In the wake of recent speculation suggesting the Phoenix Coyotes could be moving back to Winnipeg (back in February it was the Atlanta Thrashers, maybe in April it’ll be the Florida Panthers rumored moving there!) more than a few pundits, fans and bloggers have claimed the Coyotes were doomed to fail in Phoenix because it was a bad market for hockey.
But is that really true?
The Coyotes moved to Phoenix in time for the ’96-’97 season, and played in the 16, 210 seat America West Arena, notable for its poor sight lines for hockey fans. Despite that problem the Coyotes actually did reasonably well at the gate in their first two seasons, averaging well over 15,000 fans in their first three seasons and just under that mark over their next two seasons.
During that period the Coyotes made the playoffs in their first four seasons and five of their first six seasons in Phoenix.
After 2001-02 their numbers for the next two seasons would average over 13,000, until their move into their current arena in 2003-04, which saw their attendance spike again to over 15,000 for that season plus the first season following the lockout.
Since then however the Coyotes attendance numbers have steadily fallen off, putting them this season at the bottom of the league. The possibility of the club being sold and moved elsewhere undoubtedly factored into those numbers.
But with the Coyotes perched this season amongst the top four teams in the Western Conference their attendance over the course of the second half has also been climbing, suggesting if the Coyotes continue to play well next season (and they stay in Phoenix) they could see a substantial increase in attendance.
The Coyotes aren’t the only team whose attendance fluctuations were based upon on-ice performance. The Tampa Bay Lightning, Carolina Hurricanes, Atlanta Thrashers and Florida Panthers have followed that trend yet they’re often cited as examples of poor hockey markets, where there simply isn’t enough interest in professional hockey for their teams to survive there.
Tampa Bay in particular saw significant improvement at the gate following their Stanley Cup championship in 2004. In the first three seasons following the lockout the Lightning ranked amongst the top ten in attendance, dropping off the following two seasons as their performance deteriorated.
With new, stable ownership and the possibility of an improved roster in the coming years the Lightning could return to the top ten in attendance.
The only club which seems to defy the trend of improved performance equaling better attendance is the Nashville Predators, who’ve consistently iced a competitive playoff contender but cannot seem to grow their attendance by a substantial amount.
Perhaps that’s due in part to their inability to advance in the playoffs, or lingering uncertainty over the club’s future in Nashville given the highly publicized attempt three years ago by Canadian billionaire Jim Balsillie to purchase the Predators and move them to Hamilton, Ontario.
Poor performance resulting in declining attendance isn’t a trend limited to these so-called “non-hockey” markets.
The Edmonton Oilers saw their attendance plummet in the mid-1990s, a combination of the breakup of their Cup dynasty and fan disgust toward then-owner Peter Pocklington. The Vancouver Canucks and Calgary Flames saw their attendance suffer in the late 1990s due in no small part to icing mediocre rosters.
This season the Ottawa Senators are currently 12th in attendance, down significantly from their 3rd overall placement in 2008, the season following their march to the Stanley Cup final.
The Boston Bruins and Chicago Blackhawks are venerated Original Six franchises yet from the late 1990s to the latter years of the past decade their attendance was often in the bottom third of the league, a result of poor on-ice product and fan anger toward the respective ownership of those clubs for their seeming indifference toward improving their rosters.
The Colorado Avalanche and Dallas Stars rode high in the NHL’s attendance list from the late 1990s to the early ‘00’s, but since the lockout their attendance has declined right along with the deterioration of their game.
People forget the mighty Detroit Red Wings used to have trouble drawing fans during most of the 1980s, when the club was for years amongst the worst teams in the league.
The NY Islanders are often at or near the bottom of the league in the standings and attendance and have been for many years but during their glory days in the late 1970s and early 1980s the Islanders had no problem selling out their building.
All of this appears to refute the notion of “bad hockey markets”, where teams are doomed to fail no matter how well they perform.
It remains to be seen if the Coyotes will have the opportunity to build up its fan-base in Phoenix, as it is still possible they could be sold and moved in the off-season if the NHL is unable to find a buyer willing to keep the franchise where it is.
I can’t help but wonder however if the Coyotes would be in this mess had they iced a competitive playoff contender for most of the past decade.
JetsJoe: I have studied the records. Again, while the actual attendance is lower than their reported attendance, that's still doing reasonably well in their first seasons compared to how they did later on. Remember, they were also playing in a crappy arena in those first season, which had the worst sightlines of any arena in the league at that time. Remember, I said, "reasonably well'. Compared to their attendance in their latter years, drawing over 12,000 per game in actual attendance is reasonably well.
SpectorNext, as I've previously said, the declining numbers in their recent years was a reflection of the lousy product on the ice. Again, if the team had been a perennial playoff contender during those years and still drew poorly, you wouldn't get an argument out of me about Phoenix being a "bad market". We simply don't know that. It has nothing to do with having a 'soft spot' for Phoenix as I have no dog in this fight. It's merely pointing out an obvious fact, the Coyotes attendance numbers correlate with the quality of their on-ice product, just like most NHL teams.
Yes, the Jets loses in their final season were nowhere near those currently of the Coyotes, but that doesn't detract from the fact they were losing money, and losing so much their ownership couldn't afford to keep the team there, and couldn't get a new arena deal in place. The reason they needed a new arena was just to get a better lease, it was to increase revenue to keep up with the growing cost of maintaining an NHL franchise. I've listed the reasons in an earlier post:
community.foxsports.com/Spector/blog/200...
Times might've changed but not the viability of the Winnipeg market. Thomson might believe he can make a go of it but that doesn't mean he can. As I noted in my earlier blog post on this subject, Winnipeg would remain the smallest, most isolated market in the league, with a fan base that outside the Maritimes draws the lowest weekly average wage and are amongst the highest taxed in Canada.
That'll mean this team would have to charge the lowest fan cost index in the league, which in turn would ensure it would be a club like the Nashville Predators, perennially unable to keep up with the rising cap, forced to maintain a roster near the cap floor.
It has nothing to do with Winnipegers or Manitobans love of hockey. If that were all it took to land an NHL franchise, we'd see another six in Canada. It has everything to do with market size and potential, which is why the NHL prefers to keep the Coyotes in Phoenix or failing that would look at ownership willing to move it to Kansas City or Southern Ontario (with the Leafs blessing). Winnipeg is as many observed more like "Plan C", if anything.
That's the reality, whether you want to admit it or not. Hey, if the league ultimately decides to move the Coyotes back to Winnipeg or place another franchise there, I'll wish that franchise and the city of Winnipeg the best of luck, but I fear the issues which drove the Jets out of town would rear its ugly head once again.
8:30 AM