Jump to content

The Decision 2011


fish7718
 Share

Recommended Posts

So I decided this year that I'm going to make a conscious effort to get into hockey. As a sports management major I'm only limiting my career in sports by not knowing hockey and the people who like hockey seem to love it. That said, I need a team :). Now the obvious answer would be the Rangers, they seem to me lower NY's team however I tend to hate Rangers fans. There are really 4 acceptable choices to me.

 

Buffalo Sabres

New York Rangers

New Jersey Devils

New York Islanders

 

So this my decision 2011. I'm gonna make an effort to watch a game or 2 from each of the teams listed. Whoever I like most I will probably choose.

 

Any advice? :)

 

Looking forward to posting with you hockey fans in the future :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I decided this year that I'm going to make a conscious effort to get into hockey.

Same here.

 

I was leaning toward the Isles for some time, and when the Islanders to Brooklyn rumors arose, I decided they would be my team. I'm not quite sure how to familiarize myself with the game, haha. I just sort of absorbed baseball and basketball when I was young, and football was just always there and easy to follow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go with the Islanders.

 

Rangers- Popular team with a great (arguably best) goalie in the NHL, and have some good talent, but are boring as hell to watch right now.

 

Sabres- Probably the best out of all of those teams right now, and are a "sexy" Stanley Cup pick right now with the additions they made this off-season.

 

Devils- They have some good offensive firepower, and have some great defensive prospects, but are known as the most boring team in the NHL because of their system.

 

Islanders: They're sucked for years, but they have tons of young talent, and one of the best players to be drafted recently in John Tavares. They'll be exciting to watch, and have arguably the best long-term future.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We got some subtle hints that the Islander talks are a bit more advanced than just Bruce Ratner and Brett Yormark visiting the NHL offices...that Charles Wang, the Islanders owner, has a working knowledge of the Barclays Center's ability to host hockey games. And we got further confirmation that the arena already has ice-making capability beyond NHL standards.

Link

 

BLS: You have college hockey coming to Barclays Center, so it can be converted into a hockey arena. Any interest in having the New York Islanders move in?

 

BY: Let me just say that we can convert it to a hockey venue and have a great destination for professional hockey. And although it is not legalized in New York State, we can handle MMA when and if it is legalized.

Link

 

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd still be wary about putting hockey in an arena not built for it. But I guess with the Islanders, if it's their only option they have to go for it.

 

But NHL hockey in buildings built primary for basketball always has problems. Just look at Phoenix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. Islanders were at the bottom of my list with the rumors they could be moving to KC or even out of state. I'll have to look at them more I guess.

 

Going into this my list would be

 

1. Rangers

2-3. Islanders-Devils (interchangeable)

4. Sabres

30. Flyers ;)

 

Like I said I will watch the teams play before I make the decision. Thanks for the tips so far!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. Islanders were at the bottom of my list with the rumors they could be moving to KC or even out of state. I'll have to look at them more I guess.

 

Going into this my list would be

 

1. Rangers

2-3. Islanders-Devils (interchangeable)

4. Sabres

30. Flyers ;)

 

Like I said I will watch the teams play before I make the decision. Thanks for the tips so far!

 

Really, is going to games a factor for you? If so, you can save yourself a lot of money by choosing the Devs or Islanders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd still be wary about putting hockey in an arena not built for it. But I guess with the Islanders, if it's their only option they have to go for it.

 

But NHL hockey in buildings built primary for basketball always has problems. Just look at Phoenix.

After their proposal to build a new arena got voted down, it seems like Nassau and Barclays are the only two options.

 

The seating capacity would only be about 14,000, but it may be worth it.

 

It turns out that US Airways Center was also designed by Ellerbe Beckett. They designed Conseco Fieldhouse as well, which has a bowl similar to that of the Barclays Center. Conseco is home for a minor-league hockey team and has an unusual layout for its hockey games.

 

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/704455/conseco-hockey.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, they also have AHL/ECHL teams in San Antonio, Cleveland, and perhaps another NBA city in their NBA arenas. In a lot of these cases, I think they put a curtain over the upper deck and just use the lower bowl for seating. Which is fine when you are only getting 7 or 8K fans per game. I remember in Phoenix, when they had to use the upper deck, there were major sight line problems with the hockey layout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really, is going to games a factor for you? If so, you can save yourself a lot of money by choosing the Devs or Islanders.

Well certainly doesn't hurt ya know? I'll def be taking that into account. Although off the 3 in the NYC area MSG is by far the easiest to reach.

 

Reason why the Rangers are 1 right is because a few of my best friends are Rangers fans so that also factors into going to games...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, they also have AHL/ECHL teams in San Antonio, Cleveland, and perhaps another NBA city in their NBA arenas. In a lot of these cases, I think they put a curtain over the upper deck and just use the lower bowl for seating. Which is fine when you are only getting 7 or 8K fans per game. I remember in Phoenix, when they had to use the upper deck, there were major sight line problems with the hockey layout.

Sightlines are the main issue. The Nets spent some money to conduct a "Hockey Sightline Study." If they can make some adjustments with that, it might not be such a bad option to switch to a lower capacity arena, considering the location and the option to play in a $950 million venue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Way up in the air college midterms and papers hit like a bitch not to mention I've been hooked on video games. It's inevitable that I will get into hockey this year because I want to so bad. Just won't happen till like winter break tho

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...