If the Devils were as stupid as the Nets?

[Jimmy Leeds]

On ‎5‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 1:12 AM, Onddeck said:

The celtics- nets trade might be the worst trade in the history of sports... seriously 

Nolan Ryan for Jim Fregosi

[Jimmy Leeds]

On ‎5‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 11:46 AM, Devilsfan118 said:

I'm going to echo this.

When they took "NJ" off their away unis before officially moving out of NJ they lost any sort of loyalty I had.

Hope the franchise burns to the ground.

Not me. While I hated and I am NOT a big NBA fan, I hate the Knicks with a burning passion. So I stuck with the Nets. At least they kept their name.

['7']

3 hours ago, thecoffeecake said:

The New York Nets would've been a much worse flop. The brand would not have worked as a second New York team. In fact, it would've defeated the whole purpose of their entire project. Ratner wanted to be the one to bring sports back to Brooklyn, and the Nets were just acquired to fill his shiny new development. Identifying as Brooklyn allowed them to carve out some kind of fan base, and even that wasn't very successful. How would they expect to go toe to toe competing with the Knicks as just another NY team? It would be a much bigger disaster. They tried to make a splash bringing sports back to Brooklyn, they wouldn't have moved at all if that wasn't the plan. They were always going to go all out Brooklyn. Getting rid of the Nets name would've made far more sense than branding New York.

As horrid as the basketball product is, both on the court and in terms of support, their brand is wildly successful, and "pandering" to the urban democratic is a huge reason why. I see tons of people in Nets stuff constantly around Philly, Sixers fans that are into the brand and wear snapbacks and other garbage.

When I first heard about the Nets wanting to move back in like 04 or 05, even as a kid I stopped supporting them. In the glory days, I was as big a Nets fan as I was a Devils fan. I was devastated. I bounced around teams here and there that I liked to watch growing up, but it so entirely turned me off of the NBA. And having the Nets sit around dead man walking for almost a decade was tough. The worst thing is when people would and still do say something along the lines of oh they're only in Brooklyn, you should still support them. I took a crack at watching the Sixers when I first moved to Philly, but that doesn't do much for me. I catch parts of games here and there and get alerts, probably have a Sixers tshirt stashed somewhere. I'm a big Jonathan Isaac fan, and if he ends up here, maybe I'll make an effort. But the NBA is a God damn circus, with the dead atmospheres, ridiculous entertainment, music playing during game play, players that don't give a sh!t, every team plays the same way. It really doesn't interest me. I went to a basketball school and started getting my fill with college ball. So much more exciting.

Bottom line, yea, fvck the Nets, and I hope the whole thing stays and horribly uninteresting and dead as it's been through the first 5 years. I hope you rot in Hell, Bruce Ratner.

Sure they would've gotten some heat over time, much like the LA Angels of Anaheim did...but that would blow over. The Nets could never topple the Knicks, not in NJ, Brooklyn, or anywhere...but at least try to play to the larger demographic and have a broader appeal. Even if the Nets actually won a NBA title...honestly I doubt few would care in NYC, the Island, or NJ.

The whole project was misguided to begin with. The Jets and the Giants toe the NY/NJ line and have for decades. The Nets should've at least tried to do that.

['7']

4 minutes ago, Jimmy Leeds said:

Nolan Ryan for Jim Fregosi

Supposedly Ryan's wife was terrified of NY and wanted out.

Still a terrible trade for a middling dime a dozen player.

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

4 minutes ago, '7' said:

Supposedly Ryan's wife was terrified of NY and wanted out.

Still a terrible trade for a middling dime a dozen player.

Fregosi was actually a very good player...he had been an All-Star in six out of his previous eight seasons before being dealt to the Mets, and was only two seasons removed from an excellent year (22 HR, .812 OPS).  He did have a down year prior to being traded, but the Mets clearly thought that he would regain his top form.  It didn't happen. 

As far as the Nets go...they sold Dr. J for $3 million...no players, no other compensation. 

And of course, there's the all-time gaffe...the Red Sox selling Babe Ruth to the Yankees for cash (so owner Harry Frazee could finance one of his Broadway musicals).    

[thecoffeecake]

21 hours ago, '7' said:

Sure they would've gotten some heat over time, much like the LA Angels of Anaheim did...but that would blow over. The Nets could never topple the Knicks, not in NJ, Brooklyn, or anywhere...but at least try to play to the larger demographic and have a broader appeal. Even if the Nets actually won a NBA title...honestly I doubt few would care in NYC, the Island, or NJ.

