| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Guest6818
( )
|
 Posted - 11/03/2009 : 09:23:38
|
I think a hockey team in Saskatoon would work. Beans said that people wouldnt travel to a game on a sask. road in the winter, we dont care about the weather, we have driven in it all our lives and we wouldnt hesitate to go watch an NHL game. Plus our rinks sell out in record times to watch any kind of major sporting event. Like Calgary and NYI. We were thinking of buying tickets to that PRE-SEASON game and were not even fans of either team. We just want to watch some hockey and saskatchewan is huge into hockey. Besides, saskatoon is big enough to hold a team guarenteed.
My vote goes to Saskatoon. |
 |
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 09:25:44
|
Sure, U2 tickets are selling out in Edmonton as fast as you can imagine. But if U2 played every 2nd night, would they still sell out???
Nope.
Unfortuantely, same goes for Saskatoon. Above that, I think we have already established that it takes SIGNIFICANTLY more $ to run a team than just gate revenues.
Who are the corporate sponsors who would be willing to pony up the $50+ million a season to keep the team functioning??
Sasktoon's fans deserve a team, but it's just not going to happen. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 10:44:30
|
$9.75 a beer? Sheesh....i thought we had it bad, ours are "only" $7.75 |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2009 : 14:55:07
|
Ok if a team sells out a stadium for the regular season they generate 36+ million. Beer alone earns them 5 million. If you add in other merchandise at the games and merchandise sold away from the games I bet an average team which sells out most games can earn $50 million in canada. Add in possible post season income, revenue sharing, corporate sponsorship and Television/Internet income and potentially a team could earn from 50-80 million. More than enough to support an NHL team and better than the performance Carolina, Tampa, Pheonix, Florida, Buffalo, NYI and Atlanta have been performing in the last decade or so.
All those number have used the assumption that any new franchise would be average at gate and merchandise. My assumption is any franchise in Canada would be above average in the top 1/3 of gate and merchandise sold, especially a GTA franchise or southern Ontario |
|
|
|
Guest2120
( )
|
Posted - 11/08/2009 : 10:15:13
|
I think Beans was right a while ago when he said Wpg, QC and the GTA are the only viable Canadian markets. He's made good points to that, so I won't repeat them.
But as an example, Saskatoon is roughly 400k in population? People talk about Winnipeg being 'too small' of a market to sustain a hockey team (I disagree, but it has been mentioned). Winnipeg has about 750k people. Nearly double Saskatoon.
For US markets, Seattle? Really? That's never going to happen. I'm sorry. Milwakee (sp?) is an interesting suggestion and this is the first time I've heard that. I like the idea of exploring the northern states though, but could they support a losing team in a recession?
It frustrates me when people complain about Bettman and his reluctance to expand hockey in Canada. First off, the markets we all talk about as such great markets, have all failed in the past. Wpg, QC, they've been Nashville, Carolina or NYI. So when we talk about these cities as such great markets, you have to take it with a grain of salt because they're both second chance markets.
The reason hockey has expanded to the US is because that is where the money is. The real money is in TV contracts, and the advertising contained within. Before you object, let me explain.
Bettman's goal, is to popularize the NHL to the point where it earns a national television contract in the US. That is the long term goal, and that is the big pay day in the future. You can argue all you want, and it may never happen, but that is the plan. I'm not talking about small local networks, but the big guys. Think NBC's sunday games, but expand it. That's the goal, that's where the money is, and that's why we will not see teams moving back to Canada. The fact of the matter is, those contracts won't come if hockey pulls out of the US.
|
|
|
|
Guest4729
( )
|
Posted - 11/08/2009 : 12:37:11
|
Definatally Winnipeg, we have proven time and time again that we can fill an arena for hockey events. The city has fought for 15 plus years to get the Jets back and the support has never diminshed. Every major hockey event that is in reasonable distance you will spot a Jets jersy or a Save our Jets banner.
