Rarely is a sports team's relocation an easy process, but the Atlanta Thrashers' imminent move to Winnipeg, announced yesterday, makes lots of sense. From about 1989 to 2002, the four major sports leagues were infatuated with expansion, opening franchises in unexpected locations and increasing their sizes to about 32 teams each. The phenomenon dovetailed nicely with the urban development trend of using fantastically subsidized stadiums or arenas as the anchor of new urban entertainment or mixed-use districts. The leagues reached new metro markets and cities had new redevelopments, though they usually didn't succeed as dramatically as hoped.
The NHL was burned more scaldingly than anyone else by this movement. Either through expansion or relocation, it ended up with teams in Anaheim, Dallas, Nashville, Phoenix, Tampa, suburban Miami, Columbus, Raleigh and Atlanta. Using a simple litmus test of whether it's cold enough to play hockey in these places, only Columbus passes. A few of the teams have caught on with local fans well enough, but the owners in Nashville, Columbus, Phoenix and Atlanta have all suggested a move was close at some point in time. Atlanta is the first to go through with it, selling to a Canadian ownership group that will move the team to Winnipeg, which lost its franchise -- the Jets -- to Phoenix in 1996. Perfectly enough, the Phoenix team appears on the verge of moving to Quebec, which lost its team to Denver in 1995.
Those Southern U.S. cities sure look appealing on paper -- growing metro markets with middle-class families moving into new subdivisions, expanding businesses and disposable income. But in the same way that urban planners and developers overlook the economic and cultural value of engrained neighborhoods for the allure of sweeping transformations, the NHL wrongly left Canada, where the love of hockey is forever instilled, for the potential to remake its brand in the Sun Belt. Even if metro Winnipeg's population is only about one-seventh the size of metro Atlanta's, the former will almost always draw more fans to its teams' games because hockey is a passionate part of local identity; in Atlanta, it's not and might never be. The small but loyal often has value that the large but apathetic simply can't match. This can be easy to overlook while analyzing market demographics in league offices in New York.
Atlanta's mayor, Kasim Reed, also deserves credit for not subsidizing the Thrashers' operation with city money, as Glendale, Ariz., a Phoenix suburb, is doing to keep the Coyotes in the city temporarily. Despite the $25 million bailout, the team is still expected to leave, and the money can't be spent on the true building blocks that make a place worthwhile -- schools, parks, housing, etc. Reed realizes, as many mayors haven't, that sports don't make the city and Atlanta doesn't need a hockey franchise to be a first-class one. Good for him.
While this happens, it seems appropriate that the Stanley Cup matchup, beginning tonight, is the Boston Bruins versus the Vancouver Canucks. The first is one of the NHL's original six franchises, in a place that's always loved hockey, and the second is Canadian, in a place that's always loved hockey (even if it's more similar to Seattle than to Toronto). Sometimes, staying true to your core identity makes sense; the NHL has learned this the hard way. And, boy, was the Jets team on EA's NHL '96 a good one!
No comments:
Post a Comment