|
|
Post by rockon on Dec 13, 2007 20:21:12 GMT -4
I really don't understand Savard when it comes to the lease he signed with the city as it was only signed last year and he already doesn't think it's a good deal for the Rocket. I can understand wanting a deal similar to what Drummondville, Victoriaville, etc have, but why didn't he negotiate that when the lease was signed in 2006? He knew then (at least you would think he did) that attendance was a problem, so why not sign a lease that would help alleviate some of the financial problems from low attendance. I can understand if it was the 3rd or 4th year into a lease where attendance all of a sudden became a problem, but in the 2nd year of the lease knowing attendance was steadily declining. Come on....bad deal by Savard and he has no one to blame for that but himself as he knew what the numbers were on his lease. The other thing about the lease, why is he going to the papers and the fans? We heard this before the season started and here we are almost 4 months later and he still hasn't met with the city about it. Don't complain to me about it, sit down with the city and at least talk about it, it's not going to get done by talking to Charles Reid from the Guardian. As far mentioning about attendance, what has the Rocket done in regards to renewing/generating interest since the last time he brought up the attendance...nothing. Talking about decisions potentially being made due to declining attendance to you, me or any other fan who attends the games regularly is not going to solve the problem because we are already buying the tickets, what more does he want us to do? And if he is using the media with talk like that to spurr on the fan who lost interest or the fan who never had the interest, to go out and start supporting the team to prevent them from leaving, is simply not going to work. At least get off your arses and go sell some tickets, for once work to get the interest back up because the on ice product alone is not going to do it. So according today's Compass report, the Rocket lease with the CCC is 3 times that of other comparable teams in Q. and the mayor is willing to sit down with Serge and work something out. BUT, the mayor would like to some financial statements first. Now this should be interesting  |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 14, 2007 3:40:49 GMT -4
The problem is the league is watered down. Too many teams has the talent level spread out too thin. Teams like PEI this year and ours for the next couple of years after all the trades have been ironed out will need to develop from within and the Fans will need to support it, if they dont, they wont have a team.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockon on Dec 14, 2007 8:41:14 GMT -4
The problem is the league is watered down. Too many teams has the talent level spread out too thin. Teams like PEI this year and ours for the next couple of years after all the trades have been ironed out will need to develop from within and the Fans will need to support it, if they dont, they wont have a team. So you're saying that the attendance problem is a result of too many teams in the league? I really can't agree with that. As we have had our share of talent, but we just couldn't build a good enough team to keep the fans interested. I truly believe that we have the fan base here, but they're just not interested in watching inconsistent and sometimes dreadful hockey. Improve the product and market it properly and the fans will come! |
|
|
|
Post by countsheep on Dec 14, 2007 9:20:51 GMT -4
The problem is the league is watered down. Too many teams has the talent level spread out too thin. Teams like PEI this year and ours for the next couple of years after all the trades have been ironed out will need to develop from within and the Fans will need to support it, if they dont, they wont have a team. So you're saying that the attendance problem is a result of too many teams in the league? I really can't agree with that. As we have had our share of talent, but we just couldn't build a good enough team to keep the fans interested. I truly believe that we have the fan base here, but they're just not interested in watching inconsistent and sometimes dreadful hockey. Improve the product and market it properly and the fans will come! Actually, I think Captain Moose is right. The more teams you have, the fewer talented, exciting players you have per team, and the more pluggers stick around. No doubt dilution of the talent pool lowers the quality of play, which in turn decreases interest. Less talent per team + overlong and virtually meaningless regular season = lesser fan interest. Not complicated. |
|
|
|
Post by rockon on Dec 14, 2007 10:00:53 GMT -4
