This Has Nothing To Do With Nashville As A Hockey Market

[mojo1917]

There will be exceptions in the large market vs. small market arguement. Dallas being one of them. The problem to me is when a small market DOES draw well they still can't compete. If Nashville increased their ticket prices to equal the Flyers, would they still draw? If their arena were 2,500 seats bigger, would they still be at 97.5% capacity? if they charged the same for local TV rights as the Flyers, would they find a buyer?

Maybe. Maybe not. With the Predators the answers are filled with uncertainty. Not the case with MOST large market teams.

I think we agree that this isn't about Nashville as a hockey market entirely, there's a lot more moving pieces in play. the points you make regarding salary structure are valid and would be good to work into this next CBA so you have fun with that...

when the day comes and the Chaiman has moved to the great sky box in the afterlife we'll see what happens with our beloved team, could be pretty crappy, they could be spun off to be their own entity and become like your team or nashville...who knows.

And I'd like to point out if you've been to Dallas you know that "Dallas" goes from Fort Worth to Plano and includes Arlington, so while Dallas has a population of 1 million there are actually 4 cities connected by the Parkway that makes Dallas, DALLAS. see what i'm sayin' it's not just the folks in the city proper. so saying Dallas has a population of 1 million while factually correct doesn't tell the whole store of DALLAS as a market.

[radoran]

this debate should end right here. then WHY DIDN'T THEY!? nashville left the door wide open for this to happen. that's what people here, like myself, are trying to convey. this is where, to me, the idea of 'fairness' goes out the window. simply put, Nashville blew it. Sooner, rather than later, should have been the M.O. for nashville's management. ESPECIALLY, since they are operating under ***more limited funds*** than other teams.

*** again, i've heard they have a mega billionaire owner, so this might be a moot point.

Hey, I AGREE that this is a legal offer - that's NOT the point. I've stated it MANY times.

But this is NOT about "Nashville being willing to pay" - this is about Suter and Weber BEING WILLING TO SIGN.

"Why didn't Nashville lock them up?" NEITHER of them would sign.

Why? Because they don't think that Nashville can compete.

And they've both proven why - because Nashville doesn't have the financial backing to exploit loopholes and shove vast quantities of up-front money like a small handful of teams that currently enjoy that competitive advantage.

Nashville COULD have given BOTH of them the same cap hit deals they got - and we don't KNOW what was offered - instead they created a self-fulfilling prophecy.

At least Weber chose a winner.

[Phillygrump]

Weber was offered arbitration. It wasn't just that he wouldn't sign.

Do you think that these guys thought that Nashville couldn't compete or wouldn't compete?

Which do you mean?

[AndyS]

So give me some numbers. I already showed you that Nashville sells about as many tickets as they can.

If you go by tickets sold, local TV ratings and merchandise sales then those flightless birds across the state win hands down and I know you aren't ready to concede that the Pens have better fans than the Flyers.

Plus, stands to reason that a large market means more people which means a bigger pool of fans. If every fan of the Calgary Flames bought a jersey it would not come close the the number sold if every Flyers fan bought a jersey. Bigger market = bigger fan base (usually). Yet there is no way you can tell me Flyers fans are more rabid than Flames fans. See what I am getting at?

My point is that hockey seems to be popular enough in Nashville that it's not an issue as far as their ability to sign Weber.

Tickets sold does not = demand. There is much more demand for tickets in Philly (as there should be). If Nashville raised their prices, they would almost certainly sell fewer tickets.

And our tv ratings are very good locally. Add to that the fact that the Flyers are a big draw nationally (the reason we have already been in 2 Winter Classics already).

[radoran]

Weber was offered arbitration. It wasn't just that he wouldn't sign.

Do you think that these guys thought that Nashville couldn't compete or wouldn't compete?

Which do you mean?

I think it's a combination of both along with the bad blood between players and management.

I'm saying that I don't believe either player when they use the "want to win" argument as a reason to leave Nashville.

Although I do give Weber the edge on his choice of teams

[Phillygrump]

I think it's a combination of both along with the bad blood between players and management.

I'm saying that I don't believe either player when they use the "want to win" argument as a reason to leave Nashville.

