Jump to content

return of Nordiques to NHL


Recommended Posts

It is amazing what a difference having a higher dollar makes to the bottom line in a league that pays in U.S. dollars

Not to mention a salary cap. The NHLPA should hush up about that issue.

The way this is going to happen is if a U.S. owner is looking to move rather than go bankrupt. I think Phoenix is ample evidence of how not to do it.

Agreed, if the judge ruled in favor of Balsillie, pro sports and the franchise system would be turned on its side.

As I said, it won't be Winnipeg approaching the NHL, it will be the other way around.

That won't be happening for quite a while, their experiment in the states isn't over yet and is not a complete disaster. The salary cap is a game changer and the league is far more competitive because of it.

However relating to Quebec, if Winnipeg can't do it and they are trying privately. Quebecers could be seeing a pile of tax dollars going to constructing a new rink that quite possibly would have no team in it. That would be a colossal waste of money, it would be the big O all over again...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't think the NHL would risk a 250+ million dollar franchise in a market that is tied to government whims.
That is an absurd number for a franchise in Quebec, $50 million will be closer to reality. And they won't be paying any $150 million to Molson for 'infringement', unless The Habs paid that to the Nordiques for leaving 15 years ago.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Youll see another team in southern Ontario before you get one in Quebec or Winnipeg.

In any case... The NHL should and will expand in Canada because thats where the money is.

The 6 Canadian teams accounted for a whopping 31% of NHL revenues last season, and saw double digit increases in revenue. Meanwhile 11 of the 24 US club either had flat revenues or lost income.

So whether Quebec and Winnipeg are the "perfect" cities for teams or not, they are likely better markets than at LEAST a half dozen of the US markets that currently have teams.

If you wanna start a Jack In The Box I guess...

Phoenix

Tampa

Sunrise

Releigh

Anaheim

NY Islanders

Atlanta

Columbus

Nashville

St.Louis

Might do ok...

But IMO Quebec and Winnipeg would be a better place for pretty much ANY of those teams.

http://www.torontosun.com/sports/columnist...243026-sun.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Youll see another team in southern Ontario before you get one in Quebec or Winnipeg.

Not a chance, MLSE and the Sabres will fight tooth and nail. Buffalo would fold and the Leafs would lose dollars.

I don't see a team coming to Canada for quite some time.

The experiment in the US is not anywhere near over. The US is key for growth of the game. Loading up the NHL with Canadian teams runs the risk of turning the NHL into the gong show that is the CFL. The NHL needs the Americans whether Canadian fans like it or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a chance, MLSE and the Sabres will fight tooth and nail. Buffalo would fold and the Leafs would lose dollars.

I don't see a team coming to Canada for quite some time.

The experiment in the US is not anywhere near over. The US is key for growth of the game. Loading up the NHL with Canadian teams runs the risk of turning the NHL into the gong show that is the CFL. The NHL needs the Americans whether Canadian fans like it or not.

The NHL needs successful US teams. It doesnt need these teams...

Phoenix

Tampa

Sunrise

Releigh

Anaheim

NY Islanders

Atlanta

Columbus

Nashville

St.Louis

And theres big demand for another team in Southern Ontario. Also... BTW... Toronto and Buffalo get two votes at an NHLBOG meeting. And if Buffalo folds because a team in Hamilton out-performs it as a business... who cares. So be it. I dont know when it will it be but its inevitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NHL needs successful US teams. It doesnt need these teams...

Phoenix

Tampa

Sunrise

Releigh

Anaheim

NY Islanders

Atlanta

Columbus

Nashville

St.Louis

And theres big demand for another team in Southern Ontario. Also... BTW... Toronto and Buffalo get two votes at an NHLBOG meeting. And if Buffalo folds because a team in Hamilton out-performs it as a business... who cares. So be it. I dont know when it will it be but its inevitable.

There has been a consistent growth of US born players currently playing in the NHL. That in itself says the expansion south has been somewhat a success. The Board of Governors are not fools, they know that there is a much better shot at getting revenue by having teams in the US than plopping them in saturated Canadian markets.

The NHL Board of Governors could care less of the opinions of Canadian hockey fans, they are cash cows that offer consistent support. The other 28 owners of the NHL agreed with Toronto and Buffalo in UNANIMOUSLY rejecting Ballsillie's attempt at getting the Coyotes through bankruptcy. The revenues have grown from 400 million to 2.2 billion since the expansion down south, I don't think the BOG is going to change direction from its present course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. If any team is to be relocated, it will NOT be to Southern Ontario. It will be going to Kansas City.

