HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

Rangers Games at Yankee Stadium (1/26 at Devils; 1/29 at Islanders)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-16-2013, 09:46 PM
  #76
NCRanger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 1,022
vCash: 500
An outdoor game in Los Angeles?

Really?

Didn't the 45 and rainy in Pittsburgh teach the league anything about weather?

NCRanger is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 09:48 PM
  #77
cjc5103
Registered User
 
cjc5103's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Washington DC
Country: United States
Posts: 467
vCash: 500
Here's another link from SBNation

http://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2013/4/1...cago-vancouver

cjc5103 is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 09:54 PM
  #78
Giacomin
Registered User
 
Giacomin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,582
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 17futurecap View Post
If I remember correctly, we were offered tickets to the game in Philly by the Rangers. I said no to the original questionnaire, and they still offered me tickets, so I imagine the season ticket holders will be offered seats.
I would guess the same. It should be fun if it happens

Giacomin is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 10:58 PM
  #79
Problematique
Registered User
 
Problematique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 336
vCash: 500
Does being the away team in both games have anything to do with having a new road jersey similar to the WC?

Anybody know?

Problematique is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 11:05 PM
  #80
Kane One
Global Moderator
vBookie Bookie
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 25,889
vCash: 3000
Smart idea to have the Rangers as the road team in both games. They will still sell out 41 home games + these two outdoor games.

If the Rangers were the home team, you'd be taking two sellouts away from the Rangers at MSG while giving the Islanders and Devils a home game in their arenas that most likely won't sell out.

__________________
++++++++++[>+++++++>++++++++++>+++>+<<<<
-]>++++++.>+.+++++++++++++++.>+++++++++.<-.
>-------.<<-----.>----.>.<<+++++++++++.>-------------
-.+++++++++++++.-------.--.+++++++++++++.+.>+.>.

NHL Standings Under Different Point Systems

Last edited by Kane One: 04-16-2013 at 11:13 PM.
Kane One is online now  
Old
04-16-2013, 11:06 PM
  #81
BrianBoyle
Nash goes HAM
 
BrianBoyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: On the grass
Country: United States
Posts: 51,612
vCash: 300
Welp, there goes any integrity this event ever had.

__________________

Neutral Milk Hotel are literally GOAT
Amy Poehler <3

Credit to Ail for the sig.
BrianBoyle is online now  
Old
04-17-2013, 12:04 AM
  #82
DevilChuk*
(not that -chuk)
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 7,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker McDonald View Post
Smart idea to have the Rangers as the road team in both games. They will still sell out 41 home games + these two outdoor games.

If the Rangers were the home team, you'd be taking two sellouts away from the Rangers at MSG while giving the Islanders and Devils a home game in their arenas that most likely won't sell out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenith View Post
Welp, there goes any integrity this event ever had.
It's pretty easy to figure out why it happened this way. The sell-out reasoning doesn't really work out because you're not taking away any random home game, you're taking away a Devils-Rangers game which was going to sell out at the Rock (and Nassau) regardless. The way these things work, I'm pretty sure, is that the home team is compensated the $$$ they would have made for a normal regular season game and the NHL takes home the rest, so not like there's any direct monetary incentive to host (but there is publicity, jersey sales, etc. for both teams).

TG (Devils beat writer) said that the NHL didn't want to leave one of the three teams out, so they needed to have two games to get everyone involved. If the Rangers were going to play in both games, as they should because they're the bigger market, this kind of 'evens' it up for Devils/Islanders fans in terms of tickets as well as connection to the event.

Look at it this way, the only difference is what color jersey the team will be wearing (if that, because if they keep up retro jerseys for this, could theoretically be anything).. and you guys get two outdoor games versus everyone else's one.. that's two tickets to look for a decent deal vs. the one game you HAVE to go to at any cost. It would be cluster**** for you guys to scramble for tickets to one game (see: last year's WC.. tickets were pretty expensive).

I was at the WC last year and even though I was hoping the rink would collapse and engulf my two most hated rivals, it was a really cool experience.. definitely going to attend the Devils one. Having it all on Superbowl week will be epic as well.


Last edited by DevilChuk*: 04-17-2013 at 12:09 AM.
DevilChuk* is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 12:23 AM
  #83
Kane One
Global Moderator
vBookie Bookie
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 25,889
vCash: 3000
Ah, this makes sense.

Kane One is online now  
Old
04-17-2013, 01:20 AM
  #84
Bird Law
Daisy's back.
 
