Baggins Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 The fan base didn't even care enough to sell out the games in the playoffs. Maybe they just can't handle watching an elderly regular season team. I wonder how long people think the team's 'stars', the Sedins, will last? Forever? lul Missing the playoffs once not only ended the sellout streak it made an estimated 5 to 7 year waiting list completely disappear. What happens if we become a bottom feeder for five years or more? Last time we fell to that status we were in the bottom five in the league for attendance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry_Wilkins Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Missing the playoffs once not only ended the sellout streak it made an estimated 5 to 7 year waiting list completely disappear. What happens if we become a bottom feeder for five years or more? Last time we fell to that status we were in the bottom five in the league for attendance. I can say exactly what would/could happen. We'd be in serious jeopardy of losing the franchise. Many Vancouver fans, younger ones especially, are unaware of just how poor our attendance, and the resulting financials, looked in the late 80s. The "new franchise" status had shielded the team from significant fan neglect throughout the miserable 70s, and the unexpected Cup run in '82 juiced the fan base for a few more years. But after that, until Pat Quinn came along, attendance figures were routinely in the 11,000 - 12,000 range, sometimes lower. This history lesson is not lost on Trevor Linden who came along as a player on the cusp of that era. Hockey-mad Calgary and Edmonton and TO and Montreal can suck for years, and owners have no fear of losing revenue. But Vancouver has always been a fair-weather sports city, hockey included. So fans here can continually drool over the fantasy of "tanking" (stupid tactic on so many levels), but for the above reason (and the others that Benning/Linden bring up), it will remain just that -- a fantasy. Thankfully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMorrison 7 Posted April 30, 2015 Author Share Posted April 30, 2015 I can say exactly what would/could happen. We'd be in serious jeopardy of losing the franchise. Many Vancouver fans, younger ones especially, are unaware of just how poor our attendance, and the resulting financials, looked in the late 80s. The "new franchise" status had shielded the team from significant fan neglect throughout the miserable 70s, and the unexpected Cup run in '82 juiced the fan base for a few more years. But after that, until Pat Quinn came along, attendance figures were routinely in the 11,000 - 12,000 range, sometimes lower. This history lesson is not lost on Trevor Linden who came along as a player on the cusp of that era. Hockey-mad Calgary and Edmonton and TO and Montreal can suck for years, and owners have no fear of losing revenue. But Vancouver has always been a fair-weather sports city, hockey included. So fans here can continually drool over the fantasy of "tanking" (stupid tactic on so many levels), but for the above reason (and the others that Benning/Linden bring up), it will remain just that -- a fantasy. Thankfully. I think we would have more people coming to the games if we lowered the ticket price personally. We are top 5 in richest teams in the NHL lol I don't think we should worry about losing the franchise because of a more aggressive rebuild to what benning is doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry_Wilkins Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I think we would have more people coming to the games if we lowered the ticket price personally. We are top 5 in richest teams in the NHL lol I don't think we should worry about losing the franchise because of a more aggressive rebuild to what benning is doing. By richest teams, do you mean team revenues -- gate, merchandise, offset by players' salaries, other employees + ? Because a friend of mine knew the chief accountant of the Vancouver Grizzlies before Stein pulled the plug on the franchise for poor attendance and revenue. But he (the accountant) said that the numbers were "massaged" so that the paper assets/liabilities would look worse, hence hastening the justification for the American billionaire to move the franchise to the States. In short, don't trust the books. And every owner has his own tolerance for losing money. Just look at some of the owners' losses in the hockey Sun Belt. That said, the owner may not have much choice BUT to lower tix, as you say. Simple supply and demand. But the main point is that Aqualini is a "what have you done for me lately" guy anyway. That, with the Canucks' fans' "we love you, win or win" mentality, and it's easy to see why upper management's push for continual playoffs is the modus operandi, no matter how much some want to see them bottom out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMorrison 7 Posted April 30, 2015 Author Share Posted April 30, 2015 By richest teams, do you mean team revenues -- gate, merchandise, offset by players' salaries, other employees + ? Because a friend of mine knew the chief accountant of the Vancouver Grizzlies before Stein pulled