2. Winnipeg is a place the NHL would be ok in returning to. It is not at the top of the list but has already been mentioned by Bettman.

3. The "Nordiques" will never come back to Quebec. They will have a different name. The Poutine's maybe?

4. Montreal would not lose revenue with a team in QC. Nor would Toronto lose money with a team in Southern

Ontario. If anything the rivalry would generate even more money through higher TV ratings, ticket demand etc.

5. There is no way the NHL is going to relocate a team into Ontario and miss out on the 400-500M in expansion fees. IF you want another team in Ontario, start praying for expansion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has been a consistent growth of US born players currently playing in the NHL. That in itself says the expansion south has been somewhat a success. The Board of Governors are not fools, they know that there is a much better shot at getting revenue by having teams in the US than plopping them in saturated Canadian markets.

The NHL Board of Governors could care less of the opinions of Canadian hockey fans, they are cash cows that offer consistent support. The other 28 owners of the NHL agreed with Toronto and Buffalo in UNANIMOUSLY rejecting Ballsillie's attempt at getting the Coyotes through bankruptcy. The revenues have grown from 400 million to 2.2 billion since the expansion down south, I don't think the BOG is going to change direction from its present course.

That is only half right.

Some on the BOG are already losing money. WAng I think said 20-30M per year for the last few years. The problem lies with taking a money losing franchise and moving it to somewhere it will be profitable. Since players salaries and the salary cap are tied to league revenue's if you increase revenues you increase the cap. With owners losing moneys already with the cap floor where it is at, it would only mean more money down the drain if another healthy profitable franchise were to join the league and raise the salary cap floor.

Edited by Who's Doing What?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4. Montreal would not lose revenue with a team in QC. Nor would Toronto lose money with a team in Southern

Ontario. If anything the rivalry would generate even more money through higher TV ratings, ticket demand etc.

5. There is no way the NHL is going to relocate a team into Ontario and miss out on the 400-500M in expansion fees. IF you want another team in Ontario, start praying for expansion.

Tickets only generate a portion of revenues for teams. The Canadian sports TV industry cannot afford to pay more teams the same amount of TV revenue, more teams means they all take a bath. Then there is merchandising as well. MLSE and Molson want people in Quebec City and Hamilton wearing Habs and Leafs sweaters. Saying a franchise wouldn't lose money when one sets up shop nearby is laughable. Its like opening a Tim Hortons and saying your going to do just as well when one opens across the street.

As for point 5, the league would have to reduce the amt. of teams, then expand. I don't think the BOG would approve with that considering the 30 franchise system is working well. All the pro sports systems in North America have 30 franchises except the NFL with 32 and the NHL is minor league compared to the NFL. Expansion from 30 is not happening period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is only half right.

Some on the BOG are already losing money. WAng I think said 20-30M per year for the last few years. The problem lies with taking a money losing franchise and moving it to somewhere it will be profitable. Since players salaries and the salary cap are tied to league revenue's if you increase revenues you increase the cap. With owners losing moneys already with the cap floor where it is at, it would only mean more money down the drain if another healthy profitable franchise were to join the league and raise the salary cap floor.

Before revenue sharing and the rise of the dollar/economy boom, it was the Canadian teams that were in trouble. Very likely it would have came down to 2 or 3 left. The board approved a revenue sharing plan to bail out these franchises. Apparently the board thinks 6 franchises is what Canada can handle without watering things down.

The cap era has changed the NHL and has made it a much more competitive league a la the NFL, every season is now a crapshoot. In this system any team has a potential to do well, (Philly from the basement to a small playoff run the next season). I can see the board waiting about 10 yrs to see how this strategy is doing.

The BOG who are losing money are losing money in their other ventures, I think the coyotes prev. owner lost his shirt when the economy went south and his primary venture went all to hell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has been a consistent growth of US born players currently playing in the NHL. That in itself says the expansion south has been somewhat a success. The Board of Governors are not fools, they know that there is a much better shot at getting revenue by having teams in the US than plopping them in saturated Canadian markets.

