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.
There is one big minor league in North America... The AHL. Aside from that there is really only a couple of pro leagues. ECHL, Central Hockey League. Then a couple of other smaller pro leagues that are in regional areas and not really associated with the NHL.
The AHL averages just under 6000 a game in attendence.
The ECHL averages just under 2500 in attendence.
What if the NHL focused on better minor leagues? Have 3 levels of the minor leagues... so 90 teams in the minors. Doesn't need to be only 3 leagues after the AHL... could be smaller then 30 team leagues. Change the 50 player rule to the 80-90 player rule. Make it a 15 round draft instead of 7 rounds. Don't let so many players go to the KHL or SEL. Make it posble to earn a living in North America in the minors. More like Baseball with AAA AA A ball. Still need to be able to let players opt out and go play in Europe if the players want to. But a better organization and better leagues would make it more profitable to play hockey in North America.
The NFL has no real minor leagues, nor really does the NBA. Fan attention and $$$ is spent on college teams. Hockey would be great in having minor leagues, there could be lots of teams in places where college hockey is not big.
The NHL would need to advertise hockey itself and the entire minor league system, in tv advertisements on NBC, Versus etc. Push the entire minor league system. Push the connection with the NHL teams and make more TV fans of hockey. It is a much better way to get a big USA TV contract then the NHL has followed for a couple of decades. True grass roots. Far more then recently.
You expand in Canada too... don't kill junior hockey but more AAA (AHL). Now there is only St. John's, Halifax, Hamilton, Toronto, Abbottsford. More AA teams, More A teams. In Quebec they get attendance with a fighting league.
Aim for 5000-10000 for AHL AAA
Aim for 3500-6000 for AA
Aim for 2000-5000 for A
Make the franchises help build new stadiums and make all teams ice teams at all levels. 120 Pro teams... 4 for each NHL team including the NHL team.
Min Salary AAA $75K
AA 60K
AAA 45K
Not a semi pro league. If you get to play pro hockey in North America you at least earn a living wage... not semi-pro.
I don't think the baseball model will work for hockey. Baseball is a summer sport and many people want to go outside and watch the side show many of these teams put on display. Also, the kids are out of school in the summer time. Most minor league baseball teams charge $5 a game versus minor league hockey which the cheapest ticket is usually around $15 a game. With the economy the way it is right now I just don't see NHL teams investing in minor league hockey. I attend about 40 minor league hockey games a year, and no sport fudges numbers like hockey teams do.
I can't think of a draft and development system I like less than the one in baseball. I don't really see anything wrong with the current NHL system, so I don't see any incentive for major change.
There doesn't seem to be much of an appetite for minor pro hockey in Canada. If AHL has had issues, I can't see leagues below the AHL being successful. Leagues like the ECHL and Colonial Hockey League have tried to set up in Canada but with little success. People want to follow the NHL and the league that directly feeds it, the (junior) CHL, and outside of that there are limited success stories. There are also a limited number of markets and any attempt to build the minor pro system will inevitably come in conflict with the junior leagues.
Well, attendance isn't necessarily an indicator of the quality of play in a league. I mean, the AHL averages bigger crowds then the KHL, last I checked, but I don't think anyone would be willing to make the claim that the level of play in the AHL is higher then the KHL.
But, that being said, I actually came up with a similar idea a few months ago on the ECHL board....
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun
Well, then you really wouldn't like my overall idea on how to expand/improve minor league hockey..... officially make it three-tiered and have teams with long-standing relationships and expanded subsidies from the NHL. Basically, my idea would work like this....
Major League - NHL - 30 teams
AAA - AHL - 30 teams
AA - ECHL/CHL - 30 teams
A - SPHL/FHL/etc. - 30 teams
Honestly think that hockey should follow baseball's model and create a three-tiered farm system, with existing and stable structures at the top and then the NHL stepping in directly to stabilize at the bottom where it really needs help and long-term stability has never been guaranteed.
So, looking at the Hawks, for example.... they'd remained partnered with the Rockford IceHogs in the AHL, let Detroit have sole partnership with the Toledo Walleye in the ECHL and form a partnership of their own with another team at that level, say the Quad City Mallards of the CHL, and then reach down one more level to have a single A affiliate as well, like the Danville Dashers of the FHL. So, the Blackhawks-IceHogs-Mallards-Dashers system would exist under a confederated superstructure similar to what exists in Minor League Baseball. Each team is independently owned and operated, but the Blackhawks provide travel and salary subsidies for the three teams below while retaining sole right to promote, demote, and trade players from within their system.