The whole project was misguided to begin with. The Jets and the Giants toe the NY/NJ line and have for decades. The Nets should've at least tried to do that.

Yea the whole thing was a joke from day one. But they had no reason to move the team at all if not for the Brooklyn idea. That's what the whole move was about, building a brand around the Brooklyn identity. People in every city in the country would not be wearing NY Nets stuff, the same way the New Jersey Nets weren't a national brand.

My biggest issue with the whole thing was the fact that the team was given the green light to leave even with a brand new arena in their current home region. When has that happened in modern major pro sports? The league bent over backwards for the Kings, a team in the smallest market and lowest attendance in the league that played in the equivalent of a church gym with no stadium plan, but Ratner could do whatever the fvck he wanted and leave a market of what, 6 million people? Because just like Vegas in the NHL, the NBA was looking to cash in on a glamor project with zero regard for the actual basketball.

['7']

2 hours ago, thecoffeecake said:

Yea the whole thing was a joke from day one. But they had no reason to move the team at all if not for the Brooklyn idea. That's what the whole move was about, building a brand around the Brooklyn identity. People in every city in the country would not be wearing NY Nets stuff, the same way the New Jersey Nets weren't a national brand.

My biggest issue with the whole thing was the fact that the team was given the green light to leave even with a brand new arena in their current home region. When has that happened in modern major pro sports? The league bent over backwards for the Kings, a team in the smallest market and lowest attendance in the league that played in the equivalent of a church gym with no stadium plan, but Ratner could do whatever the fvck he wanted and leave a market of what, 6 million people? Because just like Vegas in the NHL, the NBA was looking to cash in on a glamor project with zero regard for the actual basketball.

Glamour project. Exactly right.

Another interesting thing I uncovered. Apparently the Nets warm up gear now says est. 2012 instead of est. 1967 as they did last season. They also changed the NJ Nets banners to Brooklyn colors which is pathetic.

[Satans Hockey]

I stopped supporting the Nets as soon as they announced the Brooklyn stuff. Haven't bothered with the NBA since. 

[thecoffeecake]

22 hours ago, '7' said:

Glamour project. Exactly right.

Another interesting thing I uncovered. Apparently the Nets warm up gear now says est. 2012 instead of est. 1967 as they did last season. They also changed the NJ Nets banners to Brooklyn colors which is pathetic.

Good, I'd prefer Brooklyn to be seen as a new franchise. Let them embarrass themselves by hanging black and white banners. The ones earned in Jersey belong in the Prudential Center rafters  the same way the Whalers banners are still up in the Civic Center in Hartford.

[Daniel]

On May 20, 2017 at 11:55 AM, thecoffeecake said:

Yea the whole thing was a joke from day one. But they had no reason to move the team at all if not for the Brooklyn idea. That's what the whole move was about, building a brand around the Brooklyn identity. People in every city in the country would not be wearing NY Nets stuff, the same way the New Jersey Nets weren't a national brand.

My biggest issue with the whole thing was the fact that the team was given the green light to leave even with a brand new arena in their current home region. When has that happened in modern major pro sports? The league bent over backwards for the Kings, a team in the smallest market and lowest attendance in the league that played in the equivalent of a church gym with no stadium plan, but Ratner could do whatever the fvck he wanted and leave a market of what, 6 million people? Because just like Vegas in the NHL, the NBA was looking to cash in on a glamor project with zero regard for the actual basketball.

Let's not get that nostalgic about the Nets when they were in NJ.  I think they might not have even sold out some games when they were in the Finals, and when they played the Lakers in the finals that one year, there might have been 40% Laker fans there.  The move to Newark didn't really help things.

The move to Brooklyn actually made a lot of sense.  It's a big dense market that's getting an influx of young people with money.  The right thing to do would have been to be somewhat patient, or at least not negotiate against yourself for three past their prime players.  

[thecoffeecake]

20 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Let's not get that nostalgic about the Nets when they were in NJ.  I think they might not have even sold out some games when they were in the Finals, and when they played the Lakers in the finals that one year, there might have been 40% Laker fans there.  The move to Newark didn't really help things.