Bird Law's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NoVA / NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 67,402
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Bird Law
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilChuk View Post
It's pretty easy to figure out why it happened this way. The sell-out reasoning doesn't really work out because you're not taking away any random home game, you're taking away a Devils-Rangers game which was going to sell out at the Rock (and Nassau) regardless. The way these things work, I'm pretty sure, is that the home team is compensated the $$$ they would have made for a normal regular season game and the NHL takes home the rest, so not like there's any direct monetary incentive to host (but there is publicity, jersey sales, etc. for both teams).
Actually, the sell-out reasoning works quite well. Involving the Devils and the Islanders here, we both know that the games would be sell-outs or close to them for those teams. Yet having them in the WC, then, makes up for all the other non-sellouts those two teams will have during the year. So yeah, it actually does make sense. But on a broader scale than one game.

__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB
"Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
Sestito still on the make a wish tour. - rholt168
"Okay, Joel. You've had your fun. Give your brother his pads back." - Trxjw
Bird Law is online now  
Old
04-17-2013, 02:32 AM
  #85
DevilChuk*
(not that -chuk)
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 7,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan. View Post
Actually, the sell-out reasoning works quite well. Involving the Devils and the Islanders here, we both know that the games would be sell-outs or close to them for those teams. Yet having them in the WC, then, makes up for all the other non-sellouts those two teams will have during the year. So yeah, it actually does make sense. But on a broader scale than one game.
I don't really get your point considering you really didn't say anything outright and that middle sentence doesn't make any sense at all to me. I think you're trying to say that the increased revenue generated by the game would help the Devils/Islanders 'cover-up' their otherwise lack of revenue from selling out all their other home games?

If that's the case, it absolutely makes zero sense considering the home team doesn't take a cent home from the gate sales for an outdoor game/Winter-classic. The NHL reimburses the home team the amount of money they typically make from a regular-season sellout and they keep the rest. There's no direct financial advantage in hosting such an event.

EDIT: This article on Puck Daddy talks about how revenue from the WC is split and I'd assume these outdoor events would follow the same model. Obviously both teams benefit financially from being in the game but more through merchandising than gate revenue (all goes to the league). The only financial incentive for a team to host such an event would be the increased revenue generated in the host city: http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puc...rn=nhl,wp22962


Last edited by DevilChuk*: 04-17-2013 at 02:44 AM.
DevilChuk* is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 07:36 AM
  #86
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker McDonald View Post
Smart idea to have the Rangers as the road team in both games. They will still sell out 41 home games + these two outdoor games.

If the Rangers were the home team, you'd be taking two sellouts away from the Rangers at MSG while giving the Islanders and Devils a home game in their arenas that most likely won't sell out.
Exactly this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan. View Post
Actually, the sell-out reasoning works quite well. Involving the Devils and the Islanders here, we both know that the games would be sell-outs or close to them for those teams. Yet having them in the WC, then, makes up for all the other non-sellouts those two teams will have during the year. So yeah, it actually does make sense. But on a broader scale than one game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilChuk View Post
I don't really get your point considering you really didn't say anything outright and that middle sentence doesn't make any sense at all to me. I think you're trying to say that the increased revenue generated by the game would help the Devils/Islanders 'cover-up' their otherwise lack of revenue from selling out all their other home games?

If that's the case, it absolutely makes zero sense considering the home team doesn't take a cent home from the gate sales for an outdoor game/Winter-classic. The NHL reimburses the home team the amount of money they typically make from a regular-season sellout and they keep the rest. There's no direct financial advantage in hosting such an event.

EDIT: This article on Puck Daddy talks about how revenue from the WC is split and I'd assume these outdoor events would follow the same model. Obviously both teams benefit financially from being in the game but more through merchandising than gate revenue (all goes to the league). The only financial incentive for a team to host such an event would be the increased revenue generated in the host city: http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puc...rn=nhl,wp22962
It makes sense because even (1) sellout for either team is an improvement whereas the Rangers will sell-out no matter what. It's almost like revenue sharing as Yankee stadium will be packed with Rangers fans.



Also, I like the idea of multiple outdoor games each year. I am sure teams want in on this every year and having only (2) or (4) is a tough sell. Love it.

NYR Viper is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 07:37 AM
  #87
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 30,992
vCash: 500
The NHL buys the home date from the team. The NHL gives the team losing the home date the money they would usually make in a home game. The Rangers aren't losing a home gate. Maybe there are other things tied into the decision. The NHL pays to rent the building. They buy the home date from the team. The NHL keeps everything. The beer money. Concessions. Ticket sales. Parking. Not that much parking at Yankee Stadium.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 08:37 AM
  #88
Ih8theislanders
Registered User
 
Ih8theislanders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bronx,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 13,295
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilChuk View Post
I don't really get your point considering you really didn't say anything outright and that middle sentence doesn't make any sense at all to me. I think you're trying to say that the increased revenue generated by the game would help the Devils/Islanders 'cover-up' their otherwise lack of revenue from selling out all their other home games?

If that's the case, it absolutely makes zero sense considering the home team doesn't take a cent home from the gate sales for an outdoor game/Winter-classic. The NHL reimburses the home team the amount of money they typically make from a regular-season sellout and they keep the rest. There's no direct financial advantage in hosting such an event.

