DevilMinder Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 On the ice, the National Hockey League has never been more competitive than over the course of its last collective bargaining agreement, which began with the 2005-06 season. A different team has won the Stanley Cup each season, ranging from big-market clubs like Los Angeles and Chicago to small ones such as Pittsburgh and Raleigh. A total of 12 different teams reached the finals during the seven-year CBA. So why have the owners thus far cancelled 422 regular season games of the 2012-13 season, as well as the All-Star Game, insisting on a new CBA that drastically reduces the amount of money that can be spent on player salaries (currently 57% of hockey-related revenue)? http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2012/11/28/nhl-team-values-2012-maple-leafs-first-hockey-team-worth-1-billion/ Devils 9th in revenue, but 1st overall in debt by a wide margin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 How exactly can the Devils have had virtually the same revenue as the Flyers (Devils $122, Flyers $124)? The Devils had five or six more home games than the Flyers, but Flyers sell out a bigger arena every night and probably have a better tv deal than the Devils. What am I missing here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Pittsburgh should just be called Crosby on that list. Before him that franchise was in the toilet with low attendance and would be nowhere close to the top 10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Pittsburgh should just be called Crosby on that list. Before him that franchise was in the toilet with low attendance and would be nowhere close to the top 10. Or maybe the Pittsburgh Draft Jackpots. The only team in pro sports that comes close is the Colts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorillaBiscuits Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Just go back to the Original 6, a handful of US markets, and Canadian markets and just end it already. I believe this league would be more successful in a much smaller scope. It's a niche sport as it is, being smaller would fit it. Plus the talent level wouldn't be as watered down, either. Pro sports in general has too many teams in each league and only half or maybe less of those teams anyone really cares about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 How exactly can the Devils have had virtually the same revenue as the Flyers (Devils $122, Flyers $124)? The Devils had five or six more home games than the Flyers, but Flyers sell out a bigger arena every night and probably have a better tv deal than the Devils. What am I missing here? Devils had extra playoff games, big money makers, and the Flyers may have a worse TV deal as Comcast probably prefers more profit to show on the TV side than the hockey side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin226 Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 9th in revenue is pretty awesome.. Shouldn't that make us an attractive team to future owners (who would want to keep us here) once that arena debt is taken care of? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Granted Forbes numbers are garbage, but the Devils have usually been between 9 and 15 when it comes to their evaluation of the team's revenue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin226 Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Granted Forbes numbers are garbage, but the Devils have usually been between 9 and 15 when it comes to their evaluation of the team's revenue. Right, but why aren't profits that big (or some seasons we lose money)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Right, but why aren't profits that big (or some seasons we lose money)? Because Forbes numbers are garbage? Honestly, the Devils could be making or losing a lot more money than I believe. But more importantly, the Devils have been a cap team despite being around this area in revenue - should be easy to see why that's not a strategy to make money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin226 Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Isn't it a bit of a catch 22 for the Devils.. Winning brings in fans who bring in money, which needs to be spent on talent so that the team wins and brings in fans Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Because Forbes numbers are garbage? Honestly, the Devils could be making or losing a lot more money than I believe. But more importantly, the Devils have been a cap team despite being around this area in revenue - should be easy to see why that's not a strategy to make money. I would also think that the amount the Devils pay in servicing their debt isn't chump change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorillaBiscuits Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Isn't it a bit of a catch 22 for the Devils.. Winning brings in fans who bring in money, which needs to be spent on talent so that the team wins and brings in fans When has this ever happened? This organization has never drawn the way it should given it's run of excellence and the dense population of the market in which they play in. They've cultivated a much larger fanbase then they had in 1995, but they still can't sell the building out on a regular basis even with a state of the art building. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin226 Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 (edited) When has this ever happened? This organization has never drawn the way it should given it's run of excellence and the dense population of the market in which they play in. They've cultivated a much larger fanbase then they had in 1995, but they still can't sell the building out on a regular basis even with a state of the art building. Spring 2010 when we got Kovy and were in a race to win the division attendance was way up You could also look at it like we only draw as well as we do because of how we spend and thus produce.. But that argument basically admits that the Devils will be like the Blue Jackets or Islanders in terms of attendance if we're ever in a situation where our owner won't spend to make the team competitive and worth watching.. Might as well just move the team to Quebec right now and we can all become Rangers fans Edited November 28, 2012 by Colin226 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorillaBiscuits Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Spring 2010 when we got Kovy and were in a race to win the division attendance was way up You could also look at it like we only draw as well as we do because of how we spend and thus produce.. But that argument basically admits that the Devils will be like the Blue Jackets or Islanders in terms of attendance if we're ever in a situation where our owner won't spend to make the team competitive and worth watching.. Might as move the team to Quebec right now and we can all become Rangers fans Could they be in that position? Possibly. It does scare the hell out of me if the Devils went into a 3+ year or so span of them being a non-playoff team and not a very competitive organization at that. They're not like the Rangers who can withstand a history of failure and dissapointment. The Devils could never go 7 years plus a lockout of no playoffs like the Rangers. Even the other Original 6 teams like the Bruins, Blackhawks and the Wings pre-1990 or so floundered went through attendance and support issues over the years. The Rangers and Maple Leafs and Canadiens and even the Flyers will always thrive. That's not even getting into the NHL's favortism of these markets to begin with. Ask yourself if the 1995 Cup win kept them here. I believe without the Cup, they'd be in Nashville. The problem with the NHL is the haves and have nots are so pronounced that teams don't even have to win to be a billion dollar enterprise. That Forbes ranking is eye opening even if you don't believe the numbers. Even with numbers off a bit, it's still a staggering gap. The long term key to the Devils in NJ is corporate ownership with a president/COO who understands the sports landscape in the 21st century. if that can be combined with any type of success on the ice, the Devils fortunes would change dramatically. Jeff Vanderbeek for all intents and purposes should sell this organization or find corportate backing because this team can not be a bottom 10 or even 15 payroll and regress into a period of worthless hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.