The move to Brooklyn actually made a lot of sense.  It's a big dense market that's getting an influx of young people with money.  The right thing to do would have been to be somewhat patient, or at least not negotiate against yourself for three past their prime players.  

Properly marketing the Nets would have been more prudent in terms of building a fan base instead of putting them in an occupied city uninterested in a second team.  Realistically, how much better did the Nets draw than the Devils during the good years? Of course Prudential Center didn't help the Nets, they had their bags packed and the team gutted.

North Jersey by itself is one of the biggest markets in sports. If you're not building big fan bases, you aren't trying. And I firmly believe the Nets never tried, and the Devils barely have. Again, Brooklyn is better for building a brand, not a successful basketball team.

['7']

I'm not sure how much $ the Devils really had in order to go ahead with a big marketing push. McMullen was a tightwad and Lou was a stubborn believer that just keeping quiet and winning would bring the fans in. And while yes, we did build a solid, sustaining fanbase...I always felt it could've been more if the Devils were more obnoxious and loud in advertising themselves.

Plus the optics never helped. Brendan Byrne at 19,000+ in 1982...the Rangers would've had trouble filling it on a regular basis. A terrible relocated franchise is supposed to now? When that place opened it was the 2nd largest building in the league and had a terrible atmosphere. Very cavernous.

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

1 minute ago, '7' said:

I'm not sure how much $ the Devils really had in order to go ahead with a big marketing push. McMullen was a tightwad and Lou was a stubborn believer that just keeping quiet and winning would bring the fans in. And while yes, we did build a solid, sustaining fanbase...I always felt it could've been more if the Devils were more obnoxious and loud in advertising themselves.

Plus the optics never helped. Brendan Byrne at 19,000+ in 1982...the Rangers would've had trouble filling it on a regular basis. A terrible relocated franchise is supposed to now? When that place opened it was the 2nd largest building in the league and had a terrible atmosphere. Very cavernous.

Don't forget that BBA didn't get a center-ice scoreboard until the early 90s...that made it feel even MORE cavernous (absurdly so)...I went there 3 or 4 years ago to see the Globetrotters with my wife and daughter, and though I have a lot of great memories of that place (for obvious reasons), I had forgotten just how huge (in a bad way) that place really felt.  And yeah, the team coming from Colorado was awful and was going to be for several years...outside of the fact that the jerseys had "NJ" as part of the logo, there wasn't much reason to go see them play...Devils could've done a lot more to market themselves before and during Lou's run, but they just didn't seem to think it was necessary.   

McMullen could be a tightwad for sure (he was the same with the Astros), but the Devils did spend some money while he was there (more than people think)...Lou was also a strong believer of not paying guys beyond their worth (at least before post-lockout UFA). 

['7']

11 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

Don't forget that BBA didn't get a center-ice scoreboard until the early 90s...that made it feel even MORE cavernous (absurdly so)...I went there 3 or 4 years ago to see the Globetrotters with my wife and daughter, and though I have a lot of great memories of that place (for obvious reasons), I had forgotten just how huge (in a bad way) that place really felt.  And yeah, the team coming from Colorado was awful and was going to be for several years...outside of the fact that the jerseys had "NJ" as part of the logo, there wasn't much reason to go see them play...Devils could've done a lot more to market themselves before and during Lou's run, but they just didn't seem to think it was necessary.   

McMullen could be a tightwad for sure (he was the same with the Astros), but the Devils did spend some money while he was there (more than people think)...Lou was also a strong believer of not paying guys beyond their worth (at least before post-lockout UFA). 

Yep they had those boards behind each net behind the last row in the upper deck. Not very helpful if you were sitting behind a goal, either you had to look all the way across the rink and up or turn your head back around to get information.

If they had to do it all over again that place should've sat around 16,500, give or take.

On the plus side you could always find a parking space, though I was utterly convinced that one horrible day I was going to wake up and hear that creaky bridge of doom we all had to cross over the highway would collapse. 

Edited May 22, 2017 by '7'

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

48 minutes ago, '7' said:

Yep they had those boards behind each net behind the last row in the upper deck. Not very helpful if you were sitting behind a goal, either you had to look all the way across the rink and up or turn your head back around to get information.

If they had to do it all over again that place should've sat around 16,500, give or take.

On the plus side you could always find a parking space, though I was utterly convinced that one horrible day I was going to wake up and hear that creaky bridge of doom we all had to cross over the highway would collapse. 

