Of course no one would have done a 180; once feelings are entrenched, good luck turning that ship around. But also if Kane was significantly lower profile in the team itself, I think you'd see less backlash to begin with against the team as an entity. The backlash against the Hawks had a lot of factors; a certain "scandal critical mass," a large and active defense of Kane, the perception of Kane as a face of the team and thus inextricable from it, and, yes, greater fame and profile meaning that everyone focused on them more. Of course the Preds would be promoting Ribeiro if he was still good, but the fact that he isn't and thus they aren't means that fans don't have the same perception of Ribeiro as a face of the team.

IDK, I got into hockey by bandwagoning the Hawks. When the Kane allegations broke, I was a fan. But I genuinely did find it disgusting and it did change my mind about the team, not because I was sick of their success but because the way they handled it made me sick of them, period. Of course people have self-serving memories and form opinions based on team bias, but claiming that that's all the backlash was is something I'm really skeptical about.