the plug on the franchise for poor attendance and revenue. But he (the accountant) said that the numbers were "massaged" so that the paper assets/liabilities would look worse, hence hastening the justification for the American billionaire to move the franchise to the States. In short, don't trust the books. And every owner has his own tolerance for losing money. Just look at some of the owners' losses in the hockey Sun Belt. That said, the owner may not have much choice BUT to lower tix, as you say. Simple supply and demand. But the main point is that Aqualini is a "what have you done for me lately" guy anyway. That, with the Canucks' fans' "we love you, win or win" mentality, and it's easy to see why upper management's push for continual playoffs is the modus operandi, no matter how much some want to see them bottom out.. If trevor linden for example said just pretend we are gonna have a full rebuild because that's what we need not a retool not a patch job, a rebuild. Do you think people would not get behind trevor any different then they already have? People love trevor linden he's a great public speaker and can convice the average canuck fan base of anything that's why they hired him. It was a really smart move by aquillini but the fact of the matter is our days are numbered in vancouver as a stanley cup contendor. People just want to argue with me, (not saying you) ohh Trevor's right or ohhhh we still can compete. Don't tell me that if it was Mike Gillis only as president not gm saying the same thing,you would think the same thing that we only need a retool. Aquillini wanted to make playoffs so trevor convinced us. Not me though our top 6 is all over 32 years old and we won't take proper action in building this team from the draft with draft picks 15 or lower. As for aquillini I think if he got these fans and for trevor to get behind a rebuild and have ticket prices Less expensive for a few years and create a powerhouse he would be more then fine financially lol he owns a lot more stuff then just the Canucks you know. However I am happy benning is not going to hesitate to ask players to waive there no trade clause. We will see what he will do this summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I think we would have more people coming to the games if we lowered the ticket price personally. We are top 5 in richest teams in the NHL lol I don't think we should worry about losing the franchise because of a more aggressive rebuild to what benning is doing. Um, that's because of our tickets prices and butts in the seats. In the late 90's there was talk of moving the franchise because we were losing, bleeding money, and the seats were empty. Despite having Bure and Mogilny on the team. Then Burke was hired to stop the bleeding and the WCE emerged to save the franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Um, that's because of our tickets prices and butts in the seats. In the late 90's there was talk of moving the franchise because we were losing, bleeding money, and the seats were empty. Despite having Bure and Mogilny on the team. Then Burke was hired to stop the bleeding and the WCE emerged to save the franchise. Yeah ..i think a lot of posters here either weren't born or were to young to remember this. If a business starts bleeding too much it gets sold or in the worst case moved. Could end up with a cheapo owner who has a hard time spending to the cap floor and end up with another paper bag decade. Is this fan base like Toronto or Edmonton who sell out regardless of what product is on the ice? i'm not so sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babych Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 sedins are retired in 2 years lol... 37 years old. I think in 2 years they will be on the final year of their current contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I think we would have more people coming to the games if we lowered the ticket price personally. We are top 5 in richest teams in the NHL lol I don't think we should worry about losing the franchise because of a more aggressive rebuild to what benning is doing.If 95 is your birth year then you would be the "younger fans" the op is referring to. It's no knock on you at all but he is correct that we were a horrible team that was losing money big time. I'm with you I would like to see a rebuild however owners want that playoff ticket money. I just hope we don't fall into years of mediocrity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcon45ca Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 It's gonna be a fun summer, can't wait to see what Benning does heading into the draft and free agency. Not too bad an article, though they seemed to have completely ignored how many teams (Oilers, Panthers, Sabres, Blue Jackets, etc) that traditionally pick in the top 10 that haven't been able to turn all their top picks into a winning hockey club. I actually really like JB's tactic of trading for other near NHL ready prospects, less risk and you have a better idea of where a player's at than you do at the draft date. JB's done a lot for our prospect pool in less than a year, can't wait to see what his vision of the Canucks team looks like in 2-3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcon45ca Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 When has any Vancouver GM blown up this team? The reality is that unlike hockey mad Alberta, the Vancouver market will punish any owner that doesn't put a winning team on the ice year after year. We're stuck with the Boston/Detroit model, unless of course Vancouver's population triples. Oilers, yeah. The Flames? In the late 90's they nearly lost their team because of how bad their team was, fans were sick of it. The Flames got corporate help from Molson to keep the team in Calgary, here's an article: http://oldads.strategyonline.ca/articles/magazine/20000605/flames.