HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

CBA: Contraction

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-21-2003, 11:49 AM
  #26
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilo
How is "overall success" better for St Louis than for Pittsburgh?

Or you're only taking the last few years into account???
36 years.
3 years not in the postseason.

degroat* is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 11:56 AM
  #27
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 26,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by go pierre hedin
There are obviously too many teams in the NHL and I'm bored... so I was wondering what 6 teams would you contract if it was necessary?
Let's start with your team and then anyone else who feels qualified to take teams away from fans.

It's not so "obvious" that there are too many teams. It's obvious that there is too little revenue being generated to satisfy management and players alike.

***

You started the same thread twice for some reason, so I'm merging threads.

Trottier is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 12:05 PM
  #28
Evilo
Registered User
 
Evilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Country: France
Posts: 24,885
vCash: 632
Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
36 years.
3 years not in the postseason.
And how many cups?

Evilo is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 12:13 PM
  #29
Spaceace
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: 2,000 miles from Savvis
Posts: 1,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilo
And how many cups?
I'll be glad to answer that: a big,fat ZERO!!!!!!!! Yes,it's pitiful. But at least St. Louis has more than ONE actual star player on their roster. And when Pittsburgh's only one star calls it quits for good,you might be calling that team by their new name: the Portland Pengiuns. I doubt they'll raise the money for a new arena anyways.

Spaceace is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 01:03 PM
  #30
darth5
Rowsdower!
 
darth5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Smashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 2,371
vCash: 500
You know what?

I'm sick of these threads based on the assumption the league is too big. Because I reject that notion on every level of consideration.

Think about this: If you contract the league below 30, I think you further diminish any chance at a significant TV contract. It is difficult enough already.

Then Center Ice will cost $500 US a year with fewer games covered, and people would have to choose between actual game tickets and Center Ice. The whole thing spirals further down and the size of the pie shrinks considerably for EVERYONE. How can player salary and owner revenue even be maintained under that scenario?

Chew on that for while. Meanwhile, I won't be posting in anymore of these threads. Dream on.

darth5 is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 01:07 PM
  #31
LaVal
Registered User
 
LaVal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,704
vCash: 500
all trapping teams besides Montreal

LaVal is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 01:50 PM
  #32
PecaFan
Registered User
 
PecaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
Posts: 8,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by go pierre hedin
There are obviously too many teams in the NHL and I'm bored... so I was wondering what 6 teams would you contract if it was necessary?
Ah yes, our favourite topic.

Let's go for the ones that cause the most problems to the league:

Colorado, Dallas, Detroit in the west and New Jersey, New York Rangers, and Toronto in the east.

PecaFan is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 02:15 PM
  #33
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilo
And how many cups?
When you figure out the definition to the word "OVERALL" you'll realize why that's irrelevent.

degroat* is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 02:45 PM
  #34
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Dark Mod Powers
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Fangorn
Country: United States
Posts: 24,529
vCash: 500
I wouldn't contract six; I'd contract four (at most).


Florida (rarely fill the building)

Washington (ditto, and with zero excuses also... they have money and talent out the wazoo and a new arena)

Pittsburgh (to be as un-homer-like as possible)

Anaheim (Disney, the name, two other teams in Cali, etc.)


After some re-alignment we have 13 a side. I would not change the playoff system at all, but the lottery would have to be re-evaluated.

Eastern Conference
Atlanta (SE)
Boston (AT)
Buffalo (CN)
Carolina (SE)
Columbus (SE)
Montreal (CN)
New Jersey (AT)
NY Islanders (AT)
NY Rangers (AT)
Ottawa (CN)
Philadelphia (CN)
Tampa Bay (SE)
Toronto (CN)

Western Conference
Calgary (NW)
Chicago (CN)
Colorado (NW)
Dallas (SW)
Detroit (CN)
Edmonton (NW)
Los Angeles (SW)
Minnesota (CN)
Nashville (CN)
Phoenix (SW)
San Jose (SW)
St. Louis (CN)
Vancouver (NW)

I don't get why setups like this are so hard for the NHL, NBA and others to figure out. The teams aren't *that* loosely grouped, geographically speaking....

There's also another option... Northern and Southern Conferences. (posting now...)

Darth Vitale is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 02:50 PM
  #35
thestonedkoala
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Minnesota is almost untouchable. They lost their team once and it showed that they were wanting a second franchise to move in. The Wild are probably doing the 2nd or 3rd best in the league right now for attendance and fan loyalty.

