Franchise Down: A Fan’s View of NHL Markets

AP Photo/The Canadian Press, Darryl Dyck

Franchise Down: A Fan’s View of NHL Markets

Dec 12, 2010 12:03 AM David M Singer

Ever since the Winnipeg Jets, Quebec Nordiques and Hartford Whalers moved in the 1990s, there have been contingents of fans in each city waiting, hoping, that an NHL team would return to a local arena.

The financial woes of any team over the last decade has brought out legions of fans wanting for the NHL to bring their team back, and Minnesota regaining a team after the North Stars left only gave fans in those cities more hope. The Phoenix Coyotes troubles has fans in Winnipeg begging for a second chance. Fans of the Nords recently took a bus trip to a New York Islanders game to show the NHL the market in Quebec City is still alive.

The debate about which city could support an NHL team again is only rivaled by the debate about which team should be relocated. We've setup a series of polls asking fans which of the current NHL teams that are in the bottom 10 of attendance can succeed.

It's a simple yes or no vote, and the reasoning is left up to you. Team management, arena situation - whether it's old or simply in the wrong location, economics of the market, television deals, or whatever else you see as the big reasons why a team may, or may not succeed in their current location.

The Polls

We chose attendance numbers because it's a very simple metric and an easy starting point for the polls. Outside of the Tampa Bay Lightning, #18 in average attendance, but #23 in capacity, all of these teams were bottom 10 in both categories, with the Ducks being bumped to #20 in capacity with the Bolts drop. An interesting note is always about the Islanders: they play at Nassau Coliseum, which has a very small capacity compared to other NHL arenas. Selling out every game would only put them at #19 on the average attendance list, but that's obviously not a talking point this season.

Rank	Team	Avg Attendance	Capacity
21	Carolina Hurricanes	15445	82.5
22	Florida Panthers	14819	77.0
23	Anaheim Ducks	14547	84.7
24	New Jersey Devils	14434	81.9
25	Colorado Avalanche	14306	79.4
26	Dallas Stars	14268	77.0
27	Columbus Blue Jackets	12570	69.3
28	Atlanta Thrashers	11929	64.3
29	New York Islanders	10770	66.1
30	Phoenix Coyotes	10189	58.2
source: espn.com

