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.

Relocation, Expansion, Realignment

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-05-2005, 01:51 PM
  #1
EricBowser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 174
vCash: 500
Relocation, Expansion, Realignment

Want a way to fix the game on ice. Get the teams into the right markets. have fair division competition and alignment and things will grow for the sport.

Relocation
- Anaheim moves to Las Vegas
- Florida moves to Houston

Expansion
- Winnipeg
- Quebec

Realignment

Toronto - Ottawa - Montreal - Quebec
Boston - Buffalo - Pittsburgh - Columbus
Philadelphia - New Jersey - NY Islanders - NY Rangers
Tampa Bay - Atlanta - Carolina - Washington

Detroit - St. Louis - Chicago - Nashville
Colorado - Dallas - Houston - Minnesota
Los Angeles - San Jose - Las Vegas - Phoenix
Vancouver - Calgary - Edmonton - Winnipeg

To do such an endeavor, NHL will have to reduce the team roster size to 20 and game roster to 16 skaters and 2 goalies. This will help with the talent pool in the league and having only 3 full forward lines will force coaches to demand uptempo hockey since they can't mix and match lines.

and oh yeah, fix the financial system and rules.

EricBowser is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 01:59 PM
  #2
wazee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,140
vCash: 500
If those changes aren't enough to get people riled up, you can always add 4 on 4 hockey and a shootout.

wazee is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 02:03 PM
  #3
Reilly311
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 1,211
vCash: 500
I'd rather just see 4 on 4 for the entire game if we're going to add two more teams. That would cut your roster down a whole lot. Two more expansion teams could work, you'd just have to wait I'd say at least 5 more years until the current expension teams have developed their players.



I think a team in Las Vegas would be a gold mine.

Reilly311 is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 02:04 PM
  #4
Street Hawk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,598
vCash: 500
Are you kidding????

What are you on man?

Have you not seen the quality of the NHL game drop in the past decade and now you want to expand into 2 more markets. Why not just move to Winnipeg and Quebec instead of Houston and Las Vegas?

You should also realize, along with Chelios and others that moving a team isn't that easy. It's because they have signed very strict lease agreements with the city to use publically funded arenas like the Home Depot Center for Florida and the Arrowhead Pond in Anaheim. If you recall, the reason that Peter Karmanos paid like 25 million to the city of Hartford when he moved the Whalers to Carolina in 1997 was because he got out of the lease agreement early and had to pay to get out of town. He felt being in Hartford as a lame duck team wouldn't help his team (like playing in Greensboro for 2 years was better?)

Teams like Pittsburgh, who's lease with the Mellon Arena expires in 2007 have the freedom to move after that. Same with the Devils when their deal expires in 2008 I believe, that's why they are building a new rink in Newark.

Street Hawk is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 02:08 PM
  #5
no13matssundin
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Hawk
What are you on man?
Its called "drugs".

Although I like the idea of having Winnipeg & Quebec City back in the NHL, the idea of expanding to Las Vegas reeks of ESPNHL. Sorry, while the lure of a 32 team league is strong, theres no need to water down the product even more and compound the problem by putting hockey into ANOTHER market where people wont care if it exists.

The days of the Bettman Expansion craze is over. Time to bring hockey back from the brink.

no13matssundin is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 02:11 PM
  #6
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,796
vCash: 500
i think relocation is inevitable, because thats what change is. things will change and teams will move - not always the teams you would expect either. i dont think any moving is imminent, though. i dont think the lockout will cause any. a new cap world will take a season or two to really take hold and for owners to see if they like what they have. a couple of teams may move then.

expansion is overdone as it is. im against that - strongly.

realignment could happen, but im neither here nor there on it. i would like to see the playoffs go to a 1-16 seeding that goes cross conference instead of the present setup. i dont think the rivalries are as prevalent as before, and they could still happen. this way if the best two teams are in the same conference, they have a chance to meet in the cup. it would do a better job of eliminating cup finals that dont have the draw that the conference finals do.

bleedgreen is online now  
Old
02-05-2005, 02:22 PM
  #7
EricBowser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 174
vCash: 500
just throwing out ideas, talking about the NHL-NHLPA lies and rumor mongering is old.

I think the NHL should abandon hopes in Carolina, Florida, Anaheim, and go to Vegas, Winnipeg, and Quebec. They don't necessarily have to do it through expansion.

The league product isn't diluted as it is the collection of talent is only on a few teams and by cutting the overall roster sizes to 20, I think you'll see more than a few skilled players end up in those expansion cities, but like I said here in this post, relocation is a better option than expansion.

EricBowser is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 02:26 PM
  #8
nyr7andcounting
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,919
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricBowser
Want a way to fix the game on ice. Get the teams into the right markets. have fair division competition and alignment and things will grow for the sport.

