HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
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.

Who here would like to see the NHL completely dissolve?

View Poll Results: Would you like to see the NHL crumble and see a new league created?
Yes 210 29.41%
No 504 70.59%
Voters: 714. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-12-2012, 10:42 PM
  #351
AM
Registered User
 
AM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,890
vCash: 500
Id like to see 40 teams and lower salaries.

AM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2012, 10:46 PM
  #352
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,067
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AM View Post
Id like to see 40 teams and lower salaries.
I think 40 is on the overkill side.

SaintPatrick33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2012, 11:58 PM
  #353
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Quebec, Seattle, Hamilton, and possibly Milwaukee and Houston with Saskatoon a a few years down the road when the population is larger. You don't need a dozen possible destinations when there aren't a dozen teams that need to move.
Good list. A couple other destinations to at least consider are Baltimore, KC and Portland. Baltimore is a solid standalone market in any other sport it's been tried at, and KC and Portland are good options to have in your pocket to stash a team temporarily, like the Oklahoma City thunder or the Kansas City Athletics. There's plenty of markets worth a shot if the red button really needs to be pressed.

Relocation should only ever be a last ditch option. Anyone calling for contraction is right out of their head.

Dojji* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 12:00 AM
  #354
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,067
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dojji View Post
Good list. A couple other destinations to at least consider are Baltimore, KC and Portland. Baltimore is a solid standalone market in any other sport it's been tried at, and KC and Portland are good options to have in your pocket to stash a team temporarily, like the Oklahoma City thunder or the Kansas City Athletics. There's plenty of markets worth a shot if the red button really needs to be pressed.

Relocation should only ever be a last ditch option. Anyone calling for contraction is right out of their head.
What I find mind-boggling is that people seem to think there's a whole bunch of teams needing relocating when the plain truth is there aren't.

SaintPatrick33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 12:13 AM
  #355
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
What I find mind-boggling is that people seem to think there's a whole bunch of teams needing relocating when the plain truth is there aren't.
I think it's just a situation where they sort of radicalize themselves over time. A team having empty seats for a stretch of time becomes a team that's struggling, becomes a team that's clearly not likely to succeed in its market, becomes for the love of God, get that team to a Canadian city, STAT! It's faulty logic, but who said people are logical?

Dojji* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 12:18 AM
  #356
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,067
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dojji View Post
I think it's just a situation where they sort of radicalize themselves over time. A team having empty seats for a stretch of time becomes a team that's struggling, becomes a team that's clearly not likely to succeed in its market, becomes for the love of God, get that team to a Canadian city, STAT! It's faulty logic, but who said people are logical?
Yeah, I'll never understand the ones who want to turn it into a Canada vs United States thing

I expect people to be logical and not let their irrational emotions do their thinking for them.....not that I get my expectations met as often as I like

SaintPatrick33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 12:32 AM
  #357
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
That said, Phoenix *is* a problem. I'm not sure that that market can support that franchise right now.

Taking a look at the full suite of options is probably appropriate in that one situation. Relocation has to be on the table, and Quebec has to be on the table as ONE OF A NUMBER OF possible relocation sites.

Going from that to pretending you can use the struggles of the Phoenix market to in some way condemn the entire southern expansion, on the other hand. is a delusion that rises out of the frustration of 2 members of that southern expansion being former Canadian teams that Canadian fans want "back."

Dojji* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 03:13 AM
  #358
Master Shake
Registered User
 
Master Shake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kazakhstan
Posts: 1,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davebo View Post
Teams 'not invited' might sue? Shortest. Lawsuit. Ever...

They only exist due to the incompetence of bettman et al. They are welcome to stay in the nhl that created them. I have zero sympathy for those scrubs - who are the primary reason why we have no top level hockey in North America. **** them with a 10' pole! lol


So you think a small league will lead to a better league? Seriously? Just how much money do you think this league will make to be able to pay players?

So lets see what we have here

1. Low revenues
2. A dozen at best teams
3. Massive loss of jobs for NHL players
4. Complete loss of 'Major' sporting status among sports media

Yeah that sounds like a winner to me. Bet the players would be lining up in droves for the 30k a year contracts.

