Spot the differences

[KSpan]

11 hours ago, Jim3150 said:

I was more trying to illustrate that running and NHL franchise is not the same as an NFL franchise and that the comparison is a false equivalency.

 

And yes I would hazard a guess that the stakes are lower with the NHL and therefore somewhat easier.

One could easily argue the stakes are exactly the same since the objectives are exactly the same, and the challenges are perhaps greater in some ways since, while the NHL is generally accepted as the premier hockey league, there is still a respectable international hockey presence; America has an unquestioned monopoly on the football talent pool. 

[t96]

11 hours ago, MillionDollarCam said:

It’s not, statistically the Stanley Cup is the hardest trophy to win in sports (number of games needed to win, toll that hockey takes on the body, etc.).

Not to mention, the NHL has the strictest and lowest salary cap in professional sports.

That post just reads something like… “Fooseball and NASCAR are the only sports I watch.”

I mean that's just not true lol, it's no harder to win than the NFL. Just not easier. NBA/MLB if they had 32 teams and a hard cap would be just as hard too. Depending on what teams you're comparing to, NBA and MLB could actually be significantly harder to win than NHL.

[Khyber53]

12 hours ago, lightsout said:

 

Maybe in Canada. Dundon took over a bottom feeding low point Hurricanes team and turned the team into perennial contenders for years to come in a single year. Selling out at home, max capacity at all times, team turning a profit.

And that's a hockey team in the South. Not exactly ez mode.

And hockey teams have 53 players plus a practice squad to build? Nope, 18 plus two goal tenders. You've got a large college base from the US and Canada to draw players from plus a massive worldwide presence to grab players from. 

Not trying to bash hockey at all, just that if a team is smartly run, they can turn over an entire roster in a single season if they need to.

[MillionDollarCam]

9 minutes ago, t96 said:

I mean that's just not true lol, it's no harder to win than the NFL. Just not easier. NBA/MLB if they had 32 teams and a hard cap would be just as hard too. Depending on what teams you're comparing to, NBA and MLB could actually be significantly harder to win than NHL.

It’s 100% true. It’s not about comparing an individual teams chances to win, it’s about comparing how difficult it is for the winning team to win.

You can’t sit here and make caveats saying that if the NBA and MLB had this and that then it would be equal, bottom line is they don’t.

Do a Google search for the “Hardest trophy to win in sports.” On every single list the Stanley Cup will be in the top three and on the majority of lists it’ll be first.

 

 

 

 

 

[d-dave]

I'm thrilled for the Canes and the Raleigh area.  I'm glad they managed to put together a competent team and situation.

I think the biggest problem in the NFL is the money.  With the pure amount of money, plus the general ego of the rich in general; you end up with some real special people in charge of teams.  Sometimes you have a cheap billionaire, like the Hunts not wanting to give their players a new locker room.  Or you have a Tepper who will burn money because he's so rich.

I think the most important aspect of owning a team is finding people you trust and giving control to them.  Give them the reign to make decisions, learn, and improve.  That's hard when teams go from the basement to the penthouse in a season (and back down) in sports.  Admitting when you are wrong or don't know something takes a lot of humility. 

That's a difficult task for a billionaire who profited off the hard labor of others without doing much real work on their own.  It's even worse when you have a "self-made" billionaire like Tepper.  They think because they came up from nothing, they can be better than everyone else.  It's exhausting!

[Mother Grabber]

37 minutes ago, d-dave said:

 

I think the biggest problem in the NFL is the money.  With the pure amount of money, plus the general ego of the rich in general; you end up with some real special people in charge of teams.  Sometimes you have a cheap billionaire, like the Hunts not wanting to give their players a new locker room.  Or you have a Tepper who will burn money because he's so rich.

I think the most important aspect of owning a team is finding people you trust and giving control to them.  Give them the reign to make decisions, learn, and improve.  That's hard when teams go from the basement to the penthouse in a season (and back down) in sports.  Admitting when you are wrong or don't know something takes a lot of humility. 

That's a difficult task for a billionaire who profited off the hard labor of others without doing much real work on their own.  It's even worse when you have a "self-made" billionaire like Tepper.  They think because they came up from nothing, they can be better than everyone else.  It's exhausting!

are you talking about sports or corporate america? you just described half of the companies in silicon valley.

[FatChad]

3 consecutive 50 win seasons is elite.  Go Canes!

[t96]

2 hours ago, MillionDollarCam said:

It’s 100% true. It’s not about comparing an individual teams chances to win, it’s about comparing how difficult it is for the winning team to win.

You can’t sit here and make caveats saying that if the NBA and MLB had this and that then it would be equal, bottom line is they don’t.

Do a Google search for the “Hardest trophy to win in sports.” On every single list the Stanley Cup will be in the top three and on the majority of lists it’ll be first.

 

 

 

 

 

citing a google search and random lists, lol. It's significantly harder for a smaller market team in the NBA and MLB to win than for any team in the NHL to win, that is pretty much undeniable. Easier for a wealthier team in a bigger market though. NFL and NHL no difference, both equally difficult for all teams.

[MillionDollarCam]

7 hours ago, t96 said:

citing a google search and random lists, lol. It's significantly harder for a smaller market team in the NBA and MLB to win than for any team in the NHL to win, that is pretty much undeniable. Easier for a wealthier team in a bigger market though. NFL and NHL no difference, both equally difficult for all teams.

It’s not random lists, it’s literally a common opinion that nearly every sports pundit holds.

Not to mention, you’re completely missing the point… it’s not team based. It’s based on how hard it is for the champion to win. It’s not comparing the Hornets’ chances of win the the Larry O’Brien to Vegas’ chances of winning the Stanley Cup, which you seem hell bent on trying to do.

[frankw]

Having an owner who isn't a total egomaniac and driven by an insatiable need to prove he knows best is at bare minimum a decent starting point for any franchise in any sport.

Unfortunately that has not been the Carolina Panthers