Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Rock

" We're Well Prepared" Jeff O'neill On Lockout

16 posts in this topic

Brad Tapper said "It takes a lot to get fans into hockey in the south. And if we go into a lockout, we might lose fans there. Sometimes we only get 10,000 or 11,000. For us as players, we have to realize what's at stake here."

Hey Brad in the north 10 to 11,000 fans at a game is a lot and is sometimes the norm.

This issue is a power struggle with a lot to lose. Hopefully there won't be "my way or the highway" or an "arrogant stand off" attitude in the negotiations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

any lockout over 5 months would be like a death blow to hockey in the south. Whatever casual fans those teams had would forget and move on. Overall it would be good for the league as they expanded too quickly but you have to feel bad for handfull of die hard Predators & Thrasher fans

Hey Brad in the north 10 to 11,000 fans at a game is a lot and is sometimes the norm.

Blackhawks, Devils, Islanders, Bruins, Pens.....all because of the Bettman era and what it's done to the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, GR? Is that really the truth? You're making a generalization here.. "it's hard to get hockey anywhere"... well let's see:

Hockey's North: Canadian/Minnesota/Detroit/Buffalo/Colorado

Minnesota: 102.4% attendance, 18,500 average

Toronto: 102.2% attendance, 19,240 average

Colorado: 100.0% attendance, 18,007 average

Detroit: 100.0% attendance, 20,058 average

Vancouver: 99.9% attendance, 18,396

Edmonton: 98.9% attendance, 16,657 average

Montreal: 97.2% attendance, 20,672 average

Calgary: 94.6% attendance, 16,239 average

Ottawa: 93.0% attendance, 17,198 average

Buffalo: 73.5% attendance, 13,735 average

Hockey North's Averages: 96.17% attendance, 17,870.2 average

Hockey's Middle: New York/Long Island/New Jersey/Philadelphia/Columbus/Boston/Pittsburgh/Washington/Chicago/St. Louis

New York Rangers: 99.7% attendance, 18,148 average

Philadelphia: 99.0% attendance, 19,325 average

Columbus: 97.8% attendance, 17,744 average

St. Louis: 97.6% attendance, 18,570 average

Long Island: 91.6% attendance, 14,930 average

Pittsburgh: 87.0% attendance, 14,749 average

Boston: 85.6% attendance, 15,029 average

Washington: 84.6% attendance, 15,787 average

New Jersey: 78.0% attendance, 14,858 average

Chicago: 72.2% attendance, 14,794

Hockey Middle's Averages: 89.31% attendance, 16,393.4 average

Hockey's South: Los Angeles/San Jose/Carolina/Tampa Bay/Anaheim/Atlanta/Phoenix/Dallas/Nashville/Florida

Dallas: 100.0% attendance, 18,532 average

San Jose: 99.2% attendance, 17,350 average

Los Angeles: 97.0% attendance, 17,569 average

Carolina: 83.7% attendance, 15,682 average

Tampa Bay: 83.7% attendance, 16,545 average

Phoenix: 81.6% attendance, 13,229 average

Anaheim: 81.5% attendance, 13,988 average

Florida: 80.2% attendance, 15,428 average

Nashville: 77.3% attendance, 13,228 average

Atlanta: 72.7% attendance, 13,476 average

Hockey South's Averages: 85.69% attendance, 15,484.7 average

So, once again:

Hockey North's Averages: 96.17% attendance, 17,870.2 average

Hockey Middle's Averages: 89.31% attendance, 16,393.4 average

Hockey South's Averages: 85.69% attendance, 15,484.7 average

GetReal, another generalization without any facts to back it up.

I mean, this isn't even taking into account all the outliers... take Buffalo out of the North and every team has at least 93.0% attendance! Take Dallas and San Jose (have had recent success) as well as Los Angeles (second biggest city in the US) and every team has less 83.8% attendance!

GR, here are the facts. Generalizations don't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Brad in the north 10 to 11,000 fans at a game is a lot and is sometimes the norm.

Where are your facts, GetReal? Oh yeah, they don't exist.

If you look in my previous post, the lowest AVERAGE attendance for a "Northern" team is 14,749.

10,000-11,000? You need to get real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn, MrSheeps, I've never seen an argument on this board backed up by better stats. Kudos to you.

I see a nasty lockout coming... too many Jagr/Holik salaries as owners cry poverty... no matter who or what has caused the financial difficulties some franchises are in, the danger is real and the league needs to address the direction of salaries. Players, obviously, won't want to make concessions - they'll feel they worked hard to get here, let the next generation of players deal with it.