As for the 1500 seats, it is not much less than other major areanas, Rexall center only seats about 16, 000 GM place 18000. Besides 15000 filled seats are better any day than 20000 empty ones. We have all seen how US expansion turns out.
|
|
|
|
Guest4729
( )
|
Posted - 11/08/2009 : 12:42:43
|
Definatally Winnipeg, we have proven time and time again that we can fill an arena for hockey events. The city has fought for 15 plus years to get the Jets back and the support has never diminshed. Every major hockey event that is in reasonable distance you will spot a Jets jersy or a Save our Jets banner.
As for the 1500 seats, it is not much less than other major areanas, Rexall center only seats about 16, 000 GM place 18000. Besides 15000 filled seats are better any day than 20000 empty ones. We have all seen how US expansion turns out.
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/08/2009 : 15:38:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by JOSHUACANADA
Ok if a team sells out a stadium for the regular season they generate 36+ million. Beer alone earns them 5 million. If you add in other merchandise at the games and merchandise sold away from the games I bet an average team which sells out most games can earn $50 million in canada. Add in possible post season income, revenue sharing, corporate sponsorship and Television/Internet income and potentially a team could earn from 50-80 million. More than enough to support an NHL team and better than the performance Carolina, Tampa, Pheonix, Florida, Buffalo, NYI and Atlanta have been performing in the last decade or so.
All those number have used the assumption that any new franchise would be average at gate and merchandise. My assumption is any franchise in Canada would be above average in the top 1/3 of gate and merchandise sold, especially a GTA franchise or southern Ontario
There is one huge glaring issue with this.
There are only 2 or 3 NHL teams that also own the stadium they play in.
That means all that concession money, beer, parking, etc??? Zero dollars of that goes to the Team.
This does not include any lease deals where the team has to also pay the arena own $X.XX. Could be a little, could be a lot.
As I said, Winnipeg, Quebec City(with a new arena) and the GTA are the ONLY Canadian markets that could sustain an NHL team long term. |
|
|
|
Guest6982
( )
|
Posted - 11/09/2009 : 10:47:35
|
For all those people saying that winnipeg and quebec have already tried and failed, please remember that they weren't given the same amount of money struggling teams now get. I also don't get why people defend bettman if the whole phoenix situation happened to a canadian team he would be all for the movement of the team and thats what pisses me off about him
|
|
|
|
Guest2120
( )
|
Posted - 11/09/2009 : 15:49:59
|
Guest6982, that's not really what I said..
Beans, I agree with you on what new Canadian markets could support NHL teams. But you're wrong about teams that own their own arena's. I don't have time to look up every team.
But I'm a nucks fan, check out the link below, the Aquilini Group owns both the Canucks and GM place.
http://canucks.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=39758 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 11/09/2009 : 17:35:34
|
Ok Guest 2120, so Vancouver, Montreal, Toronto all own the team and the arena.
Who else??? Maybe New York Rangers???
There are VERY few teams that own their arena and the team. In fact, the arena situation has been the biggest reason teams have relocated or threatened to in the past 15-20 years.
|
|
|
|
Guest2120
( )
|
Posted - 11/09/2009 : 21:32:48
|
Beans, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but a quick wikipedia/nhl.com search leads me to believe the following teams own their own arena's:
NYR, Penguins(Consol-2010), NYI, Senators, Leafs, Habs, Thrashers, Panthers, Lightening(Partially).
Teams I couldn't find info on, or who don't own the arena:
Flyers, Devils, Bruins, Sabres, Hurricanes, Caps.
9 Teams own their arenas, 6 don't.
I'm sorry, I don't have time to look up the West, but we can probably assume it is roughly similar. If someone wants to, I know the Canucks own GM place, and the Flames lease the Saddledome.
Regardless, there's the info, draw your own conclusions. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 20:36:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by unsatsBangeal
Wow...
Several hours ago I got a phone call from 972-284-0600 and was made to believe the call was a scammer.
So I called to complain to the the number and screamed at the top of my lungs.
Anyway... Gulf Coast Western -an Oil drilling corporation- was trying to make contact was calling to tell me I got the job!
How do I fix this??
AEV High Steer
Personally, i'd call this guy i know, he's a witch doctor and can take care of many different things. He can fix a broken refridgerator over the phone or can make a house call and get rid of pesky ants in your crawl space, he's THAT good!. Don't have his number handy but if you want his email here it is:
trollsareus@getalife.com
Good luck! |
|
|
|
Guest4666
( )
|
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 22:30:59
|
I work next to the MTS Centre in Winnipeg. It's an interesting debate when it comes to whether WInnipeg could support a team.
