|
Post by TheDeuce on Aug 3, 2012 10:54:50 GMT -6
Hey all,
I was reading Randy Turner's book 'Back in the Bigs' and I got to thinking about the efforts to save the Jets back in 1996. When I look at the fragility of the ownership group we tried to cobble together back then, and compared it to the Rock of Gibraltar ownership group we have now, I got to wondering:
In the big picture, are we better off to have lost the team back then and then got it back the way we did, or would it have been better if we could have just found SOME way to keep the team back then without them ever leaving?
I know the pain of 1996 like everyone else does but I considered the following:
If we had somehow kept the team:
1. We would have had a cobbled-together ownership group with the deepest pockets belonging to Izzy Asper, who by all accounts didn't want to be there, and was only there because his sons wanted to be a part of it. At any rate, we know what happened to the Asper fortune during the period from 1996 to 2007.
2. The arena that would have been built would have been another government-led project that would likely have had a partisan Winnipeg Enterprises Corp running it.
3. No David Thomson.
4. No hearts growing fonder by way of absence. Having lost the team, and now having them back, has, imho, made the city embrace the new team to a near-infinite extent. Our city is saturated with everything Jets. I don't think that would have happened if we had kept the original team.
5. The Return of the Jets was the major news in sports from May 2011 - October 2011. I loved hearing stories of Blackjack dealers in Vegas offering up congratulations to Winnipeggers upon hearing of their home town. All eyes were on us as we shocked the continent by selling out season tickets in 4 minutes, gobbling up Jets merchandise as fast as they could produce it, and assuming our place as the wildest, most passionate fanbase in hockey. No relocation to Phoenix, no big story of the Jets returning.
6. No cool new logo. Never thought I'd say it but I like the new logo so very much more than the old one.
7. We would have had to suffer through some of the dullest, trap-filled hockey the league ever saw. Plus we'd have had to suffer through the lockout.
Fifteen years without the Jets was a hell of a price to pay, no doubt. Was it too high?
Discuss!
m.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Aug 3, 2012 11:08:45 GMT -6
Like everything in time you start to not appreciate something you got and take it for granted. It's like the guy who beats cancer and a couple years later takes up smoking again. My biggest fear is we are at the top of the league for ticket prices, and they are not going to go down or stay the same. The team made good money this year but they still raised the prices because they could, a big change in our economy could show cracks in the foundation.
|
|
|
Post by USApegger on Aug 3, 2012 11:48:01 GMT -6
I would say without a doubt we are stronger.
The serendipity with Thomson has made this franchise so much stronger.
I actually think in two to three years that the Jets will be one of the franchises that will attract free agents.
The Izzy led group would have always been bottom line guys (not syaing Chipman/Thomson aren't) however Chipman had 15 years to learn the business
|
|
|
Post by wolfmannick on Aug 3, 2012 11:49:39 GMT -6
To answer this question I look at the Flames and the Oilers. Both teams were close to relocating around the time the Nordiques and Jets did due to the same economic problems that faced the latter teams. However, a new system was put in place to try and protect smaller market teams and ownership kept the teams in their current markets. Since the mid 90's, both teams have made it to a Cup Finals, with Calgary screwed out of a Cup in the process, and both teams are VERY successful both economically and having a great fanbase. So I think that if Winnipeg had the help of the League that the Flames and Oilers did, than the team would have never left and the Jets would have success compairable to that of the Jets we know and love today.
|
|
|
Post by Guardian on Aug 3, 2012 11:51:39 GMT -6
I have to admit, the Jets leaving in 1996 was for the best.
As a kid, it felt like someone ripped my heart out.
But, as a man who runs his own business, I can understand why their departure at that time was inevitable.
Some of my greatest successes came after I was knocked down to my knees.
I always got back up and moved forward, Winnipeg has done the same.
Can't wait for the Stanley Cup Parade on Portage Avenue!
|
|
|
Post by domi on Aug 3, 2012 11:55:22 GMT -6
If you look at a team like Vancouver, 16 years ago (despite the stanley cup final), they were not attracting top free-agents or making tons of cash. But things changed for them. Perhaps it started with the Messier signing (although that did not end well), and then there was new ownership, a push for a new arena, and even a new logo. Now, they are a top team.
Of course the increase in the Canadian dollar has also been a big factor in helping Canadian teams.
But my point is, just like Vancouver, Winnipeg could have undergone the same metamorphosis, had the team stayed. There's a good chance Chipman would have been involved early on, there's a good chance a new arena would have been built, and that may have even brought on Thomson anyway.
