HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Columbus Blue Jackets
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

CBJ Board realignment discussion

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-16-2011, 04:13 PM
  #201
WFNY5Hole
Registered User
 
WFNY5Hole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Worthington, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 94
vCash: 500
In the interest of full disclosure, I should point out that I am Dan from The Cannon (WFNY5Hole = Waiting For Next Year 5-Hole columns, which now = Dan P. at The Cannon).

Thanks for the kind words. I originally set out this morning wondering how likely it actually was that Atlanta might move, as we've been hearing about what *might* happen WRT realignment if they did, and not WHY they're possibly moving.

The main question was: we're all of a sudden hearing about how Atlanta might move right away, and yet the Coyotes' situation has been dragging on for YEARS; what was the difference?

We can debate the merits of an NHL franchise and its viability in Atlanta. What's sad, though, is that the more I really looked into the differences between the two situations, the more it really LOOKS like it all really comes down to money for the NHL despite all of their "WE DON'T WANT TO RELOCATE!!" posturing. As a Jackets fan, that was more than a little unsettling for me.

WFNY5Hole is offline  
Old
05-16-2011, 04:17 PM
  #202
sarcastro
Registered User
 
sarcastro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,245
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by WFNY5Hole View Post
What are Detroit's arguments, other than "We'd really like to move East?"

Columbus is the farthest East. Columbus can show a tangible financial benefit to moving East. Columbus can cite a theoretical improvement in competitiveness by moving East.

Detroit can... what?

As far as I'm concerned, Detroit got realigned into a division with TWO expansion teams in it starting in 1998-1999 (Nashville) and then Columbus (2000-2001). They get to whomp on two teams struggling to get going for YEARS. They can deal with staying in the West.
Two cents from Wingland

Wings owner Mike Ilitch:

Quote:
"Well, I think they want to keep us in the division we're in now because we fill their arenas," Ilitch said then, adding, "We want to go in the East now, and we're working real hard so that our fans can see our team all the time. They don't have to (wait until) 10 o'clock, 11 o'clock at night (for games) and all that business."

I asked Ilitch that day if he'd gotten any assurances from the league and its commissioner, Gary Bettman, that Detroit eventually would head East, as Toronto did in 1998.

"Well, (Bettman) has told Jimmy (Devellano, senior vice president for the Red Wings) and I on two or three occasions that we're next," Ilitch said.
From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110516/...#ixzz1MYGu7fvt

The Wings' brass is putting this out there in hopes of establishing some kind of public expectation that the Wings are next. No matter what the NHL has told them, I'm not buying it.

I think the geography, the potential of stranding the Hawks alone in the West, and the perceived attendance boost the Wings give the West, all put this in the category of Columbus before Detroit.

I'd say Nashville should have the biggest advantage because of how neatly they'd slide into the Southeast as Atlanta's replacement, but it'd be tough to sell a Central Time Zone team moving before two Eastern Time Zone teams.

I'd love to see the Wings move East and get to play the other Original 6es more often. And fewer 10pm starts would be nice as well. It's not going to happen though. It will come down to Columbus or Nashville, unless they end up moving the Yotes to Hamilton or something.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithBWhittington View Post
I don't necessarily always agree with Portzline, but I think this is a fair assessment of the situation he made in the blog today:

"4. Would the NHL favor Detroit moving to the East?

No question, the Red Wings hold considerable sway with the NHL's Board of Governors, who would have to approve any of these moves. If it's hard to imagine the Blue Jackets beating the Red Wings on the ice, it might be an even taller tale in the boardroom. But if Detroit goes East, that puts five of the Original 6 franchises in the East and it leaves the West with only one nationally marketable NHL franchise -- Chicago. Yes, Vancouver and San Jose are very good teams right now, but they don't have fans all across the U.S. like the Wings and Blackhawks. One can never overestimate the impact of TV ratings, even when they're on the small side."

We'll see what happens, I know this is isn't a Bettman-Only Decision, but I certainly see Detroit as having plenty of "bullets in the gun" to potentially affect this decision if necessary.

The easiest way I can sum up my thoughts is this way: I will not feel like the CBJ ultimately have the leg up on Detroit in this argument until we are playing the Eastern Conference.
As I mentioned above, the general consensus on the Wings board is that no matter what promises have been made, and no matter how much sway the Wings have with the board, Bettman both intensely dislikes the Wings and believes that they are the only thing keeping attendance figures tolerable in most of the Western Conference.

