Name Recommendations for 2nd NHL team in Southern Ontario

[kq76]

Originally Posted by RchW

With all due respect to hockey fans in false markets, the 3-4 millon that live west and south of Toronto are a slam dunk market for hockey. The reason Bettman opposes Ballsille is that he considers the Canadian market captive and he wants to place an expansion franchise there so that it will generate income for the current owners in the NHL.

I agree that would be the smartest play now, but you make it sound like that's been his plan for a long while now. If that really was the case I think it would have happened years ago. I think Bettman is just stubborn and if that's his only good move now then he very well may take it, but I don't think it's what he wants to do. I think he really does want to stick it out in the states even if it hurts the league in the short-run because he can't bear to think he could actually possibly be wrong about the long-run.

Frankly, I think the bankruptcy judge should do what's best for the creditors and, unless the city of Glendale is a major creditor, it sounds like what's best for them is to take Balsillie's money and say sayonara to the team. I feel like I should maybe feel bad for Phoenix fans (I'm still sore over the Grizzlies and Sonics), but they got their team from Winnipeg which supported the Jets quite well from what I can remember so they'll only get what they took away from others. Granted, most fans didn't steal the team from Winnipeg, they only welcomed it, but they did gain from the loss of others.

Besides, in this day and age with our current system I think it's too idealistic to feel a team should just stick it out forever wherever it is, especially when there is an apparently much better market elsewhere. If you can make more elsewhere then fine, go there. I just wish we had an open system up promotion and relegation where teams didn't move, they just feel from grace as others ascended to glory.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by RchW

The reason Bettman opposes Ballsille is that he considers the Canadian market captive and he wants to place an expansion franchise there so that it will generate income for the current owners in the NHL.

The idea of expanding the NHL is, well, insane. The league is already overstretched with franchises of dubious value, so adding any more is crazy.

Based on the historical size ratios between the four major team sports in North American, the NHL (and NBA too for that matter) is too large. For much of the 1980s you had the NHL at 21 teams, the NBA at 23, MLB at 26, and the NFL at 28. The NFL is now at 32 and MLB at 30, which essentially maintains the ratio between those two. But the NHL and NBA are both at 30 teams when, based on the 1980s, the NHL should be closer to 24 teams and the NBA closer to 26 teams. (And, interesting enough, back when the NHL had 24 teams, 8 of them were located in Canada. Thus one-third of the league was Canadian-based.)

Originally Posted by kq76

Besides, in this day and age with our current system I think it's too idealistic to feel a team should just stick it out forever wherever it is, especially when there is an apparently much better market elsewhere.

The only problem with that statement is when the current market has pumped in many public dollars to build the stadium for the team.

[kq76]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

The idea of expanding the NHL is, well, insane. The league is already overstretched with franchises of dubious value, so adding any more is crazy.

Based on the historical size ratios between the four major team sports in North American, the NHL (and NBA too for that matter) is too large. For much of the 1980s you had the NHL at 21 teams, the NBA at 23, MLB at 26, and the NFL at 28. The NFL is now at 32 and MLB at 30, which essentially maintains the ratio between those two. But the NHL and NBA are both at 30 teams when, based on the 1980s, the NHL should be closer to 24 teams and the NBA closer to 26 teams. (And, interesting enough, back when the NHL had 24 teams, 8 of them were located in Canada. Thus one-third of the league was Canadian-based.)

Who's to say those old ratios were ideal or if they're ideal now? Ratios are cool and all, but I don't think they make for a convincing argument in this case. If you want to say it probably won't work to have an NHL and an NBA team (both playing at about the same time) in a relatively small market, then sure, I'll probably agree with that no problem. To compare overall league sizes, though, not so much.

And how exactly do you determine if a league is maxed out team-wise? From what I understand people were saying the NHL was bigger than it should be when it was in the low 20s. Sure, we've had an influx of European talent since then, but are we really at a point where the product is too diluted? Maybe, but I'm sure some would say that even if there were only 20 teams right now. Whether markets can support a team is more convincing to me, but there again, if the salary floor was lower or there was a different system of some sort like luxury taxes or players got less, I'm sure the teams in trouble right now would be doing much better and they could maybe expand to 40 teams even. (I'm trying to think whether expanding in itself would lower average team payroll..) Other than economic reasons, some of which you can change, I just don't know how one can really say a league is too big or too small. Surely there is a point, but I don't know how you determine it exactly.

