The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Define "small market". Buffalo & Pittsburgh do pretty darn well.
buffalo and pittsburgh are constantly on deaths doorbed
buffalo says a team in hamilton would kill them... they had ownership problems most the past decade. they do have a big pocket owner now, but how long will that last?
pittsburgh does ok when lemieux and jagr and crosby and malkin are around.. but who wouldnt? those are damn fine gate attractions. Go 5 years between them though and this team goes onto deaths doorstep. How likely is it they will be lucky enough to get the next Lemeux/Crosby in 10 years time?
most winning teams are profitable... but the real measure of a big market team is a team that can constantly draw money even if it wasnt winning... and those teams are few and far between
Northeast
Boston
Montreal
Hamilton
Toronto
Buffalo
Ottawa
Atlantic
New Jersey
New York
Quebec City
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Looks good JM, though Im not sure I like the way youve got Quebec in a separate Division from Montreal. Id move Boston into the Atlantic & Quebec into your Northeast.... or are you an existing Bruins fan ready to switch your allegiance to Hamilton but still wanna see your old favorites more frequently?
Define "small market". Buffalo & Pittsburgh do pretty darn well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberta_OReilly_Fan
buffalo and pittsburgh are constantly on deaths doorbed
buffalo says a team in hamilton would kill them... they had ownership problems most the past decade. they do have a big pocket owner now, but how long will that last?
pittsburgh does ok when lemieux and jagr and crosby and malkin are around.. but who wouldnt? those are damn fine gate attractions. Go 5 years between them though and this team goes onto deaths doorstep. How likely is it they will be lucky enough to get the next Lemeux/Crosby in 10 years time?
most winning teams are profitable... but the real measure of a big market team is a team that can constantly draw money even if it wasnt winning... and those teams are few and far between
Less than 2 million. Buffalo says SO would kill them and Pittsburgh only draws when they are winning.
These are the big market teams
NYR
PHI
BOS
WSH
TOR
MTL
LA
CHI
DET
The true big market teams. Always in the black, contribute the most to revenue sharing.
Looks good JM, though Im not sure I like the way youve got Quebec in a separate Division from Montreal. Id move Boston into the Atlantic & Quebec into your Northeast.... or are you an existing Bruins fan ready to switch your allegiance to Hamilton but still wanna see your old favorites more frequently?
I use to be a Canadians & Flyers fan up until the 2009\2010 when I just had enough of the NHL. bull crap & now the only hockey I watch is team canada hockey wethier it juniors , worlds or olympics . Until the NHL. puts a team in Hamilton I will boycott watching & buying anything NHL. .
What I would like to see the most is the concept of belonging to a team whether it's the players or the city and community being closer to a team:
1. Now I know trades and free agency is exciting to people(myself included) but I would like to see players being with teams all their lives and that their would be a stronger fidelity for people to identify with their team.
2. To create a stronger link with the community the best players of each Canadian province would go the teams of those provinces like it was with the Habs for a couple of years.
And that instead of hockey teams being franchises to the NHL, the team would take precedence to the NHL logo and being "slave" to the NHL.
And that whether there's a cap or no caps that you basically keep what you make. God knows in a cap World, most teams are on a even playing field but the most successful teams have no advantage. But keeping what you make would at least give the owners of the teams that makes the most to keep their returns.
Now those things seems pretty selfish but really it's my ideal league so I can do whatever I want.
Most of the teams from Canada and North East USA(20):
Montreal Canadiens
Boston Bruins
Quebec Nordiques
New York Rangers
Buffalo Sabres
Philadelphia Flyers
Winnipeg Jets
Minnesota North Stars
Chicago Black Hawks
Michigan Red Wings
Edmonton Oilers
Calgary Flames
Vancouver Canucks
Ottawa Senators
Colorado Avalanches
Toronto Maple Leafs
Hamilton Maroons
Saskatchowan Beavers
Halifax Whales
Milwaukee Giants
i actually developed an idea for a new 'community' hockey league that i thought was interesting. it involves a city having maybe 4 teams... a house league sort of... and these teams would share a building. so the building would get like around 120-160 dates and the city would have one team hosting a game almost every night during the season.
the other teams would play a huge majority of their road games at home too... so no travel costs.
