I personally liked where Atlanta was heading. They did well during free agency to bring in some very decent players and were, at one point this season, in sight of another playoff berth. In my opinion, they won the Ilya Kovalchuk deal and had some good things to look forward to in the coming years. But it's not about what the Atlanta Thrashers did. It's about what the fans did not do and plainly, they did not show up. To the tune of 28th in attendance...
It's difficult to blame them. When the product on the ice is so poor for so long, you really can't expect people to budget for tickets. At the same time, is it crazy to believe owners would be more inclined to spend on talent if tickets were selling like crazy? Doubled edged sword to say the least...
As an Avalanche fan, I feel extremely lucky to have been gifted such a talented team from day one. Colorado benefited mightily from Quebec's failures and it is not outside of the realm of possibility that if we hadn't, the Avs would be in the running for Winnipeg as well. Though that statement is disappointing, it is not far from the truth. Attendance in Denver has been dipping significantly over the last few seasons...right along with the Avs' success (or lack their of). In a few years, if things don't turn around, who's to say the Avs won't be the next Thrashers or Coyotes.
You really have to feel for the fans in Atlanta. There are probably some who live and breathe the Thrashers just as much as I live and breathe the Avalanche. But it's just not enough. You can't hemorrhage $20 million a year and just keep things as they are.
All of this really makes you appreciate those other franchises who, despite extremely lackluster performances season after season, continue to sell out their stadiums and rally support for their team (Toronto Maple Leafs...I'm looking at you). It also makes you question other franchises who succeed year after year and rarely ever fill their arena (WTF Devils fans...).
Maybe in October, Winnipeg will get a chance to tell us...
-Shaela
"I Hate Winnipeg" by the Weakerthans
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYou make some interesting points.
ReplyDeleteI think the league needs to come to the realization that its dreams of colonial expansion to non-traditional markets have not proven amenable to realization in objective reality. A quick look at average attendance around the league quickly dashes any such illusions:
http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance
In the top 15 in terms of mean attendance, only 2 teams exist in what I ignorantly would describe as non-traditional markets - DC and LA. Both of those teams have been in existence for a long time, however, and also exist in very wealthy markets which have extensive non-locally born populations. They also, coincidentally or not, both had very good teams this year.
And while the bottom 15 contains some teams which play in areas which might be considered tradtional hockey markets, it is largely comprised of teams that have been imported into markets which for the most part lacked any pre-existing local demand for hockey.
In other words, the results of the Bettman experiment do not yield any compelling justification for its continuance.
I think in general, you can put any city's market for a given sport in one of three categories: 1) the fans care so much about the sport that they will support the team through thick and thin, 2) the fans will support a winner, and 3) regardless of performance, there are not enough fans to support the team regardless of performance.
I think most markets fall into the 2nd category, and i think the 3rd is more common than the first. At least when considering hockey.
I didn't find the study itself in my cursory seach, and I think this article was written before the particular study that I'm thinking of was penned, but it describes the underlying situation in denver:
http://www.5280.com/blogs/2009/12/09/how-many-professional-sports-teams-can-denver-support
I think in your situation, and in a lot of the smaller markets which have both basketball and hockey teams, there are dedicated fans of basketball, dedicated fans of hockey, and then the rest of the fans, possibly 3/5 of the total local sports population, which will follow a team when it's doing well and ignore it when it's not. Unfortunately in smaller markets with teams in both sports, they are largely competing against each other for the more transient fans. Except in situations where both teams are elite within their respective sports, one of them is going to draw many of its fans at the expense of the other, and if both teams maintain their relative level of performance for a sustained period, the under-performing team will likely not surive.
Sorry, tried to edit and make the links active, but couldnt figure it out