EDIT: This article on Puck Daddy talks about how revenue from the WC is split and I'd assume these outdoor events would follow the same model. Obviously both teams benefit financially from being in the game but more through merchandising than gate revenue (all goes to the league). The only financial incentive for a team to host such an event would be the increased revenue generated in the host city: http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puc...rn=nhl,wp22962
So the home team wouldn't get compensated for the increased ticket prices, they'd get the same money as a regular sellout?

Ih8theislanders is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 08:51 AM
  #89
Tawnos
Moderator
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,032
vCash: 500
To all the complaints about there being too many games,

This seems like the exact kind of thing where everybody expects it to flop, but the games still get a bunch of attention and sell out. Kinda reminds me of the speculation on the NHL losing a ton of revenue following the 04-05 lockout.

Tawnos is online now  
Old
04-17-2013, 08:52 AM
  #90
trueblue9441
Registered User
 
trueblue9441's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bronx, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,336
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to trueblue9441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ih8theislanders View Post
So the home team wouldn't get compensated for the increased ticket prices, they'd get the same money as a regular sellout?
correct.

this is a stupid, stupid idea. too many outdoor games in my opinion, the winter classic will lose all of its appeal. thats the game i wanted. not two meaningless games vs. the islanders and devils. just sucks

trueblue9441 is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 08:52 AM
  #91
Tawnos
Moderator
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCRanger View Post
An outdoor game in Los Angeles?

Really?

Didn't the 45 and rainy in Pittsburgh teach the league anything about weather?
It definitely taught them that the weather might make the hockey game itself a little worse, but the event will still be a big success.

Tawnos is online now  
Old
04-17-2013, 09:05 AM
  #92
nyrmetros
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,284
vCash: 500
I think the outdoor game vs the Devils should be played at Red Bull Arena.... Thoughts? I know RBA only holds 25, 000, but the noise that the roof generates from the crowd would be epic.

nyrmetros is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 09:10 AM
  #93
LittleKev6D9
Unregistered User
 
LittleKev6D9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middletown
Country: United States
Posts: 950
vCash: 500
Congratulations New York Rangers on getting 43 home games next year.

What a dumb idea. Two outdoor games. The NHL just ruined a great idea with some stupid gimmick. Why not have a game where the two teams play a game of Roller Hockey as well? Stupid.

LittleKev6D9 is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 09:27 AM
  #94
blue425
Registered User
 
blue425's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 2,205
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyrmetros View Post
I think the outdoor game vs the Devils should be played at Red Bull Arena.... Thoughts? I know RBA only holds 25, 000, but the noise that the roof generates from the crowd would be epic.
I have said this exact thing several times in the past. Red Bull Arena would a sick venue for a hockey game.

blue425 is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 09:31 AM
  #95
TomLaidlaw
Registered User
 
TomLaidlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Transylvania
Country: Romania
Posts: 3,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleKev6D9 View Post
Congratulations New York Rangers on getting 43 home games next year.

What a dumb idea. Two outdoor games. The NHL just ruined a great idea with some stupid gimmick. Why not have a game where the two teams play a game of Roller Hockey as well? Stupid.
I like this idea. Can they blast Abba throughout the entire game to really get that Roller Rink feel?

TomLaidlaw is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 09:56 AM
  #96
GarretJoseph
Registered User
 
GarretJoseph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 7,372
vCash: 500
sorry couldn't help myself


GarretJoseph is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 10:13 AM
  #97
Trxjw
Moderator
Bored.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 15,792
vCash: 500
Welp. That about kills my interest in outdoor games.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 10:56 AM
  #98
1Knee1T
OHH MAMMA DONT U CRY
 
1Knee1T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 3,170
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleKev6D9 View Post
Congratulations New York Rangers on getting 43 home games next year.

What a dumb idea. Two outdoor games. The NHL just ruined a great idea with some stupid gimmick. Why not have a game where the two teams play a game of Roller Hockey as well? Stupid.
Only if they put ramps behind the net and point shots count as two goals.

1Knee1T is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 12:11 PM
  #99
Frozen North
Healthy Scratch
 
Frozen North's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: OK
Country: United States
Posts: 1,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TullyNYR View Post
Only if they put ramps behind the net and point shots count as two goals.
Yes! And sign Tony Szabo to a PTO contract. And have the Rangers wear "Salsa" jerseys, and the Isles wear "Web Warriors" jersey!


Frozen North is offline  
Old
04-17-2013, 12:55 PM
  #100
Tawnos
Moderator
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,032
vCash: 500
I can only imagine what the reaction would've been like on here when the league moved to having 2 neutral site games every year for every team.

Tawnos is online now  
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 04:46 PM.

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.