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

The only problem with that statement is when the current market has pumped in many public dollars to build the stadium for the team.

Eh, I'm not in favour of public funding of pro sports arenas anyway. Even if someone wants to argue they'd provide a net benefit, I'm sure the dollars could be better spent elsewhere (like say affordable housing for the homeless which can save millions of $s a year). It hurts to lose a team like the Sonics, but at the same time you have to say, "yeah, good on you for taking a stand". As for the Glendale fiasco, surely someone must have said, "you know, maybe this isn't such a good idea, the arena is on the outskirts of the area and how many people are really going to be into hockey here, in the desert??". I think someone just got greedy and wanted the bragging rights of having a town with so many major sports.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by kq76

Other than economic reasons, some of which you can change, I just don't know how one can really say a league is too big or too small.

Except that the ratios are a handy stand-in for how the sports leagues have fared in terms of public acceptance and popularity, and thus the number of markets which can sustain them. The idea that there are as many markets in North America which can successfully support major league hockey as there are which can support major league baseball seems an unlikely statement. Has the growth rate in the number of hockey fans exceeded that of baseball so much so that hockey and baseball can now successfully support the same number of franchises?

I suspect the only reason the NHL has twice within the last fifteen years embarked on rapid expansion was to quickly line the league's pocket with expansion fee cash, and not because the newly admitted markets made much rational economic sense. (And let's not forget the relocations which have transpired since the. Is Phoenix really a more lucrative market for hockey than is Winnipeg or Quebec City?)

[alslammerz]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

I suspect the only reason the NHL has twice within the last fifteen years embarked on rapid expansion was to quickly line the league's pocket with expansion fee cash, and not because the newly admitted markets made much rational economic sense. (And let's not forget the relocations which have transpired since the. Is Phoenix really a more lucrative market for hockey than is Winnipeg or Quebec City?)

But it's also the NHL. And with them hurting in this economy, won't the first thing they look to do when it recovers be go on a rapid expansion spree that quickly line's the league's pockets? And what better place to do that then the Golden Horseshoe? Doesn't really matter if it makes sense or not, it's the NHL.

As far as Winnipeg or QC, from what I've read about them, the argument is there isn't enoughy corporate sponsorship money to sustain a team in those two cities, whereas I suppose Phoenix is (and just like, ugh, Las Vegas would be with all those casinos and 7k fans). Now I really don't know what that means, but no less a source than Wayne Gretzky, iirc, was the one to make that argument. Of course, he was fending off the Canadian media that wants his Phoenix team to be sold and moved back north, so he may have a vested interest.

[mgom27]

Bettman has said Toronto won't be getting a Second team.

He's how the Divisions would be
West-,LA,Anaheim,San Jose
Midwest Dallas,St. Louis,Denver,KC Islanders,Houston Coyotes
Central Minnesota,Chicago,Detroit,Columbus
Northeast New York,Boston,New Jersey,Buffalo
Altantic Washington,Pittsburgh,Flyers
Southeast Hurricanes,Orlando Predators,Panthers,Lighting,Altanta
Canada Vancouver,Edmonton,Calgary,Senators,Montreal,Toron to
There's a chance for the Islanders to move to KC. Houston wants a NHL Team. Because Nashville is really anywhere in geographically I decide Orlando because can keep team name because the Area Bowl team there has that name or can rename to the Solar Bears.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Except that the ratios are a handy stand-in for how the sports leagues have fared in terms of public acceptance and popularity, and thus the number of markets which can sustain them. The idea that there are as many markets in North America which can successfully support major league hockey as there are which can support major league baseball seems an unlikely statement. Has the growth rate in the number of hockey fans exceeded that of baseball so much so that hockey and baseball can now successfully support the same number of franchises?

I suspect the only reason the NHL has twice within the last fifteen years embarked on rapid expansion was to quickly line the league's pocket with expansion fee cash, and not because the newly admitted markets made much rational economic sense. (And let's not forget the relocations which have transpired since the. Is Phoenix really a more lucrative market for hockey than is Winnipeg or Quebec City?)

There certainly are enough markets, the NHL just isn't in all the right ones.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by alslammerz

But it's also the NHL. And with them hurting in this economy, won't the first thing they look to do when it recovers be go on a rapid expansion spree that quickly line's the league's pockets? And what better place to do that then the Golden Horseshoe? Doesn't really matter if it makes sense or not, it's the NHL.