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dura_mater Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I respect the fact that the Canucks had no fans in the seats in the 90's or earlier and that hockey is a business. However, I disagree that this team would get relocated if we "tanked" or performed poorly to build a stronger team. Maybe I just have more faith in Vancouver fans then some of the older guys on here but I don't see Canucks fans allowing the team to get relocated. If it were a choice between watching a Vancouver version of the Oilers or seeing the team get relocated I'd gladly shell out for seasons tickets; even if it was for an inferior product and I don't think I'm alone on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24K PureCool Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 You just can't sell change to people who only believe change will come when we get rid of the Sedins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I think what this has shown is that the Linden Vey experiment is over, or should be. With Baertschi, Horvat, Kenins already pencilled in for next season, and with the likes of Virtanen, McCann, Shinkaruk, Jensen, Grenier all knocking on the door, Vey doesn't appear to have much time left to impress, if any. I'd take a 3rd for him if we could get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k_man08 Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 We have some good talent in this club already who should be ready to take over in 3-4 years. Some of these players are ready in 1-2 years. the players are: jensen, Kassian, Horvat, Virtanen, Markstrom/Lack/Demko, Baertschi, McCan, Cassels, Corrado. In the upcoming draft, would be nice to concentrate on getting players ready to go, Centres, or D-men in that order. We have players that can hold the fort while the young talent is infused in as needed. Where veterans have run their course, they can be traded before the draft for more picks (as JB indicated) which gives us a bigger prospect pool. We will be just fine. If we can continue to put up 90 - 100 point seasons while this transition occurs and if we keep continuing to make a push for playoffs and continue to play hard and advance to 2nd, 3rd round of playoffs then i think we're re-building progressively and i find nothing wrong with that. People that complain about this season are the worse. Last year when we had an abysmal year we had a reason to complain. This year we have done 100% better but we have identified our faults where we have to continue to build from. If Calgary can do it, so can we. And we're well on our way already Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimberWolf Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 We don't have a winning culture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May4 Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I think Benning is doing what he knows from experience. He is building team character and a winning attitude rather than a losers and he is doing a great job. Sure the Canucks require a few players but that doesn't happen in a year. So for those who want a rebuild he is doing that but he has a team that, on most nights, plays to win because they believe that they can. This also keeps the fans happy and involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I have no doubt Benning wants a winning culture. This core group is not inspiring any confidence I that regard though. This team doesn't win when push comes to shove, they fold and choke. How is that a winning culture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I think Vancouver will be okay. I do agree that Vancouver probably can't win with the Sedins as front line players but they absolutely can with someone like Horvat taking charge. I think that if someone like Horvat can be the locker room voice and put the team on his back (in 2 years) and the Sedins can play the secondary scoring role we have a good shot. I hate to say it but in order for this to happen Burrows and Higgens and probably Bieksa need to be moved. LUCIC - HORVAT - KASSIAN D. SEDIN - H. SEDIN - VRBATA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thad Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Can't please everyone I guess. I for one am on board with what JB is doing. We can't just trade everyone and put the team on Bo's back. Can't wait to hear all the "benning got lucky" if Sbisa takes a major step forward next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.