Quote :

"it still blows my mind that people PAY to go to legion games"

why does this blow your mind?

2/20/2006 5:51:36 PM

Quote :

"Several handfuls of hair off... big difference from $60 to $10-$17 and $12 to $25. Making shit up on the spot isn't usually his forte but he most definitely was speaking without basis this time."

Huh? There are a handful of $10 seats to hockey games but many tickets in the upper deck are $25-$35.

And teh Carolina Hurricanes have the lowest ticket prices in the league.

Nosebleeds are ~$60-$75 for a Dallas Stars or New York Rangers game.

A lower level seat at a Hurricanes game will easily run you $50-$60 depending on what section you're in.


I used to take dates to games and tickets were $99 apiece... after $5 to park, $10 beers, etc and dinner before the game I'd spend well over $300 to take a girl to watch a fucking hockey game.

35% of the merchandise at Zales doesnt even cost that much.

Baseball games are way cheap. You can easily get decent seats in the $10-$20 range.

You cant possibly compare the average hockey ticket to the average baseball ticket.

Not to mention sitting in the upper deck in hockey isnt entertaining at all.

Now I predict with certainty that someone comes with the "I'd much rather sit up high where you can see everything" comment...

No, you wouldnt. You just don't have the money to sit down low, or you don't want to spend the money to sit down low.

And no self-respecting girl is going to be impressed by nosebleeds in a half empty arena.

[Edited on February 20, 2006 at 6:13 PM. Reason : a]

2/20/2006 6:12:59 PM

no self respecting girl is going to be impressed by hockey

and ^^ its legion ball
its the guys who work at the pepsi bottling plant, go to your church, or do your taxes
its just average guys
why should anyone pay to watch that?
it'd be like paying to watch fight club

2/20/2006 6:15:43 PM

^ actually it is high school kids playing summer baseball. Shelling out an "Abe" to support youth athletics in your community was never a big deal for me. But hey, i guess i just have money to throw away.

[Edited on February 20, 2006 at 6:27 PM. Reason : sp]

2/20/2006 6:21:49 PM

^^^ I'm going to walk right into this, simply because I can. I'm in my third year of season tickets in the upper corner at hockey games by choice for a number of reasons. The first is that the atmosphere upstairs is much better than downstairs, where most people can't be bothered to cheer. Secondly, the only decent seats in the lower deck are 2/3rds of the way up the bowl in the neutral zone. In the corners you're too low to see the far zone clearly, and on the glass you're too low to see the far zone AND you can't see what's directly to your left and right because of the glass. Sitting down low is definitely good for listening to the players and seeing the speed and power up close, but once you've seen 500+ hockey games, that's not all that impressive any more. From upstairs, I get a clear view of the entire surface.

Anyway, unless it's her first time (which makes the experience a novelty), a girl that doesn't like hockey isn't gonna be impressed by $100 seats any more than $32 seats. Girls either like hockey or they don't, and trying to add some luxury that isn't really there is stupid.

As for a "handful" of $10 seats, there are around 1,800. If you have any question about them being quality seats for hockey, just ask one of the NHL scouts that frequent those sections.

2/20/2006 7:05:02 PM

bullshit man...

when you get seats on the glass or in a box a girl is impressed.


When you put her upstairs she will ask how many periods there are about 500 times.


No girl (that isnt a hockey fan) is going to enjoy sitting in the nosebleeds.

Front row seats are definitely appreciated.


And blah blah I knew you were gonna go in with the "i can see much better from up high" because ive heard this argument a million times.

Congratulations, you can see the whole ice. Too bad you cant see the players. If front row seats cost the same as nosebleeds there is just no way you'd pick the nosebleeds.

I'm not saying you might not find better "value" from the upper deck, that may be entirely true.

To me, its better value to sit on the glass. Id rather spend an extra $50 and have the girl actually enjoy the game then spend $35 apiece so she can yawn and wonder what time the game ends.


As for pure enjoyment of the game, you're right they might not enjoy the GAME all that much more.

What they will enjoy is the feeling of importance they get from sitting on the glass or in a luxury box. They will enjoy being on display, and they will enjoy being within spitting distance of hot athletes rather than fat drunken people wearing hockey jerseys. Quick, take a survey of the girls you see in the front row, and a survey of the girls in sec. 320 and tell me which ones you'd wanna get with. They will enjoy the free food/alcohol as well if they are in the box.

2/20/2006 9:45:55 PM

this might be the first time I agree with you rally

2/20/2006 9:53:33 PM

I don't think Rally has any leg to stand on when it comes to Hockey games. Go to one before you start talking shit.

2/20/2006 9:54:59 PM

I do not know shit about hockey.....I will never argue with that, I just had a hard time keeping up with the puck when I was way up next to the box seats.....that’s all....the girl stuff.....I am not saying that.....(because I never took a girl to a hockey game.....not that there’s anything wrong with that)

2/20/2006 10:02:21 PM

i was just stating that rally is ignorant when it comes to hockey.

2/20/2006 10:04:29 PM

^gotcha

2/20/2006 10:11:12 PM

Quote :

"I don't think Rally has any leg to stand on when it comes to Hockey games. Go to one before you start talking shit."