I grew up in Edmonton watching the Dynasty Oilers, so I never really got attached to the Jets before they left. I'd love to be able to watch an actual Oilers game outside of the pre-season, though. |
|
|
|
just1n
PickupHockey Pro
282 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2010 : 18:10:24
|
| The luxury boxes have to be a big part of the revenue, as we are made to believe teams need to build new arenas with them to make more money. Filling an arena in Saskatchewan, Winnipeg, etc isn't the issue at all, but as Beans has pointed out it doesn't make enough money by itself. Smaller cities likely do not have the clientele to fill the luxury boxes... |
|
|
|
Guest4850
( )
|
Posted - 03/28/2010 : 05:31:49
|
1-Stockholm
2-Helsinki
3-Prague
4-Moscow
5-Hamburgh
6-Bern
7-Minsk
8-Quebec City
9-Winnipeg
10-KC |
|
|
|
Axey
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
877 Posts |
Posted - 03/28/2010 : 21:29:17
|
| Milwaukee. They were in the top 5 viewers in the US for the olympic final. Seems like a good hockey market to me. |
|
|
|
impropriety
Top Prospect
Canada
78 Posts |
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/29/2010 : 13:40:00
|
I'd love to see a team back in Winnipeg. This would more than likely mean Vancouver going back to the Pacific and the new Jets being part of the NW.
Although, if Phoenix does get some attendance numbers in the playoffs then it will be pretty hypocritical for them to move them for next season. But would that really surprise many people?? |
|
|
|
impropriety
Top Prospect
Canada
78 Posts |
Posted - 03/29/2010 : 13:56:24
|
I don't think it would be hypocritical. The NHL has a timeline to sell the team, right?
If they can't meet the timeline to sell the team, and nobody else steps up to keep the team in Glendale, what are their options are that point?
Does the hypocrisy come from resigning themselves to moving the team to Canada after they were so opposed to it? I don't think the move to Canada was the focal point of the debate. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/29/2010 : 15:08:10
|
I agree that the point never was moving the team to Canada or not. There were various points during the battle, one of them being the argument over the Phoenix being a viable hockey market.
As Phoenix draws closer and closer to a playoff spot, they are getting more and more fans to the gate. Through March the Coyotes averages 4500 more fans a game into a still low but signficantly improved 15,000 fans a game.
So if the NHL/Board of Governors will now allow a move after Phoenix is proving they can get fans if they are winning, then it's a bit hypocritical. |
|
|
|
impropriety
Top Prospect
Canada
78 Posts |
Posted - 03/29/2010 : 15:25:04
|
Interestingly enough, I don't think fan support comes into the scene at this point. The problem at this point - as mentioned in the article - is the possibility that the financiers involved in keeping the team in Glendale might not be rock-solid as they were originally made out to be.
Even if they had 100,000 people show up to a protest to keep the team in Glendale, it doesn't mean much if no one steps up and opens their wallet.
At that point, the next question is... if you have to sell it to someone, and nobody from Phoenix is buying, who do you sell to? |
|
|
|
Guest4746
( )
|
Posted - 03/29/2010 : 19:39:19
|
| WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEGWINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG WINNIPEG |
|
|
|
impropriety
Top Prospect
Canada
78 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 08:07:37
|
| Looks like there's some legs to the Winnipeg thing this go around. Kypreos on Sportcentre today said he's heard it from a few of his in-the-know sources that a deal's been in the works since the olympic break. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 08:58:32
|
One thing is assured: if Phoenix actually manages to move back to Winnipeg, it won't have been Bettman's idea!
I would welcome back any team to Canada, and support this wholeheartedly. Do I think a team in southern Ontario in Toronto's area would do even better? Hell yeah . . . but that doesn't take away from the fact that WInnipeg is very deserving of getting their team back. No WAY do I want to see another disaster in a city like Kansas City, which there have also been many rumours about . . .
Phoenix to Winnipeg - check!
Next up:
Nashville to Hamilton - ?
