Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
TheWizard

NHL Expansion/relocation

Recommended Posts

If there's a name for the new Hamilton what do you think it would be...

Hamilton Preadtors

Hamilton Alexander Hamilton's

I'm convinced this team is going to Hamilton Baisille would go to war to move this team there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If there's a name for the new Hamilton what do you think it would be...

Hamilton Preadtors

Hamilton Alexander Hamilton's

I'm convinced this team is going to Hamilton Baisille would go to war to move this team there.

How bout the Hamilton Steelers since Hamilton is the "Steel City of Canada"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
healthy attendance is 16,500.....Florida isn't close to that, so no they aren't an example of a healthy move to the south. Tampa and Dallas are though.

Boston, St. Louis, NYI, and Chicago are all weak teams who have struggled for a long time. Those teams don't scare me. What scares me are the highly successful teams who are below 16,500 like Nashville, Atlanta, Anaheim,

Exactly, thank you Hoyle. When a team has a great record and yet still can't attract fans..makes you wonder how healthy of a market it is. Chicago,St.Louis,NYI ...they have had some bad seasons for a long time but they are not going anywhere and how their distance to Hartford pertains to this conversation is a mystery to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparantly hartford should just get Boston--obviously the experiment in working there, or Chicago or NJ or St. Louis or the Isle.

Any coincidence that of the 6 worst attended teams, 3 are within an easy drive from Hartford?

I personally don't see any reason to expand--I would rather see contraction if anything--but if people truly want hockey to succeed, it MUST find a way to expand viewership in non-traditional markets. Otherwise only those people within 100 miles of the Canadian boarder will care. And what will the NHL become---just an icy version of the CFL. No more Ovechkin, Sundin, Selanne, Kipper, Lundquist and crew. All the Euros will stay in Europe and maybe even some of the North Americans playing in the NHL will go to the Euro leagues for more money.

:blink: and where are we going with these points?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FW the NHL won't risk moving a team back to Hartford, because WWF would probably try suing for animal rights violations.

LOL....especially if they went back to their old harpoon logo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Years ago they actually started a mini series about an NHL team in Hamilton, the team was called The Hamilton Steelheads.

So what your saying is if your team is the Steelheads, than the logo could be an X-ray of Bettman's brain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Years ago they actually started a mini series about an NHL team in Hamilton, the team was called The Hamilton Steelheads.

So what your saying is if your team is the Steelheads, than the logo could be an X-ray of Bettman's brain.

Any logo with Bettman's face would have to have a rainbow in it somewhere, with teddy bears dance in cotton candy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Years ago they actually started a mini series about an NHL team in Hamilton, the team was called The Hamilton Steelheads.

So what your saying is if your team is the Steelheads, than the logo could be an X-ray of Bettman's brain.

Brain? What brain?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something to think about....Jim Balsille requested a meeting with the board of govenors to discuss his proposed purchase of the Preds and subsequent move to Hamilton.....Gary Bettman comes along and says "no, we won't be discussing any re-locations plans nor the sale to Mr. Balsille athe is board meeting"

Now my question is....had the move been to Seattle, Washington, Las Vegas, Nevada or Kansas City, Missouri...would the answer be different than say Hamilton, Ontario, CANADA or Winnipeg, Manitoba, CANADA....I am saying Gary doesn't want any more teams in Canada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gary Bettman also desperately needs owners with deep pockets to buy financially struggling teams. That's why he hasn't taken a firm stance on the issue yet.

Let's not forget that the Preds offer also ups the value of other teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if that's true.....

There are a lot of things that determine the value of a franchise. I'd say about 1/4 of that overpriced bid, is dependent on the potential of relocation. If that option is taken off the table completely, the idea of spending 220 mil for Nashville is utterly ridiculous.

Forbes values the team at 134 million....

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/31/biz_06...ors_310472.html

Liepold has lost about 60 million over recent years

http://www.nashvillepost.com/news/2007/6/1..._sale_in_danger

Balsillie's bid is 220 million

(220-134-60=26)

Not only does Balsillie's bid balance Liepold's losses it also gives him a 26 million dollar profit from the sale.

The local ownership group of Nashville, really only has enough money to buy the team at the market value Forbes has set. They've already stated they'd have to borrow 100 million to match the 220 bid. However with almost no guarantee that the franchise can turn any profit, borrowing 100 million almost seems ridiculous. I could only imagine how upset Liepold would be at both Bettman and the BoG if they stripped him from this potentially high business sale. Nor could I see this whole debacle make the NHL look popular among the business community.

It's probably in the NHL's best interest to let Balsillie have the team, especially from a business perspective. Balsillie made it publicly known after Pittsburgh, that there are a number of financially struggling teams in the NHL and that he'll keep trying to buy them one by one. Either the NHL just allows him to buy a team, or he;ll continue to overbid on every team up for sale, making the potential seller happy but strong-arming any other potential buyers out of the picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gary Bettman also desperately needs owners with deep pockets to buy financially struggling teams. That's why he hasn't taken a firm stance on the issue yet.