Master Shake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 03:16 AM
  #359
Master Shake
Registered User
 
Master Shake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kazakhstan
Posts: 1,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dojji View Post
That said, Phoenix *is* a problem. I'm not sure that that market can support that franchise right now.

Taking a look at the full suite of options is probably appropriate in that one situation. Relocation has to be on the table, and Quebec has to be on the table as ONE OF A NUMBER OF possible relocation sites.

Going from that to pretending you can use the struggles of the Phoenix market to in some way condemn the entire southern expansion, on the other hand. is a delusion that rises out of the frustration of 2 members of that southern expansion being former Canadian teams that Canadian fans want "back."
Calgary and Edmonton both had to beg fans to buy tickets a few years ago. Edmonton almost moved to Houston.

Why is growing the league only the owners responsibility? Why should the players only benefit from the partnership while sharing none of the risk or cost?

Master Shake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 03:22 AM
  #360
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plan The Parade View Post
The League decided to add 4 teams for the 1999 NHL season. In 1997, the Board of Governors listened to 9 cities bid for a team. Those cities were:

Nashville
Houston
Atlanta
St. Paul
Columbus
Oklahoma City
Hampton Roads
Raleigh
Hamilton

That seems fairly logical to me. And what are these "wrong reasons" you speak of?
To get a platform to get a tv deal. It was a fairly science-fiction by Bettman: put teams in the desert, in the south were there's no hockey tradition "because he needed teams everywhere to get a big tv contract". Not only it never worked, but to do crazy expansion like these and not even thinking about the talent pool and if there would be enough talent to fill those teams was stupid and irresponsible.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 03:33 AM
  #361
Master Shake
Registered User
 
Master Shake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kazakhstan
Posts: 1,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
To get a platform to get a tv deal. It was a fairly science-fiction by Bettman: put teams in the desert, in the south were there's no hockey tradition "because he needed teams everywhere to get a big tv contract". Not only it never worked, but to do crazy expansion like these and not even thinking about the talent pool and if there would be enough talent to fill those teams was stupid and irresponsible.
Wrong wrong and wrong.
Bettman has grown the game tremendously.

Welcome to last year....
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=560238

NHL, NBC sign record-setting 10-year TV deal


Industry observers were widely impressed with the decade-length of the deal after months of reporting on the League's courting by several suitors. NBC Sports Group will pay about $200 million annually, for the length of the contract, reports SportsBusiness Daily.




PS- Canada has less citizens than the State of California alone. How exactly do you propose the NHL grow under such a small population?

Master Shake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 03:57 AM
  #362
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jossipov View Post
Yes, that's exactly what I meant
Pretty much.

Quote:
The big TV contract is important. The NFL is HUGE...and ticket sales are not even a quarter of their revenue. It is needed to give the game national attention. An NHL with only provincial attention and surviving only on gate revenue will die shortly it gets overtaken by MLS.
But you get that big tv deal, when there's a demand for it. Don't try to artificaly trying to create interest. The NFL's business and product has been so sound and so well administrated that tv stations are ripping themselves to shred to have the NFL on their tv.

Quote:
And how is "the soul of the game" tarnished exactly? What do you mean by Soul of the game?
Again, I'm sorry but a lot of this just reads like "My team didnt compete, and that's not fair, because we "deserve" it."
By putting teams in places where it doesn't deserve to be hockey just to make yourself pretty for the big tv networks. It's whoring on a whole new level.

And I haven't mentioned the changing of the game, the shootouts and all that stuff.

Quote:
Both of them? Again, if you dont try and break into new markets you wont go anywhere.
I disagree. Re-enforce the place that you already have, make your product better known through better promotion and people will be drawn to the NHL logo. That's how you create fidelity with the fans. Hockey fans don't want to see teams in Florida.


Quote:
I disagree. You know the other team they wanted to remove? It was the Twins, and now the Twins are doing great.
That's a matter of opinion. I think MLB as a whole is doing great. Should there be baseball in Minnesota? I don't know.

