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.
LeBrun: NHL made new offer to NHLPA on Thursday (12/27)
A quick look at that list...several Cup wins, several appearances. Some have thrived and done so in relatively short order. What this list really brings to light is just how awesome some ownership and management groups have been...and how utterly miserable others have been.
It's not where the teams were put that was the issue. It's whom the teams were given to, and whom they subsequently hired to run the teams. Markets fail when ownership and management fail. This is a fact. You put a winning team in any market, and eventually you're going to draw a rabid fan base. That's just how it works. No one falls in love with a losing team. No sport becomes ingrained in a region if it never ever sees a winner.
Correct! This is another reason a cap is bad. It handcuffs owners who truly want to build a great product and will invest in their product to do so.
I am sorry that you feel things haven't worked out in Detroit since the last work stoppage but the reality is the league has had record revenues the last few years and they did land a national TV contract. So while I would agree that the NHL under Bettman has had it's ups and downs it most defenitley has not been a failure.
As far as the cap goes I can offer a different perspective being a Bruins fan for 25+ years. Our owner, Jeremy Jacobs, was never willing to spend the money necessary to compete with the other big market teams under the old system and the fans suffered for it. But under the cap there is league wide parity and the Bruins have thrived which has revitalized the orginazation in Boston. Under the cap the Bruins are a stronger orginazation and have more fan support than they have had in nearly 20 years. It's been amazing to watch the turnaround. Hockey is back in Boston and its a beutiful thing.
The rest of the league just came down to the Bruin's level and bad ownership is rewarded.
Haha, can someone please explain to me how the rules of the NHL are more complex than the rules of the MLB and the NFL? I mean they have ex-refs as part of the broadcast teams in the NFL to explain exactly what is happening to the viewers and the MLB? Baseball is so quirky and complex it's ridiculous, tell Bill James baseball is a simple sport.
They are not. Hockey is simple enough to understand although I think the new interference rules are vague and open to interpretation. Way too many ticky tack calls instead of playing hockey.
Indeed, precisely what it is, "conjecture" based on the facts that I/we have available. If something else is relevant and as of yet unpublished or unknown, do share. I base my opinion's on fact's.... which includes btw that while playing out of the downtown AWA, attendance was not entirely anemic, actually fairly healthy, and particularly so during their first 7seasons, playing above .500 and making the playoff's every year but one. However, the Lease with Colangelo was dreadful, the actual in-game experience lousy as a lot of seating was obstructed as configuration for hockey from a basketball specific venue usually is and when Ellman & Gretzky acquired the team in 2001, the bottom pretty much fell out of the boat in terms of the on-ice "product" thereafter. Never mind the nonsense being perpetrated off-ice in Glendale, the move to the job, followed by the Lockout, market & sub prime mortgage meltdown that hit Arizona & Phoenix particularly harshly....
exactly, the people arguing about phoenix and atlanta just want to say "hockey doesn't belong in the US" "non traditional markets" blah....same old
if people would read the facts about the phoenix or atlanta mess, or had been to phoenix to games before or after the move......
and the whole people in the south love nascar........
never been to a sprint cup series, never want to, sounds boring to me, but some people love it........ and go look at the schedule, over half the series is not played in the south, and there is only one game in 2013 played in Ga.
Unfortunately, I'm afraid that phoenix is doomed..... but it isn't the fault of Bettman and it isn't the fault of the fans and it's not because it isn't in a climate that doesn't have "pond hockey."
If I allocate my entertainment dollars based on how much money I want owners to make then I am going to be pro cap. If I want the best high caliber hockey the I am anti cap.
Haha, so if you like the cap system you support owners profits and if you like an uncapped system you support good hockey?
Wow, what a thinking error you've got here. 4-5 teams spending more money than everyone to suck up the league’s entire top end talent not only alienates the other 25 teams in the league and its fans but it by no means results in “high caliber hockey.” It’s a downright selfish/narrow minded view and I really struggle to see how anyone can defend a system that promotes unfair advantages based on market size and individual owner’s willingness to buy high end talent.
Could someone tell me why it's such a big deal to the league to have a 60 million cap in Year 2 when escrow will correct for it anyway? Why can't they just give the players the cap they're asking for?
Haha, so if you like the cap system you support owners profits and if you like an uncapped system you support good hockey?
Wow, what a thinking error you've got here. 4-5 teams spending more money than everyone to suck up the league’s entire top end talent not only alienates the other 25 teams in the league and its fans but it by no means results in “high caliber hockey.” It’s a downright selfish/narrow minded view and I really struggle to see how anyone can defend a system that promotes unfair advantages based on market size and individual owner’s willingness to buy high end talent.
I don't think he's a hockey fan; more like a fan of some idealized-fantasy-version of hockey where just a handful of teams composed of top-elite players compete against each other. All-star, all the time....in 25% of the games. The other 75% of the games are blowouts and non-competitive. And this is by some stretch of imagination, going to make the NHL a better product long-term.
Because 'parity is a disease' blah blah blah, and the hockey nowadays is 'unwatchable' and he hasn't been entertained in years apparantly.