But who knows??? 15 years was a big price to pay.
|
|
|
Post by TheDeuce on Aug 3, 2012 13:10:46 GMT -6
{snip} There's a good chance Chipman would have been involved early on, there's a good chance a new arena would have been built, and that may have even brought on Thomson anyway. {snip} I usually preface my thoughts with an 'imho' or some such but I'm going out on a limb on this one and declaring that Thomson would not have been involved. His involvement came via his ownership of the land that the old Eatons building was on and none of the arena deals being canvassed back then contemplated using that location. They were looking at the Forks, by the convention center, refurbishment of the old arena. No Eatons location = no Thomson. Chipman was involved with the original 'Save the Jets' efforts but as a local businessman with limited hockey business knowledge. The value TN has by dint of Chipman's 15 years of experience in the IHL / AHL is immeasurable. m.
|
|
|
Post by ministerofdefense on Aug 3, 2012 13:21:07 GMT -6
Hey all, I was reading Randy Turner's book 'Back in the Bigs' and I got to thinking about the efforts to save the Jets back in 1996. When I look at the fragility of the ownership group we tried to cobble together back then, and compared it to the Rock of Gibraltar ownership group we have now, I got to wondering: In the big picture, are we better off to have lost the team back then and then got it back the way we did, or would it have been better if we could have just found SOME way to keep the team back then without them ever leaving?I know the pain of 1996 like everyone else does but I considered the following: If we had somehow kept the team: 1. We would have had a cobbled-together ownership group with the deepest pockets belonging to Izzy Asper, who by all accounts didn't want to be there, and was only there because his sons wanted to be a part of it. At any rate, we know what happened to the Asper fortune during the period from 1996 to 2007. 2. The arena that would have been built would have been another government-led project that would likely have had a partisan Winnipeg Enterprises Corp running it. 3. No David Thomson. 4. No hearts growing fonder by way of absence. Having lost the team, and now having them back, has, imho, made the city embrace the new team to a near-infinite extent. Our city is saturated with everything Jets. I don't think that would have happened if we had kept the original team. 5. The Return of the Jets was the major news in sports from May 2011 - October 2011. I loved hearing stories of Blackjack dealers in Vegas offering up congratulations to Winnipeggers upon hearing of their home town. All eyes were on us as we shocked the continent by selling out season tickets in 4 minutes, gobbling up Jets merchandise as fast as they could produce it, and assuming our place as the wildest, most passionate fanbase in hockey. No relocation to Phoenix, no big story of the Jets returning. 6. No cool new logo. Never thought I'd say it but I like the new logo so very much more than the old one. 7. We would have had to suffer through some of the dullest, trap-filled hockey the league ever saw. Plus we'd have had to suffer through the lockout. Fifteen years without the Jets was a hell of a price to pay, no doubt. Was it too high? Discuss! m. x2 specifically we are better off with our ownership group now then what we would have had then
|
|
|
Post by cheswick on Aug 3, 2012 13:52:10 GMT -6
Honestly don't agree with most of your points.
1) Agree.
2) I thought negotiatiosn to build the new arena included control and WEC would not be part of it. I could be remmebering incorrectly.
3) Agree but it's the same as point number 1.
4) Disagree. The way the community rallied to try saving the team was just as great as the support it received this past season.
5) Couldn't care less. Because it was a news story doesn't make it a good thing.
6) Disagree. Teams can change logos whenever they want. We could have had several cool new logos in the 15 years.
7) Listing the lockout as a pro reason to not having a team for 15 years makes no sesnse. Hey its good we didn't have a team for 15 years cause then we wouldn't have missed that one season of no hockey.
Really only decent point was we have a more stable ownership group now, but Chipman was involved in the efforts to save the team 15 years ago. Ownership groups are dynamic. We could have easily made it to the point we are now, with good owners, a new logo etc all without losing the past 15 years. So no, I don't think the past 15 years were worth were we are now cause for all we know we could have still been here.
|
|
livewpg
4th Line Grinder
Posts: 165
|
Post by livewpg on Aug 3, 2012 14:24:33 GMT -6
I have to admit, the Jets leaving in 1996 was for the best. As a kid, it felt like someone ripped my heart out. But, as a man who runs his own business, I can understand why their departure at that time was inevitable. Some of my greatest successes came after I was knocked down to my knees. I always got back up and moved forward, Winnipeg has done the same. Can't wait for the Stanley Cup Parade on Portage Avenue! I love your comments here, and agree with you 100%. I remember all the apathy that existing here about the old Jets; there were hardcore fans, but nowhere near the numbers that exist today. I too, have been knocked down in my professional life, and once that happened I made some of my best decisions & am enjoying success again. I think if the Jets could have survived up to the lockout, they would have been okay, but those years from 96 - 04 would have been very tough. I also don't think we would have had the nice centrally located arena that we have today! So, to make a long story short, I think we are better off having lost the team. All parties (fans, players, league, gov't) went in with their eyes wide open & I have no doubt that the Jets will be around for many many years!
