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.

NHL Hockey Coming Back to Hartford?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-16-2010, 03:56 PM
  #26
Buck Aki Berg
My pockets hurt
 
Buck Aki Berg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,426
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
In their defense, Jim McKenzie's number retirement was a bit of a travesty in itself. Making Rick Ley's the only legitimate retired number that was re-circulated. Incidentally, Ley's #2 was re-retired after Glen Wesley used it.

I wouldn't have done it, and I don't know the rationale behind that decision.
I think you mean John McKenzie (a player named Jim McKenzie actually was drafted by the Whalers in 1979, which makes the incorrect name even more confusing )

I think John McKenzie's number was retired by Hartford as a vehicle to connect the NHL Whalers to its WHA roots (probably the same reason Al Hamilton's number was retired by Edmonton). That's all I can really think of, since McKenzie's career wasn't very remarkable.

Buck Aki Berg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2010, 03:58 PM
  #27
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,816
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Believe it or not, I think Hurricanes fans would be a bit upset by losing the Whalers' history. Of course it would vary greatly from one fan to the next, but the Whalers legacy is part of the team's identity. We've spent the past 15 years with Ron Francis as the franchise scoring leader, hearing the old Hartford goal horn, and in many cases wearing Whalers jerseys to the games. It would seem wrong to just suddenly strip all of it away... and yes, I do appreciate the deliciously twisted irony in saying that It's a real mind-bender philosophically.

But if it were to happen, it could be a tremendously cathartic moment to both fanbases if it was done ceremonially and with consideration to the shared identity on both sides. Might even be a great moment for the league, like Bourque handing over his sweater to Esposito.
my friend, you needed to be around during my many whaler discussions about the team on the canes board. i routinely get pounded for bringing any of it up, regardless of attempts at being diplomatic about it. canes fans here get worse about it every year, they dont care nor have any interest in acknowledging. most of them, not all of course. things have changed on that board over the recent years.

bleedgreen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2010, 03:59 PM
  #28
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,816
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haymaker View Post
I think you mean John McKenzie (a player named Jim McKenzie actually was drafted by the Whalers in 1979, which makes the incorrect name even more confusing )

I think John McKenzie's number was retired by Hartford as a vehicle to connect the NHL Whalers to its WHA roots (probably the same reason Al Hamilton's number was retired by Edmonton). That's all I can really think of, since McKenzie's career wasn't very remarkable.
jim mckenzie was a crazy sob. dude would fight ANYONE. some of the most gnarly fights i ever saw live.

bleedgreen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2010, 04:00 PM
  #29
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 34,420
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brodie View Post
Why was John McKenzie's number retirement a travesty?
Wikipedia:

Quote:
His #19 was retired by the Hartford Whalers, making him unusually one of only three players whose number was retired by an NHL franchise for which he never actually played (the other two being J.C. Tremblay by the Quebec Nordiques and Frank Finnigan by the modern-day Ottawa Senators). It was widely believed at the time, since McKenzie's contributions to the WHA Whalers were modest, that the honor was a public relations sop to the Boston Bruins' fan base for which Whalers management was competing.
His stats with the Whalers:

197677 34 11 19 30
197778 79 27 29 56
197879 76 19 28 47

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2010, 04:01 PM
  #30
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,643
vCash: 500
One thing I've never understood about the NHL, compared with the other major US sports, is the abandonment of the old names and histories of franchises when they move.

With the exception of the Atlanta -> Calgary Flames, no other NHL Franchise move has retained the old name. OK, I'll give the North Stars / Stars half a point.

Compare this to:

Boston -> Milwaukee -> Atlanta Braves
Philadelphia -> Kansas City -> Oakland A's
Brooklyn -> Los Angeles Dodgers
New York -> San Francisco Giants

Boston -> Washington Redskins
Cleveland -> Los Angeles -> St Louis Rams
Chicago -> St Louis -> Phoenix/Arizona Cardinals
Oakland -> Los Angeles -> Oakland Raiders
Baltimore -> Indianapolis Colts

Minneapolis -> Los Angeles Lakers
Milwaukee -> St Louis -> Atlanta Hawks
Ft Wayne -> Detroit Pistons
Philadelphia -> San Francisco -> Golden State Warriors
San Diego -> Houston Rockets
New Orleans -> Utah Jazz
Kansas City -> Sacramento Kings
San Diego -> Los Angeles Clippers
Vancouver -> Memphis Grizzlies
Charlotte -> New Orleans Hornets

Other sports, particularly tradition bound baseball, embrace their past histories. Hell, the NBA keeps names that make absolutely no sense in their new locale - Lakers? Jazz?

