Skyline_BNR34 wrote:
Post the percentage of seats filled then, that is a better way to determine attendance really, not what rank in the league.
Post the actual percentage of the seats filled. And we'll determine how many fans went to each game, or at least had the tickets.
If you do that, I'll look up arena seating and calculate the totals. Because even if you're selling 88% of an 18000 seat arena, that is 15000 seats so that means people care.
If Phoenix hadn't been through all their turmoil and had a better team last year, you'd see many more of the non skewed attendance ratings.
Also, on opening draft day when it was awarded to Carolina, it drew the LARGEST opening day attendance of over 14,000, you still trying to say people don't actually care about little things like that.
But if you're selling 88% of the league, your fans still suck because you're coming in around 20th in attendance compared to the rest of the league.
I see where the argument is going, that selling 15,000 seats isn't a failure to put asses in seats. Depending on your definition of success, that might be true. However, I think that you need to develop some context in which to define success, and the best way to do that is to rank them against other teams in the league. When assessed league wide, every single southern market fails to fill their arena, especially considering that every team (with the exception of Nashville and Carolina) exists in a relatively large market.
For attendance data, you can go here:
http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance/_/sort/homePctYou will get the percentages for the past few years. Otherwise you have to do your own calcs.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
