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.
Realistically....How many teams should be in the NHL?
Can't see them cutting any teams. Would only make the league look worse. I think it could be 32 teams by the end of the decade (Phoenix relocates to Quebec City and expansion teams in 2 of Houston, Las Vegas, Seattle or the GTA).
__________________
Exhibit A as to how hockey doesn't matter on ESPN:
Last night an ESPN program was discussing how the Detroit Pistons needed a hero citing the heroes on the Detroit Tigers, Detroit Lions and no mention of the Detroit Red Wings. All this despite the Red Wings probably being the most succesful team in Detroit right now.
Because they are the biggest providers of NHL players and if they stop being that, then we have no NHL.
And the CHL for instance have the best model at producing NHL-ready players as far developement and having the character-players for the NHL. You won't see a James Neal and Milan Lucic come out of Sweden(although from Europe you have an odd cat like Chara).
I disagree. Canada is currently the largest provider of NHL talent, but if other countries make gains and continue pushing the percentage of Canadian players downward, so be it. I'm not talking about removing Canada as a pipeline, I'm talking about other places making serious gains.
Quote:
But how many of them are NHL players? Russia is supposed to be a big country but as far as number of players and quality of them, they have a only a few.
The KHL is a big variable as far as talent from Eastern Europe. I'm not convinced of the long-term viability of that league, but that's a discussion for another day.
Quote:
No question it's great that other areas of the states are producing players but not enough that it can justify having more NHL teams. And it's not that other countries produce more talent than before, it's that the NHL more easily welcome them. There has been great players in the past from these countries that have never played for the NHL. But now the NHL are tracking the whole planet to find players and they let everyone in.
I've mentioned before that there's likely enough legitimate NHL talent that's been buried that a two-team expansion would be able to succeed. In any given expansion draft, there have been players not getting a chance who immediately flourished...aging veterans like Geoff Sanderson, afterthoughts like Tomas Vokoun, guys out of favor like Brian Bradley, etc.
Because they like to complain and point their fingers at the closest thing without doing any research.
Even people living in the Golden Age used to go around complaining about how everything looked so dreadfully yellow FS. Just human nature Im afraid. I know this of course as I lived it in an earlier past life, but I digress.... Texans Love their hockey, and insofar as Im concerned, cest criminel' that Houston & Austin are still out of the loop....
That's like calling Brooklyn a "suburb".....no sale....
Actually a better analogy for Glendale's situation in Arizona would be Iqaluit in Nunavut, No offense to Iqaluit, the attendance for hockey would actually probably be better there. In case Bettman is browsing on here looking for a place to expand a link will be provided:
Well, when Governor Sam Houston refused to take the Oath of Allegiance to the Confederacy & was turfed from office as a result, the "Country of Texas" become a "supply state". Cotton, Cavalry & Men. Then came the Blockade of Galveston. Nasty business that. Now of course its pretty much a "Nation State" in and of itself. One of the finest places on the planet quite frankly, so does it even matter? Texas is a State of Mind in as much as its a location, and hockey, the NHL brand in particular an absolute natural.
Last edited by Killion: 12-29-2012 at 06:54 PM.
Reason: typo...
Actually a better analogy for Glendale's situation in Arizona would be Iqaluit in Nunavut, No offense to Iqaluit, the attendance for hockey would probably be better. In case Bettman is browsing on here looking for a place to expand a link will be provided:
Well, then Governor Sam Houston refused to take the Oath of Allegiance to the Confederacy & was turfed from office as a result, the "Country of Texas" become a "supply state". Cotton, Cavalry & Men. Then came the Blockade of Galveston. Nasty business that. Now of course its pretty much a "Nation State" in and of itself. One of the finest places on the planet quite frankly, so does it even matter? Texas is a State of Mind in as much as its a location, and hockey, the NHL brand in particular an absolute natural.
It certainly shouldn't matter, but when you're used to hearing you should lose your hockey team because it doesn't snow in your city, well, I guess you just shrug your shoulders and resign yourself to that type of "logic."
It certainly shouldn't matter, but when you're used to hearing you should lose your hockey team because it doesn't snow in your city, well, I guess you just shrug your shoulders and resign yourself to that type of "logic."
Boltsfan, I'd like to think that I have sort of an understanding of both sides. Being Canadian, I certainly do understand the mentality that if... 'in that part of the continent it doesn't have "winter conditions", virtually never natural ice and snow, then how is it that "they" (the fans there) can have the same appreciation, or any real appreciation at all about what it is to really enjoy the sport of hockey.'...
But on the other hand, I'm a Canadian who hates the cold, much prefers temperate climates, in places like Raleigh, Atlanta, Nashville, St Louis, San Jose, Portland... and I like the idea that places like that can have the opportunity to enjoy hockey. I think it's a simple but hard task though; fans in southern cities have to really be dedicated, because there are generally going to be fewer of you (I believe) and you're going to possibly have to make a greater effort to keep your team there. Eventually however, after the team has a relatively established history, its fanbase should be strong enough and big enough to sustain the team like in any other city.
That's my perspective. I hope you don't take offense to any part of it. And if you disagree with part of it, then by all means feel free to set me straight.
Now this is the final part in which you can attack me... I do however have trouble with the idea of hockey teams in Florida, or anywhere along the Gulf of Mexico, or long the Mexican border. Even for me, I think there's a limit. But hey, that's my personal mentality; I don't run the NHL.
I disagree. Canada is currently the largest provider of NHL talent, but if other countries make gains and continue pushing the percentage of Canadian players downward, so be it. I'm not talking about removing Canada as a pipeline, I'm talking about other places making serious gains.