The LA Dodgers retired the numbers of Pee Wee Reese, Duke Snyder, Roy Campenella, and Jackie Robinson even though they played all (or the vast majority) of their careers in Brooklyn - Reese played one year in LA, Snider four, the other two never donned LA Dodger Blue.

The SF Giants retired Christy Mathewson, John McGraw, and Bill Terry and retained the retired numbers of Carl Hubbel and Mel Ott.

The Atlanta Braves retired the numbers of Warren Spahn and Eddie Matthews.

The Washington Nationals have retained the retired numbers of Gary Carter, Andre Dawson, Rusty Staub, and Tim Raines.


Last edited by kdb209: 04-16-2010 at 05:55 PM.
kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2010, 04:05 PM
  #31
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,816
vCash: 500
its a tough issue. teams in new places want their own identity and want their guys to be in the lights. i get it. its equally tough to see the careers of huge franchise players discarded because of that attitude.

bleedgreen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2010, 04:05 PM
  #32
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 34,420
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
my friend, you needed to be around during my many whaler discussions about the team on the canes board. i routinely get pounded for bringing any of it up, regardless of attempts at being diplomatic about it. canes fans here get worse about it every year, they dont care nor have any interest in acknowledging. most of them, not all of course. things have changed on that board over the recent years.
I've seen a couple of those. To be honest, I think it's a matter of context. Usually it seems to be people reflexively pushing back against the idea of Hartford's history somehow upstaging present achievements.

I doubt it would go over terribly well with the fanbase in general, beyond HFBoards, if a new Whalers organization filed some kind of legal suit to strip the franchise of its records and history. Even though there's a perfectly legitimate point to be made that the city of Hartford "owns" those memories, it would still be a pretty solid slap in the face to people who have built on that legacy for the past decade and a half. IMO it wouldn't be worth the bitter fight if a more equitable solution could be reached.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2010, 05:29 PM
  #33
Tommy Hawk
Registered User
 
Tommy Hawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rojac View Post
Once again, I fail to understand why you would want to call a new team in Hartford the Whalers. Isn't that an insult to the original Whalers -- trying to assign their history to a team that has nothing to do with them but be located in the same city?

Suppose you're a parent whose child grows up, leaves home, and changes his name (because he's going into show biz or something), but you always liked the original name. Do you go out and adopt a kid and give him that name? I suspect not.
So, using your logic, Ottawa should have chosen a different name than the Senators......

Tommy Hawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2010, 06:29 PM
  #34
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
I've seen a couple of those. To be honest, I think it's a matter of context. Usually it seems to be people reflexively pushing back against the idea of Hartford's history somehow upstaging present achievements.

I doubt it would go over terribly well with the fanbase in general, beyond HFBoards, if a new Whalers organization filed some kind of legal suit to strip the franchise of its records and history. Even though there's a perfectly legitimate point to be made that the city of Hartford "owns" those memories, it would still be a pretty solid slap in the face to people who have built on that legacy for the past decade and a half. IMO it wouldn't be worth the bitter fight if a more equitable solution could be reached.
The Whalers would win. What would Carolina gain by fighting them? It would just make southern hockey more hated, and have more people calling for their heads.

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2010, 09:07 PM
  #35
Mike in MN
Registered User
 
Mike in MN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: South St Paul
Country: United States
Posts: 168
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
One thing I've never understood about the NHL, compared with the other major US sports, is the abandonment of the old names and histories of franchises when they move.

With the exception of the Atlanta -> Calgary Flames, no other NHL Franchise move has retained the old name. OK, I'll give the North Stars / Stars half a point.

Compare this to:

Boston -> Milwaukee -> Atlanta Braves
Philadelphia -> Kansas City -> Oakland A's
Brooklyn -> Los Angeles Dodgers
New York -> San Francisco Giants


Other sports, particularly tradition bound baseball, embrace their past histories. Hell, the NBA keeps names that make absolutely no sense in their new locale - Lakers? Jazz?

The LA Dodgers retired the numbers of Pee Wee Reese, Duke Snyder, Roy Campenella, and Jackie Robinson even though they played all (or the vast majority) of their careers in Brooklyn - Reese played one year in LA, Snider four, the other two never donned LA Dodger Blue.

The SF Giants retired Christy Mathewson, John McGraw, and Bill Terry and retained the retired numbers of Carl Hubbel and Mel Ott.

The Atlanta Braves retired the numbers of Warren Spahn and Eddie Matthews.