Atlanta to Quebec City - ?
Florida to . . . Halifax ?!? 
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
impropriety
Top Prospect
Canada
78 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 09:17:40
|
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/NHL-has-spoken-with-True-North-about-return-to-Winnipeg-89436782.html
This is what local media's got to say about it.
I also just noticed I said Kypreos on Sportcentre. It was actually on Sportsnet Connected AM.
He was basically saying that the deal in place is that Thompson would assume all of the debt associated with the Coyotes franchise (which is really best-case scenario for the NHL) in exchange for moving the team to Winnipeg. Then in a couple years when he already has his foot in the door with the league, he sells his interest in the Winnipeg franchise and gets the option to set up shop for a second team in the GTA through expansion. |
|
|
|
Guest4339
( )
|
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 10:20:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6982
For all those people saying that winnipeg and quebec have already tried and failed, please remember that they weren't given the same amount of money struggling teams now get. I also don't get why people defend bettman if the whole phoenix situation happened to a canadian team he would be all for the movement of the team and thats what pisses me off about him
Absolutely wrong; the league would not allow ANY team to move in the Phoenix situation.
Guys, don't let Balsillie brainwash you. That was all about control over who gets to decide where franchises go. It was not about US vs Canada and all that other stuff.
As for the guest that said that 15k is "almost" the same as 18k.
That 3k difference, if we use Bean's $50 average ticket price translates into $6 million per year revenue. |
|
|
|
ReyR
Top Prospect
13 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 10:22:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4339
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6982
For all those people saying that winnipeg and quebec have already tried and failed, please remember that they weren't given the same amount of money struggling teams now get. I also don't get why people defend bettman if the whole phoenix situation happened to a canadian team he would be all for the movement of the team and thats what pisses me off about him
Absolutely wrong; the league would not allow ANY team to move in the Phoenix situation.
Guys, don't let Balsillie brainwash you. That was all about control over who gets to decide where franchises go. It was not about US vs Canada and all that other stuff.
As for the guest that said that 15k is "almost" the same as 18k.
That 3k difference, if we use Bean's $50 average ticket price translates into $6 million per year revenue.
Darn, I just registered. That was me above. |
|
|
|
impropriety
Top Prospect
Canada
78 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 11:18:30
|
I'm not sure how true this is, but I've been hearing a lot of talk about plans to renovate the MTS Centre to seat ~18,000 people. I've been hearing it from quite a few reputable sources.
I really don't see how it could happen. I go to the MTS Centre a lot. My office building is connected to it so I go there every day because there's a Tim Hortons in the concourse. I'm also a regular fixture at Manitoba Moose games because there's a company discount available.
They list the capacity at 15,000 but I'm pretty sure they only actually sell to ~13,000, and even then it's cramped. They could hit 18,000 with a major renovations as there's a huge parking lot that's adjacent, but it would be a big job. |
|
|
|
Guest2000
( )
|
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 11:48:57
|
Gentleman many interesting and well researched responces as far as my answer to whom deserves a team. Being originally from the East Coast i'd love to see a team in Halifax an agree that large company's like Irving, Sobeys, Moosehead & Keiths & Global would all jump at the bit as either investors or sponsors for such a move.
In the GTA Mississauga or Woodbridge / Richmond Hill could easily support a team. Hell if the leafs weren't so greedy you could successfully put a team in both areas and this would still leave the Golden Horse Shoe area who regularly attend the Sabres games not killing the Buffalo organization.
I Like Regina or Saskatchewan as a potential location seeing how crazy and loyal roughrider fans are i could only imagine if we tapped into their hockey market.
I am not a fan of a Winnipeg market hell thats why we have a team in Phoenix now cuz they flunked the first time. ( I'm Sure i'll get a little grief for this.) But thats just my opinion.
Even though Quebec flunked the first time i believe their the first candian city to get a chance at the next team just because they are desperately making moves to build an arena. As far as the US Market i do like the idea of Wisconsin they are loyal College Hockey fans and knowledgeable; if you can tap into a third of the packers fan base then you have a sell out every game not to mention its -40 there in the winter so i'm sure there are more then enough people who enjoy the game of hockey.