I've been to 25-30 Hurricanes games.... both in G'boro and Raleigh...and a Penguins game...


I've been to 15-30 minor league hockey games as well (sorry its tough for me to estimate this one)


Im sure plenty of people have been to more, but i think thats sufficient to form an opinion.

2/20/2006 10:25:43 PM

your opinion is still wrong.

2/20/2006 10:27:12 PM

uh, care to be more specific?


I think the triangle could easily support a pro baseball team.


You have any idea how many people from outside the triangle would travel to see them play? If you're from bumfuck, NC you'd be at games all the time.

1.5 hrs might be too far to drive to see the Hurricanes play the Sharks...

but its damn sure not too far to see our baseball team play the Mets.....

You just dont understand if you're not from NC how big baseball is down here in most counties (Wake county being an exception)

[Edited on February 20, 2006 at 11:00 PM. Reason : a]

2/20/2006 11:00:17 PM

TV contracts. Games won't sell out, therefore no tv play in the local market. Braves are already entrenched in this area along with orioles. population is too spread out to support it. list goes on and on.

2/20/2006 11:04:40 PM

Quote :

"You ever been to St. Louis??? It is not bigger than Charlotte. Outside of STL and KC what does Missouri have? Not much and they still support 2 teams. NC could easily support one."

Have you ever been to St Louis? I know I have. It is bigger than Charlotte. The St Louis metro area has a population of 2.7 million people while Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord comes in at almost half that with 1.4 million people. Yes, NC is a state with a high population but that population is pretty evenly spread out across the state while most states have very polarized population distribution.

Quote :

"Huh? There are a handful of $10 seats to hockey games but many tickets in the upper deck are $25-$35. And teh Carolina Hurricanes have the lowest ticket prices in the league. Nosebleeds are ~$60-$75 for a Dallas Stars or New York Rangers game. A lower level seat at a Hurricanes game will easily run you $50-$60 depending on what section you're in."

There are more than a handful of tickets for $10. Heck they guy at work next to me has been to 9 games this year for $10 a ticket. You don't think a NC baseball team would be among the lowest ticket prices in the league? You are drastically overexagerating the cost of NHL ticket prices with your examples. The are almost as many $10 tickets in Dallas up top as there are $65 tickets. Those $65 tickets are not nosebleeds, they are upper mezzanine seats at mid-ice which are prime for watching hockey. You can spend the same amount for premiere mezzanine tickets at a Yankees game. A lower level seat at a baseball game can easily run you $50-60 or more, depends on the ballpark.. heck, you can spend that in Tampa. You can get a seat 3 rows back of the ice for about $50 at the RBC.

Quote :

"I used to take dates to games and tickets were $99 apiece... after $5 to park, $10 beers, etc and dinner before the game I'd spend well over $300 to take a girl to watch a fucking hockey game. 35% of the merchandise at Zales doesnt even cost that much. Baseball games are way cheap. You can easily get decent seats in the $10-$20 range. You cant possibly compare the average hockey ticket to the average baseball ticket."

That's great and all but you can spend that at a baseball game(or any other sport for that matter). You can take a family of four to a Hurricanes game with average seats; buy four small soft drinks; two small beers; four hot dogs; two game programs; parking; and two adult-size caps for a mere $170. That is the same as the average MLB game. The same purchases would be $120 at the cheapest MLB park (KC), not exactly earth shattering difference. Hockey is the cheapest ticket outside of MLB, and baseball has the advantage of playing twice as many games in stadiums twice the size of arenas at a time of year where there is no professional competition.

For reference, has all sports and all teams:
http://www.teammarketing.com/fci.cfm?page=fci_nhl_05-06.cfm

Quote :

"Not to mention sitting in the upper deck in hockey isnt entertaining at all. Now I predict with certainty that someone comes with the "I'd much rather sit up high where you can see everything" comment... No, you wouldnt. You just don't have the money to sit down low, or you don't want to spend the money to sit down low. And no self-respecting girl is going to be impressed by nosebleeds in a half empty arena."

Of course the nosebleeds aren't the best seats, but neither are nosebleed bleachersa few hundred feet away fromt he action in a ballpark. The mezzanine seats, even on the 3rd level, are perfect for watching hockey. People for some reason want to sit in the first row but the seats suck. You can't see the action except for the 10-15 feet immediately in front of you, and if you are at mid-ice that is only while they advance through the neutral zone... exciting. I've been to about 40-50 Hurricanes games since they moved to Raleigh and went to about 15-20 in Greensboro. I've been to about 15 or so of those in RBC luxury suites, first level and club level, while the rest where everywhere from the $10 to on the glass. The best seats are club level mezzanine, second best would be upper level mezzanine, and third would be mid-ice or "endzone" about 2/3 of the way up so you can see over the glass. Price is not a factor, I make a good living. If you aren't a good enough date to make watching the game a good enough experience on your own, then sure... go ahead and spring for the $99 tickets. However, they are far from necessary to have an amazing experience at a hockey. game.