We don't really think there's any chance that he ever lets the Wings move East, under any circumstances. It's not officially his call but the board will do what they're told if it comes down to a vote. I don't doubt that he's told the Wings they're next, but I also don't doubt that he was lying through his teeth.

sarcastro is offline  
Old
05-16-2011, 04:25 PM
  #203
pete goegan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
pete goegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,639
vCash: 500
Here's another well-done piece on the issue from Jeff Little's blog:

http://tenminutemisconduct.com/#!/entry/542

I know not all of you have as much time to waste as I, so, when I see something of interest in my wanderings, I try to post a link. I think these outside materials add to the discussion and often present info or perspectives that haven't been fully explored here. Guys like Jeff and Dan are doing a great job and are really advancing the quality of the output from the "non-traditional" media. I appreciate their efforts.

pete goegan is online now  
Old
05-16-2011, 05:33 PM
  #204
CapnCornelius
Registered User
 
CapnCornelius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by leesmith View Post
That is a straw man. I'm certainly not advocating NO cap. I'm stating the fact that the cap is currently not fulfilling the objectives we were told it was designed to accomplish.
It isn't the "cap"--it's the revenue sharing system. And the crybaby fans and owners of the big market teams and the Canadian teams are already whining that they are paying too much to the "weak sisters" so good luck getting that fixed without the small market owners siding with the players on that one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
The system is broke and revenue sharing is part of that "system". Having said that, basing player salaries off of league revenue is moronic no matter how revenue is shared.
I don't see it as moronic in any way shape or form. For one thing, it is likely more to the benefit of the owners than the players given the way those idiots spent like drunken sailors pre-cap. Player costs are and always have been the biggest expense for owners. Unless one of their other expenses somehow were to so dramatically increase as to make it impossible to pay the players their share of revenue, I don't see how this is relevant to the problem with the system. The PA actually worked to get a better revenue sharing model than what went into the final agreement. But the big clubs would have none of it which is where the problem still lies and is why the NHL system is not nearly as good as the NFL's system, for example--with one obvious difference in circumstances being the huge source of leaguewide revenue in the NFL that is their TV deals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leesmith View Post
Regarding Hamilton, I don't see it happening. 1.) Toronto and Buffalo fight it; 2.) it won't be with Balsillie as an owner, so who else is championing Hamilton as an NHL city?
Hamilton or somewhere else in Southern Ontario is an inevitable addition for the NHL. The question is how they maximize that eventual reality given the type of dollars we're talking. Can the league charge as much for a relocation fee as an expansion fee when a relocation fee will be

I reiterate my prior comment on this whole thing as even the talking heads now seem to be assuming the Southeast would be the likely destination for whoever moves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnCornelius View Post
And, here's another question for those longing for a move to the East--what division do you think we're going to be put it? I don't think the Northeast or Atlantic are likely spots because of the traditional rivalries. Which puts us in the Southleast with Carolina, Tampa and Washington. Not sure (1) that helps much at the gate or (2) that will help much in getting into the playoffs given that Tampa and Washington have the makings of two teams that will be perennial playoff teams for years to come.

CapnCornelius is offline  
Old
05-16-2011, 07:00 PM
  #205
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnCornelius View Post
I don't see it as moronic in any way shape or form. For one thing, it is likely more to the benefit of the owners than the players given the way those idiots spent like drunken sailors pre-cap.
That's nice. I understand why the owners only list revenue, however player salaries tied to revenue is moronic on principle.

blahblah is offline  
Old
05-16-2011, 07:46 PM
  #206
CapnCornelius
Registered User
 
CapnCornelius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
That's nice. I understand why the owners only list revenue, however player salaries tied to revenue is moronic on principle.
Moronic based on what principle?

I don't see it as any different than an airline that chooses to fix its fuel cost by entering into a supply contract. Maybe fuel price goes up and they "win" or fuel price would have gone down and they "lose," but they made a business decision to fix the costs based on a given metric, in this case revenues.