Quote:
However, the biggest part is that if it wasnt for the expos there may never have been a Blue Jays, because the Expos were important for breaking baseball into the Canadian market...expanding the game.
I would not call going to Toronto expanding the game. It's not the best baseball market.


Quote:
Also, the Expos did not fail simply because people just didnt support them, they failed because they were horribly mismanaged. And you know what helped more than anything else with the huge drop in the fan base? The strikes and.....they had no TV contract.
because TV contracts are important.
I'm a Expos fan and I know, even when they had a stacked team, the Expos had problems filling the place. Even when they had the best team in Baseball in 94! Instead of mismanagement, you should look at the reasons why management sold off most of their best players: because they could not afford them because the market was not strong enough.

Quote:
The Quebec Nordiques werent filling their arena, and were losing money. There was also little potential to grow. Now, I'd actually not have a problem with moving the Yotes to Quebec City, but that is a lot different from what you were suggesting, and it also doesnt mean that a future Quebec Nordiques would not have revenue problems and be able to survive in a league without revenue sharing, salary caps, TV contracts, ect.
For 5 years straight of losing and finishing last, the Nordiques were still filling their arena. I was there.

Quote:
Dont agree much with that argument. Heck, you can just compress the NHL to two teams, and every game can be the all star game...that would be exciting.
You can think whatever but more quality talent makes for better hockey. I'm just going with logic. Maybe you prefer less talent per teams?

Quote:
Frankly, I think the opposite for this very reason: Less exposure of hockey = fewer people getting into hockey = fewer people becoming good hockey players in the future (more good soccer players though).
Who talked about less exposure? I think less teams in financial difficulties would mean a healthier league and more good teams with a compressed pool of talent. Making the league better and more successful.

Quote:
Could you imagine if more kids in the US were getting into hockey instead of just football? Not only would the NHL get a bit more color in its cheeks, but the talent pool would expand greatly. These are long term considerations that are important for the future of the game, and for the long term, no matter what and even with relocations, there needs to be a continental league with national attention.
Yea because the NHL would lose the potential of a kid in Phoenix becoming a hockey player? lol People won't suddenly drop Football for hockey because we want them too. Americans knows that hockey exist, they decided they didn't want to play it. I don't think the NHL ever had in mind to find futur hockey players by putting teams in Florida. The NHL should concentrate on making it easier on Canadians to play hockey. You know the place were most players come from? Hockey is pretty costly these days and kids are dropping like flies because of it.


Quote:
Maybe, but it didnt...and going backwards (new league of the O6 and a few small Canadian markets?) would not only not fix that, but make that problem worst. It also hasnt been a failure, Revenue and media attention has been going up. It hasnt been a success either. I'm all for making adjustments...but that's a red herring...because it wasnt what was being talked about.
All we're saying is that the big clubs would rise up pretty easily if the NHL would crumble. Maybe hockey would be played at the places it deserve to be played again.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 04:03 AM
  #363
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Shake View Post
Wrong wrong and wrong.
Bettman has grown the game tremendously.

Welcome to last year....
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=560238

NHL, NBC sign record-setting 10-year TV deal


Industry observers were widely impressed with the decade-length of the deal after months of reporting on the League's courting by several suitors. NBC Sports Group will pay about $200 million annually, for the length of the contract, reports SportsBusiness Daily.
First, it was pocket changes, second, that length is incredibly stupid, especially if NBC has exclusivity. Hockey rarely has exposure on NBC.


Quote:
PS- Canada has less citizens than the State of California alone. How exactly do you propose the NHL grow under such a small population?
Growth? It's more like the songs of Charlatans. Fix the economic problems of the league then we'll talk about growth. Growth can mean a lot of things. I say going to Quebec is a growth because it's a hockey-starved market that doesn't have a team. Go where the interest is, where the money is. Just like the UFC does. The fastest-growing brand in the World.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 08:05 AM
  #364
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Shake View Post
Wrong wrong and wrong.
Bettman has grown the game tremendously.

Welcome to last year....
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=560238

NHL, NBC sign record-setting 10-year TV deal


Industry observers were widely impressed with the decade-length of the deal after months of reporting on the League's courting by several suitors. NBC Sports Group will pay about $200 million annually, for the length of the contract, reports SportsBusiness Daily.