Comments

Just a small note for our Canadian friends The LOS ANGELES BASIN HAS MORE NHL SEASON TICKET HOLDERS than anywhere else in North America. Combined attendance is over 35,000 on a regular basis, and that's for two teams less than 25 miles apart. So before our Canadian friends tell us about how great their fans are (which is undeniable), let us balance that by reminding you how crappy Canadian owners are, and how they ruin it for both the fans and the rest of the league when they bitch about currency exchanges, high taxes and start a lockout. Be patient with American Teams, FOR YEARS KINGS FANS WERE TOLD WE SHOULDN'T HAVE A TEAM. The weather wasn't suited, the team was crap and the fans were uneducated. Now we have more fans than anywhere else, we have the best junior development in the country. BUT IT TAKES TIME. It took 20 years before hockey boomed, and 15 years before the Kings were decent. Give it time.
Posted by Greg on 2011-01-29 15:19:39 Having NHL franchises in some southern and southwestern US cities is no doubt a poor business decision. I am reminded of this each time I watch the Pens play at Florida, Atlanta, Phoenix, and to a slightly lesser degree, Tampa. It is always amazing to me how many empty seats can be seen. If those teams can't draw with Sid, Geno, and Fleury coming to town, they should be relocated. Another thing to consider is that since hockey is overwhelmingly played and watched by white players and fans, why would the NHL try to force-feed franchises into cities with very large non-white populations? Those non-white fans really seem to have little, if any interest in hockey. Perhaps it is because they grew up playing other sports like baseball and hoops, or because they have very, very few non-white players to identify with. Who knows for sure? One thing we do know for sure is it is not working in those cities and it is past time to pull the plug. Why not move Atlanta, Florida, and Phoenix to KC, Winipeg, and Quebec? Maybe even TB to Portland or Seattle? New,sensible (Det and Colu are in the Eastern time zone) divisions could be created. The East could be Tor, Buf, Ott, Mont, and Que in the North, Bos, Phi, NYI,NYR, and NJ in the Atlantic, and Pit, Was, Car, Colu, and Det in the Central. The West could be Van, Edm, Cal, Win and Sea/Por in the North, Min, Chi, Nas, Stl, and KC in the Central, and SJ, LA, Ana, Dal, and Colo in the South. Maybe that seems far-fetched, but something should be done. Constantly playing in buildings that are 2/3 full is not working.
Posted by Brian on 2011-01-29 11:31:34 Columbus Blue Jackets - When the Jackets landed in Columbus I knew it was going to be hard. They have to win and they have to compete with The Ohio State Buckeyes. Columbus had an ECHL team called the Columbus Chill a team now known as The Reading Royals. Couldn't even support decent team at a lower level. Plus some of the Jackets fans need to take Hockey 101. "The Chili Chant", "Carry The Flag", passing around a 12' flag around the crowd to wave DURING game play, cheering after the opposing team killed off your teams power play. Not Joking about any of the 4. Seen It First Hand. Some jackets fans kinda don't deserve a hockey team. Plus ticket prices are WAY cheaper at Nationwide Arena than Consol Energy Center so over priced tickets aren't the issue.
Posted by Chris on 2011-01-19 10:53:38 We complain about hockey in June. We want to stay outside and play/watch soccer, baseball... It is the same for people in the sunny south. Hockey is not just competing with other sports. It competes with the weather. It is not and never will be part of the culture that makes the winter classic successful. Hockey will never have long term success in the south.
Posted by Keeder on 2011-01-10 02:30:21 Having teams in the southern states is stupid. Canada is defined by hockey. Why are we taking away teams from areas that would have loyal fan bases? I live in New York City, so yes there is a hockey fan base and it's growing. I look at the Stars, Coyotes, Panthers, and Lightening in particular because those areas have some other sports going on and hockey will never gain popularity down there. Dallas has the Mavericks and Cowboys. Phoenix has the Suns and the Cardinals are in Glendale along with the Coyotes, and not to mention if the Super Bowl is ever there again hockey will go on the back burner for a while. The Panthers are near Miami. There are the Heat, Dolphins, and Marlins. Tampa Bay has the re-emergence of baseball(with the Rays) and football(the Buccaneers). So how can hockey compete with these other sports? One of the kids in my school was born in Dallas, he came to school one day wearing a Stars hoodie. I said the Stars are doing pretty good this year. "I hate hockey," was his response. Obviously why is he wearing the hoodie? He said it was cold so I dropped the subject. Now that's one person but if I go to Dallas, I feel all I'll see are Romo jerseys. Yes these teams have experienced some success in past years, but really? What's the point of succeeding in sports if you have no one supporting you?(that's why people say that winning in NYC is worth more than other places because of the fan support). Move them back to Canada where people care.