CapnCornelius is offline  
Old
05-16-2011, 08:08 PM
  #207
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
That's nice. I understand why the owners only list revenue, however player salaries tied to revenue is moronic on principle.
Actually, I think it's quite logical. When I've done management consulting contracts, one of the very first thing I did was examine the P&Ls looking at the ratios, including employee expense as a percentage of revenues. It make total sense to me. Employee costs need to be variable and tied to revenues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Foley View Post
I don't get it; do you guys think Bettman holds some sort of Rasputin-like control over all the NHL owners? You have to remember that Bettman works for the owners, not the other way around.

In the end, each Board Governor will vote in the best interests of their respective Profit & Loss statements as opposed to deferring to the wishes of an Original Six team.

Bettman clearly holds sway over what actually gets on the Board's Agenda for a vote. That is significant. I also think the Red Wings have done a good job of building relationships with other owners. They may be able to sell others on the idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
And what does one have to do with the other? Going from one broke system to another isn't really all that exciting. Just because this is less broke then the last, doesn't make it a good system. Never implied the old system would have worked better. Not sure now you came up with that from what I said.

The system is broke and revenue sharing is part of that "system". Having said that, basing player salaries off of league revenue is moronic no matter how revenue is shared.
Some of the challenges are with the revenue sharing system, another is that changes in the value of the Canadian dollar can create false revenue "growth." In fact, the opposite was true not so long ago. The Loonie was dropping in value and the small market Canadian teams had a major problem, because all player contracts are in US dollars. This had a great deal to do with the loss of teams in Winnipeg and Quebec City and threatened Edmonton and Calgary's viability. Finally, large markets are growing revenues at a greater rate than the small markets. This means the cap gets driven by those increases, while markets like Columbus among others are not enjoying the increases in revenues.


Edit: and just to weigh in, I doubt either Detroit or Columbus join the Eastern Conference. It just seems logical to me that the most likely choice is Nashville. They could have an all SEC Region division.

TaketheCannoli is offline  
Old
05-16-2011, 10:46 PM
  #208
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,033
vCash: 500
Thrashers move could mean more changes


http://www.thefourthperiod.com/colum...tta110516.html

RDriesenUD is online now  
Old
05-17-2011, 05:44 AM
  #209
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by leek View Post
Actually, I think it's quite logical. When I've done management consulting contracts, one of the very first thing I did was examine the P&Ls looking at the ratios, including employee expense as a percentage of revenues. It make total sense to me. Employee costs need to be variable and tied to revenues.
Are you basing multi-year contracts based on such a large percentage of revenue of off collective independent franchises while trying to maintain a competitive balance? The system over time is going to collapse under it's own weight.

It's one thing to have a private company in which you are throwing around internal numbers employees you can lay off next week if you want to..... Ultimately, all costs will be tied to P&L. All internal costs are variable and employee costs will vary from business to business. You aren't going to say "Let's tie employee salaries (large long term contracts no less, that are hard to get our of) to 40% of revenue (in which revenue can vary wildly from year-to-year) even though we are bleeding 2 million a month.". Oh and your percentage of revenue will be higher then other franchises (and lower then some), oh and you have to spend that percentage to have a realistic chance to compete (performance - financially and product) from year-to-year.

Oh and what do corporations ultimately do with under performing locations?


Last edited by blahblah: 05-17-2011 at 06:02 AM.
blahblah is offline  
Old
05-17-2011, 07:30 AM
  #210
Double-Shift Lassť
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassť's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarcastro View Post
Two cents from Wingland

Wings owner Mike Ilitch:



From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110516/...#ixzz1MYGu7fvt

The Wings' brass is putting this out there in hopes of establishing some kind of public expectation that the Wings are next. No matter what the NHL has told them, I'm not buying it.

I think the geography, the potential of stranding the Hawks alone in the West, and the perceived attendance boost the Wings give the West, all put this in the category of Columbus before Detroit.

I'd say Nashville should have the biggest advantage because of how neatly they'd slide into the Southeast as Atlanta's replacement, but it'd be tough to sell a Central Time Zone team moving before two Eastern Time Zone teams.

I'd love to see the Wings move East and get to play the other Original 6es more often. And fewer 10pm starts would be nice as well. It's not going to happen though. It will come down to Columbus or Nashville, unless they end up moving the Yotes to Hamilton or something.



