Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Canada can support 3 more teams in 20yrs


  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

#61 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,608 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:02 AM

 

I never understood this argument because a large arena does nothing if you can't fill it. So yes, Winnipeg has only 15.000 seats but it's sold out every game other teams have bigger arenas but fail to even reach the 12.000 mark.

 

The League plays the tune, the franchises have to dance to it. If they say you're facility doesn't meet their "minimum seating capacity" criteria they have established, you will either modify the existing site or build anew.

Seattle = Uncle Gary's latest wet dream.


"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#62 DickieDunn

DickieDunn

    http://redwingsandotherthings.wordpress.com/

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,396 posts
  • Location:Belding

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:09 AM


All possible Canadian cities mentioned, with the most remote of chances of getting an NHL franchise, all suffer from the same "malady": an arena that would not meet the League's criteria for minimum size.


 
I never understood this argument because a large arena does nothing if you can't fill it. So yes, Winnipeg has only 15.000 seats but it's sold out every game other teams have bigger arenas but fail to even reach the 12.000 mark.


Winnipeg is capped at 15k. I'd your barn can hold 19k you have the potential to sell that many tickets even if you're not because your team sucks.

Oh this young man has had a very trying rookie season, with the litigation, the notoriety, his subsequent deportation to Canada and that country's refusal to accept him, well, I guess that's more than most 21-year-olds can handle... Ogie Ogilthorpe!


#63 frankgrimes

frankgrimes

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:19 AM

 

The League plays the tune, the franchises have to dance to it. If they say you're facility doesn't meet their "minimum seating capacity" criteria they have established, you will either modify the existing site or build anew.

Seattle = Uncle Gary's latest wet dream.

 

Agreed and hopefully the final nail in his coffin. Seattle would be an absolute horrible idea, the league seems to like problem childs and non hockey places.


kftx.jpg

 

The Offseason of truth ...

Welcome to hockeytown Jonas aka Lundquist 2 Gustavsson!

blank cheque for The Captain or Jim Star Nil please..


#64 Euro_Twins

Euro_Twins

    Healthy Scratch

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,123 posts
  • Location:Windsor, Ontario

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:28 AM

Winnipeg is capped at 15k. I'd your barn can hold 19k you have the potential to sell that many tickets even if you're not because your team sucks.


Ya but if you see a arena that holds 15,000 people full every night, or one that holds 19,000 at %75-%80 capacity every night l, as an investor who are you going to invest in? I would assume the one that is sold out every game

#65 Holmstrom96

Holmstrom96

    Banned Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,605 posts
  • Location:Warren, MI

Posted 14 May 2014 - 09:38 AM

I would move a struggling US team to Hamilton and Quebeq.  I wouldn't do any more expansion.



#66 frankgrimes

frankgrimes

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 10:01 AM

Winnipeg is capped at 15k. I'd your barn can hold 19k you have the potential to sell that many tickets even if you're not because your team sucks.

Ya but if you see a arena that holds 15,000 people full every night, or one that holds 19,000 at %75-%80 capacity every night l, as an investor who are you going to invest in? I would assume the one that is sold out every game


Exactly and the thing is most of these high capacity by tax payers money built arenas aren't even at full 70 % capacity. Personally I'd tell them you guys have had enough time to build and invest into this franchise you didn't, so back t Canada we go.

As an investor you want to make money the right way and not by ripping tax payers off or try to build a hockey market somewhere where people couldn't care less!


kftx.jpg

 

The Offseason of truth ...

Welcome to hockeytown Jonas aka Lundquist 2 Gustavsson!

blank cheque for The Captain or Jim Star Nil please..


#67 kipwinger

kipwinger

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,628 posts
  • Location:Mt. Pleasant, MI

Posted 14 May 2014 - 10:08 AM

As an investor you want to make money the right way and not by ripping tax payers off or try to build a hockey market somewhere where people couldn't care less!

 

You mean like Mike Illitch does?


GMRwings:  "Well, in other civilized countries, 16 years old isn't considered underage.  For instance, I believe the age of consent is 16 in Canada.  There's some US states where it's 16 as well.  

 

Get off the high horse.  Not like she was 10."

 

"Some girls are 17 even though they look 25."

 

 


#68 WorkingOvertime

WorkingOvertime

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,422 posts
  • Location:Columbus, OH

Posted 14 May 2014 - 01:24 PM

The Canadian sports media goes crazy over any Canadian team now and I'm sure CBC or TSN would be all over a deal. Hell, CBC even shows games in Punjabi so I'm sure they'd want to serve English Nordique fans. As for financial backing, the municipality is building them a rink and there's not even a team yet so clearly there's money to back them. 

