HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

NHL to Expand 2 teams in Canada - THN

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-13-2012, 08:34 AM
  #851
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
Orr, you know I love your Mix East And West agenda.

However, there's a number of things I'd change.
If you're adding six markets, why not use the markets themselves to solve why W-E conferences don't work?
Been there, done that recently in another thread here.

Quote:
MIN, CHI, STL, NSH, DAL, Houston
WIN, EDM, CAL, COL, PHX, Salt Lake
LA, ANA, SJS, VAN, SEA, Portland

Houston is larger than MIL, MIL is right on top of CHI while HOU is four hours from DAL.

Salt Lake is smaller than KC or MIL, but would give Colorado a regional rival.
Absolutely! I forgor Houston when I posted that yesterday. Definitely would be a more potential choice than Milwaukee. Salt Lake I also included in that other East-West alignment I mentioned above.

Got to go to work now, I'll get back with more.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 09:39 AM
  #852
Fidel Astro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Putting that all together:
WestEast
PACIFICNORTHEAST
VancouverMontreal
SeattleBoston
San JoseNY Islanders
Los AngelesNY Rangers
AnaheimNew Jersey
PortlandQuebec City
- -
GREAT LAKESNORTHWEST
OttawaEdmonton
TorontoCalgary
BuffaloWinnipeg
DetroitMinnesota
ChicagoColorado
Southern OntMilwaukee
- -
CENTRALATLANTIC
DallasFlorida
St LouisTampa Bay
NashvilleWashington
ColumbusPhiladelphia
CarolinaPittsburgh
Kansas CityAtlanta

Blue = Expansion 1, Red = Expansion 2, Purple = Expansion 3.
(Ultimately Atlanta could flip Divisions with Carolina.)
No way Atlanta is ever getting a third shot at the NHL after two disasters. Not going to happen.

Fidel Astro is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:46 PM
  #853
voyageur
Registered lunatic
 
voyageur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: negotiable
Country: Canada
Posts: 409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SerenityRick View Post
Not bad except Boston and Montreal not being divisional rivals anymore would be extremely controversial
Splitting up Montréal-Boston would be controversial, as that is a great rivalry. But Montréal-Québec was an even greater rivalry until the Nordiques flew away, one that captures the passion of an entire province (nation). Boston in the Comcast/NBC division gives the broadcaster access to the greatest hockey metropolises in a concentrated format, and preserves the equal distribution of Original Six franchises. So I say let it be. The Northeast is essentially configured as a Canadian division, and maybe Buffalo can swap some broadcasting rights from TSN for the concession of a couple of neutral games in
Hamilton.

I know it won't play out the way I suggested. I think the Molson-Bettman feud and Quebecor's lawsuit against Bell will hamper Québec's bid. Sports after all is governed by politics. I also believe that both the owners and players are greedy enough to charge exhorbitant amounts for expansion teams which will only further saturate the league (because it is evident that the NHL has the same stability as the NFL) and extend the NHL season, when the best way to grow the sport is in my opinion to shorten our season, and work in conjunction with the IIHF to have international hockey expanded.

voyageur is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 02:49 PM
  #854
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,801
vCash: 500
It's real easy to make alignment plans that work when you're "allowed" to move teams and expand the league by six.

I think 32 in the 4 conference structure is pretty easy, too. Southern Ontario in the Central, CBJ in the "Patrick" (with PIT) and QUE in the Adams (with OTT, MON and BOS).

KevFu is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 01:42 AM
  #855
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fidel Astro View Post
No way Atlanta is ever getting a third shot at the NHL after two disasters. Not going to happen.
It'll happen, just not for another 25 years.

DyerMaker66 is online now  
Old
11-14-2012, 03:12 AM
  #856
saskriders
ColinGreening's#1fan
 
saskriders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Calgary/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,248
vCash: 1322
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
It's real easy to make alignment plans that work when you're "allowed" to move teams and expand the league by six.

I think 32 in the 4 conference structure is pretty easy, too. Southern Ontario in the Central, CBJ in the "Patrick" (with PIT) and QUE in the Adams (with OTT, MON and BOS).
The thread title says expand 2 in Canada, why not do what is "easy"

saskriders is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 08:36 AM
  #857
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,880
vCash: 500
Two different conferences, two different realities. In the East, it's all about rivalries. In the West, it's all about travel. Why do the two have to be set up the same way? Why does one size have to fit all?

