Guest Crymson Report post Posted March 8, 2007 prove it then. don't just come on and say "you're wrong" without giving any reasons. I've no need to argue with the poster in question; I believe my views are quite clear, and in any event I was only marveling at his style of posting. You really want to know my response? Ok, I'll summarize it: 1) The Wings do not have an empty cupboard; we've got the largest crop of promising prospects we've had for years, as well as chaps like Hudler and Filpulla. As a point of information, Nashville sold the farm to get Forsberg. Nor, indeed, are the Wings especially old; of our valuable players, only Hasek, Schneider, Lidstrom, Chelios and Draper are really getting up there. Schneider will likely be gone soon--and he is replaceable--and Hasek, though an incredible goaltender whom I love--will likely retire soon, and we've got guys coming up. Nashville does have a very young team, yes--but that means utter jack in the salary-cap era, as players will leave when they get better offers elsewhere, and Nashville does not have a good record of holding on to good players. Detroit's history of retaining vital personnel, on the other hand, is the best in the league... 2) The Preds are deep, yes. So are the Wings, when we've got our boys healthy. Point? Goaltenders? Hasek is a titan this season, and he comes at a fraction of Vokoun's cost. Osgood is a solid backup. Floppa? Don't forget that you have up a third of your defense in order to pick him up. That didn't help your depth at the blue line. Anyway, as somebody mentioned, Floppa hasn't played against the Wings in the playoffs since 2002, and hasn't won since 2000. As such, I don't see the point in that. The idea that he is somehow monstrous, historically, against Detroit in particular is silly in any event; I fail to see how this could sustain itself across seven years with three different coaches and varying personnel. I imagine Floppa would do well against any team; then again, he won't help the Preds at all if he can't take the ice... 3) I'll end this on a nice note--Dawn of Pred should learn that 'cupboard' is not spelled with three Bs. I couldn't disagree more. I count my lucky stars every year that, even when the Wings don't win it all, I've had the wonderful opportunity to see them with the Stanley Cup three times. It's so hard to win it in this era with so many good teams and so much roster turnover, that to win it as much as they did in that small time frame was a huge accomplishment to me. You can talk all you want about payrolls and whatnot, but in the end you need to be just as good as you are lucky, and so the Red Wings orginization has been extremely blessed with their success in recent years. And you know, they worked too hard to get what they did, to just say "they shoulda won more." Talk about easier said than done. Word!! Man. Have some pivo bro. It's on me. Are you sure that's not urine? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brutus 0 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 a side note. The Preds are ranked 23rd in the league in Attendance, why is it that we're so often mentioned as the team that needs to move? Also, if we sold out every single game, we would still only be ranked 16th. Would people still complain? Probably, because we'd be in the bottom half. which is a prime example of why there should not be team in Nashville. In the first place, building an arena with the maximum potential of lower half of the league attendance is kinda sad and sees to me to be bad business. If the marketing analysis determined that this number was the maximum number of seats that could be sold then I believe it was a poor decision to locate a team there. As far as being 23rd...what are the records of the 7 teams are below Nashville in attendance....I don't know nor do I really care but my instinct tells me they are not among the elite successful teams in the NHL...that is why they are often mentioned as being moved...a recently moderately successful franchise that has no hope of ever garnering the revenue in Nashville that could be had elsewhere. What if we were among the league leaders in attendance? Wouldn't we still get complaints from bitter fans who hate seeing a southern franchise ranked above theirs? Won't/Can't happen because as you stated above it is impossible...well OK not IMPOSSIBLE but pretty darn near so and if that happens the whole NHL will probably fold....as far as being raked above theirs...I can't speak to that because it is such a recent phenomena and I will be surprised to see it continue so a rather moot point as far as I am concerned. And don't even get me started about being proud to be ABLE to receive revenue sharing...that is symptomatic of a failure to thrive and be self sufficient Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Crymson Report post Posted March 8, 2007 Yeah, Sure.....I got it...Don't stir up anything that might be fun or remotely controversial. You sound like Gary Bettman. Ban this guy. I wouldn't shed a tear. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Legionnaire11 0 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 As a point of information, Nashville sold the farm to get Forsberg. No, we just had a much larger farm than anyone else who was a player to get him. So what we gave up seemed like a lot to other teams. Nashville does have a very young team, yes--but that means utter jack in the salary-cap era, as players will leave when they get better offers elsewhere, and Nashville does not have a good record of holding on to good players. Detroit's history of retaining vital personnel, on the other hand, is the best in the league... It's not really a fair argument at the moment. The Preds have never really had any good players to hold on to. Can you name any star player who bolted the Preds for more money elsewhere? Brendan Witt is the only one I can think of, and he isn't exactly a marquee name. We've managed to re-sign Vokoun more than once, re-signed Steve Sullivan, who after he was traded to us even said that he didn't think he'd want to sign with Nashville again, but once he got here he was won over. This coming summer will be the big test for us. Kariya, Forsberg, Hartnell and Timonen are all going to be unrestricted. Pretty sure we'll lose one of them, but i'm pretty confident that we'll sign 3. Floppa? Don't forget that you have up a third of your defense in order to pick him up. That didn't help your depth at the blue line. We gave up one defensive prospect who had a bad back. And still have Franson and Klein knocking on the door. So, even when someone makes a horrible post like Dawn of Pred did. There is some truth in it. I think they were reaching on most of the Wings bashing, but on his/her points regarding the Preds was pretty truthful. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheLegend19 1 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 I wouldn't take too much stock in what some of those Preds fans were saying--afterall, they did say Nick Lidstrom belonged in the minors. The entire thread was a bunch of lies slamming the wings. I couldn't believe they said that. They're obviously extremely jealous of the Wings. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Legionnaire11 0 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 And don't even get me started about being proud to be ABLE to receive revenue sharing...that is symptomatic of a failure to thrive and be self sufficient Trust me, I'm not, and I don't know any other preds fans who are proud of getting revenue sharing money. I'm ashamed and embarassed by it. But, hopefully it keeps the franchise stable long enough for our fan base to build up more to the point where we don't qualify for the money anymore. I couldn't believe they said that. They're obviously extremely jealous of the Wings. only one person said that about Lidstrom. They are obviously an idiot and shouldn't be viewed as representative of the entire Predators fanbase. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brutus 0 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 Trust me, I'm not, and I don't know any other preds fans who are proud of getting revenue sharing money. I'm ashamed and embarassed by it. But, hopefully it keeps the franchise stable long enough for our fan base to build up more to the point where we don't qualify for the money anymore. Very understandable. Question though...even if the preds sold out every game would they still qualify for revenue sharing? I dont know if it is based on total revenue or % of possible ticket sales or what...I honestly don't know about how the whole revenus sharing thing works. I suppose that if they did sell out every game then they would probably be bumped above 50% of actual team ticket sales...as it would require every other team with a larger arena to also sell out to keep them in the bottom half of the league...if that makes sense... fwiw: it is nice to have a level headed opposing fan here...please don't misinterpret my disdain for some of the decisions made by the NHL head office as dislike in general for the fans of opposing teams. I am sure sometime it must feel like you are banging your head ona wall. brutus Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Legionnaire11 0 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 i don't know much about revenue sharing either. Just that we have to average 14,200 next season to qualify for 100% revenue sharing. I don't think we'd get any if we sold out every game, that really wouldn't make any sense... but then again, it's the NHL, so who knows. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladdy16 2,154 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 I'm starting to warm to the idea of revenue sharing. Whatever level of success Nashville achieves, the fans will always know it's due in part to Wings fans. We're paying for it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
betterREDthandead 58 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 I couldn't believe they said that. They're obviously extremely jealous of the Wings. Right, and stormtiger made an extremely unfunny and classless joke regarding the Nashville fanbase. Which means that all of us Wings fans are not funny and think Preds fans are toothless rednecks, right? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Legionnaire11 0 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 I'm starting to warm to the idea of revenue sharing. Whatever level of success Nashville achieves, the fans will always know it's due in part to Wings fans. We're paying for it. SSSSHHHHHHHH... don't spoil my fun Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 SSSSHHHHHHHH... don't spoil my fun Maybe any team that's taking revenue sharing should have to wear a small logo on the shoulder of their sweaters from the profitable teams, kinda like a sponsor. How'd you like to see the Preds jersey with a small winged wheel patch on the shoulder? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hillbillywingsfan 794 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 Maybe any team that's taking revenue sharing should have to wear a small logo on the shoulder of their sweaters from the profitable teams, kinda like a sponsor. How'd you like to see the Preds jersey with a small winged wheel patch on the shoulder? hahahaha that would be awesome Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Legionnaire11 0 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 Maybe any team that's taking revenue sharing should have to wear a small logo on the shoulder of their sweaters from the profitable teams, kinda like a sponsor. How'd you like to see the Preds jersey with a small winged wheel patch on the shoulder? I gagged a little when I read that one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
betterREDthandead 58 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 Maybe any team that's taking revenue sharing should have to wear a small logo on the shoulder of their sweaters from the profitable teams, kinda like a sponsor. How'd you like to see the Preds jersey with a small winged wheel patch on the shoulder? If that doesn't kindle up a good rivalry with all kinds of hatred for the Wings by Preds fans, nothing will Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drwscc 212 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 I like that idea. Someone get Bettman on this immediately. I have a Preds fan buddy that would die a little if this happened. Would be hilarious. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladdy16 2,154 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 I gagged a little when I read that one. Then the evil harold's work here is done. I think it's a spectacular idea, harold. Keep 'em coming. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
reyalp 4 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 Lol we always have a ton of fans everywhere, not just cuz car plants... lol wtf are they talking about? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sentonial Debut 0 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 everyone needs to settle down and just realize that Nashville isn't a hockey city no matter what a couple people say Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hillbillywingsfan 794 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 everyone needs to settle down and just realize that Nashville isn't a hockey city no matter what a couple people say now now...don't throw all the nashville fans in there...that wouldn't be right Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kp-Wings 3 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 everyone needs to settle down and just realize that Nashville isn't a hockey city no matter what a couple people say And yet another example of biased opinions towards people of the south. Care to bring Atlanta into the topic too? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sentonial Debut 0 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 And yet another example of biased opinions towards people of the south. Care to bring Atlanta into the topic too? it has nothing to do with the South Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kp-Wings 3 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 (edited) it has nothing to do with the South Then, pre tell, what does it have to do with? Are you saying that people from Nashville are dumb idiots that know nothing about the sport of hockey? Please, let's clarify a bit here. Edited March 8, 2007 by Kp-Wings Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jwo 7 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 (edited) Is Boise, Idaho a hockey city? Nope. Just like Nashville. But I heard Nashville has built some rinks though over the past few years. Edited March 8, 2007 by Jwo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sentonial Debut 0 Report post Posted March 8, 2007 a hockey city must first consist of a large amount of hockey fans...this is where the core of your fanbase comes from. now stay with me there's more. a hockey city consists of a fanbase that follows it's team year round, not just in the playoffs. fans that understand the game are also important not a bunch of morons (and i draw this conclusion by reading some of there comments like we booed when fischer nearly died or how 3 cups in the past 10 yeard hasn't been successul, it's been dissappointing). lastly they haven't been around long enough to truly be considered a die hard hockeytown Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