 

Also, the Canadian dollar argument isn't as meaningful as it used to be since the CAN dollar has been pretty high for quite a while.

 

The problem with expansion in Canada from the NHL point of view is that the media and citizens are already into hockey. That is, the NHL wants teams in new areas (like Seattle) where the television market is large and they can get new fans watching hockey, buying merchandise, etc. As I said before, I would like a team in Quebec City.



#69 frankgrimes

frankgrimes

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 03:49 PM

 

The problem with expansion in Canada from the NHL point of view is that the media and citizens are already into hockey. That is, the NHL wants teams in new areas (like Seattle) where the television market is large and they can get new fans watching hockey, buying merchandise, etc. As I said before, I would like a team in Quebec City.

 

I understand that but the problem is:

 

not enough people - including media - are willing to get into hockey or embrase it = less merchandise sale than say in Canada. Seattle only wants the NHL as an after thought and we all know how that turned out. Dallas at least has some fans showing up when the team does well = competing in the playoffs.

 

but the truth is, some markets aren't just made for hockey no matter how big their population is.

 

Canadian teams should boycott revenue sharing till the NHL front office is giving them more teams, Seattle would start with no fans at all, in a non hockey market AND with the NHL being an after thought to me that's a disaster waiting to happen.


kftx.jpg

 

The Offseason of truth ...

Welcome to hockeytown Jonas aka Lundquist 2 Gustavsson!

blank cheque for The Captain or Jim Star Nil please..


#70 evilmrt

evilmrt

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,539 posts
  • Location:Winter Freakin Wonderland

Posted 14 May 2014 - 05:12 PM

 
I understand that but the problem is:
 
not enough people - including media - are willing to get into hockey or embrase it = less merchandise sale than say in Canada. Seattle only wants the NHL as an after thought and we all know how that turned out. Dallas at least has some fans showing up when the team does well = competing in the playoffs.
 
but the truth is, some markets aren't just made for hockey no matter how big their population is.
 
Canadian teams should boycott revenue sharing till the NHL front office is giving them more teams, Seattle would start with no fans at all, in a non hockey market AND with the NHL being an after thought to me that's a disaster waiting to happen.


I would agree but with one additional point... The Seattle area is one of the most likely US metros that could potentially be converted to a hockey city (to some degree). Washington already has a lot of junior hockey, and they have a natural rival right across the border. Some very concerted grassroots efforts, and media presence, I think they'd be in very good shape after ten years, a solid hockey city. You don't have such potential in other scenarios in the US.

This would probably take better league leadership than they currently have now, though.

#71 frankgrimes

frankgrimes

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 06:32 PM

I would agree but with one additional point... The Seattle area is one of the most likely US metros that could potentially be converted to a hockey city (to some degree). Washington already has a lot of junior hockey, and they have a natural rival right across the border. Some very concerted grassroots efforts, and media presence, I think they'd be in very good shape after ten years, a solid hockey city. You don't have such potential in other scenarios in the US.
This would probably take better league leadership than they currently have now, though.


That's a very good point and I agree if there's a us city which could pull it off it might be Seattle especially if Paul Allen invests as a majority owner but it would still be far from a slamdunk like Quebec and the return of the Nordics

kftx.jpg

 

The Offseason of truth ...

Welcome to hockeytown Jonas aka Lundquist 2 Gustavsson!

blank cheque for The Captain or Jim Star Nil please..


#72 DickieDunn

DickieDunn

    http://redwingsandotherthings.wordpress.com/

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,396 posts
  • Location:Belding

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:09 PM

I don't like sticking teams back where they failed once. It's like getting back with an ex-girlfriend.

Oh this young man has had a very trying rookie season, with the litigation, the notoriety, his subsequent deportation to Canada and that country's refusal to accept him, well, I guess that's more than most 21-year-olds can handle... Ogie Ogilthorpe!


#73 frankgrimes

frankgrimes

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:17 PM

I don't like sticking teams back where they failed once. It's like getting back with an ex-girlfriend.


Winnipeg comes to mind and sometimes getting back a former ex gf turns out to be the best decision ever. Giving Quebec back what belongs to them is only fair and easier than trying to build another fanbase almost from scratch

kftx.jpg

 

The Offseason of truth ...

Welcome to hockeytown Jonas aka Lundquist 2 Gustavsson!

blank cheque for The Captain or Jim Star Nil please..


#74 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,608 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:22 PM

The name (as of right now) is the New Quebec City Amphitheatre. From the look of it's webcam, it either hasn't been updated in awhile or there is still snow in Quebec City.