So you're saying that the attendance problem is a result of too many teams in the league? I really can't agree with that. As we have had our share of talent, but we just couldn't build a good enough team to keep the fans interested. I truly believe that we have the fan base here, but they're just not interested in watching inconsistent and sometimes dreadful hockey. Improve the product and market it properly and the fans will come! Actually, I think Brec is right. The more teams you have, the fewer talented, exciting players you have per team, and the more pluggers stick around. No doubt dilution of the talent pool lowers the quality of play, which in turn decreases interest. Less talent per team + overlong and virtually meaningless regular season = lesser fan interest. Not complicated. So you and Brec think we should "throw the towel in" and give up because there's no place for small market teams in such a big league. I do admit that the talent pool is spread pretty thin, but I also believe that we can still ice a good enough team and market the product to attract a good fan base. |
|
|
|
Post by countsheep on Dec 14, 2007 10:29:01 GMT -4
Actually, I think Captain Moose is right. The more teams you have, the fewer talented, exciting players you have per team, and the more pluggers stick around. No doubt dilution of the talent pool lowers the quality of play, which in turn decreases interest. Less talent per team + overlong and virtually meaningless regular season = lesser fan interest. Not complicated. So you and Brec think we should "throw the towel in" and give up because there's no place for small market teams in such a big league. I do admit that the talent pool is spread pretty thin, but I also believe that we can still ice a good enough team and market the product to attract a good fan base. Neither of us said that, you did, so don't tell us what we "think". We're not disagreeing - you admit that "the talent pool is spread pretty thin". How in the world would that fact NOT have an effect on attendance? If we could stop calling hockey "The Product", that would be a start - enough corporate-speak, please. Too many suits, not enough hockey people, and we all end up talking the way the suits do. |
|
|
|
Post by bois on Dec 14, 2007 10:35:28 GMT -4
why are you guys mentioning Brec when you're quoting CaptainMoose?
|
|
|
|
Post by countsheep on Dec 14, 2007 10:39:09 GMT -4
why are you guys mentioning Brec when you're quoting CaptainMoose? My bad, it just sounded like Brec. I fixed it.....but unfortunately, it means you'll now have to fix yours. 14 more days till the next Rocket home game, and counting..... |
|
|
|
Post by mboyan on Dec 14, 2007 12:40:58 GMT -4
While I agree that the talent pool for the Q has been weakened, I also think that, with a proper marketing strategy, some....but not all.....casual fans could be drawn back to the arenas across the region, and based on their game day experience (which would include a) the game itself, and b) the off-ice activities), could be enticed to purchase more tickets for future games. This, in turn, could lead to season-ticket sales the following year.
Die-hard fans (like most who post on these boards) may not be concerned with what goes on off the ice between whistles, and between periods, and only want to see a hockey game, with a full effort from all players involved. Some are very knowledgeable and study the game; some....less knowledgeable, but still very much into what's happening on the ice.
Some "casual fans" could fit into the above category, such as former season ticket holders who may have decided to not renew this year, for one reason or another. You may never get these fans back....depending on what their reason was.
For most casual fans, though, it's my opinion that, in order to get them to come back, they have to leave, that one game that they did attend, thinking "Why didn't I do this before?" or "WOW!! I had a great time (or what a great game)....I think I'll get a ticket to the next game."
Close, competitive games, with full effort by all players, is certainly a big key to bringing that fan back to the next game. But, even if the game is good, if there is little or no atmosphere in the arena, casual fans may tend to become dis-interested. Between period promotions and off-ice activities between whistles can keep his\her mind from wandering away from the game.
Herein, IMO, lies the problem with the Rocket. They don't seem to understand, that to draw in these casual fans, they have to market the Rocket games as "The place to be". More importantly, they then have to make it the place to be. Perhaps they just don't know how to (haven't we been saying that for quite a while now? ;D ).
|
|
|
|
Post by bois on Dec 14, 2007 12:53:26 GMT -4
I don't think the talent pool is as watered down as people make it out to be
I think the coaching has caught up to the talent pool and the defensive systems most coaches employ stifles the natural creativity of many of the players.. turning them from potential scoring stars with some personality to robotic dump and chase, crash and bang, chip it out and if you don't ride the pine bucko
I certainly don't think the talent pool has much effect on regular attendance...