As I mentioned above, the general consensus on the Wings board is that no matter what promises have been made, and no matter how much sway the Wings have with the board, Bettman both intensely dislikes the Wings and believes that they are the only thing keeping attendance figures tolerable in most of the Western Conference.

We don't really think there's any chance that he ever lets the Wings move East, under any circumstances. It's not officially his call but the board will do what they're told if it comes down to a vote. I don't doubt that he's told the Wings they're next, but I also don't doubt that he was lying through his teeth.
Thanks for the input. So if I understand, you're (collectively) interpreting Ilitch as laying some public groundwork even though the is no formal arrangement to try and force the league's hand?

Your conclusions about why not to mvoe the Wings and why to move either CBJ or Preds seem pretty consistent with what I'm reading here and elsewhere.

And, on a side note, you'll understand if we don't sympathize with your "Bettman hates us" stance too terribly much.

__________________
"Every game, every point is a necessity." -- Ty Conklin, January 2007
"I'll have a chance to compete for the post of first issue. This is the most important thing." -- Sergei Bobrovsky, June 2012
Double-Shift Lassť is online now  
Old
05-17-2011, 07:32 AM
  #211
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
Are you basing multi-year contracts based on such a large percentage of revenue of off collective independent franchises while trying to maintain a competitive balance? The system over time is going to collapse under it's own weight.

It's one thing to have a private company in which you are throwing around internal numbers employees you can lay off next week if you want to..... Ultimately, all costs will be tied to P&L. All internal costs are variable and employee costs will vary from business to business. You aren't going to say "Let's tie employee salaries (large long term contracts no less, that are hard to get our of) to 40% of revenue (in which revenue can vary wildly from year-to-year) even though we are bleeding 2 million a month.". Oh and your percentage of revenue will be higher then other franchises (and lower then some), oh and you have to spend that percentage to have a realistic chance to compete (performance - financially and product) from year-to-year.

Oh and what do corporations ultimately do with under performing locations?
The real issue with competitive balance is the difference in revenue generation capability of markets. The NHL must determine what it wants as a Joint Venture. If they want 30 competitive teams, then they must find a way to redistribute revenues. If they want to find a way to make all 30 teams profitable, then different strategies must be deployed.

The real truth is that beyond the revenue generation challenges, the biggest cause of a lack of competitiveness is poor management. Nashville and Phoenix do more while spending less than Columbus or St. Louis. Detroit and Philadelphia spend no more than the Rangers or Maple Leafs, but the gulf between the three franchises is wide.

Oh, and to answer your question, I'm looking at industry specific numbers for % of revenue, and looking at multiple snapshots: weekly, monthly, quarterly and annual. Yes there are multi-year contracts that can come into play, but I'm well aware the challenges are different in private industry. My point is perhaps the salary cap needs to be instituted as a % of each team's hockey related revenue stream instead of the aggregate. The have nots can't keep pace with growth in major markets and the Loonie as well.

TaketheCannoli is offline  
Old
05-17-2011, 07:46 AM
  #212
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by leek View Post
Oh, and to answer your question, I'm looking at industry specific numbers for % of revenue, and looking at multiple snapshots: weekly, monthly, quarterly and annual. Yes there are multi-year contracts that can come into play, but I'm well aware the challenges are different in private industry. My point is perhaps the salary cap needs to be instituted as a % of each team's hockey related revenue stream instead of the aggregate. The have nots can't keep pace with growth in major markets and the Loonie as well.
Generally speaking, a long term contract in the private sector are reserved for the vast minority and or those industries that have a need for more contracted help, they are generally much shorter in term. Meaning a much smaller portion of the overall pie. They also generally have easier to swallow out clauses, unless you have a "C" in your title.

The % of revenue from salaries in my 5 jobs since college have swung wildly from business to business. The job I am in now has a lot of contracted help. Most can be terminated on a year-by-year basis. Meaning very nimble.

I understand your point, I am simply stating that player salaries with the competitive imbalance from team to team makes they current structure moronic. Very few industries have such an arbitrary and idiotic method of determining a salary structure in which moron owners are going to try and out-compete their rivals at a financially competitive disadvantage. Yes, you can off set some of that imbalance if you run your team well. However, the odds of Nashville winning the Cup are much more remote then a team that is free to spend to the cap on a yearly basis. It will happen from time to time, however. For example, Tampa might do it this year. However, three of the four remaining teams are cap teams and if the Pens had stayed healthy, Tampa could very well be gone right now.