Quote :

"Congratulations, you can see the whole ice. Too bad you cant see the players. If front row seats cost the same as nosebleeds there is just no way you'd pick the nosebleeds."

Incorrent. First off, the "nosebleeds" at the RBC are closer than most luxury suites at a football or baseball game. Second, I would most definitely choose upper level seats over glass seats. When you really love the actual game of hockey you do want to see the entire action unfold. You aren't impressed by being within "spitting distance of hot athletes" because you basically have an obstructed view seat. Hell, I'd rather watch a game on an HDTV with surround than sit on the glass (even if the tickets are free). Sitting on the glass is only something you need to do once, its a gimmick. I'm there to see the game, not bullshit my way into panties.

2/20/2006 11:31:48 PM

You make some good counterpoints to my post, but when it comes down to it... hockey tickets are way more expensive than baseball tickets.


$10 seats at a Dallas Stars game?


Good luck finding those... You can't park for $10 in Dallas, let alone get in the building.


If you try to pick up tickets for a single game (say ~4 weeks in advance) you arent finding them for cheaper than ~$75 from the box office. And ticket scalping doesnt work in most metro areas the way it does in Raleigh. Here you can get tickets cheap, there you usually pay a markup value.


As far as upstairs/downstairs. I just don't agree. The "sport" of it all may be better to watch from upstairs, but the entertainment value from sitting upstairs goes down exponentially.

It's hockey. No one is there to watch the precise angle the puck gets dumped into the corner or any of that nonsense.

You're there to watch hits, goals, crisp passes, saves...

Being on the ice you can actually see stick saves, poke checks, blood, sweat, etc.

Upstairs you just wait for that little red light to go off and then immediately look to the jumbotron so you can actually see what just happened.


Believe me, Ive heard the argument a million times about how you "like upstairs better".

What you mean is you'd "rather pay $15 for a ticket than $55".

Look at the NC State tickets thread here where the tickets are FREE. You have 10,000 people celebrating their lower level seats and 10,000 people bitching about their upper level seats.

When tickets are FREE, NO ONE chooses upstairs.

[Edited on February 21, 2006 at 12:04 AM. Reason : a]

2/21/2006 12:00:47 AM

Quote :

"It's hockey. No one is there to watch the precise angle the puck gets dumped into the corner or any of that nonsense."

Maybe you're not, but when you're watching/playing hockey five nights a week, that's the kind of stuff you start to appreciate.

Quote :

"Being on the ice you can actually see stick saves, poke checks, blood, sweat, etc."

Yeah, on the strip of ice directly in front of you. Unless you're at the very end of the rink, the glass makes it physically impossible for you to see what's going on more than twenty feet to your right or left, and when you're on the end of the rink, everything at the other end is a flat, lifeless caricature of hockey.

The press vantage point that is almost universally regarded as the best in the league is in Montreal. The press boxes are higher up than the ones at the RBC and sit directly above the ice. Play-by-play guys do not watch monitors while calling the game, and have no trouble spotting the little things. If no one can tell what's going on from upstairs (and the press box is level with the highest nosebleed seats in the building), how does Tripp Tracy spot a deflection before it comes up on his iso monitor?

I understand that hockey is a novelty to a lot of people, and part of that novelty is an environment where you can sit mere inches away from action. That's not what I care about when I watch a hockey game. I'd agree that the best view in the arena is the front row of the club level. You can see everything, and you're high enough up to get some sound. Even when you clear the glass down low, you can't hear.

If I could manufacture a seat location, I'd take a spot at center ice about fifteen feet from the boards and raise it up about ten feet so I could clear most of the glass in every direction. I honestly believe that teams would get more real hockey fans in down low if they were all elevated above the obstructed view.

2/21/2006 12:45:59 AM

when you sit on the glass the only thing you cant see is the near corner.... you see the players digging for the puck but you cant actually see the puck.

That's all you miss.

98% of shots, saves, passes, etc are in plain view.


The kind of plain view that doesnt require 20-15 laservision to see like the 300 level does.

2/21/2006 1:10:50 AM

If you're sitting alongside the glass in one of the offensive zones, it's physically impossible to see down to the near side of the other zone. That's a hell of a lot of ice to miss, especially with the way the Canes work the forecheck or if you're on Cole's wing.

Anyway, I've watched hundreds of hockey games in dozens of rinks from every vantage point imaginable, including on top of the referee's dressing room at the RecZone...and the glass is not the best place to watch the game. YMMV.

2/21/2006 1:30:39 AM

it is definitely the best place to sit if you are there to have fun, show off social status, or get laid.


If you are there to be a hockey geek, perhaps its not the best place.


I can agree on that.

2/21/2006 2:20:34 AM

I see what you did there

2/21/2006 2:23:04 AM

The best place to have fun is 328, mang.

I had fun there even during the worst game I've ever seen the Canes play, the 3-0 loss to Phoenix during Brian Boucher's streak.

P.S. The view of the far end from the upper corners is better than the view of the far end from the goal crease.

[Edited on February 21, 2006 at 2:57 AM. Reason : d]

2/21/2006 2:35:37 AM

225 is NICE, very NICE and a perfect view.

2/21/2006 3:39:46 AM