a building full everynight... and no travel costs... makes the economics way cheaper.
the teams would have to employ guys that live in the city... guys would be required to participate in the community... this is about community pride.. community connection...
i could imagine 4 teams in toronto easy... then maybe 4 in hamilton... for starters. Playoff would be between those two cities i guess... then try other cities if there is a demand for it.
maybe saskatoon? maybe the maritimes somewhere? quebec city?
i might alter the rosters a bit... cut out a couple skaters to keep the costs down. try to avoid having 4th line goons on the teams. maybe adopt an international ice surface? get away from the trap... from clutch and grab obstacle hockey full of diving...
the overall talent couldnt compete with the nhl... but some guys would love the option of no travel. the league would ask for local sponsorship of certain attractions to come compete for the home town. some players would be able to make money in a league like this by doing endorsements for local wealthy business.
ownership of the team would be a trust... not complete ownership. a town vote would entrust the running of the team to a candidate. he would stay in charge as long as he wins approval votes next season. he wouldnt make money... he would actually have to pay a bit to be allowed to run the team. its a civic pride/ego thing to run one of these teams.
ultimately the success of this league might be limited. there may only be a certain number of cities in canada that could support this type of schedule? or it might expand into europe... some smaller markets in the usa? but even if only 1 city did it... it would be interested to see how it worked.
look what just happened in Scotland... events conspired to put one of their two largest teams in the 4th tier and ESPN and Sky Sports merely renegotiated their TV deals to gain the rights to all those 4th tier games.
The only problem, again, though is the cultural incompatibility. There are huge TV deals (the EPL's new deal in the UK and Ireland is worth double the NHL's) in pro/rel leagues, but those aren't really applicable to the US as the system has no existing traction here. Too many people, like Machinehead a few pages back, cannot even grasp the concept or see any sort of legitimacy in it. Too many billionaires have been conditioned to see sports franchises as businesses. It's not that it's unfeasible at the moment, it's that it's unfeasible for the foreseeable future barring some cataclysm that requires all American sports to be reorganized.
Well, if it takes a cataclysm, then it's a cataclysm I'm hoping for.
Sure, teams can price their tickets lower when they're spending less and aren't competitive. But ultimately, fans want to watch a competitive team, not a team that's losing every night because it spends so much less than the great majority of other teams.
People love to root for teams that represent where they come from, it's a matter of local pride. Look at European football, for a great example of that. We can have the same set up on this continent with hockey...we just have to allow ourselves to think and act outside the corporate dead league(s) currently in operation.
Right now if you live in Medford, chances are you root for the Bruins. Imagine if you could be going down to your local arena and cheering on Medford's team instead, knowing that someday it could potentially happen that your local boys could meet the big bad Bruins on the (ice) field of battle. Tell me that isn't better than the current 30 catch-all hockey franchises competing in their dead league.
Quote:
A Cap Floor is a baseline, if team can't spend to it, then perhaps it does need to be relocated. If we're talking only a couple of Seasons, due to some specific financial difficulties, then that's what revenue sharing is for. But again, a Cap Floor that's reasonably calculated.
Well, I've already said I am for getting rid of a floor entirely, so we disagree here.
The book written by the sports economist and anti-trust lawyer, Sports Fans of the World Unite, goes into it. Basically, it would require someone with a big agenda to file a huge antitrust lawsuit from what I remember reading 2 years ago.
With the EPL bigger and bigger even in N.America, maybe someone within the leagues could warm up to the idea.
But seriously, its why the only money I throw behind sports is never a minor league. I'll support theWinnipeg Jets because they are in the top league. I'll buy Blue Bomber tickets because there's only two leagues playing Canadian rules football. Other then that, I could never pay money for a deadend team if my support did not have written-out rules saying team A moves up to League based on these results. What's the point?
So instead of concentrating thier current efforts to remove about $300 million per year from the players, they should somehow get at least 20 of 30 votes in order to become an open league and completely change the way the League does business, which will in fact hurt the "have-nots" much more than the ManU's and Liverpool's of the world?
Never fly. And most of the pro/rel propoents have agreed so, as it is common knowledge the NHL would like to control its own destiny. It isn't dinosaur thinking, it's reality.
cutchemist addressed the points you've made here as good or better than I ever could. His/her reply to this is spot on.