NJ didn't even know for sure that they were even getting a hockey team at all...sure, it was rumored, and earlier Rockies owner Arthur Imperatore wanted to move them to NJ, but a lot of different scenarios were discussed.  And the McMullen negotiations to buy the Rockies were not all smooth sailing. 

That friggin' bridge...Jesus Christ.  It was funny...as you know, you had your pick...either park in the Arena lot and deal with a sh!tload of traffic on your way out (you quickly learned that parking FURTHER away from the Arena was the way to go in that lot, whenever possible), or take your chances at Giants Stadium with the bridge...you'd at least get out a lot faster.  But damn was that bridge scary.  And ball-shriveling freezing come wintertime.  Made losses that much more painful...and the smell of those god-awful burnt-to-a-crisp pretzels at the Giants Stadium end of the tunnel never helped much. 

Edited May 22, 2017 by Colorado Rockies 1976

[Daniel]

3 minutes ago, '7' said:

I'm not sure how much $ the Devils really had in order to go ahead with a big marketing push. McMullen was a tightwad and Lou was a stubborn believer that just keeping quiet and winning would bring the fans in. And while yes, we did build a solid, sustaining fanbase...I always felt it could've been more if the Devils were more obnoxious and loud in advertising themselves.

Plus the optics never helped. Brendan Byrne at 19,000+ in 1982...the Rangers would've had trouble filling it on a regular basis. A terrible relocated franchise is supposed to now? When that place opened it was the 2nd largest building in the league and had a terrible atmosphere. Very cavernous.

It's much more simple.  Hockey is a relatively unpopular sport in the US, yet there are more professional hockey teams in the same media market than there are baseball, football or basketball.  (You could even argue that when the Devils moved here, there were four hockey teams in the same market if you include the Whalers). 

Then you add bad marketing and the fact that everyone in your state that you want to identify with was a Ranger fan for decades before you got there, it's a recipe for low attendance.  I say bad marketing in that for years when I knew of professional hockey generally, I didn't even know there was a jersey team.  Maybe with social media though, things like that take care of themselves nowadays. 

[DevsMan84]

Only good thing about BBA were the memories of us winning.  Outside of that the place was a dump.  I do vaguely remember the time before the center scoreboards and you basically had only the dot matrix boards on each end of the rink as well as two big screens (which these days would be considered tiny) in two of the four corners up top.  Then I believe they added two more screens in the corner and the center board roughly at the same time.  Last time I was at the arena was in 2011 for a graduation and outside of the memories everything else about it sucked.  Glad we have the arena we are at now.

The current cattle bridge isn't terrible.  It's fairly wide and since it is concrete it is nice and sturdy.  However you are right about the old wooden one.  That thing was cramped and seemed like it was about to collapse at any minute.  It was very poorly lit with lights I can only described as those dim ones you see in coal mines.  Luckily when we had season tickets we got the parking passes after a couple of seasons so we could park close to the arena and avoid that terrible tunnel.

[Chuck the Duck]

The cattle bridge was built as a temporary structure that was meant to last 2 or three years before a permanent structure was to be built.  It ended up lasting over 20 years because that's how government works in this state.  It's amazing that it never collapsed.

My best/most frightening memory from walking across that thing was being with my father after the Devils won the Cup in 1995.  People are going crazy inside there and it's so loud your ears are just ringing.  People would pound on the corrugated metal sides all the time, but this was on a whole other level.  At one point, the pressure got too much and they popped one or more rivets or screws out of one of the panels right in front of us as we went along.  I thought for sure that thing was going to fall right onto the road underneath and it's a miracle that it didn't.

['7']

58 minutes ago, Chuck the Duck said:

The cattle bridge was built as a temporary structure that was meant to last 2 or three years before a permanent structure was to be built.  It ended up lasting over 20 years because that's how government works in this state.  It's amazing that it never collapsed.

My best/most frightening memory from walking across that thing was being with my father after the Devils won the Cup in 1995.  People are going crazy inside there and it's so loud your ears are just ringing.  People would pound on the corrugated metal sides all the time, but this was on a whole other level.  At one point, the pressure got too much and they popped one or more rivets or screws out of one of the panels right in front of us as we went along.  I thought for sure that thing was going to fall right onto the road underneath and it's a miracle that it didn't.