The goals do not match the system. The system is set up to consistently have 5 to 10 of your team under perform financially and risk them going out of business. Especially in a down economy.

I'm not going to bother proposing a system, because I know the unions would never accept what I proposed. However, this system is just dumb. Even if in some ways it's better then the previous system.

Now Capn does have a point that better sharing of revenue could help. However, the odds of the Rangers and Toronto agreeing to it are very remote.


Last edited by blahblah: 05-17-2011 at 07:52 AM.
blahblah is offline  
Old
05-17-2011, 07:49 AM
  #213
KeithBWhittington
Going North
 
KeithBWhittington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Brick by Brick
Country: Hungary
Posts: 10,238
vCash: 500
This is a post I made on the Business Boards under a thread for the Red Wings:


Would Bettman's position be in trouble if he moves Columbus or Nashville before Detroit? Does Illitch have enough goodwill built up with the BOG and the other owners to actually make Bettman think twice about this?

Certainly seems like the Red Wings are going to fight tooth and nail for something they see as something that was promised to them, before either Columbus or Nashville even starting playing in the league.

End/

I Know Bettman doesn't hold the final cards on this one, but certainly, if the owner of one of your leagues true Model Franchises is unhappy with you, as commissioner, the ball could be rolling to get Bettman axed, right?

KeithBWhittington is offline  
Old
05-17-2011, 07:54 AM
  #214
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithBWhittington View Post
I Know Bettman doesn't hold the final cards on this one, but certainly, if the owner of one of your leagues true Model Franchises is unhappy with you, as commissioner, the ball could be rolling to get Bettman axed, right?
And you start to touch in the political side of things that we can't known the answer to. At least the vast, vast, majority of us and probably no one reading these threads. So how much political capital is each side willing to front to move Detroit and not move Detroit.

I'm not sure Bettman is willing to stick his neck out at all on this issue. He could very well just let the owners fight it out.

Seriously what happens to Bettman if he sticks his neck out to move Columbus for financial reasons and the financial situation in Columbus doesn't improve? I don't know how much political capital I would spend on Columbus until the revenue stream issue is resolved (arena related, parking, naming rights, ownership). Another minority owner, for example, is a temporary fix.

blahblah is offline  
Old
05-17-2011, 07:59 AM
  #215
KeithBWhittington
Going North
 
KeithBWhittington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Brick by Brick
Country: Hungary
Posts: 10,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
And you start to touch in the political side of things that we can't known the answer to. At least the vast, vast, majority of us and probably no one reading these threads.
Yeah, but with the league looking at other potential work stoppage in a few seasons, I don't see much drawback to starting a pr fight over this if I'm the Wings.

This league is very ill right now, not as sick as the NBA, but its not far off.

I fear we are getting our hopes up just to have them dashed once more.

KeithBWhittington is offline  
Old
05-17-2011, 08:04 AM
  #216
Double-Shift Lassť
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassť's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithBWhittington View Post

I fear we are getting our hopes up just to have them dashed once more.
The added piece is the possibility of waiting a year for any realignment anyway, in the event PHX ends up moving eastwards in the end, thus negating the need to shift a team out of the Central.

Double-Shift Lassť is online now  
Old
05-17-2011, 08:05 AM
  #217
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithBWhittington View Post
I fear we are getting our hopes up just to have them dashed once more.
As I said before, it's depressing that we're (collectively, not me personally) looking to a conference move to "fix" things. Especially seeing as it doesn't resolve the underlying issue(s). Bad revenue stream and questionable management.

If we were a team that made money, then I might be more interested in this conversation. Mainly so that maybe I can go to sleep sooner a few times a year. Not because of some wild hope that we suddenly see more playoff hockey games.

I don't have any hopes, therefore there is no chance they can get dashed. It's way too early in this discussion to have hopes.

blahblah is offline  
Old
05-17-2011, 08:07 AM
  #218
Double-Shift Lassť
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassť's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
As I said before, it's depressing that we're (collectively, not me personally) looking to a conference move to "fix" things. Especially seeing as it doesn't resolve the underlying issue(s). Bad revenue stream and questionable management.