That and he has the Ontario Teachers Union or whoever is MLSE is breathing down his neck. Ballsille is like a Trophy girlfriend. It is great to have for a while but sooner or later, you have to make the decision if the trouble is worth it.

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't ??

I find it funny that Karmonos was the "hated rich guy" in certain cities, including Canadian cities yet when Ballsille comes in, he is seen as a savior. We will see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like Karmanos because he's a hypocrite....

He was the man who got the ball rolling with inflated salaries, yet when it snowballed out of control in traditional markets, he did the most complaining and threatened to support 2 years of NHL lockout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't like Karmanos because he's a hypocrite....

He was the man who got the ball rolling with inflated salaries, yet when it snowballed out of control in traditional markets, he did the most complaining and threatened to support 2 years of NHL lockout.

I don't care for him for a number of reasons. Your point about his hypocrisy is dead-on but it was made even worse when you take into account that a big part of his motivation, possibly the biggest part, was little more than wanting to stick it Ilitch for personal reasons. He has since acknowledged publicly that it was a mistake but has never really come clean as to why he did it in the first place.

I'd love to see him sell the Canes to local ownership group but with his son Jason entrenched here, I doubt it will happen. I just don't trust the guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other argument given is that he was trying to prove a point to the NHL as to how hard it was for struggling teams to attract big name players. But I truly think his struggles at the time had a lot more to do with the fact his team management didn't really know how to draft well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on topic.....

The NHL probably postponed Balsillie's application, because they want their lawyers to do their homework......The NHL needs to know if Balsillie has a strong case or not, if they try to fight him in court from moving or purchasing the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A proposition here:

The worst 6 teams financially fold. 2 12 team conferences, 4 6 team divisions (or the other way around, whatever). 12 teams make the playoffs to keep people interested and teams selling tickets. Salary problems are over. There is plenty of top talent to go around and demand is down. Teams are able to assemble teams worth watching, with first lines like jagr staal heatley as commonplace as, well, almost every team. We get more exiting games with more offense and more american fans back on board (especially with all the american talent being drafted recently), sign that tv contract with espn 2 and work our way back onto espn. Finally, beat NBA in ratings and become a top 4 sport again...you may say that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the NHL is this:

* expanded into unchartered hockey territory which is proving to be unstable and embarrassing

* a poorly marketed sport

* no tv contract ( ESPN is not coming back..poker gets better ratings)

* watch NBC get the hell out too

* season is too long...NO PLAYOFFS IN JUNE

* the lockout lost many fans and so did rule changes

We need to face the facts, hockey will never be a national hit...never. Hockey is and will always be a regional success. That is why the NHL needs to stick to traditional markets from now on. The NHL will never get a national tv contract that is worth a damn...and I mean never. The interest is not there and it won't be. Everyone can cry all they want that the NHL needs to expand into Vegas and Seattle for exposure, if you haven't learned yet that those moves will only hurt the league in the long run then I don't know what to tell ya.

There is no quick fix to the NHL's problems but the start to getting on the right path would be to fire Bettman and replace him with a person who has business and hockey knowledge that is both needed to run this league. Sadly, Bettman is lacking in the first and is totally absent in the second. Eventually the NHL, will need to cut its losses in certian markets (Nashville,Florida,Atlanta,Phoenix) and move those teams into traditional hockey markets where the teams will flourish (since this sport is a regional success) .

It's too easy to say ...get a tv contract(news flash...no one is watching)....It's too easy to say...move to the west for more exposure (did moving to the south help the NHL as a whole...no) The NHL is what it is and will always be, others are living in a fantasy world of EA sports

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with the NHL is this:

* expanded into unchartered hockey territory which is proving to be unstable and embarrassing

* a poorly marketed sport

* no tv contract ( ESPN is not coming back..poker gets better ratings)

* watch NBC get the hell out too

* season is too long...NO PLAYOFFS IN JUNE

* the lockout lost many fans and so did rule changes

We need to face the facts, hockey will never be a national hit...never. Hockey is and will always be a regional success. That is why the NHL needs to stick to traditional markets from now on. The NHL will never get a national tv contract that is worth a damn...and I mean never. The interest is not there and it won't be. Everyone can cry all they want that the NHL needs to expand into Vegas and Seattle for exposure, if you haven't learned yet that those moves will only hurt the league in the long run then I don't know what to tell ya.

There is no quick fix to the NHL's problems but the start to getting on the right path would be to fire Bettman and replace him with a person who has business and hockey knowledge that is both needed to run this league. Sadly, Bettman is lacking in the first and is totally absent in the second. Eventually the NHL, will need to cut its losses in certian markets (Nashville,Florida,Atlanta,Phoenix) and move those teams into traditional hockey markets where the teams will flourish (since this sport is a regional success) .