East: NYR, NYI, NJ, Phi
North: Bos, Mtl, Ott, Tor
Central: Pit, Buf, Det, Clb
South: Was, Car, TB, Fla

- All 16 ETZ teams in the East
- 6 games against 3 division opponents(18)
- 4 games against 12 conference opponents(48)
- 1 game against the West(14)
- Go to an even 80 game schedule, or add two wildcard games against two teams from the West for 82
- Every team has the same chance of making the playoffs
- 1-8 conference seeding
- Division winners get the top 4 seeds

Midwest: Chi, Nas, StL, Min, Wpg, Dal, Col
West: Van, Edm, Cal, SJ, LA, Ana, Phx

- 6 games against 6 division opponents(36)
- 4 games against 7 conference opponents(28)
- 1 game against the East(16) + maybe two wildcard games
- 80 or 82 game schedule
- Every team has the same chance to make the playoffs
- Top 4 in each group makes the playoffs, and they play each other in the 1st and 2nd round, to cut down on travel
- If the 5th team in one group has a better record than the 4th in the other, suck it up and deal with it
- Sorry Chi, StL, and Nas, but Detroit doesn't really care about you guys anyway, at least not enough to turn down more 7pm start times on the road

Now if only they could figure out how to split the billions of dollars, realignment might matter.

KingsFan7824 is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 09:27 AM
  #858
WJG
Running and Rioting
 
WJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: Ireland
Posts: 12,743
vCash: 500
I have been out the country for months and haven't been following anything hockey-related, but isn't Seattle further ahead than Markham/Hamilton at this point? Quebec City I could understand though.

WJG is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 09:46 AM
  #859
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Ahh, it's good, I wouldn't complain with that. But it could be better:



That Division should be matched with something similar in the east, or else Vancouver's alignment sticks out like a sore thumb. For Example:
NORTHEAST
Montreal
Boston
NY Islanders
NY Rangers
New Jersey

(which also keeps Montreal and Boston together)

Having your other western Canadian-content Division


Match this eastern one:
GREAT LAKES
Ottawa
Toronto
Buffalo
Detroit
Chicago

Now, no matter how much I think 2 Florida teams are at least 1 Florida team too many, there is no immediate sign that either team is going to disappear anytime soon:


The problem still remains though as to which three other teams would combine with the two Florida teams to create a well-rounded hockey Division. Other than one idea of combining the Florida teams with the NYC area teams, another option could be this one:
ATLANTIC
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Washington
Tampa Bay
Florida

(also keeps the Pennsylvania teams together)

Now that changes up your


To make this
CENTRAL
Dallas
St Louis
Nashville
Columbus
Carolina

A Division which I think creates an interesting mix and potential for those teams.

Putting that all together:
WestEast
PACIFICNORTHEAST
VancouverMontreal
SeattleBoston
San JoseNY Islanders
Los AngelesNY Rangers
AnaheimNew Jersey
PortlandQuebec City
- -
GREAT LAKESNORTHWEST
OttawaEdmonton
TorontoCalgary
BuffaloWinnipeg
DetroitMinnesota
ChicagoColorado
Southern OntMilwaukee
- -
CENTRALATLANTIC
DallasFlorida
St LouisTampa Bay
NashvilleWashington
ColumbusPhiladelphia
CarolinaPittsburgh
Kansas CityAtlanta

Blue = Expansion 1, Red = Expansion 2, Purple = Expansion 3.
(Ultimately Atlanta could flip Divisions with Carolina.)

Also notice that there are 3 Orig-6 teams in both Conferences.
I like this but replace KC with Houston. The NHL is lacking for big markets out west.

Melrose Munch is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 03:01 PM
  #860
KingJet*
Welcome Back
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,651
vCash: 500
Six places I would expand to are:

Canada: Quebec City, Saskatoon and if their moving a team in the Toronto Area, I say put it in Hamilton.