Support for either of the systems comes down to this. If you like the closed system, you want stability for maybe your team who would be relegated and you care that 30 random you will never know, earn a profit off their entertainment business. Their interests will usually come before yours.
In the pro/rel system, some teams won't be stable, but that's the nature of the real world in every other industry. You also might not see sports as being something that should even earn a profit since a lot of European owners don't care for profits. Atleast in a pro/rel league, everyone's needs are being met since the market is doing the allocating of teams/markets/and resources. Less money is wasted.
My opinion of the NHL/NBA/MLB/NFL would change if they were operated as publicly traded companies where I could reap the benefits as a shareholder. Since the leagues are limited to 30ish shareholders, all I want is the best sporting spectacle, and pro/rel provides that.
No NA league provides drama as well top-to-bottom, and none of the leagues provide a playoff as huge and epic as the Champions' League.
For anyone here so against pro/rel maybe describe what you think would change about your experience as a fan that would make you hate it.
+1 billion
Could you imagine a hockey version of a Champions League, or a Canada Cup where several small and larger market Canadian teams compete for a trophy mid-season, or a similar tourney amongst various US markets? How any hockey fan could look at that scenario and not drool, is beyond me.
A 30 team dead league is nowhere near as exciting.
i might go with 16 class A teams... the top 14 teams from the previous year plus the top 2 from B league moving up. Have these teams play each other for the majority of the new year schedule and all of these teams make the playoffs.
increase the amount of playoff games... weight them heavier in favor of the home team... go to a best of 9 with 6 of the dates on home ice. try to make it most likely that the best team actually wins.
but then have 16 or more B teams too... let these teams escape the punishment of a CAP SYSTEM. Pro hockey of any sort is better then no pro hockey at all, but its not realistic most of these teams can win even under the current system anyhow. I mean sure, they might win one out of every ten years if they get real lucky with the draft... but for the most part the cup winner will come out of the other 14-18 teams that would spend most the time in the class A league anyhow.
I think fans in most these cities would be fine just trying to get into the A league... getting a chance to see the A league superstars hit town once a year or once every other year maybe?
I would add a team to Toronto market and maybe even 2 teams... maybe 1 for Toronto and 1 for Hamilton. I realize this would screw Buffalo but I am afraid Buffalo is a B market anyhow. Why deny the league 2 legitmate A markets just to prop up 1 B market?
Id also go to Vegas... not sure it's a legitimate A market but someone has to test the city sooner or later. I dont think it really matters how many B market teams there are. More B market teams mean more jobs so union would like it. And more markets helps tv revenues. More markets help travel you would think. There wouldnt need to be a perfectly balanced schedule. more fans get NHL hockey locally with more teams.
Its really only when the top teams play each other that we care who plays who anyhow. No one gets worked up over a Philly/Colorado match... or Montreal against Phoenix... or when Florida takes on Detroit. We want the marquee matchups. They sell the national exposure.
Maybe in Edmonton here... it would tick off the locals. Calgary... Winnipeg... Theres no guarantee these teams could make top 16 and I am sure they feel like they should be top 16... but for real TV exposure these teams dont sell the game either... dont help it thrive in LA or Dallas or St Louis o wherever...
Ultimately add a Europeon Division too. Watered down talent is a reletive problem. Ultimately more jobs paying million dollar salaries will result in more talented athletes taking up the game... more teams in more markets will broden the profile of the sport. Soccor ends up with enough talent to go around. Hockey would too eventually
in the short term... the real premiere teams go from 30-16 anyhow so less top talent is needed.
Ultimately everyone gets what they actually can earn in this system. Smaller market teams wouldnt be prohibited from spending if they wanted... trying to compete for A division status. They just wouldnt be forced to do it still. The very best players can make whatever money they want playing for the very biggest markets. They dont need to take paycuts. Rank and file players would have more teams to find employment with. They dont deserve the 3-4 mill per year salaries anyhow.. but small markets would want 1-2 bankable guys to sell to the fans so a few of them still would get paid.
ticket prices might even go down to affordable levels once the preasure is off to try to spend like New York and Toronto?