Indeed, the current world juniors must be boring as dirt to him right now, unwatchable rubbish because of the underdeveloped, 'not fit for my real NHL' level of play being put on display. A true hockey fan indeed. One who supports 'good hockey'.
Could someone tell me why it's such a big deal to the league to have a 60 million cap in Year 2 when escrow will correct for it anyway? Why can't they just give the players the cap they're asking for?
Because they want to pay out less money to the players. Escrow is used to adjust each player's slice of the pie according to the 50% HRR value.
exactly, the people arguing about phoenix and atlanta just want to say "hockey doesn't belong in the US" "non traditional markets" blah....same old
if people would read the facts about the phoenix or atlanta mess, or had been to phoenix to games before or after the move......
and the whole people in the south love nascar........
never been to a sprint cup series, never want to, sounds boring to me, but some people love it........ and go look at the schedule, over half the series is not played in the south, and there is only one game in 2013 played in Ga.
Unfortunately, I'm afraid that phoenix is doomed..... but it isn't the fault of Bettman and it isn't the fault of the fans and it's not because it isn't in a climate that doesn't have "pond hockey."
What frustrates me is these same people seem unable or unwilling to comprehend what successful franchises in Atlanta and Phoenix (two of the bigger TV markets in North America) could have meant for the NHL and the sport; especially when it usually ends up in statements like “the ___________(insert favorite big market team here) have to suffer so that the league can keep these small market teams going.”
Haha, so if you like the cap system you support owners profits and if you like an uncapped system you support good hockey?
Wow, what a thinking error you've got here. 4-5 teams spending more money than everyone to suck up the league’s entire top end talent not only alienates the other 25 teams in the league and its fans but it by no means results in “high caliber hockey.” It’s a downright selfish/narrow minded view and I really struggle to see how anyone can defend a system that promotes unfair advantages based on market size and individual owner’s willingness to buy high end talent.
This says it all. Cap sports are watered down parity puddles of mediocrity.
What frustrates me is these same people seem unable or unwilling to comprehend what successful franchises in Atlanta and Phoenix (two of the bigger TV markets in North America) could have meant for the NHL and the sport; especially when it usually ends up in statements like “the ___________(insert favorite big market team here) have to suffer so that the league can keep these small market teams going.”
So explain to me how I am better off as a fan if the sunbelt teams suddenly catch fire and become profit machines but my big market team is a watered down mediocre parity team? Why don't we just change the rules so that the team that scores has to let the other team score before attempting to score again? That way there won't be winners and losers. Parity.
This says it all. Cap sports are watered down parity puddles of mediocrity.
I have been a diehard sports fan in a big market for nearly 30 years; the Bruins, Celtics, Patriots and Red Sox are all top franchises in their respective leagues and could out spend nearly anyone, and no one will ever convince me an uncapped system is better than a cap system. And I am clearly never going to change your mind regardless of how much logic I use, so let's just agree to disagree and call it a day.
I have been a diehard sports fan in a big market for nearly 30 years; the Bruins, Celtics, Patriots and Red Sox are all top franchises in their respective leagues and could out spend nearly anyone, and no one will ever convince me an uncapped system is better than a cap system. And I am clearly never going to change your mind regardless of how much logic I use, so let's just agree to disagree and call it a day.
No winner and no losers! Perfect! Now we have parity in our conversation too!
No winner and no losers! Perfect! Now we have parity in our conversation too!
Nah, there was a clear winner. There was parity in the opportunity just as there is parity in the opportunity presented to every GM in terms of the money they have available to pay the players on their NHL roster.
So explain to me how I am better off as a fan if the sunbelt teams suddenly catch fire and become profit machines but my big market team is a watered down mediocre parity team? Why don't we just change the rules so that the team that scores has to let the other team score before attempting to score again? That way there won't be winners and losers. Parity.
In the long-run, you get better quality hockey, because as those sunbelt teams develop, so too will their fanbases, which will then produce grassroots hockey programs, which will recruit more athletes for the sport, thereby improving the quality of the league in the future. The cap facilitates this by creating spending parity among franchises.
__________________ CanadianHockey________ __ __________Sens, Oilers, and Team Canada
In the long-run, you get better quality hockey, because as those sunbelt teams develop, so too will their fanbases, which will then produce grassroots hockey programs, which will recruit more athletes for the sport, thereby improving the quality of the league in the future. The cap facilitates this by creating spending parity among franchises.
I will die of old age long before any of that happens.
I will die of old age long before any of that happens.
We want the World and we want it... NOW as Jim Morrison once railed, and unfortunately, you cant have it. No Siree schminksbro. So ya, you might not be around when 18yr olds from Chattanooga to Tehachapi are going 2 & 7 in the Draft, but ultimately, thats the goal, the objective, and its' going to happen.... imagine when the naturally talented & gifted athletes in the South & Southwest pickup a stick & skates instead of a bat, basket or football & have access to rinks, coaching & leagues? Bigger, faster, stronger. Europe & Canadas' developmental systems, the raw numbers are stagnating, the real growth potential is & always really has been in the US. So rather than complain about it, you mebbe should look into Reincarnation as your New Religion. Give yourself something to look forward to.