For a hockey fan - and I consider myself to be a hockey fan above a Devil fan - this is going to be a depressing time. Remember how long it took baseball to 'come back' and that took McGwire... we don't have that kind of exposure or superstar - you think most of North America would care if Mario Lemieux was on track to break Gretzky's goals record? A lockout could doom some of the franchises, but not doing anything will doom them all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheeps,

thanks for breaking out the statistics because I wasn't in much of a mood to go hunting for attendance stats and blow GR's theory out of the water :lol: . Good work!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not only that, but ^7^'s contention that the Hawks, Bruins, Pittsburgh, and Islanders have been ruined by the Bettman era is of course, horrifyingly flawed.. the Hawks and Bruins owners aren't willing to spend a dime, Wirtz doesn't even broadcast the games played in Chicago, I mean, how good is that to sell the game of hockey? Jacobs has let players go from Boston without replacing them. Pittsburgh spent themselves into debt well before the Bettman era, and their fiscal stability was ruined by the early 90s. The Islanders owners were also unwilling to spend any money. Is that Bettman's fault? No, it's the collective bargaining agreement's fault for failing to put checks on teams that felt they were one player away from the Cup every season. Salaries have gone up what, 300% since 95?

And the Devils wouldn't be doing any better attendance-wise if they still had Janne Ojanen and were scoring 3+ goals a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheeps thanks for the work, not required however, please re-read what seemed to send you into orbit,

"Hey Brad in the north 10 to 11,000 fans at a game is a lot and is sometimes the norm."

So so Stats on averages don't cover one game I didn't mention average, every game or team for that matter.

Don't get like Triumph, and go into orbit, read first. thanks however for the stats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, let's take us, New Jersey: 78.0% attendance, 14,858 average. Since we're one of the worst "Northern" teams in terms of attendance, I think it's fair.

In 2001-2002, we only had two games out of forty-one with under 12,000 attendance, one at 11,420 and one at 11,731.

2 out of41 is "the norm"? Especially since we're considering the team with the third-worst attendance in the 20 Northern-most teams...

GR I do not think I "went into orbit," I think I reacted to one of your many blanket statements with facts, not figures made up that don't hold true to any real fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheeps thanks again for the info. Attack all you want.

The point that I made point in first post to this was it wasn't only the south that would hurt because of a lockout but that the north would suffer as well.

Tell me you can't agree with that, Sheeps?

So after that you can go where you want certainly your choice but don't put it me about average attendance or stats because that wasn't my point and if you read it again you see that.

Have a nice day. And Sheeps you did react. You read what you wanted to read and wanted to show how good you are getting stats when that wasn't necessary because it doesn't alter my point.

Again have a nice day. As for my many blanket statements, life is made up of blanket statements without facts to get the idea across and you asked for this, just ask G.W. or re-read Goerge's remarks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope there is some sort of dialogue between the NHLPA and the NHL this summer. I think both sides should take the intitative and start the process of negotiating. I don't want to hear about the problems of both sides.

Get it done!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure O'Neill is poor........anyway....... and Tucker can practice his cheapshots with his club on unassuming golfers.

It sounds like an impending lockout is on it's way and could be long and/or ugly. By the looks of this article, no one seems to want to get things started, either.

The fans obviously are the ones who are going to suffer and it will be worse in the South. I do think soon as the puck is ready to be dropped that the mainstream crowds will be more than eager to get back to the game.

Kudos to you Sheeps, stats and all! grinning-smiley-003.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just can't agree with you here. Sure it's going to hurt every team, but how much? Toronto sells out the Skydome during the playoffs, so approximately 70,000 come out to eithe Air Canada Centre or the Skydome, if only just to watch it on TV. I was impressed with Carolina selling out their arena for away Finals game, but now they're back to filling up 83% of the arena. Toronto has sold out every game for how many years?

Sure, everyone will suffer, that is not what I got from your original post. You were saying that the norm for Northern teams is 10,000-11,000. The New Jersey Devils have poor attendance but have only had 11,000 some attendance figures twice.

You give a figure, it's not right.

You say it's the norm, but it isn't.

You dislike G.W. but basically say, "He makes blanket statements, why can't I?"

The only way to directly address blanket statements is to use facts. Go ahead, call it an attack. What was I supposed to do, keep telling you that your blanket statement was wrong, over and over? No. I wasn't trying to prove that I am good at getting facts, I was trying to prove - and did so successfully - that your blanket statement was wrong. It still is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
any lockout over 5 months would be like a death blow to hockey in the south.

Hockey in the South will be just fine, given time and a little marketing. Trust me. Just for an example, my (former) home team, the Birmingham (Alabama) Bulls of the ECHL had 8 10,000+ crowds out of about 36 home games between 1/93 and 1/94. This was a minor league team that got next to zero advertising. Birmingham also had a WHA team that got good attendance years earlier.

Southerners in general love hockey, once they get used to it. They also generally love defensive, grinding hockey. Nashville will be okay, especially if they start winning more often.

And BTW, Atlanta IS NOT the South, it's a suburb of NYC. :puke:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tucker Lindros etc don't wnat their vacations to last past September? I can understand that, since they all started in early May!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0