 
Old
11-21-2003, 02:59 PM
  #36
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Dark Mod Powers
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Fangorn
Country: United States
Posts: 24,529
vCash: 500
In this scenario I have regrettably contracted only the (dying anyway) Blackhawks, and my beloved Pens (have to do *something* about the talent pool). [upon further reflection... this would keep intact almost every important rivalry in the game, excepting the ones dealing with Detroit mostly (and there are ways around that with good scheduling)].

What do you guys think??



Northern Conference

Boston (AT)
Buffalo (AT)
New Jersey (AT)
NY Islanders (AT)
NY Rangers (AT)

Montreal (CN)
Ottawa (CN)
Philadelphia (CN)
Toronto (CN)
Detroit (CN)

Minnesota (NW)
Edmonton (NW)
Calgary (NW)
Vancouver (NW)


Southern Conference

Atlanta (SE)
Carolina (SE)
Florida (SE)
Tampa Bay (SE)
Nashville (SE)

Colorado (CN)
Columbus (CN)
Dallas (CN)
St. Louis (CN)
Washington (CN)

Anaheim (SW)
Los Angeles (SW)
Phoenix (SW)
San Jose (SW)


Personally I think this would be sweet. And I think a huge North-South rivalry could grow out of this as well. Sort of the "new NHL" vs "the old".

Darth Vitale is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 03:00 PM
  #37
Baron Von Shark
Registered User
 
Baron Von Shark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: CA
Posts: 3,274
vCash: 500
i dont see how anyone could even mention san jose. attendance has never been a problem out here. we've also generated so much revenue for the nhl from our merchandise. what about one of the most memorable mements in allstar history, when nolan called thed goal on hasek at sj arena?

(i am aware that att. is a problem this year, but you need to look at economics. the recession has hit the bay area harder than anywhere else in the nation.)

Baron Von Shark is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 03:08 PM
  #38
dulzhok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,466
vCash: 500
And just how do you go about telling an owner that their 100+ million dollar investment is non-existant? The owner paid for it. It's theirs. Unless the owner wants to contract the team, I don't see how contraction is legal.

dulzhok is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 03:31 PM
  #39
evman150*
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Six teams for contraction, hmmm....

Phoenix - Big mistake coming here in the first place. Terrible hockey city, and a continually lacklustre product on the ice.

New Jersey - Great organization; fans, and the market in general are a joke. One of the worst in the league when it comes to fans.

Nashville - I really like the team they have, but I just don't think hockey in Nashville is going to work. Nashville's a nascar and football city, not a hockey city.

Atlanta - Another good young team. Too bad they have ****** fans. After they're contracted (please), maybe they'll get another chance at a team. Third time's a charm?

Carolina - J-O-K-E.

Anaheim - Three teams in California is one too many, imo. The Ducks draw the short straw.

evman150* is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 03:33 PM
  #40
evman150*
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaVal575
all trapping teams besides Montreal
Then who would Montreal have to play?


evman150* is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 03:57 PM
  #41
Steve L*
Registered User
 
Steve L*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton, England
Country: England
Posts: 11,551
vCash: 500
Eastern Conference

Carolina - Terrible team
New Jersey - Fans dont show even if they win, what kind of trouble will they be in when theyre not successful.
Pittsburgh - An AHL team with a handful of NHLers


Western Conference


Anaheim - Any team based on a film shold be contracted
Chicago - A lot of history but the owners dont deserve an NHL team.
Phoenix - Another team in finacial trouble

Steve L* is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 04:33 PM
  #42
-(v)atrix-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 33
vCash: 500
contract Calgary?? a team that has missed the playoffs for 7 straight years and still get good attendance. (better than half the league)

just think when they start making the playoffs again, if they can still get good crowds out to every game (and sellouts) after being out of the playoffs that long, imagine how it will be when they finally make it.

Anyway, I don't think any team should be contracted. Just because some teams don't have as good fan support than others, doesn't mean their isn't any diehard fans. Every team in the league has die hard fans, and they don't deserve to lose their teams either.