IMHO, that would be a major win-win for all parties involved. The NHL teams would have a much deeper source of talent development and even potentially have a system where injured players could rehab at lower levels like you see in baseball all the time. The lower league teams, especially at the AA and A level, would get much greater financial stability and still retain day-to-day operational control, while granted losing the ability to make trades. Maybe still have a system where teams at the lower levels can still sign players independently to their team that no one else picked up, and if they turn out to be attractive players wanted at a higher level, then their parent club could have some reward system in place to compensate teams that lose a player that they brought in.
And the NHL could use the A level, as it's mostly non-existent save for the fairly undersized SPHL and FHL, to develop hockey interest in regions that don't have access to professional hockey, such as in parts of the Great Plains, South, and West. And on top of that, major win for players, too, as they'd have more open roster positions with four professional leagues operating and better access for non-drafted or supposedly washed up players a chance to get back in if they impress at lower levels and have the opportunity to move up.
Just my two cents....
And, as far as I know, the western part of the ECHL follows the same rules as the rest of the league.
.... worth a read, I think, but the general consensus after a brief discussion was that there just weren't enough players to make a truly 3-tier minor league system given how much smaller the NHL draft is from the MLB draft. And, with the dominance of junior hockey leagues in Canada pretty much shutting out the vast majority of that country to minor league hockey (though a few markets, like Thunder Bay, could likely support a minor league team), there probably aren't enough markets to sustain that sized of an organization either.
The reason the NHL isn't as invested in the minor leagues as a whole as opposed to their affiliate is because they don't own their affiliates(in most cases). So if the affiliate is losing money they don't care as long as they can put their own coaches and players in place.
The reason the NHL isn't as invested in the minor leagues as a whole as opposed to their affiliate is because they don't own their affiliates(in most cases). So if the affiliate is losing money they don't care as long as they can put their own coaches and players in place.
Neither do a lot of MLB teams. In most cases affiliates are owned separately from the big club and IIRC, only the Braves own their entire farm system (well all except their High A team, the Lynchburg Hillcats, although they have a deal in the works to purchase that team too and move them to Wilmington, NC). For instance, locally, the Durham Bulls (AAA) and Carolina Mudcats (High A) are affiliated with the Tampa Bay Rays and Cleveland Indians, respectively. Neither the Rays or the Indians own either team. The Bulls are owned by Capitol Broadcasting (who are also minority owners of the Hurricanes) and the Indians are owned by Steve Bryant who bought the team (then the Columbus (GA) Mudcats) and moved them here.
I can understand why you could think that, especially being in Florida where you've got the Grapefruit League during Spring Training and then the Florida State League and Gulf Coast League - many of those teams ARE owned by the big club, but that's not the case for the majority of MiLB teams.
Neither do a lot of MLB teams. In most cases affiliates are owned separately from the big club and IIRC, only the Braves own their entire farm system (well all except their High A team, the Lynchburg Hillcats, although they have a deal in the works to purchase that team too and move them to Wilmington, NC). For instance, locally, the Durham Bulls (AAA) and Carolina Mudcats (High A) are affiliated with the Tampa Bay Rays and Cleveland Indians, respectively. Neither the Rays or the Indians own either team. The Bulls are owned by Capitol Broadcasting (who are also minority owners of the Hurricanes) and the Indians are owned by Steve Bryant who bought the team (then the Columbus (GA) Mudcats) and moved them here.
I can understand why you could think that, especially being in Florida where you've got the Grapefruit League during Spring Training and then the Florida State League and Gulf Coast League - many of those teams ARE owned by the big club, but that's not the case for the majority of MiLB teams.
I wasn't advocating for a minor league system like the MLB's(where they as well don't always own their affiliates) just voicing my opinion on why there wouldn't be much development on overhauling the NHL minor league system
Neither do a lot of MLB teams. In most cases affiliates are owned separately from the big club and IIRC, only the Braves own their entire farm system (well all except their High A team, the Lynchburg Hillcats, although they have a deal in the works to purchase that team too and move them to Wilmington, NC). For instance, locally, the Durham Bulls (AAA) and Carolina Mudcats (High A) are affiliated with the Tampa Bay Rays and Cleveland Indians, respectively. Neither the Rays or the Indians own either team. The Bulls are owned by Capitol Broadcasting (who are also minority owners of the Hurricanes) and the Indians are owned by Steve Bryant who bought the team (then the Columbus (GA) Mudcats) and moved them here.