If we were a team that made money, then I might be more interested in this conversation. Mainly so that maybe I can go to sleep sooner a few times a year. Not because of some wild hope that we suddenly see more playoff hockey games.

I don't have any hopes, therefore there is no chance they can get dashed. It's way too early in this discussion to have hopes.
For me anyway, it's not a matter of the change in conferences as a fix, but simply a matter of practicality. If the Jackets were in a better way, I'd still think a move to the East was a good idea.

Disclaimer - I am not in favor of relocating the Atlanta franchise.

Double-Shift Lassť is online now  
Old
05-17-2011, 08:28 AM
  #219
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-Shift Lassť View Post
For me anyway, it's not a matter of the change in conferences as a fix, but simply a matter of practicality. If the Jackets were in a better way, I'd still think a move to the East was a good idea.

Disclaimer - I am not in favor of relocating the Atlanta franchise.
I would rather play in the West, I like more competitive hockey. However, from a pure "makes sense" standpoint. Detroit and Columbus make more sense in the East.

Disclaimer: I'm never for not having relocation. Sometimes it because a necessity for the good of the NHL (or whatever sport). However, I will morn the fans because it's usually other people fault that the situation has become that bad. Either ownership or the city. And I will certainly never cheer it. Especially for the betterment of myself or my team. In the case of Atlanta, they have a massive mess on their hands and their faithful fans are stuck in middle.

In our case, relocation might have to become a necessity at some point. If we continue to have a standoff between Nationwide and Franklin County, well the fans and the Jackets ownership might end up suffering the fate of relocation. At some point the JPM might have to cut ties as his options are somewhat limited and short of Nationwide buying controlling interest of the team I'm not sure who else will step up from our community with the revenue issues we have.

I mean, seriously, who actually wants to own Nationwide Arena? Which is what happens if you buy the team.


Last edited by blahblah: 05-17-2011 at 08:35 AM.
blahblah is offline  
Old
05-17-2011, 08:46 AM
  #220
sarcastro
Registered User
 
sarcastro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,245
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-Shift Lassť View Post
Thanks for the input. So if I understand, you're (collectively) interpreting Ilitch as laying some public groundwork even though the is no formal arrangement to try and force the league's hand?

Your conclusions about why not to mvoe the Wings and why to move either CBJ or Preds seem pretty consistent with what I'm reading here and elsewhere.

And, on a side note, you'll understand if we don't sympathize with your "Bettman hates us" stance too terribly much.
I should clarify - I'm mostly giving my opinion on the matter, but I get the sense that most of the Wings board shares my general belief that the Wings won't be moving East. The "road attendance" factor seems to be the most compelling reason. This is in spite of the fact that, as you can see in the article I posted, the Wings fan base and the Detroit sports press have some reason to believe there is a handshake deal to move the team to the East if there's a spot open.

It sounds to me like Bettman has promised multiple teams that they get the next open spot in the East. This would not surprise me, as his position as Commish is dependent on the support he receives from as many owners as possible. So then, there is going to be a scuffle over which team(s) he was lying to, and which team is actually moving. It's my opinion that the Wings realize they're probably about to get double-crossed, but they want to see if they can get the hot stove buzzing in their favor, possibly leading to some kind of consensus in the hockey press about the Wings being the front-runner to move. Hence the public comments about a deal.

If we assume that there are no deals in place or that there are multiple deals in place (which effectively means there are no deals in place), it's pretty cut and dried IMO. Pretty much the only reasons to move the Wings East would be because it would be cool for us Wings fans to see different teams and the other O6 teams, we wouldn't have to stay up late as much, and they'd have to travel less. I don't think that will fly. Personally I'd prefer it if they scrapped the East/West format and did something more interesting with it, but they're not creative enough to do that.

And as far as Bettman not liking the Wings, I didn't think there was much doubt about that - he has our players suspended when they sit out the All Star game to rest and receive treatment for injuries (while his Pens get away with it). When he finally gets to give the Cup to his Pens, he bypasses the standard "and let's congratulate the other team for being really good too" spiel when that team happens to be the Wings. He openly hangs out in the opposing owner's suite during Finals games against the Wings. It's legal to throw hats and fish and sharks on the ice, but he's cracking down more and more on the octopi. Etc.