The NHL Board of Governors could care less of the opinions of Canadian hockey fans, they are cash cows that offer consistent support. The other 28 owners of the NHL agreed with Toronto and Buffalo in UNANIMOUSLY rejecting Ballsillie's attempt at getting the Coyotes through bankruptcy. The revenues have grown from 400 million to 2.2 billion since the expansion down south, I don't think the BOG is going to change direction from its present course.

They rejected the process Ballsillie used not the idea of adding Canadian teams.

The fact remains that a whole bunch of teams in the US are not profitable and probably never will be. They will need to be moved to markets that can sustain them, and of those Southern Ontario is definately the top pick.

As for your suggestion that theres been consistant growth of US players in the NHL... got a source? The only stats I can find say the percentage of Americans in the league has dropped about 1.5% in the last 25 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They rejected the process Ballsillie used not the idea of adding Canadian teams.

The fact remains that a whole bunch of teams in the US are not profitable and probably never will be. They will need to be moved to markets that can sustain them, and of those Southern Ontario is definately the top pick.

As for your suggestion that theres been consistant growth of US players in the NHL... got a source? The only stats I can find say the percentage of Americans in the league has dropped about 1.5% in the last 25 years.

link

From 14% to 22%, not bad.

Then if Canadian teams were such a good idea, why were they not added during the expansion phase of the 90's? Why wasn't Hartford moved to Canada instead of Carolina?

Southern Ontario is saturated. All the hockey fans there already have their merchandise and there is only so much money the Canadian media has to throw at broadcasting Canadian teams. The average ticket price in Air Canada centre only nets the leafs 37 million dollars in revenue, and that's if it sells out every game. Darn rights the Leafs and Sabres are going to fight a team in Southern Ontario. MLSE wants Hamilton people watching leaf games and buying leafs merchandise, not the Hamilton franchise. Its not about the fans, its about the money. I don't know if there is enough money in that saturated of a market for a franchise to work without one going under. Having a franchise go under in an expanding market is bad for hockey.

Back to the Tim Hortons analogy, if you had a Tim Hortons would you want one opening up across the street? As a franchisee, you are entitled to your territory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

link

From 14% to 22%, not bad.

Then if Canadian teams were such a good idea, why were they not added during the expansion phase of the 90's? Why wasn't Hartford moved to Canada instead of Carolina?

Southern Ontario is saturated. All the hockey fans there already have their merchandise and there is only so much money the Canadian media has to throw at broadcasting Canadian teams. The average ticket price in Air Canada centre only nets the leafs 37 million dollars in revenue, and that's if it sells out every game. Darn rights the Leafs and Sabres are going to fight a team in Southern Ontario. MLSE wants Hamilton people watching leaf games and buying leafs merchandise, not the Hamilton franchise. Its not about the fans, its about the money. I don't know if there is enough money in that saturated of a market for a franchise to work without one going under. Having a franchise go under in an expanding market is bad for hockey.

Back to the Tim Hortons analogy, if you had a Tim Hortons would you want one opening up across the street? As a franchisee, you are entitled to your territory.

Im sure Toronto and Buffalo voted against Ottawa as well.

But yes... when you buy a franchise you get rights to a certain protected area... do you have a link showing that Hamilton is part of Toronto or Buffalos protected area? Because if it isnt all they get is ONE VOTE EACH.

And if I was going to open a Tim Hortons Id want to it to be where theres lots of coffee drinkers, and If I had a bunch of them in markets where the stores were empty half the time, like the NHL does than Id be looking for new venues.

In any case theres a pile of franchises in the US that are going to need to be moved. At least 6. Currently the successful franchises are being forced to subsidize them, meaning they lose revenue.

Edited by dre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im sure Toronto and Buffalo voted against Ottawa as well.

But yes... when you buy a franchise you get rights to a certain protected area... do you have a link showing that Hamilton is part of Toronto or Buffalos protected area? Because if it isnt all they get is ONE VOTE EACH.

Too bad the other 28 governors also understand Toronto and Buffalo's predicament. They voted unanimously 29-0 of Balsillie and his move to hamilton even though he could have sold the rink out every home game. Also of note that 23 of 29 owners would have to agree on balsillie's purchase and 16 of 29 would have to agree on relocation. Toronto's area is as big as it sees fit, same as Buffalo's, and if somebody threatens that market, then they take their case to the board of governors and surprise surprise they win. The NHL board of governors consist of business men who know how to make money. Setting up shop in Canada would hurt the established team's revenues. The board wants to see how the cap era NHL is going to play out, with parity in the league there will be more competitive teams which could draw crowds in. San Jose is not a traditional hockey market yet they still do well. Hell even the cup run in Carolina brought fans in. By your logic, the majority of major league baseball teams would be in constant danger of relocation because of few fans in the stands.

