Go Ed! And yes, response in Hamilton would be through the roof. There are enough hockey fans in southern Ontario to easily support 2 teams, probably 3.
I'm not arguing, but do you really think fans would bail on the Leafs (and to a lesser extent, the Sabres)? Aren't they supposed to be one of the most loyal and die hard fan bases in all of sports? I'm not from the area so maybe I am way off base, but for instance, if a new team sprung up closer to me than the Flyers, I would not jump ship on the Flyers and I imagine many, if not all of you, feel the same way.
I could see it being an easier adjustment in a less popular team's area or even slightly further away. Again, not arguing, but I just can't imagine a team's fan base like the Leafs (or the Sabres) being cut split up like that.
I'm not arguing, but do you really think fans would bail on the Leafs (and to a lesser extent, the Sabres)? Aren't they supposed to be one of the most loyal and die hard fan bases in all of sports? I'm not from the area so maybe I am way off base, but for instance, if a new team sprung up closer to me than the Flyers, I would not jump ship on the Flyers and I imagine many, if not all of you, feel the same way.
I could see it being an easier adjustment in a less popular team's area or even slightly further away. Again, not arguing, but I just can't imagine a team's fan base like the Leafs (or the Sabres) being cut split up like that.
Yup, because they had a season ticket sale when Balsillie was trying to buy the Yotes and they sold a ton. I was a Leaf fan up till 74 and got fed up and switched to Philly and I have no doubt there would be an audience, especially since they have a playoff team and the Leafs haven't been in the playoffs for years. The Leafs will also have a huge fanbase but it would be awesome to have such a close rival. You look at the Rangers, Isles and Devils who should only have 2 teams and NY doesn't have nearly the hockey madness than any Canadian city does. If they can have 3 there's no reason we can't.
You do not need a crystal ball to suggest Hamilton ( Toronto) would not be sold out every game. Season ticket drive there would crush what Winnipeg did. ( who have 3-5 years guaranteed sell outs).
Also nice to hear Ed is getting antsy, time for him to ***** slap the little puke and end this mess.
Lost my love for Snider (and Holmgren) when they traded Mike Richards but if Ed Snider gave little Napoleon enough of a whipping to get this thing back on the road to recovery, he'd be back in my good books for sure.
Lost my love for Snider (and Holmgren) when they traded Mike Richards but if Ed Snider gave little Napoleon enough of a whipping to get this thing back on the road to recovery, he'd be back in my good books for sure.
He's denying the story on the Flyers' web page. So typical of the Flyers' brass, they give a scoop, the story is written and then they immediately deny it, knowing they made their point.
He's denying the story on the Flyers' web page. So typical of the Flyers' brass, they give a scoop, the story is written and then they immediately deny it, knowing they made their point.
Well, he would have to do that in this case. He's walking on egg shells with certain other owners
I've always been convinced that the Flyers are strongly against the NHL's position in all of this. I don't doubt that they leaked that to the media on purpose
Well, he would have to do that in this case. He's walking on egg shells with certain other owners
I've always been convinced that the Flyers are strongly against the NHL's position in all of this. I don't doubt that they leaked that to the media on purpose
Certain members of the Philly media tend to make a story when there isn't one.
Yup, because they had a season ticket sale when Balsillie was trying to buy the Yotes and they sold a ton. I was a Leaf fan up till 74 and got fed up and switched to Philly and I have no doubt there would be an audience, especially since they have a playoff team and the Leafs haven't been in the playoffs for years. The Leafs will also have a huge fanbase but it would be awesome to have such a close rival. You look at the Rangers, Isles and Devils who should only have 2 teams and NY doesn't have nearly the hockey madness than any Canadian city does. If they can have 3 there's no reason we can't.
Good deal. I'm all for getting the teams out of the sun belt.
Yup, because they had a season ticket sale when Balsillie was trying to buy the Yotes and they sold a ton. I was a Leaf fan up till 74 and got fed up and switched to Philly and I have no doubt there would be an audience, especially since they have a playoff team and the Leafs haven't been in the playoffs for years. The Leafs will also have a huge fanbase but it would be awesome to have such a close rival. You look at the Rangers, Isles and Devils who should only have 2 teams and NY doesn't have nearly the hockey madness than any Canadian city does. If they can have 3 there's no reason we can't.
A team in Hamilton hurts Buffalo ,, Its pretty simple
Toronto may someday get a 2nd team ,, But Hamilton will not get an NHL team
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers
Good deal. I'm all for getting the teams out of the sun belt.
TB and Carolina have been good for league as has the expansion into Nashville (Great fans grown from ground up)
Stars before Hicks destroyed them financially were a top draw thru late 90's and early 00's and powerhouse
Abandoning the Sunbelt is idiotic ,, Also abandons all growth made there and the NHL wont be a national league with no presence in South
how is this possible? Why does gary bettman act like the NHL's owners have no control over the contracts they design and present to their players? there's already a cap. I do not understand this **** at all. All i know is i go to watch the players. I love hockey but ****** this league is a joke.