PS- Canada has less citizens than the State of California alone. How exactly do you propose the NHL grow under such a small population?
YEAH!!!




Except, that the NHL is getting a measly 200m per year and were locked out so no money is being made from the games!

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 08:28 AM
  #365
saskganesh
Registered User
 
saskganesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the Annex
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,046
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Shake View Post

PS- Canada has less citizens than the State of California alone. How exactly do you propose the NHL grow under such a small population?
But the business has grown in Canada, quite a bit. Revenues are up, rinks are full, waiting lists are swelling and the league is looking forward to renegotiating its national TV deals, which will bring in more lucre than NBC once they are consummated.

The difference is that in Canada, the NHL is like the NFL. It's THE big league, so the ceiling keeps on rising. And some of these revenues -- National TV, merch, some sponsorships -- go into central revenue, so American teams benefit financially from growing the game in Canada.

saskganesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 08:56 AM
  #366
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskganesh View Post
But the business has grown in Canada, quite a bit. Revenues are up, rinks are full, waiting lists are swelling and the league is looking forward to renegotiating its national TV deals, which will bring in more lucre than NBC once they are consummated.

The difference is that in Canada, the NHL is like the NFL. It's THE big league, so the ceiling keeps on rising. And some of these revenues -- National TV, merch, some sponsorships -- go into central revenue, so American teams benefit financially from growing the game in Canada.
But Canada is changing. And hockey is expensive. The US school system is better for growth then the CHL.

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 10:32 AM
  #367
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
I'd rather have 10% of 100 dollars than 50% of 10 dollars.

Especially if I thought that with intelligent planning and hard work, I could wind up with a fair bit more than 10% of that 100 dollars while there's only 5 more dollars to even grab in the other option.

Canadian fans need to accept that the way to grow this game is to Americanize it. That is simply the truth, love it or hate it.

Southern fans tailgating outside a hockey game, The Rats, and the "hey you suck" chant Nashville cribbed from its college sports experience is one of the best things that could happen to the sport. Frankly I'm looking forward to how they change the sport by adopting it into their own unique sports fan culture. So far the results are very interesting.


Last edited by Dojji*: 12-13-2012 at 10:38 AM.
Dojji* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 01:04 PM
  #368
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dojji View Post
I'd rather have 10% of 100 dollars than 50% of 10 dollars.

Especially if I thought that with intelligent planning and hard work, I could wind up with a fair bit more than 10% of that 100 dollars while there's only 5 more dollars to even grab in the other option.

Canadian fans need to accept that the way to grow this game is to Americanize it. That is simply the truth, love it or hate it.

Southern fans tailgating outside a hockey game, The Rats, and the "hey you suck" chant Nashville cribbed from its college sports experience is one of the best things that could happen to the sport. Frankly I'm looking forward to how they change the sport by adopting it into their own unique sports fan culture. So far the results are very interesting.
the best thing for the league it to chase fair weather fans in hopes that some small percentage of them might eventually ( after all the free tickets with happy meals) become a fan of the game ?
I dont think so.

The only thing the NHL needs the south for is a big US TV contract. That is it. If the NHL can survive without a national US contract ( and it most certainly can) and it may never get a nba-like tv deal no matter what they do then by extension the NHL does not need the southern teams and their fates become ever more precarious.

If this means that a large part of the us population ( who were given the chance to become fans but declined) see the nhl as small potatoes, so be it. canadians like the hip even though people dont know them in the southern us. we like smarties and coffee crisp and tim hortons when most southern americans have never heads of any of these. You want to say that these are also small potatoe things, go right ahead. Its not going to make one iota of difference as to whether we enjoy it or not. If you understnd your market ou can make a go of it by relying on your base, expansion for the sake of expansion ( especially in non traditional markets) is frought with risk and linked to dubious benefits in the loyal markets.


The nhl should not be run like a freaking cell phone company giving all of the best deals to new subscribers and telling the people who have supported the league for years and years to get bent because the mere potential of a new potential customer is more important than an existing loyal customer.

