Fudged or (more likely) paid for by corporations and not attended by foreign business associates? Its called average attendance for a reason. I know some games were poorly attended but others were packed. I don't think Van really padded the numbers too much...I do know alot of teams do though; the struggling US ones for ex. I'm willing ot believe 14.5 was about average...keep in mind that is PAID tickets not bums in seats.levelheaded wrote:Having been to a number of games between 97 and now, I can assure you that those numbers are fudged up. I went to a San Jose Vancouver game in 98 or 99 and the stadium was less than half full. I bought tickets in the back of the upper bowl, but walked almost all the way down to the front. The lower bowl was just as bad. 14k sounds on the high side to me, I guess teams like Toronto still drew, but there were a lot of games where people didn't even vaguely care to watch.ClamRussel wrote:97/98 = 16,986
98/99 = 15,803
99/00 = 14,642
00/01 = 17,017
Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.
- CC Legend
- Posts: 3992
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
- Location: New South Wales, Australia
"Once a King, always a King" -Mike Murphy
Cornuck wrote:Like LiG, I wasn't a 'huge' fan, but if we don't retire his number, then we don't retire anyone's.
In reality the Canucks shouldn't have any retired numbers other than Wayne Maki. Then again they have set the bar so low by hanging 12 and 16 up there, that they may as well retire Naslund's.
They may as well retire Ohlund's number as well when he packs it in. Fucking pathetic really.
“Gohmert and Bumpty sitting in a tree”
- Posts: 1345
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:25 pm
- Location: Toronto, but heart's in Vancouver
The point remains. The Canucks weren't a draw and people weren't showing up as a result. The team was doing pretty poorly with its high draft picks (Nathan Smith, early Sedins, Bryan Allen) and needed a miracle to stop it being branded a small market forever. That miracle was the WCE led by Markus Naslund. A decade ago Dan Hamhuis wouldn't have considered signing here over other teams like Pittsburgh and Philly, BC boy or not. We have Nazzy to thank for that. Considering we've never won a cup, that's the most you can ask from one of our alumni. Smyl led the team to a resurgence, Linden led the team to a resurgence, Naslund led the team to a resurgence.ClamRussel wrote:
Fudged or (more likely) paid for by corporations and not attended by foreign business associates? Its called average attendance for a reason. I know some games were poorly attended but others were packed. I don't think Van really padded the numbers too much...I do know alot of teams do though; the struggling US ones for ex. I'm willing ot believe 14.5 was about average...keep in mind that is PAID tickets not bums in seats.
The other thing that bothers me is Naslund's reputation as a floaty euro. He wasn't a defensive forward by any stretch, but who was it that drove to the net with 4 seconds to go against Calgary in game 7 in 03/04? Who was it that essentially won Vigneault the Adams trophy by actually backchecking? Who was it that could turn a game around by himself like no other Canuck than Bure? Naslund. He didn't stop trying late in his career with us, he simply got old and broken. He was no better with NYR, and like the classy individual he is, walked away from $4M with them to help their cap situation rather than stick around for another year. Was he a defensive stalwart like Linden and Smyl? Of course not, but not all players are. Naslund is a victim of his nationality. I assure that had he been from Humboldt, Sask or Peterborough, Ont retiring his number would be a no brainer.