Would A Second Hockey Team in Chicago Survive?

Jntg4

Fire Forum Moderator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
26,017
Liked Posts:
3,297
Location:
Minnesota
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  2. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Chicago State Cougars
  2. DePaul Blue Demons
  3. Illinois-Chicago Flames
  4. Loyola Ramblers
  5. Northern Illinois Huskies
  6. Northwestern Wildcats
:andruw: I like how he actually thinks he knows hockey.

Kinda like how you think that a side remark about the NFL or MLB in the very early 1900s is about knowing hockey.
 

DewsSox79

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 24, 2010
Posts:
29,059
Liked Posts:
7,249
Kinda like how you think that a side remark about the NFL or MLB in the very early 1900s is about knowing hockey.

he should have said....you dont know anything about the nfl and the mlb. fact.
 

southern_cross_116

New member
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
1,748
Liked Posts:
1,012
Location:
Australia
No mate- no one was talking 'eras' - but rather an established team with an established tradition in town - the plain and simple fact was at that time the town was not able to support the second team that came along later in the same league as the team with the established tradition in the town.

You can't possibly be serious in saying that the Blackhawks are not established with their own tradition in this town and that an expansion team (or whatever dreg that could move here (and the Hawks - iirc would have a say in it) could establish a fan base.

The Cardinals thing was not a hypothetical - but rather an empirical example of a team that couldn't hack it in town under those same pressures -it has nothing at all to do with anything apart from it actually happened that way.

You bring up baseball - ok, let's - but you have to bring up baseball in the sense that say you move the Kansas City Royals into town and expect them to compete with the White Sox ... not going to happen -and really there isn't any reason to.

___

Ok, since apparently the example was too tough to grasp - let's try this a different way - the Hawks would have a say in if it ever were to happen - all of the sociological demographics aside- it is a moot point -they have the market all to themselves- and it is written into the NHL bylaws -I don't recall exactly what the radius is - but I remember talk about Milwaukee being a potential expansion city candidate in the 90's and Dollar Bill Wirtz nixing it --- and if Milwaukee was within the radius where the Hawks would have to ok it -naturally Chicago proper would be as well.

So, in all honesty -what exactly is the point? It isn't ever going to happen.
 

BlackHawkPaul

Fartbarf
Donator
Joined:
Sep 28, 2010
Posts:
5,997
Liked Posts:
2,338
Location:
Somewhere in Indiana
I think you could've had a play at a NHL team when the Hawks had their drought between 1998-2007 (with the one decent 2002 season), but I think it's more pipe dreams than anything else.
I think WWW would've fought extremely hard to make sure that wouldn't happen. I thought that (and correct me if I'm incorrect) was the reason why the NHL really never looked at Milwaukee because of it's proximity being 90 or so miles from Chicago-- plus WWW didn't want a team there either (rumor?).
The Hawks were the hottest ticket in town back in the day due to the extremely poor/below average performances of the other sports teams pre-1983.
You had a cup win in '61, and a NFL championship in '63-- and nothing until '85 (a few short playoff runs between the inept baseball clubs in 83/84). Pretty crappy performances from a city that really didn't get on a roll until the Jordan Bulls.
 

Top