Posted by MIXEDUPTHROWDOWN on 2010-12-29 00:59:48 The best way to judge if a city could support a NHL team, check the attendance of minor league and/or collegiate teams. Take Kansas City. Since the two year stint of the KC Scouts in the mid-seventies, there have been 4 minor league teams and only the Blades lasted more than 2 seasons (they lasted 10 years, 1990-2001). The question would be why would the NHL waste time and money making a go in a town that can't support a minor league team (it shouldn't, but who knows with Bettman in charge). Now Hartford could happen since they have had a team since the Whale left town. Its simple economics. No support for minor league hockey, probably no support for major league hockey, or what ever sport for that matter.
Posted by Big Bri on 2010-12-26 05:47:34 Good riddance to ALL these weak links in the NHL chain.Isles,Avs,and Devils are the only teams on the list worthy of an NHL franchise. Why does the NHL (and midget Bettman)feel obligated to shove hockey down the throats of hillbillies south of the mason/dixon line when they'd rather spend 300.00$ per tix to watch a car go left than spend 50.00$ to watch a quality hockey game??? All that talent on those teams can get intergrated into the league to give REAL fans a better product and lose the albatross at the same time. Next thing that little freak will try to bring Hockey to Mexico,Puerto Rico,and Hawaii just to get a few extra days of sun for his sorry little ass.What a PUKE!!!
Posted by Mark on 2010-12-26 04:21:21 @#25 I think #17 has point, and your missing it. You don't have to know hockey to understand what is going with finacial aspect of the situation(s). There just isn't a strong fan base for hockey in the South as there is in the North. Canada has always had hockey, only few areas in the Northern U.S. have always had hockey where most of the country always had baseball, then footbal and basketball. And as far as college football goes it rules the South East. If ever come down this way you will learn that if the NCAA ever banned students from attending football games they would still fill up their stadiums. Most died hard college football fans,at least here in the South East, have never attended ANY college. You throw the NFL and NBA into that mix and your South East hockey "base" are only Northern transplants such as myself. I would hate for the Thrashers to leave bc they are the closest NHL team to me. But I can't help but wonder why the NHL won't consider going back to a fan base they know exist and is stable. One last thing Tank, even though Disney is a bullshit excuse, it's in California not Florida, so don't be a stupid hillbilly retard from CT, OK.
Posted by Nick on 2010-12-23 04:17:38 @#17 You are a moron. OBVIOUSLY people are going to also go to baseball and football games. Hockey is not the only sport on the face of the earth. And to even dare and compare football to hockey is absolutely absurd and idiotic. Football teams play 8 home games a season, not 40. So I think it is pretty obvious more people will go to football games since they only have a limited number of opportunities to see their football team play. And college sports are mostly attended by STUDENTS. so when you have a major university with 80,000 students, i think that accounts for 50% of your saturday football games attendance you jackass. And Disneyland? Really? DISNEYLAND is the reason people aren't going to the Panthers games? And maybe you forgot that the Phoenix Coyotes also have the Arizona Cardinals to blame for the poor attendance, and the University of Phoenix...your a stupid hillbilly retard from Kentucky that doesn't know shit about hockey or anything except for fucking your sister. Are you gonna blame that on Disneyland too? Your argument is fucking dumb and so are you if you honestly believe that shit.
Posted by Tank on 2010-12-22 22:31:42 This idea more then likely will not happen but it would work. For more information about my Theory email me at dan_odenbach@hotmail.com The MLB has an American League and National League. The NHL should have a Canadian League and American League. 17 teams in each League and 3 divisions. 2 divisions with 6 teams and 1 division with 5 teams. 34 teams in total. I've researched Canadian City Metros and yes they have the population and the Economy to support an NHL team. These Metros have at least 100,000 people, not including towns +50km away. This would involve the relocation of 8 teams and the creation and investments of 5 new teams.
Posted by Dan Odenbach on 2010-12-22 04:30:53 One market that continues to be overlooked by NHL brass, but could support an NHL team with a little market development is Portland. They have the facility, NIKE hq, and a history of supporting junior hockey teams like the Winterhawks. I believe that QC will be the next place for a NHL franchise, with a new building, and over a million rabid Quebecois fans. Winnipeg is just way too small. And Hamilton is too close to Toronto and Buffalo. After that, Portland makes the most sense provided there is a local evangelist to carry the banner and finance the drive.