|
|
|
Post by TheDeuce on Aug 3, 2012 15:16:52 GMT -6
Honestly don't agree with most of your points. 1) Agree. 2) I thought negotiatiosn to build the new arena included control and WEC would not be part of it. I could be remmebering incorrectly. 3) Agree but it's the same as point number 1. 4) Disagree. The way the community rallied to try saving the team was just as great as the support it received this past season. 5) Couldn't care less. Because it was a news story doesn't make it a good thing. 6) Disagree. Teams can change logos whenever they want. We could have had several cool new logos in the 15 years. 7) Listing the lockout as a pro reason to not having a team for 15 years makes no sesnse. Hey its good we didn't have a team for 15 years cause then we wouldn't have missed that one season of no hockey. Really only decent point was we have a more stable ownership group now, but Chipman was involved in the efforts to save the team 15 years ago. Ownership groups are dynamic. We could have easily made it to the point we are now, with good owners, a new logo etc all without losing the past 15 years. So no, I don't think the past 15 years were worth were we are now cause for all we know we could have still been here. Well thought-out points, especially #1 and #3 being effectively the same thing. +1! The arena deal as I remember it didn't contemplate the WEC being involved but it was also not contemplating the Jets owing the arena outright like TN does with MTS. The deals being proffered back then ensured that the Jets got all the concession and parking money that the WEC gobbled up at the old barn, but didn't contemplate the non-hockey related revenues (concerts and such). Are those non-hockey event revenues essential to making the NHL work in Winnipeg? I don't know, but they sure don't hurt. I'll disagree strongly on only one point you make, that being #4. The support during the Save Our Jets rallies was undeniable but so too was the lackluster support the team itself got. Mark Chipman himself, irritated by it, noted that back then when the Habs or Leafs were in town the game felt like an away game. I remember in elementary school it was uncool and loser-ish to be a Jets fan and half the kids would have Bruins, Habs, or Edmonton {team that shall not be named} patches on their school bags. Not any more. This is a Winnipeg Jets town to a degree and extent that it never would have been if not for the love, loss, and regaining of the team. I also take a different position than you vis a vis point #5 but it's neither here nor there. Either you like the publicity or you don't - I loved it. One man's opinion. Good discussion. Now I gotta get ready for tonight's Bomber game. Here we go Bombers, here we go! Woot Woot!m.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2012 15:28:36 GMT -6
I don't know - does being held captive for 15 years make someone stronger? Maybe we are stronger, but I think the passion for the team would still be the same. I think that 15 years was too much.
In the end, it's a moot point because what happened, happened. We got them back and that's all that matters.
|
|
|
Post by shakinallover on Aug 3, 2012 16:21:05 GMT -6
The damage to our collective pride was something that took a long time to get over and still lingered right up to the day of the return. Rarely in those "dark years" did anyone stand up and say they were proud to be from Winnipeg and we were more apt to whine and bitch about everything "Winnipeg". Sure there would have been financial and ownership struggles over those 15 yrs and it's likely Chipman and Thomson would not have been involved but we would always have that big league feeling to fall back on.
The return of professional hockey is not the reason for our resurgence but rather a result of it. If the Jets had not left they would have experienced it too., maybe not to the extent we now see but an increase nontheless.
|
|
|
Post by The Unknown Poster on Aug 3, 2012 17:37:57 GMT -6
Difficult question to ask.
Are we stronger now than the team that left in 1996? Absolutely, no doubt about it.
But no one can say we're stronger now than the team that left in 1996 would be if it hadn't left. We simply dont know what would have happened.
Its possible that Chipman may have eventually risen to the top of the ownership group and took control of the team. Maybe not. One thing that does seem certain is the path that Chipman took in bringing the Moose to Winnipeg and then building MTSC, allowed him to accumulate a lot more wealth than he otherwise would have.
if the team had not left, we would have had a very good new arena at the Forks, larger than MTSC in a great location. Who eventually would have controlled the team, and thus the arena, is pure speculation.
|
|
jmt21
1st Line Centre
"Winnipeg... Hello"
Posts: 480
|
Post by jmt21 on Aug 4, 2012 10:12:35 GMT -6
I've read the book as well and without doubt.... losing the Jets in 96' HAD to happen to get where we are today. WEC was a cancer to the Jets and they frankly had zero hope of remaining without huge government input. COG anyone?
Great arena, solid, smart and very wealthy ownership with a core of players with huge potential. Sure, ticket prices are high but it hasn't seemed to affect the passion for people to go to games... and likely won't for at least 5 years.
Losing the Jets 1.0 was painful.... but the city, province and fans are now reaping the rewards.
|
|