Yup, because they had a season ticket sale when Balsillie was trying to buy the Yotes and they sold a ton. I was a Leaf fan up till 74 and got fed up and switched to Philly and I have no doubt there would be an audience, especially since they have a playoff team and the Leafs haven't been in the playoffs for years. The Leafs will also have a huge fanbase but it would be awesome to have such a close rival. You look at the Rangers, Isles and Devils who should only have 2 teams and NY doesn't have nearly the hockey madness than any Canadian city does. If they can have 3 there's no reason we can't.
there is nowhere near the hockey madness in the NY/NJ area compared to the Toronto area - but there are 20 billion people in the NY metropolitan area compared to 6 million in the Toronto area.
TB and Carolina have been good for league as has the expansion into Nashville (Great fans grown from ground up)
Stars before Hicks destroyed them financially were a top draw thru late 90's and early 00's and powerhouse
Abandoning the Sunbelt is idiotic ,, Also abandons all growth made there and the NHL wont be a national league with no presence in South
Maybe I spoke too generally. I don't really consider Carolina a sun belt team (but if others do I guess I can't argue that). Obviously not all the sun belt teams have been failures. Florida, Phoenix, and more recently Dallas are all fledgling form my understanding. Move Florida and Phoenix. Leave the others and see how things go.
Maybe I spoke too generally. I don't really consider Carolina a sun belt team (but if others do I guess I can't argue that). Obviously not all the sun belt teams have been failures. Florida, Phoenix, and more recently Dallas are all fledgling form my understanding. Move Florida and Phoenix. Leave the others and see how things go.
TB and Carolina have been good for league as has the expansion into Nashville (Great fans grown from ground up)
Stars before Hicks destroyed them financially were a top draw thru late 90's and early 00's and powerhouse
Abandoning the Sunbelt is idiotic ,, Also abandons all growth made there and the NHL wont be a national league with no presence in South
Isn't the NHL telling us that another lockout (and another lost season) is necessary because too many franchises are losing money? And aren't the majority of these financially losing franchises located in non-traditional markets? But these are all good franchises for the league's health and apparently growth in these markets is indispensable. I can't handle the dissonance.
there is nowhere near the hockey madness in the NY/NJ area compared to the Toronto area - but there are 20 billion people in the NY metropolitan area compared to 6 million in the Toronto area.
Yeah but if only 500,000 of those in NY care about hockey compared to 1 million in the GTA...
Hockey players don't have "further down the line". For most, this will be the only CBA negotiation they will be a part of. Over half of all NHL players play less than 100 NHL games in their career. Only 4% dress for more than 1000 games. Over 60% of the current members of the NHLPA won't be around in 7 years.
Those run-of-the-mill, rank-and-file players don't really have much to gain or lose either way. They are "minimum wage" guys one way or the other. Their future isn't really at stake here.
Those run-of-the-mill, rank-and-file players don't really have much to gain or lose either way. They are "minimum wage" guys one way or the other. Their future isn't really at stake here.
Borderline players are more likely to be replaced in the lineup, meaning they lose there jobs and their pay. Their future is much more at stake then Ovechkin for example
Borderline players are more likely to be replaced in the lineup, meaning they lose there jobs and their pay. Their future is much more at stake then Ovechkin for example
That is merely the definition of being a replacement player. They are always looking over their shoulder, lockout or no. This stalemate is about the talent, not the replacement guys.
That is merely the definition of being a replacement player. They are always looking over their shoulder, lockout or no. This stalemate is about the talent, not the replacement guys.
The point is the "replacement guys" lose a year and possibly their jobs as a result of it. Let's say you are Jody Shelley for instance and you are scheduled to make 1.1 million dollars this year. You get burned on that, lose your job to Tom Sestito and are out of the league due to lockout. NHL has guarenteed contracts what if he had plans for that cash somewhere down the line and now no longer gets it will never see that type of contract again. Shelley isn't the best example by any means as he has been around forever, but there are fringe guys all over the NHL that can lose big time due to it.
The point is the "replacement guys" lose a year and possibly their jobs as a result of it. Let's say you are Jody Shelley for instance and you are scheduled to make 1.1 million dollars this year. You get burned on that, lose your job to Tom Sestito and are out of the league due to lockout. NHL has guarenteed contracts what if he had plans for that cash somewhere down the line and now no longer gets it will never see that type of contract again. Shelley isn't the best example by any means as he has been around forever, but there are fringe guys all over the NHL that can lose big time due to it.
Everyone (stars, scrubs, owners) is losing revenue because the league is dormant. The players who lose jobs because of the lockout are marginal players to begin with -- their jobs are in jeopardy every year no matter what.
Snotbubbles' point was that the real "long haul" implications don't really matter to the players because because their careers are so short. My counter-point was that the short careers belong to the marginal players who don't really have a stake in the core issues. They aren't the ones in the cross-hairs because they are small potatoes. It's just arithmetic. Limiting the contracting rights and salaries of the top paid star players (and the skill players who are one or two rungs below them) is where the real meat is. And those players have long, relatively secure careers.