Posted by MacT on 2010-12-21 20:55:48 I believe the NHL lost its collective mind with the over expansion in the early 90's. The league succeeded in watering down the talent, allowed lesser talented defensive minded teams to employ "clutch and grab" tactics just to compete and practically ruined the game. The reality of it is simple. You aren't going to succeed in cities where the population base is largely retirees and/or hispanic (Florida, Phoenix, Tampa Bay) Hispanics don't support baseball in Miami with a predominant hispanic roster. Hockey? are you kidding me? Atlanta? what a joke. Atlanta couldn't sell out Braves playoff games and already failed to support one hockey team. The fan base in Canada is supportive and rabid. Go to a Sabres game in Buffalo. A fairly large portion of the crowd is from Toronto and Hamilton, Ontario who cannot get tickets to Maple Leafs games. Relocate Phoenix, Atlanta, Florida to Winnipeg, Quebec and Hamilton. Forget about Kansas City. It failed once already. A huge metropolitan USA market doesn't equate to a successful following or large fan base. Fan support wasn't a problem in Quebec and Winnipeg. Overtaxed Canadians didn't want the burden of more taxes to fund new arenas. I'm as patriotic an American as you will find. This is Canada's game and will never succeed in our southern or south western cities. Unfortunately, the idiots who run the NHL think they can force feed hockey to these people.
Posted by William Wheeler on 2010-12-20 23:57:38 Just a note about the Devils route...First they were the KC Scouts..then moved to become the Colorado Rockies...THEN moved to become the NJ Devils. I would like to see a team back in KC, but in the early 90's, they couldn't even support the CHL team, the KC Blades, who even managed to win the CHL title in their 1st or 2nd year of existence under Coach Kevin Constantine. Players like Arturs Irbe, Jeff Odgers (Was a fan favorite for his fisticuffs which got him up to San Jose who had a development contract with the Blades a few years). I had a car at the time and was able to make games at the Kemper arena, which has been replaced with a new arena. But sadly the Blades folded and the nearest thing to a team in the KC area is a stab at the CHL again with the Missouri Mustangs playing in Independence in a 6,000 range arena... I don't even see score reports in the paper.. It sounds like a lot of chatter for KC, I sure would try to make it over there for a game, having settled for only a pre-season game long ago (just before the Blades) by St. Louis and Chicago..sadly a good scrap was broken up by some idiot throwing a large firecracker on the ice by them.. they parted and were talking like old buddies after that with the action starting in the area of the miscreant. So can KC support a team now? With the college basketball season competing for fans and Kansas University packing Allen Fieldhouse every time they play with a capacity of 16,300, with the exception of a few games at the beginning of the season vs small colleges, I was able to see Rider and SMU I think, it was around 1990 and even then if not sold out very few no-shows or tickets given away to family friends, like myself by season ticket holders. Topeka even tried minor league hockey with the Scarecrows..not sure what league and may have been another one since then...but with the support for the Mavericks now and the Blades failing along with the big-time Scouts and NBA KC Kings out in Sacramento, the area may be able to hold a team, somewhere to go if the Chiefs are sold out, the Baseball stadium being one of the smallest in the AL and NL and not filling up as of late being a major worry, I would guess that's why OKC got an NBA team rather than KC despite the new arena, I don't have high hopes for the KC market to support an NHL franchise and don't think the owners of the above teams would risk a move here. Sorry for the long winded comment, I've just thought about the chances of KC getting a team and over time, I figured this would be the case, I hope I'm wrong and someone can show I'm wrong, I really do.
Posted by Bill on 2010-12-19 15:24:28 Here's three to relocate: 1) Phoenix-it's a joke that Bettman's gone to the mat so hard for this franchise. Don't gibe me the "win and they'll come" argument, coming off a 100+ point season. MOvE TO WINNIPEG 2) Atlanta-only got a second franchise (for fans who don't know, the Flames fizzled out here long ago) because of number of corporations in the metro area. MOVE TO QUEBEC 3) Florida-same as Atlanta but with more transplanted northeasterners. Went to a game in Sunrise a few years back vs Montreal, guy from the Panthers, holding a wad of tickets thicker than a whopper in the parking lot GIVING AWAY tickets to the game. Nuff said. MOVE TO KANSAS CITY Face it Bettman, this is a regional sport. You're trying to force-feed hockey to parts of America that are not ready for it.
Posted by Kevin on 2010-12-19 01:33:14 The league's hunger for US cities was based on the false presumption that being in US cities would result in big TV contracts. Instead we have some third tier cable TV channel and a half dozen teams in cities where the local sporting goods stores don't even carry hockey sticks because there is no ice. I don't even have access to the lamo channel because we ditched cable. $100 is too much to pay for a few lame movies, 10,000 brain-rotting reality shows and ice hockey, the latter being the only thing worth watching of the three. I got diapers to buy and that is further up the list than some conglomerated high def entertainment package that I don't need. The NHL should have streaming pay per view from their website and I would glady fork over some cash to watch my Flyers. Bottom line put teams where their are fans to fill the stands. The dreams of cable empire are just that... dreams.
Posted by Mike on 2010-12-18 12:50:43 It's colder in Canada.