Relocation
- Anaheim moves to Las Vegas
- Florida moves to Houston

Expansion
- Winnipeg
- Quebec

Realignment

Toronto - Ottawa - Montreal - Quebec
Boston - Buffalo - Pittsburgh - Columbus
Philadelphia - New Jersey - NY Islanders - NY Rangers
Tampa Bay - Atlanta - Carolina - Washington

Detroit - St. Louis - Chicago - Nashville
Colorado - Dallas - Houston - Minnesota
Los Angeles - San Jose - Las Vegas - Phoenix
Vancouver - Calgary - Edmonton - Winnipeg

To do such an endeavor, NHL will have to reduce the team roster size to 20 and game roster to 16 skaters and 2 goalies. This will help with the talent pool in the league and having only 3 full forward lines will force coaches to demand uptempo hockey since they can't mix and match lines.

and oh yeah, fix the financial system and rules.
How could you possibly be calling for expansion? The NHL is going to become the first major sport to cancel an entire season in the history of major North American sports. How in the world could you want to expand to 32 teams and who in the world are you going to get to buy those teams? Expansion will only hurt the on ice product even more.

Reduce roster size to 16 skaters dressed for each game? That would hurt the on ice product as well.

Now I am for contraction but realize that it's almost impossible for the NHL to contract teams at this point. The best thing they can do is to force/help some teams relocate. There are several markets in the NHL right now that we don't need. I would be all for moving a team or two back to a hockey market such as Quebec or Winnepeg...and if the NHL gets it's finances in control it could work.

I am also all for realignment, or maybe I should call it better scheduling. I want to see more division games, more rivalries...maybe even go so far as to have playoffs within the divisions first and than have the winners play each other in the conference finals, as they did way back when.

nyr7andcounting is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 02:28 PM
  #9
no13matssundin
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricBowser
just throwing out ideas, talking about the NHL-NHLPA lies and rumor mongering is old.

I think the NHL should abandon hopes in Carolina, Florida, Anaheim, and go to Vegas, Winnipeg, and Quebec. They don't necessarily have to do it through expansion.

The league product isn't diluted as it is the collection of talent is only on a few teams and by cutting the overall roster sizes to 20, I think you'll see more than a few skilled players end up in those expansion cities, but like I said here in this post, relocation is a better option than expansion.
That I can see.

Count me in as one of the people on here who could care less if there was a Tampa, Carolina, Phoenix, Atlanta et al. These are not traditional hockey markets and there is only ONE place where a non-traditional market has panned out for the benefit of the league: Dallas.

Everywhere else in the south can up and vaporize for all I care. Frankly, My NHL does not include the Southeast Division and I dont care who doesnt like it. Hockey needs to return to traditional markets: Winnipeg, Quebec, Hartford... shoot, why not Saskatchewan and Milwalkee even. Places where people, yknow, PLAY HOCKEY.

So, ya, I can see the relocation of teams... if it were up to me, wed have 22 teams and none from places where Hockey is an afterthought of a soft fart in the wind.

no13matssundin is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 02:29 PM
  #10
Hockeyfan02
Registered User
 
Hockeyfan02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Pistivity
Country: United States
Posts: 13,946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wazee
If those changes aren't enough to get people riled up, you can always add 4 on 4 hockey and a shootout.
Dont forget about contracting a team. Then you'll have just about everyone riled up.

Hockeyfan02 is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 02:48 PM
  #11
Jazz
Registered User
 
Jazz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,442
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Jazz
I don't think Quebec City has an arena that will support today's NHL (with luxury boxes etc)...

I'm also not sure about further expansion anyways.

As for relocation, I think that Portland would be a better bet than Las Vegas - they have a history with the Winter Hawks (of the WHL) of supporting hockey for a number of years....

Also, Paul Allen (from Microsoft) has been quoted in the past (not sure if he still feels this way) that he would not consider the NHL until they got their financial house in order.

Jazz is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 03:30 PM
  #12
djhn579
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,747
vCash: 500
I never really understood the aruement that the talent was watered down. Here is the opinion of a former player and current coach...

"You always hear, "The talent is watered down,' " said Ruff, the NHL's longest-tenured coach. "I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum. I can't stand to put in a videotape from my playing days. It's embarrassing.

"The game is so much faster now. The players are stronger and better. That's what's clogging the game up. The tools are better, too. The sticks, the skates, the training - everything is so much better. It has caused a bottleneck because there are a lot of darn good skaters."


http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial...01/1014027.asp

djhn579 is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 03:34 PM
  #13
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 41,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by no13matssundin
That I can see.

Count me in as one of the people on here who could care less if there was a Tampa, Carolina, Phoenix, Atlanta et al. These are not traditional hockey markets and there is only ONE place where a non-traditional market has panned out for the benefit of the league: Dallas.

