PO revenues.

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

As long as they can is tough, as I said, in this market.

Again, attendance was lowest during the years they sucked the most - late 90s to 2004. That didn’t go unnoticed, nor did PO revenues.

Exactly. We all clamour for a rebuild, but many fans don't support the team or buy tickets to games when we aren't shooting for the playoffs.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

As long as they can is tough, as I said, in this market.

Again, attendance was lowest during the years they sucked the most - late 90s to 2004. That didn’t go unnoticed, nor did PO revenues.

Well the good thing with trying to stay relevant is you get the best of both worlds. Dropping attendance as evidenced by the growing number of empty seats last year and missing the playoffs.

But I think the thing you noticed and maybe the owners noticed is more of a correlation does not equal causation thing than it is a statement of fact in this market. Edmonton managed to keep their stands full throughout their 10 year rebuild, I am sure the Calgary market would react similarly.

[Hackey]

As soon as Tkachuk wanted out they should have traded him for a good young player. They should have sold off a bunch of players and loaded up with prospects and picks. They likely would have fallen in the draft last year and landed a solid player. That would have gave them a nice start to a rebuild in just one year. Not to mention they would have no bad contracts on the books. They could have lined up a young exciting team on the rise perfectly with the new arena.

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by Hackey

As soon as Tkachuk wanted out they should have traded him for a good young player. They should have sold off a bunch of players and loaded up with prospects and picks. They likely would have fallen in the draft last year and landed a solid player. That would have gave them a nice start to a rebuild in just one year. Not to mention they would have no bad contracts on the books. They could have lined up a young exciting team on the rise perfectly with the new arena.

Maybe so, but it might just be a woulda/coulda/shoulda situation as the mandate at the time was different for the GM, and we had a coach who was notorious for not giving young players any ice-time.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Hackey

As soon as Tkachuk wanted out they should have traded him for a good young player. They should have sold off a bunch of players and loaded up with prospects and picks. They likely would have fallen in the draft last year and landed a solid player. That would have gave them a nice start to a rebuild in just one year. Not to mention they would have no bad contracts on the books. They could have lined up a young exciting team on the rise perfectly with the new arena.

They did land a solid player.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Whatever time period makes you happy. The end of the Iginla era there was a reluctance to rebuild until the very end. There was clearly a motivation to speed it up using so many draft picks when they were forced into it. The end of the Gaudreau/Tkachuk era there was clearly an order to not rebuild even though it was an ideal time. Its already been posted on here that if the Flames were to rebuild again that ownership want the time period to be very short. So ya sorry you get butt hurt about my opinion but I think ownership is short sighted in their approach and their results are very average.

Well you've now shorted 35 years to 11 so we're making some progress!

Not sure my butt was ever hurt, thanks.

Was just pointing out lopping in three decades with almost zero continuity across ownership, management, coaching or players in that time frame is certainly looking to grasp on to what is it? Toxic negativity?

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

They did land a solid player.

He used the word "young" in there.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Well you've now shorted 35 years to 11 so we're making some progress!

Not sure my butt was ever hurt, thanks.

Was just pointing out lopping in three decades with almost zero continuity across ownership, management, coaching or players in that time frame is certainly looking to grasp on to what is it? Toxic negativity?

Over a decade is plenty enough time to see a trend. Obviously I'm using a bit of hyperbole to emphasis the point. And maybe it's negativity in your eyes because you feel some type of way about it. It's just an opinion and discussion to me.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Over a decade is plenty enough time to see a trend. Obviously I'm using a bit of hyperbole to emphasis the point. And maybe it's negativity in your eyes because you feel some type of way about it. It's just an opinion and discussion to me.

When you try and make a data sample larger than it should be to suggest things are bad and will stay bad ... yeah it's negative.

You can be negative and call it an opinion ... no problem with that. And it's certainly a discussion.

But clearly negative.

Conroy has been on the job three months. He hasn't brought in any older players, he's made the team younger, and added a pick. They drafted well.

You can choose to worry about what Al Coates did as a GM or you can take what we've seen so far as potentially a step in the right direction.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

He used the word "young" in there.

I was referring to the draft comment.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Sandman

Exactly. We all clamour for a rebuild, but many fans don't support the team or buy tickets to games when we aren't shooting for the playoffs.

The team was worse than it ever was in 2014 and they sold out every game of the season?

We are using a depressed Canadian dollar in the 90s in a pre-salary cap environment to justify not rebuilding.

[Sec214]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

they did land a solid player.

who?

[flamesgod]

Honzek

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The team was worse than it ever was in 2014 and they sold out every game of the season?

We are using a depressed Canadian dollar in the 90s in a pre-salary cap environment to justify not rebuilding.

False.

[Ashasx]

You'll have to excuse me if I think a season in which the Flames finished 27th out of 30 teams and picked 4th overall in the draft was their worst season when no alternative argument has been provided.

[transplant99]

In 97-98 the Flames won 26 games.

In 13-14 they won 35 games.

[Ashasx]

The Flames weren't even last in their division in 1998. They weren't even second last.

This is also entirely missing my point. The argument that Flames fans won't support a rebuilding team is countered by the fact that they were rebuilding from 2013-2016 and fans supported them (which is more recent than the 90s, again in a completely different economic/NHL environment).

Which holds more weight? Fan support in the 1990s or the 2010s?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The team was worse than it ever was in 2014 and they sold out every game of the season?

We are using a depressed Canadian dollar in the 90s in a pre-salary cap environment to justify not rebuilding.

Dude - you are cherry-picking one year whereas I'm talking attendance over multiple years. And as far as individual season go, 2013-14 was bad. But the Flames have had at least 8 seasons with worse records. Explain what happened between 94-04 attendance wise. Explain why last year's attendance was 3.5K more than the previous year? Could it be that people liked the success of 2021-22 and bought seasons tix?

[Ashasx]

Why was our attendance in 2022-2023 more than 2021-2022? There were no covid attendance restrictions in place for the 2022-2023 season.

I didn't cherry pick one year. The Flames averaged 100% attendance from 2013-2016 when the team had it's most recent historical low - and fans supported the team.

It's not even like the team was coming off a few hot seasons either. The team lulled in the middle - exactly where you don't want to be - for the three seasons prior to that.

I simply can't comprehend the argument that you think I am cherry picking numbers when you are referencing the 90s to argue that fans won't support a rebuilding team in Calgary.