Posted by tom on 2010-12-18 11:18:45 The thing that stands out to me on this list, is that these are all expansion franchises in markets that have bigger draws than these teams could ever hope for. Anaheim - Dodgers, Angels, Lakers, Kings, Disneyland, The Weather Florida - Heat, Dolphins, University of Miami, The Weather Carolina - Duke, UNC NJ & NYI - NYR, Knicks, Jets, Giants, Yankees, Mets, New York City Atlanta - Hawks, Falcons, Braves, UGA Dallas - Cowboys, Mavs Colorado - Broncos, Nuggets Columbus - The Ohio State Phoenix - no excuse Why was QC and now Montreal so popular? It is by far the only show in town!!!!! Canada has hockey, period. The US has football, baseball, basketball, NASCAR, and college sports, there is no way these aforementioned teams besides the Canes, will ever win over the town they live in. Not as long as other Professional or Collegiate sports options exist.
Posted by Richard S. on 2010-12-15 01:28:13 wang needs to build an arena not a city,get over your hurt feelings and either build an arena or sell the team
Posted by scott g on 2010-12-14 09:51:50 I'm 37 and I've lived in St. Louis, Chicago, Detroit, Denver and Phoenix. All are great sports towns in one respect or another. All have what it takes to support an NHL franchise in every way. I can tell you all that it is rare when crappy teams are supported unconditionally and when they are, it takes lots of time and winning (Broncos in Denver, Baseball Cards in STL, Bears in Chicago, etc). That doesn't happen overnight. Winning is the key to any team staying put, not whether or not one sport or another should be in one place over another. When the Coyotes went on a run at the end of last year, people here went to the arena (which is state-of-the-art and not a bad seat in the house). As much as I love The Great One, he was a crappy coach and the team sucked for years--but once he was gone, things picked up. People started going to the games and getting excited about hockey. Also, keep in mind that most of the population of Phoenix is from somewhere else. As the transplants start to establish families here, the fan base will grow. If you go to a Coyotes/Wings game, it looks like a home game for Detroit. Over time, that will change. When the kids here grow up with the Coyotes, as is happening, the fan base will lock in and the franchise will be more stable, assuming they can win a bit. They aren't that far away from good things as far as I can see. When the Nords moved to Denver, they were winning and the people embraced Joe Sakic and Adam Foote and several of the other players (and when they started to suck, the attendance started to go down in recent years, too). Also, Denver had an NHL team before the Avs which everyone also forgets (Colorado Rockies, who, BTW, moved to New Jersey and became the Devils). The Coyotes haven't exactly had marquis players or players that the fans can latch on to like other teams. Part of that is some players just aren't as marketable as others, so it's hard to get that bond with the fans. Another thing is that people have other entertainment options, so the competition for those dollars will tend to go to the team that's more fun to watch -- usually one that's winning. For the past few years, that has been the football Cardinals. So if the frackin' Cardinals can sell out 52 straight times in Phoenix, the Coyotes (who play right next door) certainly can enjoy some growth. the fan base is there, they just have to attract them. I think the Coyotes could be one of the better franchises over time to be perfectly honest. The hockey culture is obviously not native to this region, but if all this stuff works out with the new ownership, it will be a good thing for the area and for the NHL.
Posted by holysmith! on 2010-12-13 18:18:24 Ah, the perpetual superiority of the Canadian to the American. Give me a break. The NHL only exists because of American fans and you losers couldn't even keep your established teams that you supposedly loved so much in your cities. Let's compare the fans of Boston, Detroit, New York, Philly, Chicago etc... to cities that had teams but couldn't keep them. Without the US you have no NHL.
Posted by Rich Montagna on 2010-12-13 11:41:34 U.S citizens make us laugh. Most of the cities in the U.S don't know what that game is all about. I'have had the chance to see many games in the U.S; Denver, Detroit, Tampa Bay, Anaheim, L.A etc. It's nothing even close than going to Montreal or Qc city. In Qc city, 20 years ago when the Nordiques were trailing every years, the Colisée de Québec was sold out every games. Why? Because, WE, real hockey fans, were going there to see NHL hockey. When you compare the ambiance of the U.S cities with the one in Canada, you see how boring it is to see a game in the US. When you don't or even worst, never played that game, you can't understand it!
Posted by Richard Lafrance on 2010-12-13 06:10:43 Sorry about my typos! there are few in there and I didn't catch them before I hit enter two times by mistake! Figured I better address that before someone called me a rube, redneck, or uneducated hick! :)
Posted by tspugh99 on 2010-12-12 17:32:36 Hey why is everyone always putting Carolina in these arguments or polls. Carolina has had a successful fan base here in North Carolina and is not in any danger of being moved. Their location in the Research Triangle area of our states allows many transplants from Canada and the North which are big hockey areas to have a team here to root for. There is also a big fan base of hockey fans here in our area regardless of what all the losers who write such articles in the North and Canada. Get back to discussing fighting here and piss off on your whining about losing teams and their relocation here in the south! Hartford officials refused to make the changes they needed to make, get over it and move on! Quebec is one of the few that feel truly deserves a team back! I hope they get one as I was a Quebec Nordiques fan from way back!