Although I do give Weber the edge on his choice of teams

I agree to an extent, however, there is a difference between a desire to win and a financial committment to winning.

[AndyS]

I'll say this again - Nashville is the NHL's version of moneyball.

They think that their system is all that they need, so they don't pay their players.

Part of that is probably due to necessity, but I think they made a big mistake. They should have identified Weber & Suter (along with Rinne) as the cornerstones of the franchise and done whatever they could to keep those three long-term. They could have just added on pieces from year to year after that to remain competitive. And the fans would remain happy (and have a reason to buy jerseys).

[radoran]

I'll say this again - Nashville is the NHL's version of moneyball.

They think that their system is all that they need, so they don't pay their players.

Part of that is probably due to necessity, but I think they made a big mistake. They should have identified Weber & Suter (along with Rinne) as the cornerstones of the franchise and done whatever they could to keep those three long-term. They could have just added on pieces from year to year after that to remain competitive. And the fans would remain happy (and have a reason to buy jerseys).

They committed to Rinne. They amde offers to both Suter and Weber.

Suter walked by his own choice. Weber signed the offer sheet of his own choice.

I, for one, don't buy the need for a team laden with media-created "superstars." Pittsburgh with their Cup winning pedigree and high expectations got bumped in the first round by a team some questioned would even make the playoffs at the start of the season. Neithe r Drury nor Gomez nor, quite frankly, Briere (the best of the bunch) lived up to the hype of their "#1 C" summer.

Is Suter worth being a cornerstone? Minnesota is about to find out. The team that drafted and developed him didn't seem to think so, but maybe other people know that much more. I'm a minor Wild fan (friends in/from MN) and a big Mikko Koivu fan so, for their sake, I hope he is. I don't personally think so and, as GM, I wouldn't have given him $7.5M for the rest of his career. But that's me.

I like Weber's game. I hope the Flyers get him. I'll still say he bailed on the team he captained.

[AndyS]

They committed to Rinne. They amde offers to both Suter and Weber.

Suter walked by his own choice. Weber signed the offer sheet of his own choice.

I, for one, don't buy the need for a team laden with media-created "superstars." Pittsburgh with their Cup winning pedigree and high expectations got bumped in the first round by a team some questioned would even make the playoffs at the start of the season. Neithe r Drury nor Gomez nor, quite frankly, Briere (the best of the bunch) lived up to the hype of their "#1 C" summer.

Is Suter worth being a cornerstone? Minnesota is about to find out. The team that drafted and developed him didn't seem to think so, but maybe other people know that much more. I'm a minor Wild fan (friends in/from MN) and a big Mikko Koivu fan so, for their sake, I hope he is. I don't personally think so and, as GM, I wouldn't have given him $7.5M for the rest of his career. But that's me.

I like Weber's game. I hope the Flyers get him. I'll still say he bailed on the team he captained.

They could have signed Weber to a 3-year deal and chose not to do so.

Did they even offer Suter a contract? If they did, I never read of it. And if they were going to do that, they should have done it 2 years ago. I think part of Suter's rep was built on playing opposite Weber. Without Weber, I think Suter will be shown to be over-rated a bit.

[radoran]

They could have signed Weber to a 3-year deal and chose not to do so.

Did they even offer Suter a contract? If they did, I never read of it. And if they were going to do that, they should have done it 2 years ago. I think part of Suter's rep was built on playing opposite Weber. Without Weber, I think Suter will be shown to be over-rated a bit.

Yes, Nashville is run by idiots. You might reference the title of the thread...

There's NOTHING WRONG with signing RFAs to offer sheets. It's the TERMS of the offer sheet, which are NOT "$7.8M per year", that are the salient issue for me - and for the League and small market owners.

[AndyS]

Yes, Nashville is run by idiots. You might reference the title of the thread...

There's NOTHING WRONG with signing RFAs to offer sheets. It's the TERMS of the offer sheet, which are NOT "$7.8M per year", that are the salient issue for me - and for the League and small market owners.

But if you're going to make an offer sheet, you want it to have teeth. You don't do it to help the other team re-sign the player.

[radoran]

But if you're going to make an offer sheet, you want it to have teeth. You don't do it to help the other team re-sign the player.

Then offer Weber the $14M a season for the next four years that you're going to be paying him.