Everywhere else in the south can up and vaporize for all I care. Frankly, My NHL does not include the Southeast Division and I dont care who doesnt like it. Hockey needs to return to traditional markets: Winnipeg, Quebec, Hartford... shoot, why not Saskatchewan and Milwalkee even. Places where people, yknow, PLAY HOCKEY.

So, ya, I can see the relocation of teams... if it were up to me, wed have 22 teams and none from places where Hockey is an afterthought of a soft fart in the wind.
you mean places like edmonton and calgary? places were hockey is a tradition and where they can't afford to compete in the league and when they don't make the playoffs they can't get into the top 20 in the league in attendance? you mean places like boston that over the last three seasons is behind tampa and washington of the southeast division and not in the top 20 in attendance. you mean traditional hockey markets like that?

are you suggesting that the franchise in colorado is not better off there than in quebec city? you will find that pheonix is in much better shape in pheonix than they were in winnipeg with a brand new building. by the way...you mention dallas as the only southern market that is non-traditional and has panned out. its only because like most sports markets, the team that wins, draws. they have won the cup and been a cup contender every year since they arrived in dallas. they have missed the playoffs just once. swap dallas and pheonix win-loss records and pheonix is the successful franchise. the team in dallas was a competitive team when it moved. the pheonix team was not when it left winnipeg. hartford never came close to winning anything. atlanta, florida and tampa are brand new teams.
give them a chance to win some and compete some and you will find that they are good hockey markets as well. certainly tampa showed the last two seasons with a good team that they can make money and fill the building. you really want to dump that franchise in order to move another team back into another small canadian market like Quebec City?

txpd is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 03:45 PM
  #14
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 41,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by djhn579
I never really understood the aruement that the talent was watered down. Here is the opinion of a former player and current coach...

"You always hear, "The talent is watered down,' " said Ruff, the NHL's longest-tenured coach. "I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum. I can't stand to put in a videotape from my playing days. It's embarrassing.

"The game is so much faster now. The players are stronger and better. That's what's clogging the game up. The tools are better, too. The sticks, the skates, the training - everything is so much better. It has caused a bottleneck because there are a lot of darn good skaters."


http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial...01/1014027.asp
I think that its too easy to fall for that talent watered down theory. A lot of people forget that the Capitals got Peter Bondra because they were the only team to hear about him and scout him. That would never happen now.

While there are more teams and more roster spots to fill, there are also more sources for players. A good european player never goes unscouted. 10-15 years ago a German like Jochen Hecht or Marco Sturm would never be in the league. These are good players.

It used to be that 4th line players and 3rd pair defensemen were scrubs. not many are that any longer.

Let me also add that players take much better care of themselves and a good player often has a career that is several years longer than what they were 15 years ago.

add the longer careers to the greater sources for finding players and the quality players is at least as good as what it was. in lindy ruff's opinion they are better.


Last edited by txpd: 02-05-2005 at 03:54 PM.
txpd is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 05:34 PM
  #15
Hoek
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tampa, FL
Country: Argentina
Posts: 774
vCash: 500
Don't change anything. Just the system. The system is what's killing non-traditional markets. Everyone goes to watch a competitive team no matter where its located. Hartford, Winnipeg, and Quebec failed. They'll fail again. "Traditional hockey markets" are incredibly overrated. Look where all the bankruptcies and serious financial problems have occurred. All in the sacred hockey towns in the north where they tax everyone up the wazzoo, have currency issues when it comes to Canada, and refuse to build modern stadiums. The teams in the south have all the right groundwork to succeed. Throwing that away now would be a huge waste. Fix the system so they aren't hemorrhaging cash in order to field a competitive team that will bring in the fans and the money. Again, no matter where you are, people just want to see a winner (unless it's Washington or New Jersey where they can't even sellout playoff games). The league will never get a great TV deal where the real bucks are if they run away now.

Hoek is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 06:03 PM
  #16
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 41,302
vCash: 500
Washington's problem with selling playoff games is that they made the playoffs for 20 years in a row and advanced past the second round only once. since breaking that streak its now twice that they advanced past the second round. they were just good enough to ring the sales value out of making the playoffs.

they need to advance some and the sales will come back. i imagine there is some of the same problem in st louis.

txpd is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 06:08 PM
  #17
wazee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeyfan02
Dont forget about contracting a team. Then you'll have just about everyone riled up.
Good one. About the only thing left to to ban fighting. That always brings them out of the woodwork.

wazee is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 06:51 PM
  #18
nyr7andcounting
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,919
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by djhn579
I never really understood the aruement that the talent was watered down. Here is the opinion of a former player and current coach...

"You always hear, "The talent is watered down,' " said Ruff, the NHL's longest-tenured coach. "I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum. I can't stand to put in a videotape from my playing days. It's embarrassing.