Outside of Wisconsin i see know reason to expand any further in the US. I know KC has been thrown around but then do you endup tapping to much into the Blues Market? |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 11:50:43
|
The renovation plans for adding the 3000 seats plus luxury boxes has been in place for some time. They have been waiting for the relocation of a team or expansion
From a perspective of a fan on Edmonton, this is only a band-aid solution. Edmonton added another level of sky suites as well as I think 1500 more seats about 10 years ago and it was obsolete and outdated about 3 years after the renos. More importantly, the fan experience is garbage compared to a properly build stadium like the ACC with the giant concourses and larger seats/leg room.
I don't like the drastic moves as Slozo does of moving a number of franchises as much as I like the drastic folding of franchises. I agree that teams in Winnipeg and Quebec City make sense, but only with local government support as arena's were the reason both teams left in the first place. I am also in favor of a team in the GTA but only North as I firmly believe that a team south of TO will spell the end of Buffalo. Also consider the Islanders are more than likely out of Long Island in the next 2-4 years as they need a new building as well and the City Council wants nothing to do with it.
Ultimately, I would rather see the league fold 6-8 teams (Phoenix, Florida, Carolina, NY Islanders, Atlanta, and ??) and not replace them quickly. Rather, make a sound infastructure in 4 places (arenas/ownership/sponsorship) eventually getting to a 26 team league max. Could you imagine the quality of the sport basically taking every 4th line in the league and dropping those players out??? More skill, less goon garbage means better hockey.
Then, get into full revenue sharing a la the NFL and watch the NHL flourish in all markets. Unfortunately, ownership will not go for any of it. |
|
|
|
Guest6813
( )
|
Posted - 05/10/2010 : 15:25:16
|
EYEBROW, SASKATCHEWAN!
or Saskatoon |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2010 : 10:33:35
|
Moving a franchise in a professional sports league is "drastic"?
How about . . . healthy? Normal?
NFL - most successful sports league in North America
Since 1990:
1995 - LA Rams move to St.Louis
1995 - LA Raiders move to Oakland (not far, but it counts)
1996 - Cleveland Browns move to Baltimore, become the Ravens
1997 - Houston Oilers move to Memphis, call them the Tennessee Titans
1998 - Cleveland is awarded an NFL franchise (returned after a few years)
1998 - Tennessee Titans move from Memphis to Nashville
This is all while the NFL was passing baseball as America's most popular sport. Do any of the moves smack of "desperation", or were they just sound financial moves for franchises that were losing money?
Please note the EXTREMELY short financial leash the NFL keeps you on, compared to the NHL.
And let's keep the gov't out of it . . . I as a taxpayer - even a hockey loving one - do not want to pay more taxes for a sporting venue. Big thumbs down! No, the corporate powers can fund that quite nicely and think of a way to make money from it, thank you very much. No need for the building of a stadium to come out of poor taxpayer wallets for some corporate entity to profit from in the future, bloody hell!
However, the folding of teams, or contraction of the league, is a whole different issue - and would have to come from the top, I'd think. But we are miles away from that possibility, IMHO - I think it'd have to be many more franchises losing even bigger money before such a drastic move was made. After all, there is no better sign of a dying league than contraction (see: CFL).
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Jumbo Joe Rocks
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
410 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2010 : 10:48:05
|
My 5 choices would be
1.Winnepeg
2.Halifax
3.Regina
4.Seattle
5.Saskatoon
GO SHARKS GO |
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2010 : 15:31:33
|
Saint John, New Brunswick!!!
Heh, I can only wish.
Sadly, our city and province in general is not populated enough to support an NHL franchise, despite having one of the wealthiest Canadians (family), and Companies in Canada. The Irving's, to sponsor the franchise. Along with, Moosehead Breweries.
We'd need a new arena, as Harbour Station is not large enough. And a larger population. :(
I'd love having an NHL team where I live, but it will never happen.
Irvine/prez. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2010 : 16:43:24
|
Slozo, you are talking about apples and oranges. First off all, the NFL is a league with complete revenue sharing. Meaning (purely football profits) there are not super rich and super poor teams. They all pool their profits and spilt them 30 different ways.
That covers some issues that other league have.