[jammer2]

@radoran I dunno rad. Saying Weber bailed on the Preds is kinda strong IMHO. What was he to do, sign long term for a team that seemed to be running into money problems...knowing full well no respectable free agents will touch them with a ten foot pole? Not sign a long term deal and sign short term, knowing a serious injury could end his career without the big pay a long contract gives? Should he play somewhere he does not want to be simply because they named him the captain? I don't get your line of reasoning here....Weber did what any of us would do...give your family security and work where you would be happy for the next 14 years.

[radoran]

@radoran I dunno rad. Saying Weber bailed on the Preds is kinda strong IMHO. What was he to do, sign long term for a team that seemed to be running into money problems...knowing full well no respectable free agents will touch them with a ten foot pole? Not sign a long term deal and sign short term, knowing a serious injury could end his career without the big pay a long contract gives? Should he play somewhere he does not want to be simply because they named him the captain? I don't get your line of reasoning here....Weber did what any of us would do...give your family security and work where you would be happy for the next 14 years.

Give me just $7.5M and I'll be happy and secure, tyvm. He would have will made $15M last year and this year regardless. :-)

Doesn't have to be reasonable. This is a discussion board... He was captain. He basically said his team sucks and is gong no where and he wants out. After back to back Conference Semi appearances. What's your definition of "bailed"?

Wait 'til you hear about the $27M man all next season! Remember: actual salary is the important thing - not the cap number! He'll be four times the player Kimmo Timonen is!

I'm in "show me the money" mode with Weber. He has no reputation in orange and black. Time to start earning stripes.

Let's also face another thing, he has literally no way of knowing if he would be happy here for 14 years. None. How could he reasonably "know" that? And, let's face it, do you honestly expect him to be playing at 39 for $1M 14 years from now when Jagr and Selanne can get $4.5M today?

Again, I hope we get to have this discussion.

[B21]

@B21

So you think the only reason Nashville is a smaller market is because the size of their city is smaller?

When it comes to the ability to generater revenue - absolutely. "Market" is just that...the population.

[Phillygrump]

You don't think marketing a logo that looks like a sabretooth tiger had anything to do with it?

[Phillygrump]

You don't think marketing a logo that looks like a sabretooth tiger had anything to do with it?

[Spinorama]

there is a difference between a desire to win and a financial committment to winning.

yup. like, I desire a Ferrari, but I'm not about to sell my house to get one

[B21]

The Penguins almost went bankrupt and moved to kansas City. How could one argue they are better fans than Flyers fans? Most of them only came out of the woodwork again to buy Crosby and Malkin jerseys.

Read the entire debate, Grump. Based on what AndyS was using as a measuring stick then yeah - the Pens do have "better" fans than the Flyers. They have the highest local ratings of any NHL team. They are on a lengthy sellout streak (the Flyers are not). I don't have total merchandise sales but I imagine they are up there.

Again - that's using someone else's measuring stick. Not mine. Of course you need to drill down further.

The point was - using the above criteria it's hard to say the Flyers are "that" much better than Nashville which kinda takes away the argument that the Predators can't keep Weber because their fans are not as supportive as the Flyers fans.

[B21]

Not to be flip about it, but I don't think we need to be too scientific about this. I think common sense tells you that hockey is more popular in Philadelphia than Nashville. And more popular in Toronto than LA. If you want some numbers, look into Forbes valuation of NHL teams. The pie charts break down how much various things contribute to the overall value of the franchise:

http://www.forbes.co...ille-predators/

http://www.forbes.co...delphia-flyers/

http://www.forbes.co...burgh-penguins/

http://www.forbes.co...to-maple-leafs/

I would agree 100% but it's not much of a difference from what I can tell. Again - it's not a lack of support from the fan base that is the reason the Predators may not be able to match the Flyers offer.

[B21]

I think we agree that this isn't about Nashville as a hockey market entirely, there's a lot more moving pieces in play. the points you make regarding salary structure are valid and would be good to work into this next CBA so you have fun with that...

when the day comes and the Chaiman has moved to the great sky box in the afterlife we'll see what happens with our beloved team, could be pretty crappy, they could be spun off to be their own entity and become like your team or nashville...who knows.