And I passionately dislike the term " americaninzation" of the NHL, when what you really mean is the expansion into high population density areas of the US that have so far never given a rat's behind about the game. Continued growth in manhattan and buffalo and boston and philly are absolutely consistent with league growth and independent of whether the souther teams stay, go or fold.

I'm loathe to speak for all canadians but what I want is more stable longterm self sustaining teams. If these teams can come from the south, that's great. If they cant, find regions where they can.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 04:08 PM
  #369
Jossipov
Patty's Better
 
Jossipov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Arlington, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,427
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
the best thing for the league it to chase fair weather fans in hopes that some small percentage of them might eventually ( after all the free tickets with happy meals) become a fan of the game ?
I dont think so.
Uhm, I completely disagree with this on many levels. The problem is that the NHL has done a HORRIBLE job at this, that's the problem.
I'll tell a simple story from last night just to prove my point. So my wife is watching the neighbors kid while she's in Florida this week. Last night my wife had class so I was to watch him and put him to bed at 9:30pm. I'm watching TV and and a replay of a Rangers/Devils game is on. The kid wakes up at 10pm and says he cant sleep, after rubbing his eyes he asks "what's that?". Now his family is from Brazil and lived in the states about 5 years. In those 5 years this kid has never seen a hockey game...ever. He didnt know what it was. I decide he needs to stay up and get a lesson ASAP (because I'm a responsible adult like that... ). I proceed to inform him that this is the greatest game on Earth, and we start watching videos on youtube for the next half an hour. I'm showing him saying "Hay, you see that deke right there? Now watch this...Bam!" and he's loving it. Ok, wife will be home soon he needs to go to bed, but first he complains he wants to watch more and asks "Can you take me to a game?"....I say "sure buddy.......one day when they exist again ". Now he's getting picked up from school and asking if he could try skating some time.
If there was no lockout right now he'd be buggng his mother to take him to games right now. I think so, because that's how I got into it...and those "happy meal" tickets made it possible for a poor kid like me to get to go to those games and develop that passion.

It's not kids either. Last season I got a good amount of people into hockey. Made a few fans. People like my old 1SG, who despite living in an area with 3 NHL teams in close distance and a major hockeypresence for over 80 years had never seen a hockey game. I cant imagine how hard this is in places that have no hockey history and only relatively new presence. I'd go out of my way to take up the slack for the piss poor marketing the NHL does and would buy extra tickets and give "happy meals". I could take 3 people to a game who never cared about hockey and get at least one of them to become a fan, that's huge, and it worked. That 1SG was getting playoff fever and inviting me to games a few months later.

What I'm saying is you can expand this game. You expand it with exposure, and then more exposure, and not having lockouts every time momentum starts to build helps. Are there markets that arent viable, yep. Does that mean you just write off half the teams around, hell no. It means you have to do a better job at it, and this attitude like "those people dont deserve hockey" is ridiculous. It's parochial and after a while starts to sound like some hipster who is upset that his favorite band was on MTV.
If that becomes the prevailing wisdom, then hockey is pretty much doomed to being that game with a following somewhere between lacrosse and curling. And then one day maybe all the Canadian kids will be wanting to grow up to play Major League soccer, with a few I imagine wanting to go to Europe to ya know...play in the big leagues.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
The nhl should not be run like a freaking cell phone company giving all of the best deals to new subscribers and telling the people who have supported the league for years and years to get bent because the mere potential of a new potential customer is more important than an existing loyal customer.
Not sure I get this. How exactly does Nashville having a team equate to you having to "get bent"?

Jossipov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 04:26 PM
  #370
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jossipov View Post


Not sure I get this. How exactly does Nashville having a team equate to you having to "get bent"?
Because they are living of city largess and if this dries up ( and it may) then the NHL is going to go back to the have markets and say, you gotta pay more. We have to stabilize nashville ( or any other southern team) because Nashville cant make it on their own. oh and we need this boost for the next twenty years.

The southern market teams get to do whatever the hell the want, they can literally run the team into the ground and when someone comes calling to collect, they can cry poor and say " we cant make in in the markets we pooched, so either increase RS or we go for another lockout and take if off the backs of players".