And if I was going to open a Tim Hortons Id want to it to be where theres lots of coffee drinkers, and If I had a bunch of them in markets where the stores were empty half the time, like the NHL does than Id be looking for new venues.

And yet Tim Hortons has put the kibosh on Canadian expansion. And rightly so, the franchisee has rights to the territory, and Tim Hortons corporate who has people who know the franchise system works know the Canadian market is saturated. Yet Tim Hortons corporate is on a mission to expand to the US, and their stores down there are half empty. Why do they expand down there? Growth.

In any case theres a pile of franchises in the US that are going to need to be moved. At least 6. Currently the successful franchises are being forced to subsidize them, meaning they lose revenue.

Says who that they need to be moved? The Board of Governors has seen NHL revenues increase from 400 million dollars to 2.2 billion dollars in the span of ten years. That's phenomenal growth. 3 of the Canadian franchises were on the revenue sharing program that Gary Bettman brought in, should they have been moved as well? From a financial point of view, the move down south has been fairly successful.

Edited by blueblood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no way the NHL is going to relocate a team into Ontario and miss out on the 400-500M in expansion fees. IF you want another team in Ontario, start praying for expansion.

That is a ludicrous number, nobody will pay anything close to that. $200 to $250 million is closer to the mark and there are very few fools with that kind of spare change.

eta: the $200 million mark is only achievable in Southern Ontario, if they can find a very rich idiot soemwhere else it might get to $50 million.

Edited by fellowtraveller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a chance, MLSE and the Sabres will fight tooth and nail. Buffalo would fold and the Leafs would lose dollars.

The experiment in the US is not anywhere near over. The US is key for growth of the game. Loading up the NHL with Canadian teams runs the risk of turning the NHL into the gong show that is the CFL. The NHL needs the Americans whether Canadian fans like it or not.

It wouldn't be the first time that teams have retreated from the U.S.

I think the best example is the Atlanta Flames - Calgary Flames move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tickets only generate a portion of revenues for teams. The Canadian sports TV industry cannot afford to pay more teams the same amount of TV revenue, more teams means they all take a bath. Then there is merchandising as well. MLSE and Molson want people in Quebec City and Hamilton wearing Habs and Leafs sweaters. Saying a franchise wouldn't lose money when one sets up shop nearby is laughable. Its like opening a Tim Hortons and saying your going to do just as well when one opens across the street.

As for point 5, the league would have to reduce the amt. of teams, then expand. I don't think the BOG would approve with that considering the 30 franchise system is working well. All the pro sports systems in North America have 30 franchises except the NFL with 32 and the NHL is minor league compared to the NFL. Expansion from 30 is not happening period.

So which game do you think is going to generate more viewers and thereby more advertizing revenue?

A game between MTL and Tampa Bay or a game between MTl and a new Quebec team?

Easily the QC v. MTL game. Rivalries are what builds the sport and draws in the fringe fans. Healthy competition is a good thing for the game. The Tim Hortons analogy doesn't work with sports, sorry.

The League WILL NOT contract. Plain and simple. It won't happen. Teams will be moved first. KC, LV, WPG and now QC are all destinations the league would explore before ever considering contraction.

The only way a new team is put in Southern Ontario is through expansion. I think it is a serious possibility when you consider that expansion just to SO could put somewhere in the neighbourhood of 15M dollars into each existing owners pocket in expansion fees. That figure could go up to 20-25M with a second team brought into either QC or WPG.

That is a ludicrous number, nobody will pay anything close to that. $200 to $250 million is closer to the mark and there are very few fools with that kind of spare change.
Far from it. A franchise in SO is like a licence to print money. In a bidding war that figure could easily be attained. I doubt the league would put a team there for much less.
Then if Canadian teams were such a good idea, why were they not added during the expansion phase of the 90's? Why wasn't Hartford moved to Canada instead of Carolina?
Hamilton could have had a franchise. They just didn't want to pony up the cash, whereas TB and OTT did.