And I'd like to point out if you've been to Dallas you know that "Dallas" goes from Fort Worth to Plano and includes Arlington, so while Dallas has a population of 1 million there are actually 4 cities connected by the Parkway that makes Dallas, DALLAS. see what i'm sayin' it's not just the folks in the city proper. so saying Dallas has a population of 1 million while factually correct doesn't tell the whole store of DALLAS as a market.

Well put. I agree on Dallas, too. Heck, the numbers I was looking at were metro area figures. I assume that means "Dallas + Fort Worth". Like I said, Dallas is an exception to the large market theory. HUGE market. No one cares. Nashville is a small market that from all indications has pretty good fan support.

[B21]

Tickets sold does not = demand. There is much more demand for tickets in Philly (as there should be). If Nashville raised their prices, they would almost certainly sell fewer tickets.

And our tv ratings are very good locally. Add to that the fact that the Flyers are a big draw nationally (the reason we have already been in 2 Winter Classics already).

Not to get into an argument about economics but tickets sold IS an indication of demand. There is much more demand in Philly...because there is a larger number of people. So which is more impressive...a market of 1.6 million at 97.5 % or a market of $6 million at 100%?

I'm not sure about 2011-12 but the Flyers did not sell out every game in 2010-11. I don't have figures or a link...I just recall reading this in a column on Philly.com. That tells me that the demand is not as great as one would think.

Applies to the pricing as well. Philly can set a higher price because of the bigger number of people to draw from. I.E. - If you are I aren't willing to shell out an average of $66 per ticket, some one else will. In a smaller market, you will eventually run out of "someone elses" faster. In a market 1/6 the size...a lot faster.

Again - I am not saying the fans in Nashville are better than the fans in Philly. But Nashville being unable to keep Weber has NOTHING to do with fan support.

[La Vieielle Garde]

Still though the tv ratings for baseball are better than hockey aren't they? That is a whole different argument for a day when I have a laptop and not a droid. I do see your argument though rad.

I read earlier this summer MLB ratings were at an all time low, and even MLS was gettiing almost as high a rating. I hate both the NBA and MLB. I think the rest of the nation is completely sick of the national networks ramming the Wanks and Red Sux down are throats every frikkin night. I haven't watched MLB now for several years, unless I have insomnia.

I thought the article at the time said the NHL was 3rd in tv ratings behind the NFL and NBA.

[JackStraw]

Again - I am not saying the fans in Nashville are better than the fans in Philly. But Nashville being unable to keep Weber has NOTHING to do with fan support.

Well it certainly has something to do with money, wouldn't you say? And the Preds have been losing money for years. According to Forbes they are one of the most efficient NHL teams in terms of translating money spent to wins. And yet they still lose money. You point out that their arena is close to capacity, but there's more to it than that. And "fair" or not, of course market size (population) has something to do with a franchise's success. And has been pointed out by someone else, the fact that the Flyers are owned by a mega-rich corporation would suggest that the Flyers are a good investment.

At the risk of stating the incredibly obvious, the bottom line is in fact "the bottom line". If Nashville was a healthy franchise they could match without much trouble. If they had the fan support of the Leafs (to use the most extreme example) this wouldn't be a problem. Whether the fans they have are "good fans" or not is not the issue, the issue is, how much revenue does the team bring in, and I think it's fair to say that the amount of revenue a team brings in has a lot to do with the team's market. Great market (Toronto) plenty of revenue... not so great market (Nashville) not so much revenue. It really isn't all that complicated.

[radoran]

At the risk of stating the incredibly obvious, the bottom line is in fact "the bottom line". If Nashville was a healthy franchise they could match without much trouble. If they had the fan support of the Leafs (to use the most extreme example) this wouldn't be a problem. Whether the fans they have are "good fans" or not is not the issue, the issue is, how much revenue does the team bring in, and I think it's fair to say that the amount of revenue a team brings in has a lot to do with the team's market. Great market (Toronto) plenty of revenue... not so great market (Nashville) not so much revenue. It really isn't all that complicated.

Just not true. There are a handful of teams in the league that could even consider "matcfhing without trouble" - and many of them would be "thinking about it."

That's the whole point of the structure of the offer.

Nashville c/would match a $7.8M per year offer. That's not what this offer is.