Secondly, it is really great that you can cite 6 relocations in the NFL, none of which have occured in 12+ years and have no qualifier for any moves before 1990 to see the total history of the league.
Here are some hard facts:
The NFL has had 12 franchises relocate since 1921. Furthermore, between 1960 and 1982 there were zero relocations in the NFL. Between 1982 and today, there have been 6.
This is consistant with each of the pro sports leagues with the exception of basketball in the past 10ish years. MLB had just 3 teams relocate since 1970!!
Relocation is not healthy. It's the final option that any sports league has prior to folding a franchise. |
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2010 : 17:19:12
|
I agree with Beans in that, relocation has to be the final option. It's not good for the league or fans to just up and relocate a team, on the fly. Without first trying a multitude of other options.
However,
Where you place a team to begin with, should be considered. The NHL decided to up and try (of course they did some research), to place NHL (hockey!) teams in the deeper Southern United States.
Now, i'm not expert of research, marketing nor the US. But, it seems to me like before even trying this experiment, that it would fail. And it would happen fairly quick.
I mean, in all honesty, it does not take an expert to see that hockey is not overly popular in the Southern US.
So, I agree relocation is last resort. But perhaps, adding more franchises to begin with, and where they were placed, should have been more thought out and considered.
Irvine/prez. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2010 : 17:33:57
|
Irvine, one might agree with you.
But one might also suggest that there have been teams in the southern states for some time. In fact, Los Angeles has had a viable franchise since 1966. Dallas has found a lot of sucess, and San Jose has been very strong for nearly 20 years.
Now, I am not saying that Hockey is better in the Southern States and that too many teams in that area is a good thing, but to say that hockey in the Southern US is not very factual.
|
|
|
|
Guest4178
( )
|
Posted - 09/07/2010 : 11:58:32
|
A big factor with team location (or relocation) is the marketability of the team as it relates to the current NHL teams. With 80% of NHL franchises domiciled in the US (and the NHL's head office there), the desire to add more Canadian cities to the NHL is not their first choice.
US teams have gotten used to the current six Canadian teams, but most US teams are not in a big hurry to see Winnipeg, Halifax, Hamilton, Saskatoon, or Quebec City join the NHL. Teams like Nashville, Florida, Dallas, San Jose, etc. want to fill their rinks, and to do so, they need competitive competition, but at the same time, cities which their fans can identify with, which usually means other US cities. And while it matters somewhat that other teams are financially healthy, they are more interested in selling out their arena. This is why some US teams now have different pricing based on who they're playing against. And while some of the current Canadian team draw okay in US cities, they do better when it's a US vs. US match-up.
When Wild Bill Hunter tried to "float the noon balloon from Saskatoon" many years ago, the NHL essentially admitted that they did not want add a cold prairie city which was mostly anonymous to US hockey fans, so the St. Louis team stayed put.
When the NHL gobbled up four WHA franchises, even Toronto didn't want the Canadian teams which came with the package!
It's a romantic notion to believe that fan support (or where the players were born) would be huge factors in determining which cities deserve NHL teams. If so, Saskatchewan would be quite deserving based on both factors. Their fans are great (and not just for football – look at the support given to the Blades or Pats. They also have more NHLers per capita than anywhere else in the country, and by quite a margin!
The economics required to make an NHL team viable in Saskatchewan is certainly debatable though. (As it is with many other Canadian cities mentioned as being deserving of an NHL franchise.)
This is a very interesting post though, because the question remains "What city would you like to see for your NHL franchise?" There have been a lot of passionate responses, and lots of responses with merit, but is the NHL listening? Or does the NHL care?
|
|
|
|
Guest4013
( )
|
Posted - 09/11/2010 : 13:25:15
|
I think Milwaukee. There is over 600,000 people in the city and in the greater Milwaukee area there is more than 2 million. The Bradley Center, which is where the NBA's Milwaukee Buck's and the AHL's Admirals play seats around 18,000 people.
It's in the north, where it actually snows and people may care about hockey, unlike in other candidate cities such as Houston and Las Vegas. Plus, Bettman and the NHL would much rather have a franchise in the US than in Canada. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
what city for YOUR franchise? 