The Washington Nationals have retained the retired numbers of Gary Carter, Andre Dawson, Rusty Staub, and Tim Raines.
On the other hand with MLB, some teams did start their history's over

Washington Senators --> Minnesota Twins
Washington Senators II --> Texas Rangers
Seattle Pilots --> Milwaukee Brewers (OK, it was only a year in Seattle)

And the Nationals may have kept the Expo's retired numbers, but they have also appropriated the Histories of the old Senators teams, which is fair since nobody else was using them. For example, the high-end club for the front rows has the line score from game 7 of the 1924 series (the only time the Senators won it all) The Twins are celebrating their "50th Year" even though the franchise is 109 years old.

Personally, I believe the history belongs more with the city, not the franchise.

Mike in MN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 04:08 AM
  #36
rojac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
rojac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 6,738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Believe it or not, I think Hurricanes fans would be a bit upset by losing the Whalers' history. Of course it would vary greatly from one fan to the next, but the Whalers legacy is part of the team's identity. We've spent the past 15 years with Ron Francis as the franchise scoring leader, hearing the old Hartford goal horn, and in many cases wearing Whalers jerseys to the games. It would seem wrong to just suddenly strip all of it away... and yes, I do appreciate the deliciously twisted irony in saying that It's a real mind-bender philosophically.

But if it were to happen, it could be a tremendously cathartic moment to both fanbases if it was done ceremonially and with consideration to the shared identity on both sides. Might even be a great moment for the league, like Bourque handing over his sweater to Esposito.
Interesting. I'm a lifelong Toronto Maple Leafs fan and if the Leafs were to move away and Toronto was given a new franchise, I wouldn't want that franchise claiming the Leafs legacy. I would hope that they would keep the history alive in the new location, but even if they didn't, I wouldn't want it being claimed by some other franchise that was not really the Leafs.

rojac is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 04:19 AM
  #37
rojac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
rojac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 6,738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolvesfan View Post
So, using your logic, Ottawa should have chosen a different name than the Senators......
Absolutely.

rojac is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 04:43 AM
  #38
rojac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
rojac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 6,738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
One thing I've never understood about the NHL, compared with the other major US sports, is the abandonment of the old names and histories of franchises when they move.

With the exception of the Atlanta -> Calgary Flames, no other NHL Franchise move has retained the old name. OK, I'll give the North Stars / Stars half a point.

Compare this to:

Boston -> Milwaukee -> Atlanta Braves
Philadelphia -> Kansas City -> Oakland A's
Brooklyn -> Los Angeles Dodgers
New York -> San Francisco Giants

Boston -> Washington Redskins
Cleveland -> Los Angeles -> St Louis Rams
Chicago -> St Louis -> Phoenix/Arizona Cardinals
Oakland -> Los Angeles -> Oakland Raiders
Baltimore -> Indianapolis Colts

Minneapolis -> Los Angeles Lakers
Milwaukee -> St Louis -> Atlanta Hawks
Ft Wayne -> Detroit Pistons
Philadelphia -> San Francisco -> Golden State Warriors
San Diego -> Houston Rockets
New Orleans -> Utah Jazz
Kansas City -> Sacramento Kings
San Diego -> Los Angeles Clippers
Vancouver -> Memphis Grizzlies
Charlotte -> New Orleans Hornets

Other sports, particularly tradition bound baseball, embrace their past histories. Hell, the NBA keeps names that make absolutely no sense in their new locale - Lakers? Jazz?

The LA Dodgers retired the numbers of Pee Wee Reese, Duke Snyder, Roy Campenella, and Jackie Robinson even though they played all (or the vast majority) of their careers in Brooklyn - Reese played one year in LA, Snider four, the other two never donned LA Dodger Blue.

The SF Giants retired Christy Mathewson, John McGraw, and Bill Terry and retained the retired numbers of Carl Hubbel and Mel Ott.

The Atlanta Braves retired the numbers of Warren Spahn and Eddie Matthews.

The Washington Nationals have retained the retired numbers of Gary Carter, Andre Dawson, Rusty Staub, and Tim Raines.
Pretty much all the baseball teams that moved and kept their nicknames have generic nicknames that fit with any city, whereas those that changed that names when they moved had names that tied into their specific city (such as the Washington Senators or the Montreal Expos who were named for Expo 67).

Oh, and incidentally, the Nationals did not retain Montreal's retired numbers.

On the other hand, I hate those NBA teams that have kept their names despite them making no sense in their new location. But I guess that tradition was set pretty early with the Minneapolis Lakers move to LA in 1960. Oh, and while the Clippers retained that nickname when they moved from San Diego to LA, they were originally the Buffalo Braves. And once in a while, you get lucky with a move where the nickname makes more sense in the new city such as with the Houston Rockets.