USA: Seattle, Kansas City and Milwaukee, Houston wouldn't be a bad idea, same with Oklahoma City, but I think Utah isn't a bad idea Either

Quebec Nordiques/Voyagaurs
Saskatoon... Can't think of one
Hamilton Steelers
Seattle Thunderbirds/Americans/Totems
Kansas City Bullets?
Utah Miners
Oklahoma City Oaks

KingJet* is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 03:28 PM
  #861
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 24,925
vCash: 50
Saskatoon could happen..... in a century or so. Until the 2100's, not gonna happen.

I'd be half willing to lay odds that Atlanta will get a third team before Saskatoon gets their first NHL team.

As for OKC..... also a way's off, in all likelihood, if at all. More likely than not, the NBA will cover the market for a while until they eventually get an NFL team, and that'll be that for the very foreseeable future.

Salt Lake City does make a lot of sense as a longterm expansion goal for the NHL, given their ever-increasing market size and wealth, but they're still probably at least two decades off from being serious contenders for an NHL team, imho. If the NHL and USA Hockey were halfway intelligent, though, they'd be investing in promoting the hell out of the game in Utah and increasing youth hockey participation in order to pave the way for an eventual team.

Kansas City makes sense now, except they've shown no inclination of having a potential owner or ownership consortium stepping up.

No Fun Shogun is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 04:04 PM
  #862
daveleaf
Registered User
 
daveleaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,561
vCash: 500
Adding two more teams does nothing good for the league other than short term money when there are still franchises that are hurting. Relocating Phx and maybe Flo/Col might make more sense. Move struggling franchises to more lucrative markets. Immediate impact in ticket sales and if a new CBA comes in at 50/50 would only help these clubs.

All that being said there are still other teams struggling such as Dal, TBay, SJ, Stl and others. So again, adding two more teams would be ludicrous.

daveleaf is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 04:27 PM
  #863
SCinSJ
Sith Lord Burns
 
SCinSJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Rafael, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveleaf View Post
Adding two more teams does nothing good for the league other than short term money when there are still franchises that are hurting. Relocating Phx and maybe Flo/Col might make more sense. Move struggling franchises to more lucrative markets. Immediate impact in ticket sales and if a new CBA comes in at 50/50 would only help these clubs.

All that being said there are still other teams struggling such as Dal, TBay, SJ, Stl and others. So again, adding two more teams would be ludicrous.
SJ is struggling? Did I miss something? That's actually kind of a serious question as I haven't been paying as much attention through the lockout.

SCinSJ is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 04:37 PM
  #864
daveleaf
Registered User
 
daveleaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCinSJ View Post
SJ is struggling? Did I miss something? That's actually kind of a serious question as I haven't been paying as much attention through the lockout.
Apparently, which is shocking to me, on Hockey Central one day in Canada they were mentioning that word got out that SJ lost money in each of the last six years. Is it real money, creative accounting? I don't know but the balance sheet was made to not look that good.

daveleaf is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 04:44 PM
  #865
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveleaf View Post
Adding two more teams does nothing good for the league other than short term money when there are still franchises that are hurting. Relocating Phx and maybe Flo/Col might make more sense. Move struggling franchises to more lucrative markets. Immediate impact in ticket sales and if a new CBA comes in at 50/50 would only help these clubs.

All that being said there are still other teams struggling such as Dal, TBay, SJ, Stl and others. So again, adding two more teams would be ludicrous.
Well, Columbus can't be relocated until 2039 so they're out of the question.

candyman82 is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 04:46 PM
  #866
InjuredChoker
Registered User
 
InjuredChoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: LTIR or golf course
Posts: 17,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCinSJ View Post
SJ is struggling? Did I miss something? That's actually kind of a serious question as I haven't been paying as much attention through the lockout.
They lost/lose money. Significance is more or less speculation.

I don't think they really struggle yet but if/when they start missing playoffs..

InjuredChoker is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 05:04 PM
  #867
daveleaf
Registered User
 
daveleaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by candyman82 View Post
Well, Columbus can't be relocated until 2039 so they're out of the question.
Is that because of the lease situation? Columbus is a nice city, too bad they can't get more fans in the building.

daveleaf is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 05:23 PM
  #868
Jopsey
Registered User
 
Jopsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 585
vCash: 500
Why would they expand opposed to relocating? Relocate Phoenix, Florida, or Columbus. Why add more teams when the majority are struggling as it is.

