Even outside of that. Try doing what they do. Draft high end Euros every time and get them to report 9/10 times. Try to get defected players to chose to sign with you. Try to get random NHL draft picks from older drafts to show up when you need them (might be easier to do now). Try to get 2nds and 3rds for your 4th liners. If anyone else tries this, they set their franchise up to be god awful because even good teams miss most of the time of those kind of plays. Its incredibly naïve, bordering on childish thinking to just assume anyone can emulate these things. Its like saying Superman is the model person and all you have to do is fly around the sun. Why don't you just fly around the sun? Don't you want to be the man of steel too?
You and I traded posts a while ago on this very subject.
I agree that teams can’t copy London verbatim. However, I still wonder - can teams not aim for what DeBoer did in Kitchener/Plymouth, Vellucci in Plymouth, Kilrea in Ottawa, Todd in Peterborough? That is, having a perpetually competitive team. Granted, the latter two are older examples and may or may not be relevant anymore.
Am I out of my element by asking this question? Look at DeBoer’s Rangers from 01/02-07/08. 7 total seasons. Only 1 season under 80 points (after winning the OHL + Memorial Cup). 2 seasons 100 or more points, 4 seasons above 95 points. 6 seasons above 80 points. 2 OHL championships, 1 Memorial Cup championship. 1 Memorial Cup Finalist.
I’m just throwing this out to keep the discussion going, in a little different direction from the OP’s question, but is this unrealistic for a club to try to come close to DeBoer’s Rangers tenure? Forget about Hunter/London for a second.