|
|
|
|
Post by countsheep on Dec 14, 2007 13:38:33 GMT -4
I don't think the talent pool is as watered down as people make it out to be I think the coaching has caught up to the talent pool and the defensive systems most coaches employ stifles the natural creativity of many of the players.. turning them from potential scoring stars with some personality to robotic dump and chase, crash and bang, chip it out and if you don't ride the pine bucko I certainly don't think the talent pool has much effect on regular attendance... Well, the coaching might not have caught up with the talent pool if that talent pool was not spread out so thinly, would it? It's very hard to argue that having more teams doesn't dilute the talent pool significantly. Matter of fact, it's impossible. |
|
|
|
Post by bois on Dec 14, 2007 14:16:51 GMT -4
I don't think the talent pool is as watered down as people make it out to be I think the coaching has caught up to the talent pool and the defensive systems most coaches employ stifles the natural creativity of many of the players.. turning them from potential scoring stars with some personality to robotic dump and chase, crash and bang, chip it out and if you don't ride the pine bucko I certainly don't think the talent pool has much effect on regular attendance... Well, the coaching might not have caught up with the talent pool if that talent pool was not spread out so thinly, would it? It's very hard to argue that having more teams doesn't dilute the talent pool significantly. Matter of fact, it's impossible. Nothing is impossible my friend More teams creates more opportunities for kids who otherwise would never have gotten a shot to play at this level... also with the expansion of the league into the maritimes and eastern US.. it gave the Q rights to far more players than ever before |
|
|
|
Post by countsheep on Dec 14, 2007 14:50:38 GMT -4
Well, the coaching might not have caught up with the talent pool if that talent pool was not spread out so thinly, would it? It's very hard to argue that having more teams doesn't dilute the talent pool significantly. Matter of fact, it's impossible. Nothing is impossible my friend More teams creates more opportunities for kids who otherwise would never have gotten a shot to play at this level... also with the expansion of the league into the maritimes and eastern US.. it gave the Q rights to far more players than ever before I have no problem with the talent level in the Q as it presently is. For one thing, with no expansion to the Maritimes and specifically, no team on PEI, there's no way players like Desroches, Paynter, Praught, Snowie, Deighan and Kris Mac would ever have got a sniff of Major Junior hockey. |
|
|
|
Post by wingman on Dec 14, 2007 15:29:09 GMT -4
Even if the talent level has become diluted due to the number of teams in the league, it's still not a factor when it comes to the fact that the Rocket have not been able to build a contending team. If other teams are able to build contenders and championship teams, then the Rocket should be able to also because all the teams are building from the same pool of players.
This organization has been poorly run on and off the ice since they arrived here and without them recognizing the problem and dealing with it is the reason why they are in this mess right now. When the Rocket first left Montreal to come here we heard from the Savard's how they couldn't make a go of it in Montreal because the building was too big and costly.....no media exposure...people there only cared about the Habs, etc. Every word/excuse we heard the finger was pointed elsewhere, never heard Savard say anything like "we should have done this differently" or " if we worked harder" etc. If the Rocket were to leave the Island, you can bet where their finger will be pointed and it won't be at themselves. Using the lease is another way of trying to deflect the problem off of themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockon on Dec 14, 2007 17:36:23 GMT -4
So you and Brec think we should "throw the towel in" and give up because there's no place for small market teams in such a big league. I do admit that the talent pool is spread pretty thin, but I also believe that we can still ice a good enough team and market the product to attract a good fan base. Neither of us said that, you did, so don't tell us what we "think". We're not disagreeing - you admit that "the talent pool is spread pretty thin". How in the world would that fact NOT have an effect on attendance? If we could stop calling hockey "The Product", that would be a start - enough corporate-speak, please. Too many suits, not enough hockey people, and we all end up talking the way the suits do. I was merely summarizing your comments and presenting what appeared to be the obvious conclusion. I still think we have enough talent to build a good team and no matter what you call it, you still have to sell it to the people.  |
|