Maybe these things show his pro-Pens bias more than an anti-Wings bias, but I'm sure you can understand our paranoia.

sarcastro is offline  
Old
05-17-2011, 09:05 AM
  #221
Double-Shift Lassť
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassť's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarcastro View Post
I should clarify - I'm mostly giving my opinion on the matter, but I get the sense that most of the Wings board shares my general belief that the Wings won't be moving East. The "road attendance" factor seems to be the most compelling reason. This is in spite of the fact that, as you can see in the article I posted, the Wings fan base and the Detroit sports press have some reason to believe there is a handshake deal to move the team to the East if there's a spot open.

It sounds to me like Bettman has promised multiple teams that they get the next open spot in the East. This would not surprise me, as his position as Commish is dependent on the support he receives from as many owners as possible. So then, there is going to be a scuffle over which team(s) he was lying to, and which team is actually moving. It's my opinion that the Wings realize they're probably about to get double-crossed, but they want to see if they can get the hot stove buzzing in their favor, possibly leading to some kind of consensus in the hockey press about the Wings being the front-runner to move. Hence the public comments about a deal.

If we assume that there are no deals in place or that there are multiple deals in place (which effectively means there are no deals in place), it's pretty cut and dried IMO. Pretty much the only reasons to move the Wings East would be because it would be cool for us Wings fans to see different teams and the other O6 teams, we wouldn't have to stay up late as much, and they'd have to travel less. I don't think that will fly. Personally I'd prefer it if they scrapped the East/West format and did something more interesting with it, but they're not creative enough to do that.
Should there ever be a need to make a decision on conference reassignment based on a franchise relocation, well, it's fun to speculate and we can even hit on issues with practical real-life implications. However, as blahblah has posted, we can't really know the inner politics of the BoG. Fun discussion and I think we're in agreement on a lot of this.

Quote:
And as far as Bettman not liking the Wings, I didn't think there was much doubt about that - he has our players suspended when they sit out the All Star game to rest and receive treatment for injuries (while his Pens get away with it). When he finally gets to give the Cup to his Pens, he bypasses the standard "and let's congratulate the other team for being really good too" spiel when that team happens to be the Wings. He openly hangs out in the opposing owner's suite during Finals games against the Wings. It's legal to throw hats and fish and sharks on the ice, but he's cracking down more and more on the octopi. Etc.

Maybe these things show his pro-Pens bias more than an anti-Wings bias, but I'm sure you can understand our paranoia.
While there is plenty of Pens hate on this board, I don't think you're going to have much luck with your pleas around here - we hate the Wings, too.

And as I'm personally a Pittsburgh native and continue to root for the Pens, your paranoia is duly noted and dismissed. The Wings' years of running a successful and model franchise in the face of obvious attempts by the league to sabotage it must make you extra proud.

#barkingupthewrongtree

/my last commentary on that off-topic topic

Double-Shift Lassť is online now  
Old
05-17-2011, 09:20 AM
  #222
WFNY5Hole
Registered User
 
WFNY5Hole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Worthington, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 94
vCash: 500
That may be, sarcastro. At least every goal review ever in the history of goal reviews doesn't go against you.

/sarcasm

WFNY5Hole is offline  
Old
05-17-2011, 09:45 AM
  #223
pete goegan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
pete goegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarcastro View Post
It's legal to throw hats and fish and sharks on the ice, but he's cracking down more and more on the octopi.
It's permitted to throw hats on the ice, at the appropriate time. As I'm sure you know, nothing else is "legal." Your cephalopod flingers on the road should be forced to eat them. Same with the fish, sharks, etc., if they take their stupid show to an away arena.

pete goegan is online now  
Old
05-17-2011, 09:58 AM
  #224
Double-Shift Lassť
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassť's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,678
vCash: 500


Told ya, sarcastro.

Let's leave this off-topic be, please, in the interest of avoiding a flame war, and stick to the realignment discussion. Thanks.

Double-Shift Lassť is online now  
Old
05-17-2011, 10:00 AM
  #225
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete goegan View Post
Your cephalopod flingers on the road should be forced to eat them.
You know, I would pay $100 for a Wings game for a chance to see that.

Yeah, so, until Atlanta sells their team I'm not sure there is all that much left to talk about.... Let's see if someone comes up with something new to add....

blahblah 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 08:19 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.