As far as Winnipeg or QC, from what I've read about them, the argument is there isn't enoughy corporate sponsorship money to sustain a team in those two cities, whereas I suppose Phoenix is (and just like, ugh, Las Vegas would be with all those casinos and 7k fans). Now I really don't know what that means, but no less a source than Wayne Gretzky, iirc, was the one to make that argument. Of course, he was fending off the Canadian media that wants his Phoenix team to be sold and moved back north, so he may have a vested interest.

Somehow I don't see that sort of thing happening again anytime in the near or moderate future, strong or weak economy.

[canadiancreed]

Originally Posted by mgom27

Bettman has said Toronto won't be getting a Second team..

Hamilton is part of Toronto now? (not to mention that Toronto has never been mentioned as getting this team)

[Long_Long_Name]

Originally Posted by canadiancreed

Hamilton is part of Toronto now? (not to mention that Toronto has never been mentioned as getting this team)

We don't have to go far to find such a mention. This thread mentions it.

[canadiancreed]

Originally Posted by Long_Long_Name

We don't have to go far to find such a mention. This thread mentions it.

That Hamilton is part of Toronto? Intresting.

[Long_Long_Name]

Originally Posted by canadiancreed

That Hamilton is part of Toronto? Intresting.

Care to give it another shot and see if you can get it?ß

[Joe Canadian]

Originally Posted by mgom27

Bettman has said Toronto won't be getting a Second team.

He's how the Divisions would be
West-,LA,Anaheim,San Jose
Midwest Dallas,St. Louis,Denver,KC Islanders,Houston Coyotes
Central Minnesota,Chicago,Detroit,Columbus
Northeast New York,Boston,New Jersey,Buffalo
Altantic Washington,Pittsburgh,Flyers
Southeast Hurricanes,Orlando Predators,Panthers,Lighting,Altanta
Canada Vancouver,Edmonton,Calgary,Senators,Montreal,Toron to
There's a chance for the Islanders to move to KC. Houston wants a NHL Team. Because Nashville is really anywhere in geographically I decide Orlando because can keep team name because the Area Bowl team there has that name or can rename to the Solar Bears.

Well that's never going to happen... 3 Team Divisions, the Islanders moving, an All-Canada division, a third team in Florida.

[Erik W.]

Originally Posted by Joe Canadian

Well that's never going to happen... 3 Team Divisions, the Islanders moving, an All-Canada division, a third team in Florida.

My favorite bit is that the division sizes randomly range from three teams to six teams.

[mgom27]

Wang said if can't get a new Arena would move the team and likes KC because played a Pre-Season Game this year.
The 3 Florida NFL Teams are making it and Orlando needs another Pro Sports Team.
Okay added Seattle to the West and Baltimore to the Altantic.
Hamilton is in Canada and Bettman said the town of Toronto,Canada is not getting a second team.

[alslammerz]

Originally Posted by BruceM

Somehow I don't see that sort of thing happening again anytime in the near or moderate future, strong or weak economy.

That would require the NHL needing to show logic like a normal person though.

I often find that if you take the most illogical choice possible, the NHL will do it, and they have a surprisingly high rate of luck/success.

Let's move a team from Minnesota to Dallas. That sounds dumb, yet Dallas is a sterling franchise (as is the NEW Minnesota franchise).

Let's move a team from Quebec to Colorado. The Avs are a successful franchise.

Let's start playing hockey games in baseball stadiums. Huh, look at all the PR for the Winter Classic.

And then there's the non-success stories: Phoenix, Nashville, Atlanta, the first lockout, the second lockout, etc.

And the future non-success story- Let's play the Winter Classic in a southern football stadium. Seriously, they've already discussed the Rose Bowl. The Rose Bowl! As if there's not something with a 100x the importance (in American eyes/advertising eyes) and tradition that happens in the Rose Bowl on Jan. 1.


As for the second team in Toronto: globeandmail.com: A second NHL team in Toronto?

And that gives further proof of why they don't want Balsille to move the Yotes to Hamilton, because they feel it wouldn't be a big name draw and would kill the Sabres. And because they want him to put a second team in Toronto.

Anything else I've said need backing up?
(I do realize that one Governor claims expansion won't happen- but c'mon, they are already the laughing stock of professional sports leagues, right? Doesn't even Don Garber snicker at them now while he succesfully moves INTO Canada?)

Sorry, disgruntled hockey fan with too much time on his hands. And I've had this discussion about 1000x already.