In the case of the NHL team moves, most of the teams that changed their name upon moving had names that were tied to their locations. And in fact, I'm somewhat undecided about the decision to keep the Flames nickname upon their move to Calgary as the name had more of a conenction with Atlanta than with Calgary.

rojac is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 04:51 AM
  #39
rojac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
rojac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 6,738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
I've seen a couple of those. To be honest, I think it's a matter of context. Usually it seems to be people reflexively pushing back against the idea of Hartford's history somehow upstaging present achievements.

I doubt it would go over terribly well with the fanbase in general, beyond HFBoards, if a new Whalers organization filed some kind of legal suit to strip the franchise of its records and history. Even though there's a perfectly legitimate point to be made that the city of Hartford "owns" those memories, it would still be a pretty solid slap in the face to people who have built on that legacy for the past decade and a half. IMO it wouldn't be worth the bitter fight if a more equitable solution could be reached.
I would argue that fans of the team "own" those memories and if they decide to abandon their team because it has moved, then that is their own decision.

For example, as a Montreal Expos fan, I am bugged by the fact that the Washington Nationals don't really acknowledge their history as the Expos but at the same time, I wouldn't want the Expos history usurped by a Montreal expansion franchise or some other franchise that moved to Montreal.

rojac is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 06:52 AM
  #40
Moobles
Registered User
 
Moobles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rojac View Post
Once again, I fail to understand why you would want to call a new team in Hartford the Whalers. Isn't that an insult to the original Whalers -- trying to assign their history to a team that has nothing to do with them but be located in the same city?

Suppose you're a parent whose child grows up, leaves home, and changes his name (because he's going into show biz or something), but you always liked the original name. Do you go out and adopt a kid and give him that name? I suspect not.
No it's not an "insult", I doubt there are people around to care whether or not it's "insulting".

Your child analogy is a bit of a strawman. There's no parental figure for Hartford getting a new team and it would be more as if a new kid is coming back, not the old one (who's moved on to Carolina).

I believe a better one would be suppose there is a city. At some point, the city gets burned to the ground and all the people have to rebuild it. After some time, new people come and old people live, it's a brand new city. Now that it's brand new and back to where it was before, do you rename it or do you find a new name.

Totally depends. Here however, I think attaching Hartford to its history as the Whalers would be really positive. Plus there's always the chance a new Hartford team could go above .500. The Forever .500s would be proud .

Moobles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 09:23 AM
  #41
MHX
Hockey Makes Us...
 
MHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,016
vCash: 500
Bring back the Whalers!

MHX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 10:20 AM
  #42
NYR Hockey Fan
 
NYR Hockey Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Atlanta
Country: United States
Posts: 130
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike in MN View Post
On the other hand with MLB, some teams did start their history's over

Washington Senators --> Minnesota Twins
Washington Senators II --> Texas Rangers
Seattle Pilots --> Milwaukee Brewers (OK, it was only a year in Seattle)

And the Nationals may have kept the Expo's retired numbers, but they have also appropriated the Histories of the old Senators teams, which is fair since nobody else was using them. For example, the high-end club for the front rows has the line score from game 7 of the 1924 series (the only time the Senators won it all) The Twins are celebrating their "50th Year" even though the franchise is 109 years old.

Personally, I believe the history belongs more with the city, not the franchise.
The Twins franchise is recognized by MLB as beginning in 1901.

http://mlb.mlb.com/min/history/year_by_year_results.jsp

DC wanted the Senators nickname for the Expos but it's owned by the Texas Rangers who were also known as the Washington Senators from 1961-71.

Although DC may embrace the history of Washington baseball in Nationals Park, they do not own the history of the first two Senators teams.

The only circumstance I can think of where the team kept their history after moving was the Cleveland Browns. Although they moved to Baltimore in '96, they retained the history of the team and were offically a "dormant" franchise for 3 years.

NYR Hockey Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 11:52 AM
  #43
Harpoon Pete
 
Harpoon Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Alabama
Country: United States
Posts: 108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
I lost an agrguement on another board a few weeks ago,

Hartford falls within the territorial rights of 4 teams(NYR, NYI, Boston and NJD) and all four teams would need to sign off on a team moving there
Are you sure about that? I know that this is putting the cart wayyyy before the horse, but let's try to think this through.

NJD is in Newark now, so I doubt that they have a claim. The Islanders are a real question mark here, because their rights are close to the same as the rangers. The question is how does the NHL view the LI Sound.