Southern Ontario is saturated. All the hockey fans there already have their merchandise and there is only so much money the Canadian media has to throw at broadcasting Canadian teams. The average ticket price in Air Canada centre only nets the leafs 37 million dollars in revenue, and that's if it sells out every game. Darn rights the Leafs and Sabres are going to fight a team in Southern Ontario. MLSE wants Hamilton people watching leaf games and buying leafs merchandise, not the Hamilton franchise. Its not about the fans, its about the money. I don't know if there is enough money in that saturated of a market for a franchise to work without one going under. Having a franchise go under in an expanding market is bad for hockey.
Saturated eh? How many of your friends can afford to go to a Leafs game? How many can get tickets on a regular basis? Another option in SO is needed. The best place for a team is not in Hamilton, where everyone seems to want to put one, but in the NW corner of the GTA. Put a team in the north end of Mississauga or south end of Vaughn. There is more than enough people to support two teams in the GTA.
Back to the Tim Hortons analogy, if you had a Tim Hortons would you want one opening up across the street? As a franchisee, you are entitled to your territory.
You don't get it. Having two Timmy's across the street from each other does not increase people's interest in coffee or doughnuts. A close rivalry in sports does gererate more interest and increase the overall fanbase of the league by drawing in the fringe fans.

As far as a team's territory is concerned there is ample history of teams paying a one time fee to locate within the perceived boundary of an existing franchise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wouldn't be the first time that teams have retreated from the U.S.

I think the best example is the Atlanta Flames - Calgary Flames move.

That could very well happen, in the distant future. But the salary cup era has just begun, and from what I've seen so far it's been successful as far as generating revenue is concerned.

Give it 10-20 years and maybe some teams will be shuffled around. The BOG are not stupid and have done some hard research into this matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The League WILL NOT contract. Plain and simple. It won't happen. Teams will be moved first. KC, LV, WPG and now QC are all destinations the league would explore before ever considering contraction.

You could be right. Any contraction would be the end of Bettman.

Still, what to do, what to do about Phoenix? The league is now owner of the team while they figure this out and the losses could be plenty.

Last year attendance was 11,000 people or so. They have lost $316 million and will lose more this year.

Pre-season games this year drew 2000 people. Yikes! They have dropped ticket prices to levels not seen in decades.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hock...article1320714/

The Coyotes' season-ticket base is down about 30 per cent year over year and hovers in the 5,000-to-6,000, by one estimate - still more than three or four other teams in the NHL. For Thursday's next home game against the St. Louis Blues, the Coyotes expect to attract a crowd roughly half the size of Saturday's.
Edited by jdobbin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That could very well happen, in the distant future. But the salary cup era has just begun, and from what I've seen so far it's been successful as far as generating revenue is concerned.

I'd be shocked of Phoenix stays, wouldn't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So which game do you think is going to generate more viewers and thereby more advertizing revenue?

A game between MTL and Tampa Bay or a game between MTl and a new Quebec team?

Easily the QC v. MTL game. Rivalries are what builds the sport and draws in the fringe fans. Healthy competition is a good thing for the game. The Tim Hortons analogy doesn't work with sports, sorry.

The Toronto Maple Leafs consistently sell out every game no matter who they play. The same goes for teams in the Northern States and Western Canada. Heck San Jose sells out as well. The rivalry = more dollars is a myth and non starter.

The NHL is a franchise system, the Tim Hortons analogy works perfectly. The NHL sells hockey games, Tim Hortons sells coffee.

The League WILL NOT contract. Plain and simple. It won't happen. Teams will be moved first. KC, LV, WPG and now QC are all destinations the league would explore before ever considering contraction.

It has before, if the Board feels that an option, it will proceed. It would make sense to blow up a team then do an immediate expansion if the Canadian market was hot enough. That would ensure the board gets more money through expansion fees than relocation fees. Had Balsillie won in court, the NHL would have very likely said "we recognize that there was a team in phoenix, since there is not a team there anymore, that team would not exist", old Jim would have been out 200 mill and would be off to court. The judge ruled right in this case. Jim Balsillie is not above the franchise system.

The only way a new team is put in Southern Ontario is through expansion. I think it is a serious possibility when you consider that expansion just to SO could put somewhere in the neighbourhood of 15M dollars into each existing owners pocket in expansion fees. That figure could go up to 20-25M with a second team brought into either QC or WPG.