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 04:29 PM
  #371
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,067
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
Because they are living of city largess and if this dries up ( and it may) then the NHL is going to go back to the have markets and say, you gotta pay more. We have to stabilize nashville ( or any other southern team) because Nashville cant make it on their own. oh and we need this boost for the next twenty years.

The southern market teams get to do whatever the hell the want, they can literally run the team into the ground and when someone comes calling to collect, they can cry poor and say " we cant make in in the markets we pooched, so either increase RS or we go for another lockout and take if off the backs of players".
As opposed to the Maple Leafs running their franchise into the ground for 47 years while mooching off people dumb enough to slap down $100+ a ticket to eat a turd sammich?

SaintPatrick33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 04:38 PM
  #372
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jossipov View Post

What I'm saying is you can expand this game. You expand it with exposure, and then more exposure, and not having lockouts every time momentum starts to build helps. Are there markets that arent viable, yep. Does that mean you just write off half the teams around, hell no. It means you have to do a better job at it, and this attitude like "those people dont deserve hockey" is ridiculous. It's parochial and after a while starts to sound like some hipster who is upset that his favorite band was on MTV.
If that becomes the prevailing wisdom, then hockey is pretty much doomed to being that game with a following somewhere between lacrosse and curling. And then one day maybe all the Canadian kids will be wanting to grow up to play Major League soccer, with a few I imagine wanting to go to Europe to ya know...play in the big leagues.
?
if you have to distort other people's words, how good are your arguments ?

Want to know which fans deserve hockey, every singly one of them that wants it. Want to know which markets deserve hockey ? The ones that will freaking support it.

Its not parochial or being a hipster. I'm not against cities like phoenix or even Tennesse having a team because of demographics. I am against them having a team because it is my belief that these markets are systemically unable to support a team and this is based on their record of not being able to support a team ( without some subsidy or another) and their complete failure to make inroads into markets that they control.

If kids in canada want to play soccer that is great, but kids in canada are not likely going to want to start playing Aussie rules football because it is completely foreign culturally, and the overwhelming majority of kids will never even get to play on a AUF "pitch" ( I presume this is the correct term) because the infrastructure just does not exist.

How is this materially different from the overwhelming majority of the southern US wrt to hockey where ice's primary function is to keep drinks chilled ?

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 04:40 PM
  #373
Jossipov
Patty's Better
 
Jossipov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Arlington, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,427
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
Because they are living of city largess and if this dries up ( and it may) then the NHL is going to go back to the have markets and say, you gotta pay more. We have to stabilize nashville ( or any other southern team) because Nashville cant make it on their own. oh and we need this boost for the next twenty years.

The southern market teams get to do whatever the hell the want, they can literally run the team into the ground and when someone comes calling to collect, they can cry poor and say " we cant make in in the markets we pooched, so either increase RS or we go for another lockout and take if off the backs of players".

That greatly overestimates how much any of those teams are hurting, and Nashville has done a rather good job and is a growing market now. Ultimately the "haves" need the "have nots" to becomes stronger, that's why the league invested in expansion. Because in the long term a bigger league and larger market is better for everyone, including the "haves". As I said, in a contracting provincial league that is nationally irrelevant the "haves" will not remain "haves" either. If you think that the CAL Rangers would bring in the same revenue as the NHL Rangers, I'd say you are mistaken

Jossipov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 04:40 PM
  #374
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
As opposed to the Maple Leafs running their franchise into the ground for 47 years while mooching off people dumb enough to slap down $100+ a ticket to eat a turd sammich?
no one is forcing people to go to leafs games. The NHL is decidely forcing the leafs to contribute to RS.

and its not stupidity, its a combination of free market economics and markets teeming with passionate fans.

For nashville and phoenix..... one of these things is not like the other.... one of these things just doesnt belong.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 04:44 PM
  #375
preds1
Registered User
 
preds1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: TN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,231
vCash: 50
Come on down for an away game before you start bashing NSH.
I've met some pretty solid guys from VAN, OTT, and EDM when visiting here for a game. All were quite impressed.

Carry on....

preds1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 06:01 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.