30 years of Bettman

[Melrose Munch]

I'm a Canes STM and I find it offensive that the NHL reaching out to and including the American south and the increased involvement of the people here as consumers and players is somehow harmful to or ruining the game of hockey. I really don't understand why it's such an issue, I don't follow any other sports but do these types of attitudes exist in NFL/NBA/MLB?

Yes.

Ask people what they think about the the NFL in Toronto.

 

[canuckster19]

Yes.

Ask people what they think about the the NFL in Toronto.

Thigs that grind my gears:

"We need more NHL teams in the US south to grow the game"

Same people:

"MLB/NFL/NBA team in Canada? Pfft you don't have the fanbase"

 

[joelef]

Thigs that grind my gears:

"We need more NHL teams in the US south to grow the game"

Same people:

"MLB/NFL/NBA team in Canada? Pfft you don't have the fanbase"

I support an all those teams in canada

 

[BKIslandersFan]

Thigs that grind my gears:

"We need more NHL teams in the US south to grow the game"

Same people:

"MLB/NFL/NBA team in Canada? Pfft you don't have the fanbase"

I don't think they are the same people tbh.

 

[GindyDraws]

That's the kind of article where someone who already dislikes Bettman will nod along the whole time, but someone with a more balanced view or a favorable view of him will spend the entire article rolling their eyes. Every event is spun into the most negative possible view of it.

Well, I f***ing hate Bettman, so I agree with this article.

 

[edog37]

I don't think you are making a fair assessment here. First for all the people who criticize the Quebec rule which allowed the Canadiens to prosper in the 50 and 60s don't ever talk about Bobby Orr being signed as an underaged player, by virtue of the Bruins agreeing to stucco his parents house. Seems like a lot of teams would have liked to have drafted a player the calibre of Orr but that wasn't possible. For all the success the Canadiens had pre expansion no team has won more Stanley Cups post expansion, and it was in the days when star Quebec players were being drafted throughout the league. Fault GMs who didn't know the value of a 1st round pick in those days.

As for what Gary Bettman accomplished, it's hard to say when you don't know how much owners who hired him had pull on the league's makeup.

Certainly the Anaheim expansion, which was done without any process, was at the behest of Bruce Mc Nall, who later became famous for conspiracy and fraud. And while that process was done before Gary actually became commissioner, Gary had a working relationship with Michael Eisner, from Disney, as the NBA vice president. So I think that was part of the process, behind the scenes. Bringing Disney into the league was a big deal at the time. 3 years later, 2 more markets closer to L.A are in the league too. As a Winnipeg fan, I sure would have liked to remain in the Norris in the 80s, because that caused a lot of financial trouble in travel for our ownership, but somebody in the league thought moving a franchise from Colorado to New Jersey, giving metropolitan New York 3 out of 21 markets, was a good idea.

As commissioner he grew the game in the U.S., there is no argument anywhere. It didn't hurt his cause when New York and New Jersey won Stanley Cups in his 2nd and 3rd year. Great for the folks at ESPN, and his backyard.

The landscape of the NHL changed significantly when the league moved to have all salaries in US dollars. A weak Canadian economy made for some serious franchise difficulties, which led to two relocations. At the same time arenas were being built all across the U.S with the federal infrastructure money available. No such option was available North of the border.

I'll give him credit for helping to save the Alberta franchises. I think he knew how important they were to the league. And in both cases ownership wasn't in question.

He had some serious blunders, like the Isles being sold to John Spano.

I don't think expansion was particularly well thought out.

The division were atrocious.

How someone thought having Minnesota and Vancouver, or Dallas and Los Angeles in the same divisions was a good idea is beyond me. The South division in the East didn't have any traction either.

As a traditionalist, I really miss the integrity of the game. It was entertaining and affordable before Bettman. It didn't just operate in the sphere of the highest bidding cable company either, and regional blackouts. It wasn't about maximizing revenues, but entertainment. I preferred the white boards to the digital ads, that's for sure. The sound of the organ. Rinks with nuances. Old time hockey.

The draft lottery saved the Penguins, just like being bad enough to get Mario, across two different eras. I just recently read that in the 80s there was an offer to move the Pens to Hamilton, where Harold Ballard's son would be part owner, but that deal fell through on account of Hamilton's city council. Certainly before Bettman American franchises were more consistently on the verge of bankruptcy or relocation.

I don't particularly like the lottery, because it seems to favour certain franchise more than others...call it luck or a master plan if you want.

I think the Salary Cap saved the league and not just small market Canada, but franchises like Carolina or Nashville that couldn't compete with the Rangers, Red Wings, and whichever other owners were willing to spend their fortunes on players.

I don't have any issue with the league's growth. Arizona is the one market that has given the NHL nightmares, but after 27 years they've also built up an alumni, and some history, mostly negative. I'm sure given the choice of most players today, Phoenix would be more favourable than my home market of Winnipeg, to live in, for players.

Reffing in the NHL is probably my biggest pet peeve. It's brutal, and unintelligible. DoPs is a joke, and the NHL should be ashamed of themselves from distancing from helping players who went through the tough guy phase, which created a lot of entertainment, but also caused significant brain damage in many of its participants.

Gary has succeeded in bringing the U.S into the NHL on a significant basis. He has to respect Canada because the bulk of the league's revenues still come from there, on a comparative basis, but I don't think he is great for the game. I'd like to see a guy like Brian Burke, who has been around hockey just as long, but is a hockey guy in a true sense, represent the league. I think he'd have a better working relation with Canadian fans, having worked in Canadian markets.

He's not a New York guy trying to make New York the epicentre of hockey.

Fair enough, but my point in posting this is to respond to the ridiculous & absurd dislike for Bettman by a certain loud group of fans who generally say dumb things like "he hates Canada". Bettman was given a mandate by the BoG to grow the league in terms of footprint & revenue. In terms of that, he was an unqualified success. The league has never had the revenues it has now. He literally took it from a backwater niche sport & got it to a much better place. It will never unseat the NFL in the US, but who cares. The game is played in most regions of the US & has a footprint all over the country. There were mistakes, but every league out there has those. Same with troubled franchises. I get what you're saying about reffing, but it's always been notoriously bad. And as we saw last night in the Super Bowl, bad reffing isn't just confined to the NHL.

I understand your nostalgia as I grew up with it too. But those days are long gone across the sporting world. Every league is expensive to attend these days.

That is very true what happened after Lemieux's rookie year & Hamilton. I remember it quite well. But I also think Edward DeBartolo Sr took at look at what he had & decided to keep the team. He also owned the Pittsburgh Spirit soccer team. Even though it was modestly more successful than the Pens, the Spirit didn't have Lemieux on its roster either.

One thing I will strongly disagree with is having Brian Burke lead the league. He's a dinosaur & not a visionary. He's currently the Pens President of Hockey Operations & honestly, I have no idea what his actual job is. He's done nothing to improve the team since being hired, & word is it, the team's new owners aren't fond of him. He really didn't do anything in Toronto either. He's vastly overrated & not the type of successor to Bettman that would be good for the game.

 

[Smirnov2Chistov]

This article shows me nothing new. Just negative vitriol against Bettman that he shouldn't have.

Looking at the four commisioners as a whole through a wider lens, the NHL is pretty scandal-free when it comes to major public critisicm about certain subjects.

I don't hold any grudges over work stoppages.. Who cares. It's not Bettman himself shutting the league down. It's a novel idea that people can't grasp

 

[KevFu]

Yes.

Ask people what they think about the the NFL in Toronto.

I can't say I've ever heard a single person bad-mouth Toronto as a place the NFL doesn't belong on a basis of "deserving" a team.

I've heard vocal opposition from Buffalo Bills fans about RELOCATION to Toronto, because it was their team being talked about moving to Toronto.

Expansion to Toronto probably has some people who'd be against it... because they'd want teams in their region instead. I'm sure from 1996-2016 there were tons of people against expansion to Toronto becuase Los Angeles didn't have a team. But overall, there's probably very few people who have an NFL team in their city and would say "don't expand to Toronto because Canada doesn't deserve a team."


There IS one massive difference between NHL to the American South and NFL to Toronto, though. And that's the fact that Canada HAS a football league of it's own, and the NFL adding a team in Canada would be like "an act of war" between the two leagues. Which is most likely the real reason NFL Toronto hasn't happened.

 

[WeaponOfChoice]

There IS one massive difference between NHL to the American South and NFL to Toronto, though. And that's the fact that Canada HAS a football league of it's own, and the NFL adding a team in Canada would be like "an act of war" between the two leagues. Which is most likely the real reason NFL Toronto hasn't happened.

Yanks love to call the CFL a pro league when it suits their needs. Every other time it's " I make more money than that!"

More often they compare the CFL with the AHL. And that's how they should be treated: As a farm system for real markets. You want a team in Fresno? Fine, put an AHL team there.

 

[rojac]

I can't say I've ever heard a single person bad-mouth Toronto as a place the NFL doesn't belong on a basis of "deserving" a team.

I've heard vocal opposition from Buffalo Bills fans about RELOCATION to Toronto, because it was their team being talked about moving to Toronto.

Expansion to Toronto probably has some people who'd be against it... because they'd want teams in their region instead. I'm sure from 1996-2016 there were tons of people against expansion to Toronto becuase Los Angeles didn't have a team. But overall, there's probably very few people who have an NFL team in their city and would say "don't expand to Toronto because Canada doesn't deserve a team."


There IS one massive difference between NHL to the American South and NFL to Toronto, though. And that's the fact that Canada HAS a football league of it's own, and the NFL adding a team in Canada would be like "an act of war" between the two leagues. Which is most likely the real reason NFL Toronto hasn't happened.

There might be some in Canada who would think that way, but really the CFL, especially in Toronto, is not that big of a deal. From a quick look, it seems the highest paid CFL player makes about $550K a year while most players in the league make $60K to $100K a year. Is this really a league the NFL should worry about?

 

[joelef]

There might be some in Canada who would think that way, but really the CFL, especially in Toronto, is not that big of a deal. From a quick look, it seems the highest paid CFL player makes about $550K a year while most players in the league make $60K to $100K a year. Is this really a league the NFL should worry about?

No but it somewhat of a minor league system that they don’t have to pay for

 

[KevFu]

No but it somewhat of a minor league system that they don’t have to pay for

Right. THIS is my take on it. There's a relationship with the CFL that the NFL is quite happy with and doesn't want to alter.

That's far less significant than the money piece, obviously. But the NFL is a different animal from the other sports leagues because ALL their TV deals are National, which is why the NFL isn't as interested in expansion as the other leagues.

Expanding into Toronto means there are more teams getting shares of the TV revenue; and a Toronto team reduces the amount of money the TV networks give the NFL, because Buffalo vs Miami brings in those two markets to CBS... but Buffalo vs Toronto only brings Buffalo (Same reason the Canadian teams were rarely on NBC in the US).

Yanks love to call the CFL a pro league when it suits their needs. Every other time it's " I make more money than that!"

More often they compare the CFL with the AHL. And that's how they should be treated: As a farm system for real markets. You want a team in Fresno? Fine, put an AHL team there.

You say this like we all have some kind of anti-Canadian agenda. I assure you that doesn't exist.

The vast majority of American hockey fans love Canada and root for Canadian teams over American ones ALL the time (just up until a point where it's funny. We'll root for the Leafs to lose in the first round again, because that's hilarious. Or Vancouver to lose the finals).

When you watch the playoffs and it's not the series you're in, you're rooting for (a) upsets to help your team go further or (b) the team you hate least to win.

We hate American teams a lot more than Canadian ones. Mainly because our hate for other cities spans 3-5 sports in the US, and just hockey for the Canadian cities that aren't Toronto. I.E. - New Yorkers are rooting for the Sens over the Bruins because Yankees fans hate Boston fans. San Jose fans are rooting for Vancouver over LA because the Bay Area just hates LA.


If you think you hear CFL being called a pro-league when it suits our interest and a minor league when that serves our interest; it's not an agenda. It's pure ignorance. Outside of like 40-somethign people in Baltimore, we have zero clue what the CFL actually is.

 

[cowboy82nd]

I don't know if you understand how comical this statement is.

Bettman absolutely is the best NHL Commissioner the NHL has ever had.

He's also absolutely the worst Commissioner the NHL has ever had.

That's because the position of Commissioner was created by Gary Bettman. Before that the NHL had a President.

NHL commissioner - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not meant as a slam @Benjamin Nushmutt this is all ancient history at this point. Just thought it was funny. If you want to talk about who was the best/worst President/Commissioner... I mean Clarence Campbell might be my vote for the best. Worst? I dunno...

If you read the article that you posted, "NHL Commissioner - Wikipedia", Gary didn't create the position of Commissioner.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I think he's done a pretty good job, I think the lockouts aren't really his fault, I think both sides (players and owners) are quite stubborn and were willing to stand their ground on a lot of issues. Bettman serves at the behest of owners, he's not much of an independent power bloc on his own in CBA negotiations.

Expansion has been a wild success. The game is a lot more popular and the league is a lot more financially healthy as a whole. Places nobody would have dreamed have become thriving and successful NHL markets, basically starting from scratch.

I don't know where the perception that Bettman doesn't like Canada comes from. There are 7 Canadian NHL franchises and many of them make up some of the smallest markets. I don't know how many Canadian teams there should be, Canada has a population of 38.25 million, USA has a population of 331.9 million. There is one American NHL franchise per 13.276 million people in the USA, there is one Canadian NHL franchise per 5.464 million people in Canada.

I agree hockey is more popular in Canada so the ratio makes sense, but Canadian franchises are already disproportionately represented in the NHL. It's just math.

 

[aqib]

1) I can't say I've ever heard a single person bad-mouth Toronto as a place the NFL doesn't belong on a basis of "deserving" a team.

2) I've heard vocal opposition from Buffalo Bills fans about RELOCATION to Toronto, because it was their team being talked about moving to Toronto.

Expansion to Toronto probably has some people who'd be against it... because they'd want teams in their region instead. I'm sure from 1996-2016 there were tons of people against expansion to Toronto becuase Los Angeles didn't have a team. But overall, there's probably very few people who have an NFL team in their city and would say "don't expand to Toronto because Canada doesn't deserve a team."


3) There IS one massive difference between NHL to the American South and NFL to Toronto, though. And that's the fact that Canada HAS a football league of it's own, and the NFL adding a team in Canada would be like "an act of war" between the two leagues. Which is most likely the real reason NFL Toronto hasn't happened.

1) "I haven't heard" isn't a basis for an argument. You and I had a similar exchange about the Jays winning the World Series. You said that you never heard anti-Canada sentiment, I heard it first hand. Just because YOU haven't heard something doesn't mean it hasn't been said.

2) Even Toronto football fans were largely against the Bills moving here. I say largely because I didn't talk to everyone. The people who are already Bills fans would rather drive to Buffalo and pay half what they would pay for a Toronto team (evidenced by how badly the Bills in Toronto series did) and no one wants to hurt Buffalo. We all shop there.

3) Whatever "war" existed between the leagues evaporated years ago when the NFL bailed out the CFL. Saying that Canada has its own league, would be like saying the American South has the SPHL, ECHL, and AHL as options. Also you're not talking about putting the NFL in cities that actually care about the CFL. You're talking about Toronto where the CFL isn't relevant. The Argos were last in the league in attendance the year they won the Grey Cup. They literally could not sell out the conference title game. If anything having an NFL team here might help the Argos if it means people get excited about going to football games and they may view the Argos as a cheaper option because the NFL tickets will probably be insane.

The ACTUAL most likely reason that the NFL hasn't happened is that Toronto won't pay for a stadium. Whoever wants a team here will have to pay for it themselves.

 

[KevFu]

1) "I haven't heard" isn't a basis for an argument. You and I had a similar exchange about the Jays winning the World Series. You said that you never heard anti-Canada sentiment, I heard it first hand. Just because YOU haven't heard something doesn't mean it hasn't been said.

That's fair, but I'd remind you that you played Atlanta, with an ethnocentric fan base that roots for a team with a racist name and does a racist chant every time they get runners in scoring position; and Philadelphia, who are among the best people in the world at being jerks. So I'm sure their fan bases said a ton of stuff.

But the vast majority of every other baseball fan never really gave a damn, especially the fans who are also hockey fans.

2) Even Toronto football fans were largely against the Bills moving here. I say largely because I didn't talk to everyone. The people who are already Bills fans would rather drive to Buffalo and pay half what they would pay for a Toronto team (evidenced by how badly the Bills in Toronto series did) and no one wants to hurt Buffalo. We all shop there.

The ACTUAL most likely reason that the NFL hasn't happened is that Toronto won't pay for a stadium. Whoever wants a team here will have to pay for it themselves.

Oh, 100% it's all money. The NFL has the least reason to expand, the most leverage to get taxpayer stadiums for free, and Canada has historically not given billion dollar stadium handouts to billionaires like the US cities have.

But that's also not nationalism, it's capitalism.

3) Whatever "war" existed between the leagues evaporated years ago when the NFL bailed out the CFL. Saying that Canada has its own league, would be like saying the American South has the SPHL, ECHL, and AHL as options. Also you're not talking about putting the NFL in cities that actually care about the CFL. You're talking about Toronto where the CFL isn't relevant. The Argos were last in the league in attendance the year they won the Grey Cup. They literally could not sell out the conference title game. If anything having an NFL team here might help the Argos if it means people get excited about going to football games and they may view the Argos as a cheaper option because the NFL tickets will probably be insane.

I'm totally ignorant of the CFL, other than knowing Baltimore won the Grey Cup one year. I honestly don't care that much about the NFL lately.

 

[Reaser]

I don't know where the perception that Bettman doesn't like Canada comes from. There are 7 Canadian NHL franchises and many of them make up some of the smallest markets.

It's just math.

Not commentary on why or how it happened. Just the math part.

Before Bettman: 8 of 24 (upcoming 26) teams were Canadian.
Now: 7 of 32 (would be 6 of 32 without the Atlanta situation)

So essentially 1/3rd of the NHL was Canadian teams and relatitvely rapidly after Bettman that percentage dropped and kept dropping, and now less than 25% of the league is made-up of Canadian teams.

Again, not about who, why, how that happened, just an answer to "I don't know where the perception that Bettman doesn't like Canada comes from."

The other obvious thing is that outside of '93, no Canadian team has won the Stanley Cup during his tenure. Even '93, he wasn't hired until two months into the season and his new job didn't really start for another two months after that. So he wasn't around the entire 1992/93 season. So in other words, since his first FULL season as Commissioner no Canadian team has won the Cup.

So it's not too hard to see where that perception comes from. Whether it's reasonable or not is another discussion. I'm not Canadian, but again, not hard to see where that perception would come from.

 

[KevFu]

Not commentary on why or how it happened. Just the math part.

Before Bettman: 8 of 24 (upcoming 26) teams were Canadian.
Now: 7 of 32 (would be 6 of 32 without the Atlanta situation)

So essentially 1/3rd of the NHL was Canadian teams and relatitvely rapidly after Bettman that percentage dropped and kept dropping, and now less than 25% of the league is made-up of Canadian teams.

Again, not about who, why, how that happened, just an answer to "I don't know where the perception that Bettman doesn't like Canada comes from."

The other obvious thing is that outside of '93, no Canadian team has won the Stanley Cup during his tenure. Even '93, he wasn't hired until two months into the season and his new job didn't really start for another two months after that. So he wasn't around the entire 1992/93 season. So in other words, since his first FULL season as Commissioner no Canadian team has won the Cup.

So it's not too hard to see where that perception comes from. Whether it's reasonable or not is another discussion. I'm not Canadian, but again, not hard to see where that perception would come from.

Right but the NHL had already announced intentions to expand to 30 teams by 2000, and hired Bettman knowing that was the plan.

Considering the territorial rights issue preventing Hamilton or the Toronto GMA getting a second team; the maximum possible number of teams Canada could have in the NHL of 30 teams that the BOG announced prior to hiring Bettman, would be 8.

Which would be still be 8 of the 32 teams now. So the max is 25% and and we're at 22%.

It's one team. Quebec City.

(And I've long expected Bettman's ideal "legacy shopping" scenario would be to broker an MLSE deal for a second Southern Ontario team, bring Quebec back into the league with Houston and either Portland or San Diego; then retire).

I find the whole "without the Atlanta situation" thing is selective. Giving Bettman all the blame for Marcel Aubut selling to a group from Denver, and Barry Shankarow selling to two Phoenix investors, while NOT giving Bettman "credit" for ASG selling to Winnipeg's True North is inconsistent.

Let's not forget that before ASG put the Thrashers up when people talked about the Coyotes moving, his response was "Well if they go anywhere, it should be Winnipeg." And when there was a team that actually did have to move, they went to Winnipeg.

 

[varsaku]

Right but the NHL had already announced intentions to expand to 30 teams by 2000, and hired Bettman knowing that was the plan.

Considering the territorial rights issue preventing Hamilton or the Toronto GMA getting a second team; the maximum possible number of teams Canada could have in the NHL of 30 teams that the BOG announced prior to hiring Bettman, would be 8.

Which would be still be 8 of the 32 teams now. So the max is 25% and and we're at 22%.

It's one team. Quebec City.

(And I've long expected Bettman's ideal "legacy shopping" scenario would be to broker an MLSE deal for a second Southern Ontario team, bring Quebec back into the league with Houston and either Portland or San Diego; then retire).

I find the whole "without the Atlanta situation" thing is selective. Giving Bettman all the blame for Marcel Aubut selling to a group from Denver, and Barry Shankarow selling to two Phoenix investors, while NOT giving Bettman "credit" for ASG selling to Winnipeg's True North is inconsistent.

Let's not forget that before ASG put the Thrashers up when people talked about the Coyotes moving, his response was "Well if they go anywhere, it should be Winnipeg." And when there was a team that actually did have to move, they went to Winnipeg.

Houston would be an ideal spot for an NHL team but long term I see it turning out like Atlanta if they don't find quick success. Houston is a very fickle sports market, unless you are the Texans or winning, you end up being an afterthought.

Texans (NFL): Always the talk of the town whether they are good or bad. Games always sells out.

Astros (MLB): No one cared about the Astros until they got good. They sat at the bottom in terms of attendance for years. Now everyone is an Astros fan by jumping on the bandwagon.

Rockets (NBA): Despite being really good during the Harden years, games never sold out and would be available on the cheap hours before the game. Part of it was them being overshadowed by the Astros actually being able to win a title while they failed every year. Now that they are back to being bad, no one cares about them.

Dynamo (MLS): Was able to draw great crowds at the start when they found immediate success, but lost a lot of them once they started doing bad around 2014. Now they struggle to bring back many of those fans.

 

[Reaser]

Right but the NHL had already announced intentions to expand to 30 teams by 2000, and hired Bettman knowing that was the plan.

Considering the territorial rights issue preventing Hamilton or the Toronto GMA getting a second team; the maximum possible number of teams Canada could have in the NHL of 30 teams that the BOG announced prior to hiring Bettman, would be 8.

Which would be still be 8 of the 32 teams now. So the max is 25% and and we're at 22%.

It's one team. Quebec City.

(And I've long expected Bettman's ideal "legacy shopping" scenario would be to broker an MLSE deal for a second Southern Ontario team, bring Quebec back into the league with Houston and either Portland or San Diego; then retire).

I find the whole "without the Atlanta situation" thing is selective. Giving Bettman all the blame for Marcel Aubut selling to a group from Denver, and Barry Shankarow selling to two Phoenix investors, while NOT giving Bettman "credit" for ASG selling to Winnipeg's True North is inconsistent.

Let's not forget that before ASG put the Thrashers up when people talked about the Coyotes moving, his response was "Well if they go anywhere, it should be Winnipeg." And when there was a team that actually did have to move, they went to Winnipeg.

Their announced intentions were to expand to 28 teams.

It's not one team. City.

I specifically said multiple times my post wasn't commentary on why/how, just the math on less total teams and less percentage of teams with the cherry on top of the Cup drought. As in, answering why they would have that perception. Pretty straightforward.

 

[cowboy82nd]

Not commentary on why or how it happened. Just the math part.

Before Bettman: 8 of 24 (upcoming 26) teams were Canadian.
Now: 7 of 32 (would be 6 of 32 without the Atlanta situation)

So essentially 1/3rd of the NHL was Canadian teams and relatitvely rapidly after Bettman that percentage dropped and kept dropping, and now less than 25% of the league is made-up of Canadian teams.

Again, not about who, why, how that happened, just an answer to "I don't know where the perception that Bettman doesn't like Canada comes from."

The other obvious thing is that outside of '93, no Canadian team has won the Stanley Cup during his tenure. Even '93, he wasn't hired until two months into the season and his new job didn't really start for another two months after that. So he wasn't around the entire 1992/93 season. So in other words, since his first FULL season as Commissioner no Canadian team has won the Cup.

So it's not too hard to see where that perception comes from. Whether it's reasonable or not is another discussion. I'm not Canadian, but again, not hard to see where that perception would come from.

So, it’s Bettman’s fault that a Canadian team hasn’t won the since 93? I didn’t know that Bettman picked the cup winners every year.

 

[Reaser]

So, it’s Bettman’s fault that a Canadian team hasn’t won the since 93? I didn’t know that Bettman picked the cup winners every year.

Holy jumpin. For these exact type of responses I specifically said multiple times my post wasn't commentary on the who/why/how --e.g. I didn't blame Bettman in my post, I was answering a question about why that would be the perception-- just listed the math on less total teams and less percentage of teams with the cherry on top of the Cup drought. As in, answering why they would have that perception. Pretty straightforward.

 

[cowboy82nd]

Holy jumpin. For these exact type of responses I specifically said multiple times my post wasn't commentary on the who/why/how --e.g. I didn't blame Bettman in my post, I was answering a question about why that would be the perception-- just listed the math on less total teams and less percentage of teams with the cherry on top of the Cup drought. As in, answering why they would have that perception. Pretty straightforward.

I read your post and I get it, but people blaming Bettman for Canada not winning a cup is stupid. Just goes to show how out of touch some people are.

 

[Voight]

Yanks love to call the CFL a pro league when it suits their needs. Every other time it's " I make more money than that!"

More often they compare the CFL with the AHL. And that's how they should be treated: As a farm system for real markets. You want a team in Fresno? Fine, put an AHL team there.

CFL is basically the AHL talent wise.

 

[KevFu]

Their announced intentions were to expand to 28 teams.

It's not one team. City.

I specifically said multiple times my post wasn't commentary on why/how, just the math on less total teams and less percentage of teams with the cherry on top of the Cup drought. As in, answering why they would have that perception. Pretty straightforward.

I understand completely. You said facts to explain the perception. Those facts were accurate.

But the context for a couple of those facts makes it an irrational conclusion (and sure, people are entitled to have irrational feelings). My concern is the rationality based on more facts/math.

The NHL had decided to expand into the untapped territory where tens of millions potential customers did not have teams. That process began before Bettman, and was going to happen regardless of the commissioner, and regardless of anything.

There was no way the league could get bigger, AND maintain the ratio of Canadian to American cities, because the number of untapped American major metro areas were quite larger than the number of untapped Canadian ones.

Dallas, Denver, Atlanta, Miami, Phoenix, Seattle, Tampa, Vegas, Columbus, Nashville and Raleigh... combined have more humans currently living in their metro areas (43,049,570) than the population of Canada.

I completely understand the PERCEPTION that the league moved away from Canada and to the American Sun Belt. But that was decided by the NHL as a whole before Bettman, because that's capitalism, not nationalism. And that's what makes it irrational.

Like I said, totally valid to have irrational feelings -- my college sports conference affiliation feelings are no different. I don't want conferences being TV cartels that make college sports unfair and break up historical rivalries. Regional peer institutions should be in the same conference together -- but it's irrational to expect that completely unchecked Darwinian Capitalism is going to result in what I prefer.

CFL is basically the AHL talent wise.

I think a better comparison is "CFL is to NFL as MLS is to English Premier League."