The league is at 30 teams. 3 of 4 leagues are at 30 teams, the NFL has 32. That seems to be the magic number. If expansion to more teams was such a good idea, why hasn't it happened yet? The board who knows far more about business, marketing, revenue etc. than you or I doesn't think expansion into a saturated market is a good idea.

Hamilton could have had a franchise. They just didn't want to pony up the cash, whereas TB and OTT did.

Not a chance, that's far too close to T.O. and Buffalo. 3 teams is barely working in New York which has far more population than the T.O. Buffalo corridor. Then there is the fact that a large majority of the board has to approve expansion/relocation to that area, which would set a precedent for other owners to set up shop right nearby other franchises.

Saturated eh? How many of your friends can afford to go to a Leafs game? How many can get tickets on a regular basis? Another option in SO is needed. The best place for a team is not in Hamilton, where everyone seems to want to put one, but in the NW corner of the GTA. Put a team in the north end of Mississauga or south end of Vaughn. There is more than enough people to support two teams in the GTA.

And based on how popular a Hamilton team would be, ticket prices would be sky high as well. The Toronto Maple Leafs would have a fit. They want fans lined up and their rink sold out for ridiculous high ticket prices. They want the monopoly on TV and merchandising in that area. Why would they want someone to set up shop right beside and take all that money away from them?

You don't get it. Having two Timmy's across the street from each other does not increase people's interest in coffee or doughnuts. A close rivalry in sports does gererate more interest and increase the overall fanbase of the league by drawing in the fringe fans.

As far as a team's territory is concerned there is ample history of teams paying a one time fee to locate within the perceived boundary of an existing franchise.

Detroit and Colorado have a great rivalry and they are 1000 miles apart. Having two Timmy's across the street takes revenue away from the one that was there in the first place.

Yes there has been teams taking a bath where they were located within a perceived boundary, also what you don't realize is that the board has to approve of that as well, and the board won't approve of that unless there is a solid business plan in place. The board probably has taken a look at Hamilton and other Canadian cities, crunched the numbers, and has figured that it is better to hold the line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least that decision is up to the board and not some maverick billionaire who doesn't believe in the franchise system.

I think that might be up to a judge if the team survives.

Let's face it: Phoenix is a mess. The league is going to run it this year for the most part but they can't be happy about it.

It is a heck of a lot of money. If there was some corporate support in the town to keep the team, they probably would have stepped forward for now.

Given the trouble Edmonton was in, are you surprised they stayed?

No, actually.

I believed that a consortium was always an option in Edmonton and the losses were never what Phoenix experienced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that might be up to a judge if the team survives.

Let's face it: Phoenix is a mess. The league is going to run it this year for the most part but they can't be happy about it.

It is a heck of a lot of money. If there was some corporate support in the town to keep the team, they probably would have stepped forward for now.

No, actually.

I believed that a consortium was always an option in Edmonton and the losses were never what Phoenix experienced.

The judge already made his decision, and because of it they did survive. Moyes was a victim of the recession, as was the entire Phoenix area (I'd say hit harder than most). Had the judge ruled in favor of Balsillie, it would have been very likely that they would have been punted from the league.

Phoenix has also been unlucky, they haven't put a good team on ice for quite some time. That hurts attendance. With the cap coming in, that should fix that. I can see the league waiting for the economy to turn around and see what happens after that.

Another thing to consider is that its not attendance in the stands that makes the league money its the broadcast of games to the viewers at home. This is where the league needs to grow. The NHL is on the cutting edge as far as digital media goes and is very progressive in getting into the internet medium of broadcasting. The NHL needs to grow and expand into these southern markets in order to be competitive with other leagues, otherwise it runs the danger of turning into the CFL, which would be a disaster. As far as the TV market goes, I'd say Canada is already tapped. There is no room for growth in the Canadian TV market. The US on the other hand...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as the TV market goes, I'd say Canada is already tapped. There is no room for growth in the Canadian TV market. The US on the other hand...

I don't know...I would watch hockey more often if the Leafs were always the marquee telecast.

Lets face it, if the Flames are playing New York, and the leafs are playing the worst team in the league, not only would Toronto lose, they would also be telecast.

Why this is I do not know, but I believe they could get better ratings if they had a programmer who knew the hockey audience, and given HNiC history....they don't.

Link to comment
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...