I can understand why you could think that, especially being in Florida where you've got the Grapefruit League during Spring Training and then the Florida State League and Gulf Coast League - many of those teams ARE owned by the big club, but that's not the case for the majority of MiLB teams.
While in the MLB, teams don't own their affiliates... I do believe that the MLB teams pay the affiliates do they not? While the NHL/AHL relationship is reversed? (which I don't understand... I'd think that the NHL teams should be paying for the affiliation to first help support the existence of the team, as well as the fact that they're getting a direct impact in the say of development of their players).
Because I recall Ottawa losing the Lynx when the Expos were moved, because they no longer had an MLB affiliate.
Well, attendance isn't necessarily an indicator of the quality of play in a league. I mean, the AHL averages bigger crowds then the KHL, last I checked, but I don't think anyone would be willing to make the claim that the level of play in the AHL is higher then the KHL.
But, that being said, I actually came up with a similar idea a few months ago on the ECHL board....
.... worth a read, I think, but the general consensus after a brief discussion was that there just weren't enough players to make a truly 3-tier minor league system given how much smaller the NHL draft is from the MLB draft. And, with the dominance of junior hockey leagues in Canada pretty much shutting out the vast majority of that country to minor league hockey (though a few markets, like Thunder Bay, could likely support a minor league team), there probably aren't enough markets to sustain that sized of an organization either.
Your take on it sells me a bit more than this OP, but I still don't really see how 1) the current system is insufficient or 2) the proposed system would be superior to the current one. Starting with an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality, followed by a "okay if it is broken, why's that better?"
Your take on it sells me a bit more than this OP, but I still don't really see how 1) the current system is insufficient or 2) the proposed system would be superior to the current one. Starting with an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality, followed by a "okay if it is broken, why's that better?"
While I think a 3 tier system might be overkill (as I think the NCAA/Major Jr qualifies almost as much as an A league), properly re-structuring the existing "AAA" and "AA" leagues could be of some use.
Once you have 30 stable franchises in both of those, then you can look at a formal "A" league as well.
There's no need for three levels of minor league hockey. College and the CHL act as a form of minor league hockey.
Which CHL?
Canadian (major junior) Hockey League and College do SOME development, but the AHL, ECHL, Central Hockey League allow "depth" and/or "late bloomer" players an opportunity to develop further.
Plus UHL, FHL, SPHL, primarily non-developmental leagues, allow opportunities to play.
Your take on it sells me a bit more than this OP, but I still don't really see how 1) the current system is insufficient or 2) the proposed system would be superior to the current one. Starting with an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality, followed by a "okay if it is broken, why's that better?"
I was going from the stability factor, depth of talent development, giving the NHL clubs more control over who does and doesn't get developmental time in the minor leagues, and increasing the potential footprint and fan access of the sport with an expanded single A level to big chunks of the U.S., but problem is that the draft simply isn't big enough to likely allow for such a system in place.
That being said, I do think that the ECHL/CHL "AA" level could use a big more of a hands on approach if the goal for that is to be an actual minor league tier versus just another independent league.
I just dont see how that would be practicable. "Back in the Day" there was the PCHL and then of course the WHL & WPHL's, teams like the Winnipeg Warriors, original Canucks, Seattle Totems & so forth, several considered to be on par with say the struggling Rangers or Bruins of the late 50's & early 60's, guys who were "stars" in their own right playing out their careers in San Diego or wherever. In fact so popular, that one of the reasons the NHL expanded in 67 was because of its concern that the WHL was dominating the markets (LA, San Francisco etc) out west & challenging their position as the best league in North America, combined of course with their interest in securing a national broadcasting contract, anti-trust issues....