This is all really good. Remember too that various regional and national tournaments could run concurrent to the regular season for trophies and prizes, pitting smaller local teams against say the Habs, Leafs, Wings, Bruins, or Rangers, for example. Media coverage would be immense, and interest would rise. Somebody needs to start thinking creatively in the NHL governors meetings.
For me, a 28-team league. 4 divisions of 7, with divisional play-offs brought back. Final four re-seeds, so no conferences.
Patrick Division
Rangers
Isles
Flyers
Devils
Penguins
Capitals
Hurricanes
Adams
Bruins
Habs
Leafs
Sens
Sabres
Nordiques
Ontario (either hamilton or 2nd team in toronto)
Norris
BHawks
Wings
Wild
Blues
Jets
Avalanche
Dallas
Smythe
Oilers
Flames
Canucks
Kings
Ducks
Sharks
Seattle or 2nd team in BC or Saskatchewan (honestly not sure if there is another place for a 2nd team in BC or if Saskatchewan could support a team)
Sorry Phoenix, miami, tampa, nashville, columbus
Play 7 games against your division (42)
2 games against everyone else (42)
toronto, montreal and edmonton tier two or three. all those lost original 6 games. panthers, preds and yotes all tier one. canada would howl non-stop til it was over.
nhlpa would have to agree that all contracts are two way with a completely different payscale automatic after a team is relegated out of T1. no team paying current nhl scale could survive on relegation revenue.
As was mentioned, one of the top two teams in Scotland was relegated waaayy down, and a major broadcaster followed them and began airing games from across that lower tier, which would be great for boosting the game's popularity. Same thing would likely happen were the Leafs or Habs relegated down. And yes, local fans would be upset, fans are always upset when their team sucks - that's hockey.
If you have to completely re-do contracts and create new payscales, and blow up whatever's "current" to achieve a system that ultimately is better for fans, players, owners, media, and the game itself...then you do it.
i dont think thered be a ton of danger top teams being relegated down... if you remove the cap {and you would with a truely elite A division setup} then these top teams would spend enough to remain top teams. Even a bad year for the Boston Red Sox isnt that bad... they could still finish top 16 if they wanted to. New York always finishes top 16 in baseball...
enough spending doesnt guarantee you a champtionship but it can guarante you a middle of the pack finish. I think when a lower level team gets close.. it would spend more for a run at A division.. but it would never ever spend like New York and Philly and Toronto. So eventually it would lose those top drafted kids... and eventually would drop out of A division.
Is there 16 true A division teams that would deserve to be there all the time anyhow? I bet theres really only 12 or so that make a difference to the TV contracts. Canada is such a small market that it really doesnt matter if Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver drop out anyhow. Those cities love hockey enough that Canada will always get decent ratings... but those teams cant draw in the USA so they dont matter for USA ratings.
I think the real teams that matter... are Boston/New York/Philly most of all in the east... Detroit/Chicago for the midwest... and then LA if you want to get a west coast foothold. And if these teams had a competitive ability to spend then they would do it.. and stay in the A division. Toronto/Montreal would try. Then dependind on ownership you probably would have Washington trying... maybe Anaheim... probably St Louis... a second New York market team...
who else could spend with these guys if the cap was eliminated? who else would matter to tv revenues if they did get relegated?
i guess ultimately you got a few parties that must be kept happy in any good setup... rich teams want to be allowed to spend... this is an ego thing after all.. some owners can afford to spend and want to... some cities are so big market they MUST be world class or they have no interest anyhow. New York will never support a 25th team in any sport. LA wont either.
small market teams must be protected... and sure they want a chance to win... but ultiamtely the most important thing is they dont get driven out of business. a league is mickey mouse when 10 of its teams are constantly battling bank ruptcy and on the verge of moving. and alot of markets have very little competition for entertainment dollars and will support a team even if it isnt going to win the champtionship... as long as they understand its good value.
players meanwhile... both want to be paid alot... but also want job security. They dont really have it if 10 teams are in danger of going out of business.. or even 1 team is... sure they want the very best paychecks but imagine 16 rich markets with the spending limits taken off? This wont result in less money for the best players...