And I would really like to see Wisconsin get a team. I think they could support one and the rivalry with Minnesota would be insane

Jopsey is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 05:26 PM
  #869
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,066
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jopsey View Post
Why would they expand opposed to relocating? Relocate Phoenix, Florida, or Columbus. Why add more teams when the majority are struggling as it is.
Florida makes money for the company that owns it through the arena. Columbus is stuck until 2039. That leaves Phoenix. There aren't any other teams available for relocation unless you want to add Edmonton to that list (never going to happen).

SaintPatrick33 is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 05:27 PM
  #870
saskriders
ColinGreening's#1fan
 
saskriders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Calgary/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,248
vCash: 1322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jopsey View Post
Why would they expand opposed to relocating? Relocate Phoenix, Florida, or Columbus. Why add more teams when the majority are struggling as it is.

And I would really like to see Wisconsin get a team. I think they could support one and the rivalry with Minnesota would be insane
Imagine if they named the team the Wisconsin North Stars

saskriders is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 05:30 PM
  #871
Jopsey
Registered User
 
Jopsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 585
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post
Imagine if they named the team the Wisconsin North Stars
Their arena would be burned down before a game is ever even played.

Jopsey is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 05:32 PM
  #872
5 Minute Major
Registered User
 
5 Minute Major's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Binghamton, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 2,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hero View Post
Love it.

Imo Toronto/Quebec both would be excellent.
I love it as well.

Buffalo and four Canadian based teams. first Niagara Center would be rocking with Canadian fans coming through the gates.

5 Minute Major is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 05:33 PM
  #873
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveleaf View Post
Adding two more teams does nothing good for the league other than short term money when there are still franchises that are hurting. Relocating Phx and maybe Flo/Col might make more sense. Move struggling franchises to more lucrative markets. Immediate impact in ticket sales and if a new CBA comes in at 50/50 would only help these clubs.

All that being said there are still other teams struggling such as Dal, TBay, SJ, Stl and others. So again, adding two more teams would be ludicrous.
If payroll is tied to HRR, it probably does make more sense to expand rather than relocate.

Expansion drives up the average far less than relocation. You have one less poor team with relocation, but more teams are closer to poor, and the poor are further from the midpoint.

KevFu is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 05:43 PM
  #874
Faidh ar Rud Eigin
Modhnóirí Claonta
 
Faidh ar Rud Eigin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Transcendent
Country: Guernsey
Posts: 15,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveleaf View Post
Adding two more teams does nothing good for the league other than short term money when there are still franchises that are hurting. Relocating Phx and maybe Flo/Col might make more sense. Move struggling franchises to more lucrative markets. Immediate impact in ticket sales and if a new CBA comes in at 50/50 would only help these clubs.

All that being said there are still other teams struggling such as Dal, TBay, SJ, Stl and others. So again, adding two more teams would be ludicrous.
Just about every team you mentioned isn't struggling. Where do you get your information from?

Faidh ar Rud Eigin is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 05:51 PM
  #875
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveleaf View Post
Apparently, which is shocking to me, on Hockey Central one day in Canada they were mentioning that word got out that SJ lost money in each of the last six years. Is it real money, creative accounting? I don't know but the balance sheet was made to not look that good.
"Losing money" is borderline worthless as an indicator.

San Jose has lost money because they spend it on players:
2008: $44 payroll, +$2.4
2009: $54 payroll, -$5.0
2010: $57 payroll, -$6.2
2011: $65 payroll, -$7.8

Isn't this what everyone is clamoring for in the revenue sharing threads? "There's no incentive to improve your team!"

San Jose is what you'd WANT: They spend money to increase revenues. They lose money because they CHOOSE to lose money.
The Sharks are most like a loss-leader for the arena, which the team operates.

Even without the sweet lease that gives them all the arena revenues, their $27.5 in operating losses since buying the team in 2002 will be offset by the franchise rising $64 million in value over the purchase price since then. They'll make back all their losses on the team via the sale of the team when they decide to do so; and the team's success brings in more arena revenue.

If a team didn't invest in payroll and spent only what they can afford (which the league no longer allows), their revenue streams would be stagnant, their team value would be stagnant, and their franchise value doesn't go up.

KevFu is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:31 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.