[Edster007]

Originally Posted by grindline

You know, looking at that graph, if I were Gary Bettman I would be pretty pleased. The more recent expansions have very little negative impact on average attendance, certainly compared to the move from 6 to 12 sides. Moreover the tv ratings in places in the South are going to be higher than two decades previously I assume. My other thought was that, in some terms at least, the league could support expansion to 32 teams far better than other earlier expansions, provided that the new franchises were economically viable.

Of course I realise this data is just one metric of the health of the league and I'm most definitely not aBettmam apologist.

I think the chart for 1967 would have more significance if it tracked the effect on attendance of the original six. Those teams played each other 14 times a year in '66, 70 game schedule. I dont know how the schedule broke down in 67 other then the fact they moved to 74 games. In 1967 you were introducing professional hockey to many markets in the USA unlike later years when cable TV opened avenues to market the product. It would be reasonable to assume at that stage of devlopment there would be a giant step backwards to move the league forward.