and theres so many players that today have AHL careers or careers in minor pro euro leagues cause there just arent enough NHL jobs for them. If you can end up adding 16 or so NHL teams eventually and create 200 or more new salaries at 800k-1.5mill K then for the 200 or so guys that are currently making 3-4 mill and would get their contracts cut in half... it works out. 800k-1.5 mill k is plenty of money if the job is more secure. This is still a very very good living.
owners rich and poor both benefit.. and only a few in the middle have much reason to complain... a minority
players rich and poor benefit.. only those in the middle have much reason to complain.. a minority
and for fans... if you live in a big city you NEED competition for your entertainment dollar. Its just how it works. And tickets are going to be expensive. Its supply and demand. But if you live in a small market you dream of having options.. and hope those options are reasonable priced. You dont need a championship you just need a team.
This is a REALLY well thought out post. Well done. This should almost be made a sticky, and copied and send to the morons at NHL headquarters.
I use to be a Canadians & Flyers fan up until the 2009\2010 when I just had enough of the NHL. bull crap & now the only hockey I watch is team canada hockey wethier it juniors , worlds or olympics . Until the NHL. puts a team in Hamilton I will boycott watching & buying anything NHL. .
You do realize that a promotion/relegation system is the answer to your woes, right?
What I would like to see the most is the concept of belonging to a team whether it's the players or the city and community being closer to a team:
1. Now I know trades and free agency is exciting to people(myself included) but I would like to see players being with teams all their lives and that their would be a stronger fidelity for people to identify with their team.
2. To create a stronger link with the community the best players of each Canadian province would go the teams of those provinces like it was with the Habs for a couple of years.
And that instead of hockey teams being franchises to the NHL, the team would take precedence to the NHL logo and being "slave" to the NHL.
And that whether there's a cap or no caps that you basically keep what you make. God knows in a cap World, most teams are on a even playing field but the most successful teams have no advantage. But keeping what you make would at least give the owners of the teams that makes the most to keep their returns.
Now those things seems pretty selfish but really it's my ideal league so I can do whatever I want.
Most of the teams from Canada and North East USA(20):
Montreal Canadiens
Boston Bruins
Quebec Nordiques
New York Rangers
Buffalo Sabres
Philadelphia Flyers
Winnipeg Jets
Minnesota North Stars
Chicago Black Hawks
Michigan Red Wings
Edmonton Oilers
Calgary Flames
Vancouver Canucks
Ottawa Senators
Colorado Avalanches
Toronto Maple Leafs
Hamilton Maroons
Saskatchowan Beavers
Halifax Whales
Milwaukee Giants
Again, to keep flogging the dead horse - the best way to accomplish the community involvement you're talking about, promotion/relegation is the best answer.
32 team league with Phoenix moving to Seattle/Portland/Houston & Winnipeg moved to the western conference. 2 expansion franchises to Quebec City + southern Ontario.
- 50/50 split b/w players/owners
- 20% revenue sharing from top 10 franchises.
- 8 teams from each conference making the playoffs ( 50% of teams in playoffs )
- 2 divisions in each conference = 8 teams/division.
- 5 games against each team within each division and 3 games against teams in other division in same conference. Remaining 18 games are with teams in the other conference.
- playoff matchups are 1st vs 16th, 2nd vs 15th etc regardless of conference ( potential of seeing Montreal vs Boston or SJ vs LA in finals etc )
- 82 games/season
- Cap floor @ 70% of cap ( $70M cap would = $49M floor )
- Player contracts ( less than 30 years old ) limited to 8 years and 5 years ( over 30 years old ).
- Cap hit of contract matches actual yearly player salary.
Here's how promotion/relegation could work for the NHL.
The NHL contains 66 teams, in three conferences:
1. Stanley (competes for Stanley Cup)
2. Campbell (competes for Campbell Bowl)
3. Wales (competes for Wales Trophy)
SCHEDULE
4 games vs each team in your tier; 2 home, 2 away (84 games)
Top 16 teams in each conference advance to playoffs, winner gets corresponding trophy.
The playoff semifinalists in Campbell/Wales are promoted.
The bottom four teams demoted a tier, with one exception (During the playoffs, the non-playoff teams play a double-round robin, and the team with the highest point total is exempt from relegation. In the Wales Conference, the winner gets the #1 overall draft pick).
PLAYERS/CAP/REVENUE SHARING
-- Entry draft is 66 teams drafting per round.