It's too easy to say ...get a tv contract(news flash...no one is watching)....It's too easy to say...move to the west for more exposure (did moving to the south help the NHL as a whole...no) The NHL is what it is and will always be, others are living in a fantasy world of EA sports

I feel a well of hope springing up from within with that post....

It's too easy to say it is what it is. What is wrong with my idea of folding some small market teams mostly in the south and improving the quality of the product? I'm no business major but I think interest will take off with some teams like the 90's wings and av's. Hockey actually had decent ratings all the way into the 90's because these super teams and rivalries were so fun to watch, so intense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
* expanded into unchartered hockey territory which is proving to be unstable and embarrassing

* a poorly marketed sport

* no tv contract ( ESPN is not coming back..poker gets better ratings)

* watch NBC get the hell out too

I can only agree with these points Whale, if ESPN can market Competitive Eating then there is no reason that the NHL shouldn't have a big tv contract. The NHL is the most poorly marketed of all professional sports in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with the NHL is this:

* expanded into unchartered hockey territory which is proving to be unstable and embarrassing

* a poorly marketed sport

* no tv contract ( ESPN is not coming back..poker gets better ratings)

* watch NBC get the hell out too

* season is too long...NO PLAYOFFS IN JUNE

* the lockout lost many fans and so did rule changes

We need to face the facts, hockey will never be a national hit...never. Hockey is and will always be a regional success. That is why the NHL needs to stick to traditional markets from now on. The NHL will never get a national tv contract that is worth a damn...and I mean never. The interest is not there and it won't be. Everyone can cry all they want that the NHL needs to expand into Vegas and Seattle for exposure, if you haven't learned yet that those moves will only hurt the league in the long run then I don't know what to tell ya.

There is no quick fix to the NHL's problems but the start to getting on the right path would be to fire Bettman and replace him with a person who has business and hockey knowledge that is both needed to run this league. Sadly, Bettman is lacking in the first and is totally absent in the second. Eventually the NHL, will need to cut its losses in certian markets (Nashville,Florida,Atlanta,Phoenix) and move those teams into traditional hockey markets where the teams will flourish (since this sport is a regional success) .

It's too easy to say ...get a tv contract(news flash...no one is watching)....It's too easy to say...move to the west for more exposure (did moving to the south help the NHL as a whole...no) The NHL is what it is and will always be, others are living in a fantasy world of EA sports

I feel a well of hope springing up from within with that post....

It's too easy to say it is what it is. What is wrong with my idea of folding some small market teams mostly in the south and improving the quality of the product? I'm no business major but I think interest will take off with some teams like the 90's wings and av's. Hockey actually had decent ratings all the way into the 90's because these super teams and rivalries were so fun to watch, so intense.

......then we are in agreement...i'm not arguing with your eliminate some of the southern teams theory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with the NHL is this:

* expanded into unchartered hockey territory which is proving to be unstable and embarrassing

* a poorly marketed sport

* no tv contract ( ESPN is not coming back..poker gets better ratings)

* watch NBC get the hell out too

* season is too long...NO PLAYOFFS IN JUNE

* the lockout lost many fans and so did rule changes

We need to face the facts, hockey will never be a national hit...never. Hockey is and will always be a regional success. That is why the NHL needs to stick to traditional markets from now on. The NHL will never get a national tv contract that is worth a damn...and I mean never. The interest is not there and it won't be. Everyone can cry all they want that the NHL needs to expand into Vegas and Seattle for exposure, if you haven't learned yet that those moves will only hurt the league in the long run then I don't know what to tell ya.

There is no quick fix to the NHL's problems but the start to getting on the right path would be to fire Bettman and replace him with a person who has business and hockey knowledge that is both needed to run this league. Sadly, Bettman is lacking in the first and is totally absent in the second. Eventually the NHL, will need to cut its losses in certian markets (Nashville,Florida,Atlanta,Phoenix) and move those teams into traditional hockey markets where the teams will flourish (since this sport is a regional success) .

It's too easy to say ...get a tv contract(news flash...no one is watching)....It's too easy to say...move to the west for more exposure (did moving to the south help the NHL as a whole...no) The NHL is what it is and will always be, others are living in a fantasy world of EA sports

I feel a well of hope springing up from within with that post....

It's too easy to say it is what it is. What is wrong with my idea of folding some small market teams mostly in the south and improving the quality of the product? I'm no business major but I think interest will take off with some teams like the 90's wings and av's. Hockey actually had decent ratings all the way into the 90's because these super teams and rivalries were so fun to watch, so intense.

......then we are in agreement...i'm not arguing with your eliminate some of the southern teams theory

I'm stunned. Do you also agree that the sky is blue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...