When the Whalers were there, Fairfield Cty was always more Rangers than Whalers. This is due to the Rangers TR being close and a lot of people in that area were more NY than CT. Think of it like a DMZ. Greenwich, Trumbull, Norwalk.. are populated by a lot of NYers that take the train to NYC. My guess is that area falls into the NYR rights.

The Bruins reach extended to about Worchester, MA and into RI ....

Do remember that the market that the Whalers occupied was the Hartford - New Haven - Springfield area. We had some of a presence in upstate NY, some reach into Western Mass, and Rhode Island - but we really never extended into the big cities.

Baldwin did address this in his plan and said that he wants to maintain good relations with NYR/Boston. I am sure he understands this TR issue and has a plan for addressing it.

Territorial rights are a strange issue though. I could be wrong here, but I do not see much (or any of an overlap) of TR. I could be wrong though.

Harpoon Pete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 04:17 PM
  #44
TorontoSports
Registered User
 
TorontoSports's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,931
vCash: 500
lol Baldwin thinks that the moose drawing close to 10,000 fans is the reason why the city is on the map? Um no, it's the media and xenophobic Canadian hockey fans that put it back on the NHL map.

TorontoSports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2010, 09:28 AM
  #45
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 34,420
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lindrosfan88 View Post
The Whalers would win.
They wouldn't, without a legal leg to stand on. The only way it could go down would be an agreement on both sides.

Quote:
What would Carolina gain by fighting them?
By the same token, what would Carolina gain by passively allowing another team to take possession of their team history?


Quote:
It would just make southern hockey more hated, and have more people calling for their heads.
Honestly, people who are that juvenile toward southern hockey are just haters looking for a reason. Who cares what they think?

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2010, 10:10 AM
  #46
Ilyeu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
i personally dont believe gary b will ever willingly move a team back.
Moreover try moving a team from this back to this.

Ilyeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2010, 11:24 AM
  #47
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
They wouldn't, without a legal leg to stand on. The only way it could go down would be an agreement on both sides.



By the same token, what would Carolina gain by passively allowing another team to take possession of their team history?




Honestly, people who are that juvenile toward southern hockey are just haters looking for a reason. Who cares what they think?
Hey, I have no problem with hockey down south, just that like you said they are haters. The canes could do a Oklahoma city deal like the NBA did.

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2010, 11:38 AM
  #48
edog37
Registered User
 
edog37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Washington DC
Country: United States
Posts: 2,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
They wouldn't, without a legal leg to stand on. The only way it could go down would be an agreement on both sides.



By the same token, what would Carolina gain by passively allowing another team to take possession of their team history?




Honestly, people who are that juvenile toward southern hockey are just haters looking for a reason. Who cares what they think?
The Canes do not own the Whalers brand, the state of CT did until last year....given that Hartford had their team stolen from them (much in the same way Baltimore had the Colts stolen from them), it is a continued insult to the people of Hartford that Carolina keeps using the Whaler legacy...

edog37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2010, 12:00 PM
  #49
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 34,420
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by edog37 View Post
The Canes do not own the Whalers brand, the state of CT did until last year....
Owning the brand is one thing. But that is not what we are talking about. We're talking about having the New Whalers declared an "extension" of the old franchise for the purpose of acquiring broadcast rights and not being vetoed by 4 other ownership groups. That means re-writing the Hurricanes record books, changing their "founded" date, and taking the team's awards and archives against the will of their legal owners. It would also mean explaining to a judge why the NHL failed to handle all of this at the time of the relocation, as has been the established process for making it happen in every other pro league.

There is no precedent for doing any of those things, and an attempt to do it would be laughed out of court.

Quote:
it is a continued insult to the people of Hartford that Carolina keeps using the Whaler legacy...
Give me a break with the vicarious outrage. The Whalers moved and became the Hurricanes. It's as simple as that.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2010, 12:06 PM
  #50
Buck Aki Berg
My pockets hurt
 
Buck Aki Berg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,426
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by edog37 View Post
The Canes do not own the Whalers brand, the state of CT did until last year....given that Hartford had their team stolen from them (much in the same way Baltimore had the Colts stolen from them), it is a continued insult to the people of Hartford that Carolina keeps using the Whaler legacy...
I'm pretty sure you're drawing parallels where none exist (unless having a dbag owner is a parallel ). The Whalers' move was precipitated by sagging attendance (yes, it was an a-hole move that he decided to move the team before the deadline that he himself imposed on the fans, but it was still an attendance issue). To my knowledge, the Browns' move was a power play to get an new stadium built, no?

Buck Aki Berg is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 01:20 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.