-(v)atrix- is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 06:38 PM
  #43
kenabnrmal
Registered User
 
kenabnrmal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: the beach or rink
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,198
vCash: 500
Another "lets contract the whatever team we dont like and/or is located in a non-traditional hockey market". Fun fun.

kenabnrmal is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 10:04 PM
  #44
dirt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Spanish Lake, Mo
Country: United States
Posts: 797
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenabnrmal
Another "lets contract the whatever team we dont like and/or is located in a non-traditional hockey market". Fun fun.
But there hasn't been one in at least a week.

dirt is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 11:03 PM
  #45
Evilo
Registered User
 
Evilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Country: France
Posts: 24,885
vCash: 632
Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
When you figure out the definition to the word "OVERALL" you'll realize why that's irrelevent.
Yep I figured it out.
Pens = 2 cups overall, HOF players, big hockey history.
Blues = 0 cup, lots of playoff appearances, few HOFers.

Neat.
Now when you figure that overall also means thinking besides the last three years, you'd know that Pittsburgh is just as legitimate (if not more) than St Louis.

Evilo is offline  
Old
11-22-2003, 01:03 AM
  #46
SedinFan*
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Posts: 10,543
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to SedinFan*
Make it easy.

Get rid of teams that average less than 15,500 per game.

SedinFan* is offline  
Old
11-22-2003, 03:35 AM
  #47
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilo
Yep I figured it out.
Pens = 2 cups overall, HOF players, big hockey history.
Blues = 0 cup, lots of playoff appearances, few HOFers.

Neat.
Now when you figure that overall also means thinking besides the last three years, you'd know that Pittsburgh is just as legitimate (if not more) than St Louis.


I hope you realize how you're making yourself look by saying the Blues have only had success over the last few years. Apparently you can't grasp the fact that the Blues have only missed the playoffs THREE TIMES in their 36 year history.

Now... let's talk about this 'legitimate stuff'... are you honestly trying to say that the Blues would be contracted before the Penguins? LOL. Unfortunately, this 'big hockey history' that you essentially made up and was non-existant until the 1990's and these HOF players wouldn't prevent your Penguins from being no more. Those things don't build a new arena. Those things don't make the fans go to more games. Those things are completely irrlevent when it comes to determining who are the more stable franchises in the league.

Now.. let's talk about the Blues. Arena built in the mid-90's that you don't have to walk up fire escapes to get to your seats. Billionairre owner backed by Wal-Mart's money. Attendance at or near capacity for many years consecutively.

Those are the things that would prevent a franchise from being contracted. Not your precious Mario.

degroat* is offline  
Old
11-22-2003, 03:40 AM
  #48
Evilo
Registered User
 
Evilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Country: France
Posts: 24,885
vCash: 632
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnergizerScotty
Make it easy.

Get rid of teams that average less than 15,500 per game.
in the last year or over the length of their existence?

Evilo is offline  
Old
11-22-2003, 03:51 AM
  #49
Evilo
Registered User
 
Evilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Country: France
Posts: 24,885
vCash: 632
Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat


I hope you realize how you're making yourself look by saying the Blues have only had success over the last few years. Apparently you can't grasp the fact that the Blues have only missed the playoffs THREE TIMES in their 36 year history.
Where have I said the Blues's success is recent?
Learn to read PART I.

Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
Now... let's talk about this 'legitimate stuff'... are you honestly trying to say that the Blues would be contracted before the Penguins? LOL. Unfortunately, this 'big hockey history' that you essentially made up and was non-existant until the 1990's and these HOF players wouldn't prevent your Penguins from being no more. Those things don't build a new arena. Those things don't make the fans go to more games. Those things are completely irrlevent when it comes to determining who are the more stable franchises in the league.
Nope I didn't say the Blues should be contracted before the Penguins.
Learn to read PART II.
I said the Pens are as legitimate as the Blues if not more.
I still stand by it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
Now.. let's talk about the Blues. Arena built in the mid-90's that you don't have to walk up fire escapes to get to your seats. Billionairre owner backed by Wal-Mart's money. Attendance at or near capacity for many years consecutively.

Those are the things that would prevent a franchise from being contracted. Not your precious Mario.
I would think hockey history is part of the process to determine a "contraction" of a franchise.
St Louis was never a winner, and if not for a billionnaire owner, their losing habits would probably be placed elsewhere.
Pittsburgh on the other hand, if you give them a rich owner, you don't even hear about them moving.

Evilo is offline  
Old
11-22-2003, 04:02 AM
  #50
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
What the hell do you mean by "the Pens are as legitimate as the Blues if not more."????

degroat* 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 09:41 AM.

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.