I remember being in there during a pretty bad fight between a Devils fan and a fan of another team (I'll let you guys guess which one...it's one of the two that immediately came to mind) and he basically had our guy (who was very very drunk, like could barely stand) by the back of his hair and tried smashing his face into the metal slides. They were pulled apart but it could've ended pretty badly. 

[thecoffeecake]

4 hours ago, Daniel said:

It's much more simple.  Hockey is a relatively unpopular sport in the US, yet there are more professional hockey teams in the same media market than there are baseball, football or basketball.  (You could even argue that when the Devils moved here, there were four hockey teams in the same market if you include the Whalers). 

Then you add bad marketing and the fact that everyone in your state that you want to identify with was a Ranger fan for decades before you got there, it's a recipe for low attendance.  I say bad marketing in that for years when I knew of professional hockey generally, I didn't even know there was a jersey team.  Maybe with social media though, things like that take care of themselves nowadays. 

I don't think so, any of the 31 teams can reach anyone on social media at any time. There needs to be better local marketing. There isn't any reason the team can milk everything out of the Jersey identity and get more people out to the games. The best marketing we have is those of us who have stuff on our cars, or people on busy streets that have flags out. Everywhere I turn in Philly, there's Flyers something. Billboards, signage at bars, banners on street lights, commercials, everything. With a decentralized fan base and surrounded in extremely close proximity to very popular teams, the Devils need more marketing than anyone. Lou is gone, Dr. M is dead, the excuses are out the window. Spend the money to develop the fan base. The sky is the limit, New Jersey is massively populated, stop fvcking around.

[MadDog2020]

I don't think so, any of the 31 teams can reach anyone on social media at any time. There needs to be better local marketing. There isn't any reason the team can milk everything out of the Jersey identity and get more people out to the games. The best marketing we have is those of us who have stuff on our cars, or people on busy streets that have flags out. Everywhere I turn in Philly, there's Flyers something. Billboards, signage at bars, banners on street lights, commercials, everything. With a decentralized fan base and surrounded in extremely close proximity to very popular teams, the Devils need more marketing than anyone. Lou is gone, Dr. M is dead, the excuses are out the window. Spend the money to develop the fan base. The sky is the limit, New Jersey is massively populated, stop fvcking around.

I agree with this. I work in Teaneck and drive on route 80 every day- never once have I seen a Devils billboard anywhere. Driving on 80 through Paterson and heading towards Saddle Brook, there are a lot of billboards, particularly those electronic billboards that switch between multiple advertisers. At various times, I've seen Yankee billboards, Jets billboards, Giants billboards- and these are three teams that enjoy high levels of popularity in NJ (you could argue the Jets, but they've increased their base in Jersey since the Florham Park facility opened), and don't really need to advertise much- the Yankees and Giants are easily the most well represented fanbases in North Jersey of any of the local area teams. The Devils can't afford to not be utilizing this type of advertising. If the Yankees and Giants can do it, the Devils damn sure should be doing it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[NJDfan1711]

On 5/20/2017 at 2:13 PM, '7' said:

Glamour project. Exactly right.

Another interesting thing I uncovered. Apparently the Nets warm up gear now says est. 2012 instead of est. 1967 as they did last season. They also changed the NJ Nets banners to Brooklyn colors which is pathetic.

Wait, so they're essentially denying and ignoring their past history with NJ by saying they were established in 2012 rather than 67, but are at the same time acknowledging and taking credit for their achievements and wins?  Wow.  Classic.

[MadDog2020]

Wait, so they're essentially denying and ignoring their past history with NJ by saying they were established in 2012 rather than 67, but are at the same time acknowledging and taking credit for their achievements and wins?  Wow.  Classic.

With black and white banners....[emoji849] Like I said, 0-82 for the rest of eternity. fvck the Nets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Daniel]

1 hour ago, MadDog2020 said:

With black and white banners.... Like I said, 0-82 for the rest of eternity. fvck the Nets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Didn't really care about them leaving Jersey as I don't care about hoops all that much.  Still I'd like to see to see them get really good one of these days only because it'll torture Knicks fans.  Distraught Knicks fans on sports talk radio are great entertainment.

[NJDfan1711]

14 hours ago, MadDog2020 said:

With black and white banners.... Like I said, 0-82 for the rest of eternity. fvck the Nets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's unreal.  I would boycott the sh!t out of them.