Does Dan Wetzel even watch the NHL? Why does he say the Chicago Blackhawks were disbanded in the mid-90's?

Answer 1

It was a joke! Read wingsfan's question above this one, he has a link to the article that he makes that comment in.
Wetzel was making fun of the last time the Hawks were competitive and it actually is a pretty good article on how the NHL is considering adding 2 more teams and how stupid that would be.

Here it is:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news;_ylt=AjW4Knu21ztLWtfjqvQPlSZ7vLYF?slug=dw-nhlexpansion060807&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Answer 2

You have to love a sacrastic column. The Blackhawks have not been the same since Mike Keenan was fired. They have hired coaches with no NHL coaching level (Yawney, Alpo Sohnen and Denis Savard) experience. They have brought in players that were at the end of their careers or should have ended years before. The Hawks dismantled their minor league system for easy playoff entrances and have seen players like Hasek, JP Dumont, Dan Cleary and others go to make themselves great stars in the NHL. And finally, the Wirtz family still acts as though the Hawks are the only team in Chicago. The Bears have been to a Super Bowl, the White Sox won a World Series, the Bulls built the United Center with championships, the Wolves have won 3 championships and even the Arena Football team has won a
championship during this time. Hawks fans just want what Detroit, Anaheim and TB has done.

Answer 3

My impression was that the team that was in the Finals in the early nineties was the one that was broken up.

He sounds like an amateur and made several unsubstantiated claims. I don't think Chicago NEEDS another team while Milwaukee has an arena.

And don't even think about Canada getting another team. In fact, the Oilers look like they are going to move.

I think the league is in very bad shape, and the only thing in the Wetzel article that I agreed with is the fact that it has become a money grab. There is no respect for the traditional fan, just the almighty dollar. Expansion is the last thing the league can afford to do - I don't care how they justify it.

Answer 4

Dan Wetzel is wrong.....but only barely.

The 'hawks disbanded in the early '90's....

Chicago Stadium - gone
Belfour - gone
Chelios - ibid.
Roenick - ibid.

Just seeing the dumb decisions they made in 1992-1993, you could see the team wasn't built for winning, but for mediocrity.

Christian Ruutuu wouldn't break the lineup of any other team, how the hell did he do it with Chicago?

Who the hell is Krivokrasov? Obviously he never stuck around....

They traded for Dave Christian...........the guy was like 36 years old when they traded for him.

They had a few years where the could have been good, but they traded away young talent just to save money and avoid paying out the big bucks, and fritered away any chance they had of becoming a league elite again.

Answer 5

Bottom line, 'Dollar' Bill Wirtz has no interest in fielding a competitive squad as long as his arena is filled and concession stands are selling out inventory. If an AHL squad dressed in Black Hawk duds brings enough people out, why invest $$$ in more talented players?

The duality of competing agendas under corporate leadership is spelled out by Phil Esposito in his biography. Espo speaks of his frustration with Ranger management during his tenure as GM in the mid 80's. Specifically, he cites opportunites the team had to pick up Wayne Gretzky and Mark Messier long before they were ultimately moved by the cash-strapped Oilers.

He tells the tale of pitching the acquisition of the best player in the world (in '85 or '86) in exchange for $15M and some B-level roster players, thinking Gretzky was the missing piece to a championship Rangers team.

Why was the proposal rebuffed by ownership. Well, MSG was already sold out every night without Gretzky, so how could such an investment be justified against the bottom line? Since the mandate by ownership was fiscal profitability, at no time were the concepts of competitiveness, victory or Stanley Cups considered in the equation.

Can you imagine what Gretzky's impact would have been on NHL visibility had he arrived in NY 10 years earlier?

Oh well, at least we have Versus, baby!

Answer 6

"Look, if the league wants to further strangle itself with expansion, why not Chicago? It hasn’t had a team since Bill Wirtz disbanded the Blackhawks in the mid-1990s. "

He's making a comment that the team is lousy.
And they changed the name from Black Hawks to Blackhawks.

Answer 7

disbanding of the blackhawks start with reonick, belfore and hasek leaving follows by amonte and chelios not long after. as for as the article goes i thought it was very insight full though basically wrote out what many have been saying.
hey bettman got idea you might like instead of sending players down to ahl send teams down if u cant draw X% attendance bye bye NHL till you can.

Answer 8

Zapcity29 wins! Great answer. Questioner needs to learn about sarcasm. Apparently Dan Wetzel not only watches the NHL, but he knows enough about it to realize that Chicago is a franchise in name only. ;-)

Answer 9

Roenick, Belfour, Hasek all leaving in the 90's is probably what he is talking about. numerous other players either left before or shortly after

Answer 10

That was called sarcasm. The team has been in such disarray and a once proud franchise destroyed in the last 10+ years.