Posted by tspugh99 on 2010-12-12 17:27:17 Hey why is everyone always putting Carolina in these arguments or polls. Carolina has had a sucessful fan base here in North Carolina and is not in any danger of being moved. Their location in the Research Triangle area of our states allows many transplants from Canada and the North which are big hockey areas to have a team here to root for. There is also a big fan base of hockey fans here in our area regardless of what all the losers who write such articles in the North and Canada. Get back to discussing fighting here and piss off on your whining about losing teams and their relocation here in the south! Hartford officials refused to make the changes they needed to make, get over it and move on! Quebec is one of the few that feel truly deserves a team back! I hope they get one as I was a Quebec Nordiques fan from way back!
Posted by tspugh99 on 2010-12-12 17:25:09 Rob, why do you think that there is so much talk about moving teams from southern US up to Canada? You don't think that the NHL executives don't realize that the population is much larger in the US than in Canada? We are all aware. But the fact of the matter is, no matter how many people you have, if they aren't interested in the sport then you'll never have adequate attendance. The reason people immediately discuss bringing back a team to Canada is because the fan base here is much larger than the majority of American cities.
Posted by Andrew on 2010-12-12 15:19:25 Interesting argument, but I agree that you can't simply look at the broad corporate base and the population metrics. Winnipeg, for example, is home to the Thomson family - Canada's richest family and 20th richest in the world according to Forbes. They have already thrown their support behind the return of the NHL to Winnipeg. Another note is that the Canadian dollar is relatively at par with the USD now, wheras it was around $0.65-0.70 in the 1990s. In addition, there may only be 800,000 people in Winnipeg, but one could make the argument that there are more hockey fans in Manitoba than in the entire Phoenix metro area for example. The Winnipeg Jets deminse was also linked to the poor facility (Winnipeg Arena) which has since been replaced by the state of the art (although smallish by NHL standards) MTS Centre which is home to the AHL's Manitoba Moose - and drawing some of the best crowds in the AHL by the way.
Posted by Tyler on 2010-12-12 13:54:18 Looks like No Hockey in the South Huh look at all the teams. Put all the Hoops teams down South and give us the Hockey teams up North
Posted by Tbones on 2010-12-12 13:34:14 Rob, you can't simply look at the corporate base and population of a city. I believe Anaheim has both of the above. You even say it in your own post, if a team in the US isnt performing well, support will drop. There's the difference between a US based hockey team and a Canadian hockey franchise. Fresno?? You lose all credibility even mentioning Fresno........
Posted by Scott from JC on 2010-12-12 11:00:19 At #2.... Kansas City already had a team and it didn't work there...remember the Scouts anyone? They moved to New Jersey. As far as I'm concerned the league should contract. 30 teams is far too many in my eyes. Hockey was at its best when there was 21 teams. To me Florida shouldn't have 2 teams, California shouldn't have 3 teams and yes even Alberta shouldn't have 2 teams. So they shouldn't move teams into the southern states, and also I don't think Winnipeg should have another crack at it. Hamilton, well maybe, only because they'll draw from Metro Toronto, and if New York could support 2 teams Toronto also could.
Posted by dave on 2010-12-12 10:55:14 you know a city shouldnt have a hockey team, when they try to make their jerseys look like football jerseys...
Posted by 77 on 2010-12-12 08:14:15 The Stars aren't going anywhere. There ownership situation has hamstrung the team for almost 3 years now. Once they get a consistent winner back on the ice, the fans will be back. Dallas isn't an NHL market, its a Dallas Stars market.
Posted by John on 2010-12-12 02:34:30 I hate it when people mention teams moving from the southern United States to Canada. Look at the markets these team would play in: Quebec, Winnipeg, Hamilton, etc. Look at the populations and the cooporate base of those cities and compare it to, lets say, a metro area like Fresno, California. So if Quebec deserves a team, so should a city like Fresno. Cities like HOUSTON, TEXAS or KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI deserve far more recognition for (and only) IF a team were to relocate. These 2 cities have a large cooporate base, large populations (in the millions vs 800 thousands), and state-of-the-art areans. Canadians need to realize these facts and realize that if ANY sports team in the United States is not performing well, their support will drop.
Posted by Rob on 2010-12-12 02:24:02 For god sakes, will you STOP with the relocation crap? You just piss all the fans off. NO ONE IS MOVING. GET OVER IT. FOCUS ON THE GAME, not this CRAP. Fucking TIRED of it!!!!!!!
Posted by Jason on 2010-12-12 01:08:19

Recent Quick Hits

Follow

Follow @hockeyfights

David:

Follow @singer

Tools

RSS
More Feeds