|
|
Post by Tim on Nov 5, 2012 13:04:18 GMT -6
The thinking goes that if you're going to cancel the "premiere" showcase event of the season, then is the rest of the season just a lame duck? Some would argue it is; while others would argue it isn't. And then w/ the PHX situation, and the schedule realignment, and the East coast fans having higher priorities than hockey on their mind, it begs the question, is it better to start anew next Sept w/ a big marketing push to win back the fans? Or do you offer a shortened season for now that will most likely be poorly attended w/ the exception of the Canadian markets and some die-hard American markets? It's an interesting debate. I'm trying to see both sides of the arguement here but at the end of the day a shortened season is better than none at all. To me if you don't agree your not a hockey fan, and the longer you go without hockey the more casual fans you will lose I would think. Not a hockey fan?  If something is not done about the costs in the NHL this league is doomed. If you sit out a season and if that's what it takes to get our league in order then that what it takes. Short term pain for long term gain, I'm ok with this and I am a fan, and if prices keep rising the casual fan not going to go anyways. Got to love gate run sports, WHERE’S THE BIG TV CONTRACT GARY WHERE IS IT! |
|
|
|
Post by jetsorbust on Nov 5, 2012 15:07:33 GMT -6
I'm trying to see both sides of the arguement here but at the end of the day a shortened season is better than none at all. To me if you don't agree your not a hockey fan, and the longer you go without hockey the more casual fans you will lose I would think. Not a hockey fan? If something is not done about the costs in the NHL this league is doomed. If you sit out a season and if that's what it takes to get our league in order then that what it takes. Short term pain for long term gain, I'm ok with this and I am a fan, and if prices keep rising the casual fan not going to go anyways. Got to love gate run sports, WHERE’S THE BIG TV CONTRACT GARY WHERE IS IT! I'm not arguing you on that but my point is it's obviously better to get the deal done now than it is to get it done for next year. We all want to see a reasonable deal get done that helps the Jets to stay competitive, but anyone who still cares about hockey would want to see that deal get done sooner rather than later! |
|
|
|
Post by Lions67 on Nov 5, 2012 15:26:35 GMT -6
we dont want a deal done if its going to hurt the club down the road.
better to wait for the right deal than it is to get A deal.
case in point, see the 94-95 lockout with a shortened season.
what happened to the Jets the following year?
get the right deal, or dont make the deal till it becomes right.
|
|
|
|
Post by jetsorbust on Nov 5, 2012 16:11:40 GMT -6
we dont want a deal done if its going to hurt the club down the road. better to wait for the right deal than it is to get A deal. case in point, see the 94-95 lockout with a shortened season. what happened to the Jets the following year? get the right deal, or dont make the deal till it becomes right. Okay but now we're talking about 2 completely different issues. This story seems to be just arguing about what is better for the game and interest in the NHL - cancelling the whole season to market next years or to try to fit in a shortened seasson. Of course we want to see a good CBA (and one signed for 40 freaking years hopefully!) but hypothetically if that happens tomorrow should the league cancel this season to prepare for next year or start playing as soon as they can? Obviously start playing as soon as they can! |
|
|
|
Post by IantheD on Nov 6, 2012 13:26:35 GMT -6
The Winter Classic was the big one. Season's over, see you all next year once the owner's get what they want and Fehr gets embarrassed beyond words.
|
|