So, if we completely blew up the existing system, wiped out every single minor league including the AHL & the NHL, establishing a system of "Relegation" all under one umbrella, then sure, anythings possible. Model it after the British football system, a Premier Division of about 12 teams, followed by Divisions 1 through 6 or so. Astute management & coaching rewarded. If a team fails, tumbles & falls down the ladder, cant make ends meet, bye-bye. No Caps. No Revenue Sharing. Like the Barclays however, youd have basically 3-4 of the wealthiest teams pretty much dominating Cup play in the Premier, however in the Division 1, 2, 3 & 4 Leagues movement up & down with actually quite a bit of pride exhibited by the organizations & their fans in winning their leagues championships & moving up a rung. Like I said though, pretty radical, and I really dont think fans in about half of todays NHL locations would be buying into such a system, whereas looking at the AHL's locations and even one or two ECHL markets, the potential to show their stuff & really make a move up the ladder would certainly be appealing...
It's not worth going that far down the ladder. The ECHL first has to prove that they can produce the talent before it's worth the NHL doing a baseball model. Aside from fighters, we might get one real actual hockey player per year who made it to the NHL after cutting their teeth in the ECHL.
It's not worth going that far down the ladder. The ECHL first has to prove that they can produce the talent before it's worth the NHL doing a baseball model. Aside from fighters, we might get one real actual hockey player per year who made it to the NHL after cutting their teeth in the ECHL.
Or perhaps the NHL should take a larger interest in helping that league out by putting some talent in there that arent quite ready for the AHL or NHL and pay them just enough that the SEL and KHL aren't worth the effort.
Each baseball team also has about 35 new faces making the organization each year (50 round draft + international free agents).
As for the ownership levels of teams. The Pittsburgh Penguins own as many of their affiliates (1- WBS Penguins) as the Pittsburgh Pirates do (1- High A Bradenton Marauders).
There isn't enough reason for this yet. The ECHL has been going for two and a half decades now and the amount of players that have real careers after playing more than a handful of games there is still limited. Until that changes I don't see why more leagues are necessary. There are fewer hockey players out there and fewer prospects.
As it stands the NHL does, at least, have by far the 2nd most extensive minor league system of the major leagues. The ultra profitable NFL still hasn't figured out how to make such a thing work.
__________________
“The most terrifying fact about the universe is not that it is hostile, but that it is indifferent. If we can come to terms with this indifference and accept the challenges of life within the boundaries of death, our existence as a species can have genuine meaning and fulfillment. However vast the darkness, we must supply our own light.” - Stanley Kubrick
Each baseball team also has about 35 new faces making the organization each year (50 round draft + international free agents).
As for the ownership levels of teams. The Pittsburgh Penguins own as many of their affiliates (1- WBS Penguins) as the Pittsburgh Pirates do (1- High A Bradenton Marauders).
There isn't enough reason for this yet. The ECHL has been going for two and a half decades now and the amount of players that have real careers after playing more than a handful of games there is still limited. Until that changes I don't see why more leagues are necessary. There are fewer hockey players out there and fewer prospects.
As it stands the NHL does, at least, have by far the 2nd most extensive minor league system of the major leagues. The ultra profitable NFL still hasn't figured out how to make such a thing work.
The NFL and NBA just get fed directly from the college system is why.
And especially in the case of the NFL, careers are so short you'd have too many prospects ruined in a feeder league anyway.
I think the ECHL argument is a chicken/egg one.
I say the reason there's no talent there is because no talent is being put there. You're saying the reason to not put talent there is because it hasn't produced talent.
Keep in mind currently there's no incentive really for playing in the ECHL. It's just there if you can't play anywhere else and want to make a little playing hockey (I don't even know what their salaries are and if they hold full-time jobs elsewhere?).
Similar to the CFL - a fair number of players in the CFL hold down other jobs as playing alone can't support them.
My question is, where is all this mysterious "new talent" that the NHL would "put into" a re-vamped minor league structure... are players going to get taller, faster, and more importantly BETTER magically just because the NHL says they should be by "blessing" a minor-league system?
Minor pro in North America has undergone a serious contraction over the last 12 years -- from a height of 111 teams down to this last season's 73 in legit leagues (I don't count the FHL and other "single A" in name only gongshows). If the NHL would put money in to suddenly re-create those 38 net teams that have been lost, wouldn't that just drastically dilute the talent pool by suddenly creating 750 roster spots for players who weren't good enough to make the cut previously?
I have yet to be convinced that "more teams" and "more direct NHL input" would do anything to INCREASE the level and amount of talent in the professional game -- perhaps someone can make a coherent argument and change my mind...