"The game is so much faster now. The players are stronger and better. That's what's clogging the game up. The tools are better, too. The sticks, the skates, the training - everything is so much better. It has caused a bottleneck because there are a lot of darn good skaters."


http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial...01/1014027.asp
It's all relative though. Sure the overall talent of the league is better, but the difference between the top players in the league and the bottom players is a lot bigger now than it would be with less teams, that's just common sense.

nyr7andcounting is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 07:07 PM
  #19
McDonald19
Hampus
 
McDonald19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 17,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricBowser

- Anaheim moves to Las Vegas

:lol :lol :lol :lol

The Company that runs the Arrowhead Pond is buying the Ducks to keep them in Anaheim. They would lose millions if there is no Pro Team at the Pond.

The Ducks aren't going anywhere.

Why don't you pick on a team that doesn't have a nice arena?...Pittsburgh...

McDonald19 is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 07:25 PM
  #20
djhn579
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr7andcounting
It's all relative though. Sure the overall talent of the league is better, but the difference between the top players in the league and the bottom players is a lot bigger now than it would be with less teams, that's just common sense.
Of course, with fewer teams there would be less of a difference between the best and worst players in the league. But, I don't think there would be that much of a difference that you would notice.

In the opinion of someone who played in the league back when there were fewer teams, and that sees the talent that is available now, his opinion is that there is already a much higher talent level in the league, top to bottom, and that is in part responcible for the problems we see today.

I'll take his opinion over yours. Nothing personnal...

djhn579 is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 08:01 PM
  #21
djhn579
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr7andcounting
It's all relative though. Sure the overall talent of the league is better, but the difference between the top players in the league and the bottom players is a lot bigger now than it would be with less teams, that's just common sense.
To look at this a little bit differently, let's say we contract 4 teams. That takes out about 100 players, or 3 - 4 players per existing teams.

If you look at the bottom 5 players on each team now (150 players), they probably average about 8 minutes per game (humor me on this, I'm not looking this up or calculating...) That's 40 minutes of the 300 minutes available to the skaters, or about 13.3% of the available time. Are the bottom 5 players on each team the ones responsible for the decreased scoring and boring games?

What about the next 5 players? If we say that they average twice as many minutes per game, 16, that works out to 80 minutes out of the available 300, or 26.7% of the available time. With the bottom 5 players, that works out to about 40% of the available time for the game. Now that may be responsible for the decreased scoring and boring games, but we would have to get rid of 300 players, or 12 teams to improve the game, if this is the problem.

djhn579 is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 08:15 PM
  #22
PanthersRule96
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 6,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Hawk
Home Depot Center for Florida .
Office Depot Center

BTW, why would FLA ever relocate. Every sports team there has proven that winning=sellouts. With a cap system or a new economic system, FLA would be allowed to grow without losing large amounts of money and then, when they start winning which will prolly be in like a couple of years, they will be a goldmine here. As long as they keep winning, sellouts will keep coming. The heat's and marlin's attendances are both up with winning. The dolphins had a big dropoff when they start losing. Plus, FLA still draws decent crowds when they're as bad as they are.

Talk about bad timing. Had this debate come up 5 years ago, Tampa would be the talk of relocation.

No offense to those teams fans, but teams that would be contracted before FLA would be ANA, CAR, PIT, and any other bottom feeder that can't draw crowds or can't financially support itself. I even think the NJD should/could relocate as it's ridiculous if you can't sellout consistently if you in the cup. If FLA won the cup, I guarantee you for the first half of the next season as well as the playoff run during that year, FLA would sellout every game, no matter how bad they are the next season.

PanthersRule96 is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 08:19 PM
  #23
Crazy Lunatic
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr7andcounting

Reduce roster size to 16 skaters dressed for each game? That would hurt the on ice product as well.
I disagree strongly. No more 4th line muckers = less clutching and grabbing and more ice time for star players. I say get rid of the fourth line of forwards.

 
Old
02-05-2005, 08:22 PM
  #24
Bring Back Bucky
Registered User
 
Bring Back Bucky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Delicieux!
Country: Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 7,827
vCash: 1650
I propose the relocation of any thread with the word relocation or expansion, we've seen enough of those nightmares.

Bring Back Bucky is offline  
Old
02-05-2005, 08:32 PM
  #25
nyr7andcounting
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,919
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy Lunatic
I disagree strongly. No more 4th line muckers = less clutching and grabbing and more ice time for star players. I say get rid of the fourth line of forwards.
Yes but making players play a ton of minutes isn't exactly going to increase their play. Think about it, if teams could not play a 4th line and still get top production out of their best players, wouldn't they do it? All coaches attempt to maximize production, and that means giving a 4th line 8 minutes a game. Without that the top line guys might play too much and not be as productive in the extra time they are on the ice. Not to mention, the second game of back to backs would be a killer.

nyr7andcounting is offline  
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 09:35 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.