Discussion in 'NLL News and Rumors' started by Vin, Feb 26, 2017.

  1. Andrew GEA

    Andrew GEA Guest

    They had three iterations of the stealth franchise. I'd Vancouver has to relocate I think the name will be associated with failure.
  2. Vin

    Vin Well-Known Member

    I don't think that's a fair assessment of the team but of the owners. At the same time, I would never call Denise a failure and she is a woman who should be admired for what she has done to keep this team going since San Jose.
  3. Andrew GEA

    Andrew GEA Guest

    What I meant is that in the next two years if there was a Dallas stealth or Edmonton stealth people are going to notice that the whole franchise is basically a traveling team.

    I know most lacrosse fans will support any team going to their city but it is disappointing knowing you're the fourth version of the franchise.
  4. swami24

    swami24 Well-Known Member

    Last edited: Apr 6, 2017
  5. Vin

    Vin Well-Known Member

  6. swami24

    swami24 Well-Known Member

    The conversation I had with a Flyers rep confirmed everything people have said about how bad the relationship was between the Wings owners and the building. That couldn't be the case for any Wings vers. 2.0.
  7. Pounder

    Pounder Member


    When a city of the 70s and 80s owned and managed an arena, a niche sport had half a chance by paying rent and being responsible.

    Now the major tenant pretty much runs the joint and sucking up to that brings out all the petty jealousies... AND the accountants who can tell you what fills the building at X revenue per seat and who buys the most merchandise, et cetera, ad infinitum. It's massively harder to be a renting franchise now.

    This league is better off building fabric-roofed huts like what the Santa Cruz Warriors have (which only seats 2,500 for basketball, in a location that has probably the perfect climate for such construction). Then you control your arena. Not holding my breath, of course.
  8. swami24

    swami24 Well-Known Member

    I get that, but putting a team in as a second event on a sat or sun, even if the close the upper bowl at first, earns money for a team owner that owns the building. There is no doubt the league has to think small, but small can work in a big building that draws 7000 or whatever the lower bowl seats. It may mean sat or sun games at 1pm, but there were 3 or 4 weekend flyers games at 1pm this year which would be easy pairings for lacrosse later.
  9. Andrew GEA

    Andrew GEA Guest

    Attendance April 15, 2017,

    (1) Sask 14,532

    (3) Colorado 16,003

    (8) Georgia 3,528

    (9) Vancouver 3,725

    Top teams vs worst teams, this I s a huge difference... Sask and Colorado players won't be able to settle for 30k a year for long.
  10. Wingsfan23

    Wingsfan23 Member

    players know they aren't going to get rich playing lacrosse so I don't see how they really have a say. The plpa signs the cba
    So they have a say but again unless you want to pay 80.00 to get in the price structure works
  11. Andrew GEA

    Andrew GEA Guest

    I not saying that they should make NHL salaries (itd be nice though), but if you're consistently drawing over 10k in attendance it'd be nice to be a full time althlete. These guys are the BEST lacrosse players in the world they should make CFL salaries (80k on average) at least.

    Not rich but enough to be full time NLL, have the players live in market and have great training in off season like other professional leagues.
  12. Vin

    Vin Well-Known Member

    Current Average Attendances:

    Outside of SAS, the next top 3 are all owned by NHL owners and all play in big arenas.
    ROC and GEO play in mid-size arenas
    NBW and VAN play in small arenas
  13. Andrew GEA

    Andrew GEA Guest

    I think it's safe to say that we could bring up Toronto and Rochester to the 10k (because they have in the a past) mark.

    eventually nebw will have to go to a bigger stadium in Hartford if they continue their growth.

    Atlanta is in a good enough stadium, and the last couple games looks like they have had small growth (100 more people per game). I remember closer to the half way mark of the season their average was 3.5k and now it's 3.8k. hopefully a championship game will help, but I don't think the city will embrace boxlax.

    The only hope for Vancouver besides relocation is moving out of Langley and downtown actual Vancouver. Maybe the the current owner can sell all of half of the assets with the Canucks .

    Point is half the league is where we want them to be and the other half is falling behind
  14. Wingsfan23

    Wingsfan23 Member

    New England won't go elsewhere due to the fact they pay nothing in terms of a lease , are able to comp tickets to get people in the complex to spend money at the casino and restaurants.
    Their growth this year is based upon a long going bogo offer on season tickets which extended until almost Christmas.
    Extended into next season with early renewal , now it's buy one get one half off
    Their financial structure is completely different then the rest of the league.
  15. swami24

    swami24 Well-Known Member

    This is correct and makes theme an anomaly in tracking attendance. They really need to be removed from attendance vs financial stability conversations.
  16. BanditsRock11

    BanditsRock11 Well-Known Member

    There couldn't have been more than 1,500 people in Georgia last night against Buffalo. That might be even generous. They panned around right before the game and I've never seen a more empty arena at that point before the game.
  17. swami24

    swami24 Well-Known Member

    Pittsburgh... I counted 300 when there
  18. Vin

    Vin Well-Known Member

    1. I don't think the Black Wolves relocate to a bigger stadium at all. There is no economically motivating factor. The Mohegans who bought into the team did so knowing they would make a profit with a certain level of attendance in their arena. As long as they make a profit, why move? Suppose they did though by moving to the XL Center in Hartford which has a capacity of 14750 for hockey.
      1. The owners have to pay someone to host the game.
      2. They lose concessions which they also made money on.
      3. They lose gambling revenue from fans who stay (or go pre-game) to gamble.
      4. They risk alienating the fan base in the area who don't want to travel to Hartford (and deal with the traffic and parking hassles and costs).

    2. The Canucks won't bother with any half-ownership. No one with that much economic firepower does. Oilers had a chance to buy the Rush but they'd only do it if Bruce Urban was out of the picture. He refused so he moved. Good move for him and he did it at the right time with a championship team (which is also why the Oilers were interested, I am sure).

      Basically, if you can own something outright, why be in a partnership?
      Too many headaches.
      Too many constraints.
      Too much drama.

    3. "Falling behind" is a relative term. Yes, many teams have seen downward trends in attendance: TOR, BUF, COL, ROC, but that's not unexpected and not alarming although I'd like to see TOR come back up. The only real sore spot is Georgia - especially considering how good this team is. Hopefully, they will promote considerably now that Georgia will at least host a playoff game and likely a Championship game or 2.
  19. Andrew GEA

    Andrew GEA Guest

    The issues is with new England is when they start to peak in Mohegan the smartest business decision is to either move somewhere bigger or make the stadium bigger.

    If they just keep everything they will fluctuate from 7-5k and never grow to their potential. As a business man if you have the ability to grow and gain more profit you do it.

    I just don't want to see the blackwolves go stagnant and decline because of they're location / arena. They won't have to make this choice for another 2-3 years if they continue their growth
  20. swami24

    swami24 Well-Known Member

    Did you read Vin's post on the Woofs? Normal league economics are not relavent. If they get 3000 people in on comp tickets alone, those people buy food and beverage, which could be a pricey dinner in the casino. Let's say 1500 of those people then go to the casino (remember comped tix go to gamblers) and they lose an average of $50. That means you just profited the same as if you sold 3000 $25 seat. Additional spending and is.more profit.
    Wingsfan23 likes this.

Share This Page