My question is, where is all this mysterious "new talent" that the NHL would "put into" a re-vamped minor league structure... are players going to get taller, faster, and more importantly BETTER magically just because the NHL says they should be by "blessing" a minor-league system?
Minor pro in North America has undergone a serious contraction over the last 12 years -- from a height of 111 teams down to this last season's 73 in legit leagues (I don't count the FHL and other "single A" in name only gongshows). If the NHL would put money in to suddenly re-create those 38 net teams that have been lost, wouldn't that just drastically dilute the talent pool by suddenly creating 750 roster spots for players who weren't good enough to make the cut previously?
I have yet to be convinced that "more teams" and "more direct NHL input" would do anything to INCREASE the level and amount of talent in the professional game -- perhaps someone can make a coherent argument and change my mind...
Basically right now the 'talent' you'd expect in the minor pro leagues currently plays over in the SEL, KHL, etc (or overage in Major Jr).
If the league took a more direct involvement in the AHL and ECHL levels to establish a solid base of 30 teams for each league AND a salary structure that'd keep players interested in sticking around in the NA to work their way up to the bigs in the NHL... it'd have a chance at working.
But generally, the minors are left to their own devices and in fact their association with the NHL costs them additional money... so I don't see how that encourages a very strong system.
Keep in mind that I personally am arguing only 60 minor pro teams (a triple a and double a each... leave NCAA/Major Jr and Euro junior leagues as the 'A' system until there's a need otherwise).
I think the ECHL argument is a chicken/egg one.
I say the reason there's no talent there is because no talent is being put there. You're saying the reason to not put talent there is because it hasn't produced talent.
Keep in mind currently there's no incentive really for playing in the ECHL. It's just there if you can't play anywhere else and want to make a little playing hockey (I don't even know what their salaries are and if they hold full-time jobs elsewhere?).
NHL Sharks brass mentioned at an AHL Sharks fan Q&A that they had a lot of problems getting players to agree to AHL SPCs (some of which have the option of being assigned to the E).
For 10-11, they had about 4-5 guys (including a goalie) that were assigned/recalled from ECHL affiliate. This year they had a goalie and one other player they assigned to their ECHL affiliate.
(And with a full 50 NHL contract limit, down the stretch, the NHL franchise could not sign any more prospects or AHL vets had they wanted to. They've only signed PTO and ATO contracts for the AHL this calendar year.)
Two-way contracts have a de facto "max" of ~$105k in the AHL. Unless a team offers a substantial (think $250k+) AHL SPC, or have other (personal) reasons to want to stay with AHL team (e.g., player may have family locally near AHL team and not want to go through/risk waivers), most players would prefer to play with PTO deal in AHL if not signed to NHL (two-way) contract.
As it stands the NHL does, at least, have by far the 2nd most extensive minor league system of the major leagues. The ultra profitable NFL still hasn't figured out how to make such a thing work.
Actually, they do. It's called the CFL. That dawned on me many years ago. As a kid, I was a CFL fan. For a while, it seemed that almost every Grey Cup game was "Peter Liske's last CFL game before going to the NFL", "Warren Moon's last CFL game before going to the NFL", etc, etc, etc. Complete with tearful farewells. Maybe one reason the NFL is so ultra profitable is because they let taxpayers in another country pay for their minor league.
I have yet to be convinced that "more teams" and "more direct NHL input" would do anything to INCREASE the level and amount of talent in the professional game -- perhaps someone can make a coherent argument and change my mind...
Elementary my Dear Watson.... See, the NHL embarks on an ambitious Expansion program, but instead of just taking the money & renting a barge in Mazatlan for a Throwup Party amongst the BOG's, they re-invest it in the new markets with a "Mini-NHL".
Yepp. From Tyke to Midget. Enjoin the NHLPA. Synthetic Ice pads, money given to municipalities from San Diego to Portland, Maine to build facilities. In conjunction with their sponsors, like Reebok, CCM, Nike', Bauer & through the good services of the players themselves, Gosh DarnitBuy the World a Coke!. See what Im saying here?. Where Im goin?. Gone are the days of Mel Swig, Jerry Moyes. No Sir, plow that money back into the communities and you just watch what happens....
of course, Im drunk. But hey, guys gotta dream no?.