"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#75 PredsFanTheBayouState

PredsFanTheBayouState

    3rd Line Checker

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 489 posts
  • Location:louisiana

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:30 PM

Winnipeg comes to mind and sometimes getting back a former ex gf turns out to be the best decision ever. Giving Quebec back what belongs to them is only fair and easier than trying to build another fanbase almost from scratch

if the NHL  dosen't wanna give Quebec a hockey team again,they don't have to.The NHL may started in Canada,but they don't own the league and can't tell them where to put teams or move teams to,that is for the nhl to decide


Edited by PredsFanTheBayouState, 14 May 2014 - 07:36 PM.


#76 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,608 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:33 PM

Uncle Gary's recent realignment insures that any League restructuring will see teams be put in the Western Conference.


"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#77 vladdy16

vladdy16

    The rest are neophytes.

  • HoF Booster Mod
  • 6,166 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:59 PM

if the NHL  dosen't wanna give Quebec a hockey team again,they don't have to.The NHL may started in Canada,but they don't own the league and can't tell them where to put teams or move teams to,that is for the nhl to decide

Not that I necessarily disagree with what you're saying, but (and this is going to sound mean but that's not what I'm trying to convey, so bear that in mind) you're coming across as pretty militant about your opinion.

I get that being a Preds fan hasn't been easy, but the economic reality is that a Canadian team would be optimal, especially in the short term.  While you may think (along with many others) that a team in a different market would eventually grow the game, you can't deny the reality that it still is Canada's game no matter how much the US bastardizes it, and the smart money hockey-wise is in Canada.  A Canadian team would also benefit the Preds - chances are they wouldn't qualify for revenue sharing, which would increase - or at least not decrease - Nashville's shot at that money.


Can't wait to read the "Phoenix: I still think it's a hockey market" chapter of Gary Bettman's autobiography. I'm guessing it's going to be chapter 11.

- mjlegend 3/9/2011

#78 DickieDunn

DickieDunn

    http://redwingsandotherthings.wordpress.com/

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,396 posts
  • Location:Belding

Posted 14 May 2014 - 08:44 PM

Winnipeg comes to mind and sometimes getting back a former ex gf turns out to be the best decision ever. Giving Quebec back what belongs to them is only fair and easier than trying to build another fanbase almost from scratch


If Winnipeg has a successful NHL team in 10 years, I'll give them credit. Right now the fans are in the honeymoon stage. If this latest attempt at getting good flops, how long are they going to jeep filling the barn to see a bad team?

Oh this young man has had a very trying rookie season, with the litigation, the notoriety, his subsequent deportation to Canada and that country's refusal to accept him, well, I guess that's more than most 21-year-olds can handle... Ogie Ogilthorpe!


#79 PavelValerievichDatsyuk

PavelValerievichDatsyuk

    3rd Line Checker

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 425 posts
  • Location:Montreal, Quebec

Posted 14 May 2014 - 10:28 PM

I don't like sticking teams back where they failed once. It's like getting back with an ex-girlfriend.

I think you have to understand how they failed, though. This was no break up because of loss of love. They pretty much sold out their 15000 seat arena until the end, but there's not enough income from just tickets. They needed a bigger rink and Corporate deals.

 

They left Quebec in 1995 - before the Salary cap. Canadian teams had to pay much more for players because $1US was .70. Because of that and the escalating salaries the team began to struggle financially. Now there's the salary cap and the Canadian dollar is .92 and has been even in recent years. 

 

The team couldn't get corporate sponsors because the Quebec economy was in turmoil. This was in larger part because of the seperatist movement that lead to the 95 referendum. Nobody wanted to invest in Quebec because of that uncertainty. It's a lot different in Quebec. As already stated, Quebec City is already building a 400 million dollar modern arena just on the hope of a team. The also have a huge deal with Quebecor media for the naming rights on the arena that increases if an NHL team is there.

 

As for your idea of fans fading in interest if the team is losing - you can still buy Nordique merchandise in any sports or souvenir shop in Montreal and the team hasn't existed for almost 20 years. I think that says something. 



#80 Euro_Twins

Euro_Twins

    Healthy Scratch

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,123 posts
  • Location:Windsor, Ontario

Posted 14 May 2014 - 10:32 PM

Montreal already has a team, to me it wouldn't make all that much sense to put a team right next door in Quebec city, especially since right next door is to that is Ottawa and Toronto, that would be 4 nhl teams in a 4 hour drive, plus if you threw a team to Hamilton, 5 nhl teams in a 5 hour drive. That's too much packed together





Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users