[kq76]

Judge vows to rule on relocation fee - Sportsnet.ca

So, if I understand that correctly, the judge has already said the Coyotes are Balsillie's if he wants them, but in addition to his offer he'll have to pay a relocation fee which he, the judge, will soon decide. Since his offer is contingent on being able to move the team, I think he should be allowed to adjust his offer depending on the relocation fee the judge decides. Obviously he's not bound to it (if it's in the hundreds of millions then no doubt he'll walk away), but if it's only like 10 or 20 million then I think Balsillie should be able to say, "okay, take that out of my offer, my offer's probably still by far the best". My guess is Balsillie would just gladly pay the relocation fee if it's that low though.

The only problem I'm thinking though is say the relocation fee is a fair bit more than that, but not totally ridiculous. Say it's 60 or 80 million and say Balsillie agrees to bite his lip and just pay it if the NHL says they'll accept him. What's to stop them from bringing in an expansion team for 400 or 500 million dollars into northern Toronto a few years from now? Are his revenue projections based on the assumption that it'd just be him, Toronto and Buffalo? Would a 4th team make whatever he pays not worth it? I wouldn't put it past Gary to spite Jim like that.

I gotta say, this is great drama.

[JTSMOOTH]

I'm probably the only one here and I'm certainly not gloating, but I was happy to here the ruling given out today. Now hopefully they can find an ownership group that actually knows what they are doing.

[canadiancreed]

Originally Posted by JTSMOOTH

I'm probably the only one here and I'm certainly not gloating, but I was happy to here the ruling given out today. Now hopefully they can find an ownership group that actually knows what they are doing.

If I was in your shoes I wouldn't be. So far that was the only offer that was more then just name dropping, and the NHL had a piss poor track record of getting quality owners (the Nashville fiasco comes to mind....Los Angelas...I'm sure there's others that are not coming to my caffeine starved brain right now), and anyone that invested in the Coyotes is guaranteed to lose cash now (barring the NHL finding someone else will deep pockets...that's a laugh)

Pretty much you had someone that knew what they were doing (you don't' make billions in the IT industry for being dumb...corrupt maybe, but not dumb). Now? Who knows. Bankruptcy judges are to my understanding supposed to do what would repay as much of the companies debt as possible. Unless there's an offer of greater value that he knows about that hasn't been released to the public (which I doubt), this judge failed the team's creditors, and in his job itself.

I also wonder if the rejection of moving the team is part and parcel to some group in Toronto that has stated they would want to put an expansion team in Hamilton, hence putting more money in the leagues coffers instead of it being moved to a potential expansion area. At the very least it'll prevent the league from getting it's extortion fee of a hundred mil to move the team (I wonder if the folks that moved Dallas, Carolina, Colorado and Phoenix had to pay that? I wouldn't bet money on it)

Overall it's a great circus, gets the NHL some headlines for all the wrong reasons (apparently the league just had a championship, but I bet folks know about this more then who won the Cup), and gives it's detractors another round of ammo. Hell if you believe the comments sections on news websites (and they're as reliable for intelligent conversations as youtube comments) there's a growing movement of folks that are looking to boycott anything NHL next year because of what they perceive as consist incompetence and double standards that seem to highlight Bettman's tenure on a regular basis. (Remember when the biggest scandal was Alan Eagleson skimming off the pension fund? Those were the days).

Personally I wish you luck, and if fans down there can grow and multiply hey so much the better, but to be honest I predict the league will be looking to move this team, in one year or in a few. Whether it's from a combination of poor management, lack of revenue, or other factors that are not coming to mind, I'm thinking there's a good chance of it happening. I'll also predict that if they are moved, it'll be to a) An american market, and b) there will be no delay or legal snafus, c) it'll go to some market that everyone except the league office knows that it cant' support, Like Kansas City, d) no league resistance, "relocation fees" or the like, and e) it'll just push more of the folks that help to subsidize the league to flip the NHL the bird and keep their money. And if enough of that occurs, we all lose.

[kq76]

I was shocked when I found out because it sounded like it was going so well, but I probably shouldn't have been considering the circumstances. I had gotten my hopes up as it sounded like the judge might actually have a pair, but in the end he was just like most and decided to push. That's really too bad. I wonder if it might have gone differently if Balsillie had made the deadline further down the road. Oh well, Bettman may have gotten his way once again at the expense others, but at least the owners, players, and fans have another bone to pick with him. His reign will end one day.

This deserves some Youtube: YouTube - count sesame street