I don't think it's ever likely to happen just as far as population goes. Especially given the failure of immigration in Europe compared to the successful one in Canada. And secondly, as a NHL watcher, I prefer it as a product with more grit and we're not going to get these type of players from the Swiss leagues or any other places. And finaly the hockey developement in Canada is just too much of a formidable machine for anybody to ever compete with it and produce more players. It starts culturally, then economically and every spheres of the society. Even the most hockey-crazed place in Europe cannot compete with Canada as far as taking hockey seriously and producing players.
It certainly shouldn't matter, but when you're used to hearing you should lose your hockey team because it doesn't snow in your city, well, I guess you just shrug your shoulders and resign yourself to that type of "logic."
Doesnt snow in Vancouver much more than it does in Texas; Global Warming's seen Southern Ontario dry & brittle through much of its winters over the past 30 years, so if thats ones argument in calling for the immediate extermination of any team south of the Mason Dixon, in the Southwest or California, then why even bother dignifying such an opinion with a reply? Hockey is played in Jerusalem for Gods sake. The Israeli's have a National Team. Whats the problem here? Either you believe in the Power of Hockey or you dont. Climate & culture are meaningless.
Doesnt snow in Vancouver much more than it does in Texas; Global Warming's seen Southern Ontario dry & brittle through much of its winters over the past 30 years, so if thats ones argument in calling for the immediate extermination of any team south of the Mason Dixon, in the Southwest or California, then why even bother dignifying such an opinion with a reply? Hockey is played in Jerusalem for Gods sake. The Israeli's have a National Team. Whats the problem here? Either you believe in the Power of Hockey or you dont. Climate & culture are meaningless.
That's true, but Vancouverites only need to travel about an hour outside of the city and there's all kinds of winter conditions around. Vancouver is like this city-shangrila surrounded by the otherwise wintery conditions of Canada.
Pretty much. All it takes is The Turn of a Friendly Card in todays NHL and Bobs yer Uncle. Worked a treat for Uncle Jeremy in Bawstin back in Eleben. Too bad his luck ran out at about the same time Tim Thomas decided to move to Idaho and dig in. Armed to the teeth. Waiting forArmageddon... Fire in the Sky.Aliens.
ok....this thread is supposed to be about contraction aiding in fixing the lockout problem. how does contracting the hated sun belt usa teams and/or moving some of them to canada have squat to do with the lockout??
if bettman announced that all the sunbelt teams were gone, all those lost jobs would kill any agreement. if they moved phoenix to toronto suburbs, the nhlpa would still want all taht they want now and there would be no cba.
Has this board always had it in for the Preds? SMH.
What on Earth gives you that idea? There is no Conspiracy of Hockey Elitism in Canada beyond a very few & very vocal minority, who I would hazard to guess represent less than about 2% of the fan base up here. Indeed, the South & Canada share much in common culturally, economically, politically. Normally very Quiet Solitudes.
Even people living in the Golden Age used to go around complaining about how everything looked so dreadfully yellow FS. Just human nature Im afraid. I know this of course as I lived it in an earlier past life, but I digress.... Texans Love their hockey, and insofar as Im concerned, cest criminel' that Houston & Austin are still out of the loop....
I looked at the attendance for the Texas Stars vs Houston Aeros game that was in Houston the other day. I believe it was 11k. That's pretty dang good for an AHL team. I have full belief that a Houston team could thrive and make a great rivalry with Dallas. As for SA, I don't think they're ready yet, but in the future I can see it happening. I mean hey, if Cali gets 3 teams...
Money wise it is better short term for the NHL, yes, but when these teams start tanking even more it's going to be a huge problem. Dallas has upside and so does Florida, but teams like Nashville and Columbus are ridding themselves of all viable players. They need to not be in the NHL.
Definitely news to Shea Weber and his 100+ mil or so.
As for SA, I don't think they're ready yet, but in the future I can see it happening. I mean hey, if Cali gets 3 teams...
Houstons a no-brainer. Fantastic for Dallas, the city, corporate community & state, hockey in general. Austin I single out as it's demographics are such that it too is beyond feasible even right now really. Bedroom community sure enough, but a University & Cultural Centre. A lot of wealth. Very impressive hockey history. San Antonio is ground zero in the Republic of Texas, but ya, agree, 10-15yrs away.
The NHL should be able to sustain 32 markets soon, although there would have to be considerable relocation of current franchises.
I think that, overall, the southern expansion is a good idea for the growth of the game. However, the way it was executed was poor -- it was more guided by expansion fees than actually growing the game in a region where it is not usually played. As such, I think there needs to be a bit of a retreat from the South; the NHL should use its resources to ensure the survival of the approximately 50%+ southern teams that are relatively successful or have hopes of succeeding. Moreover, this will enable the NHL to get a foothold in the Pacific NorthWest, a region it has severely neglected.
I would relocate Anaheim, Phoenix, Carolina, and Florida to Portland, Quebec City, Seattle, and Hamilton. This would leave five sun-belt teams; San Jose, Los Angeles, Dallas, Nashville, and Tampa. I would also expand to Omaha and Salt Lake City.
I would hope for a 32 NHL league with a 4-conference, 8-division set up.
Atlantic Conference NorthEast Division
Boston Bruins
New York Rangers
New York Islanders
New Jersey Devils
SouthEast Division
Philadelphia Flyers
Pittsburgh Penguins
Washington Capitals
Tampa Bay Lightning
Northern Conference Eastern Division
Toronto Maple Leafs
Ottawa Senators
Montreal Canadiens
Quebec Nordiques
Central Division
Detroit Red Wings
Columbus Blue Jackets
Buffalo Sabres
Hamilton (Tigers?)