#1 pick (Wales lotto playoff champ)
#2-18 (Wales teams not promoted)
#19-22 (teams demoted from Campbell)
#23-26 (teams promoted from Wales)
#27-40 (Campbell teams not promoted)
#41-45 (Stanley teams demoted)
#45-48 (Campbell promoted)
#49-62 (Stanley not promoted)
#63-66 (Stanley Cup semifinalists, then Runner up, then Stanley Cup Champ)
Draft picks can be traded, but not sold. No player development contracts; loans and sales of players are allowed (loans count against your cap)
-- Salary cap the same for all three tiers. Salary floor ONLY for the Stanley Tier.
-- 100% Broadcast Revenue Sharing Among All 66 Teams. No Revenue Sharing Beyond That
-- Territorial rights temporarily suspended while we set it up, BUT rules go back into force once we start, so if you move, you've got to go somewhere completely uninhabited by a team. No dual ownership of teams (Marlies, Aeroes, IceCaps, etc have to be sold)
STARTING TIERS (My layout determined by)
STANLEY: Oldest 22 NHL franchises by start date in current city
CAMPBELL: Remaining NHL teams, restored NHL teams, AHL by date
WALES: The rest
-- 38 US markets -- Only three top 40 US markets without teams (#17 San Diego, #26 Orlando, #40 Jacksonville)
-- 14 Canadian markets -- Only one top 15 Canadian market without a team (#13 Halifax)
STANLEY CONFERENCE
Anaheim Ducks
Boston Bruins
Buffalo Sabres
Calgary Flames
Chicago Black Hawks
Dallas Texans
Detroit Red Wings
Edmonton Oilers
Los Angeles Kings
Montreal Canadiens
New Jersey Devils
New York Islanders
New York Rangers
Ottawa Senators
Philadelphia Flyers
Pittsburgh Penguins
San Jose Sharks
St. Louis Blues
Tampa Bay Lightning
Toronto Maple Leafs
Vancouver Canucks
Washington Capitals
CAMPBELL CONFERENCE
Atlanta Thrashers
Baltimore Skipjacks
Carolina Hurricanes
Charlotte Checkers
Cleveland Barons
Colorado Avalanche
Columbus Blue Jackets
Florida Panthers
Hamilton Tigers
Hartford Whalers
Hershey Bears
Kansas City Scouts
Minneapolis North Stars
Nashville Predators
Phoenix Coyotes
Providence Mariners
Quebec Nordiques
Rochester Americans
San Francisco Seals
Seattle Sounders
St. Paul Wild
Winnipeg Jets
WALES CONFERENCE
Abbotsford Red Tails
Austin Cedars
Bridgeport Sound Tigers
Chicago Wolves
Cincinnati Cyclones
Houston Aeros
Indianapolis Racers
Kitchener Royals
Las Vegas Wranglers
London Knights
Milwaukee Admirals
Norfolk Tides
Oklahoma City Barons
Ontario St. Bernards
Portland (OR) Hawks
Sacramento Hornets
Salt Lake Grizzlies
San Antonio Iguanas
Saskatoon Blades
St. John's IceCaps
Syracuse Eagles
Toronto Marlies
EDIT: Not sure why my table isn't working.
NOTES:
Campbell Conference won the coin flip to be the second tier ahead of the Wales.
Minnesota Wild renamed "St. Paul Wild" (since we add Minneapolis North Stars)
Dallas Stars renamed "Dallas Texans" (North Stars get the rights to Star names)
Texas Stars renamed "Austin Cedars" (Texas Stars play in Cedar City, outside Austin)
Norfolk Admirals renamed "Norfolk Tides" (Milwaukee was the Admirals first)
Providence Bruins renamed "Providence Mariners" (Boston was the Bruins first)
Ontario Reign (Calif.) renamed "Ontario St. Bernards" (Wild/Lightning grandfathered in, but abstract names are stupid. Ontario is in San Bernadino County)
San Antonio Rampage renamed "San Antonio Iguanas" (Abstract name)
Abbotsford Heat renamed "Abbotsford Red Tails" (Abstract name and affiliation with Flames is gone)
... If you want to keep Hamilton, then I'll toss out Florida:
