Long Term Benefit of NHL and Non-Traditional Markets

Thought that this article about what is happening in St. Louis as becoming a place where prospects are being developed is a good illustration. Increased interest in hockey caused by having an NHL team there and NHL players staying in the town to help support it.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

 

It's a good point. New Jersey is starting to really develop some blue chippers, and they've had a team for 25 years.

 

The teams in cali and texas must have had some effects. I heard about two "cant miss" college hockey prospects from texas highschools, and then ofcourse there is Robbie Earl.

 

This is from last year, INCH didn't do this census this year for some reason. But you can see college player are coming out of "nontraditional" areas.

 

No the game is failing in the US!!! Contract or relocate all the teams to Canada becuase it will never catch on.

 

Over/Under on how many people are going to take your comment seriously and act upon it (in agreement)?

 

It's hillarious how the word nontraditional gets tossed out to describe markets. The Blues have been there since 1967, isn't 40 years enough to qualify for tradition? Not to mention the Hawks and whatever minor league and college hockey has gone on there.

Same thing happens to Colorado alot and the fact remains College hockey's been a force around here since the 40's.

 

In 1967 the Blues were not a traditional market unless I am missing something.

 

Even though the Blues have been around for awhile, Missouri isn't exactly a traditional hockey environment. I think that's the point.

 

Why not? it snows in St Louis... I thought that is what qualifies a market as a traditional hockey market.

 

Namely Canadian.

 

I don't know if this is an attempt to goad someone who thinks that Canada is the only traditional market into a pointless argument but that isn't me, so tough luck if that is what you are trying to do.

The article points to an extraordinary growth in hockey programs so they feel that it is different and something that hasn't happened before..

 

So at some point Toronto wasn't either.

How many miles have to go on the odometer before you hit the traditional threshold?

It's just a strange semantic convention of this sport and i studies nationalism and national identity alot, so this kind of thing fascinates me.

 

No, St. Louis just hasn't been a place like New England, Minnesota, Michigan, upstate New York and Great Lakes areas where hockey players have traditionally come out of. It has nothing to do with Canada. Look at Los Angeles. It's been in the NHL just as long. Would you consider that market to be a 'traditional' hockey community?

 

It's where the Zamboni was invented.

 

Toronto has been a hockey community for longer than the NHL has existed. It's not semantics, it's cultural evidence of a place that produces hockey players.

The whole argument here is that NHL teams are generating more grass roots interest.

 

That's the most irrelevant argument I've ever heard.

 

How so?

It's an intergral part of the game as well as one of the game's sybols and tradition.

 

Since his last one.

The Zamboni was invented in California, I think this guy just gets off on wasting people's time.

 

Sure, you're totally right. The invention of some random piece of machinery involved the entire St. Louis community which makes St. Louis a hockey hotbed. All the evidence we need in this is the fact that there have been maybe three NHLers to ever come out of St. Louis, or be born in St. Louis. The real argument is, what's the bigger hockey factory, Montreal or St. Louis?

 

A perfect example of this is the Bay Area. Youth hockey probably is the 2nd most played sport in the area behind Little League baseball.

 

Well actualy it was invented in LA. And it's not as if we're talking about a new release valve for the refridgeration under the ice, this is the one of the most identifable symbols of the game and by any measure a great contrabution to the game. it didn't come out of Halifax, Moose Jaw or Perry Sound.

The label traditional seems liacking even the most informal boundries. As per the article Chicago hasn't been a huge producer of hockey players, yet I'm sure they'd come down on the "traditional" classification. Is it just because they've had their team so long? How long do you have to have an NHL team before you qualify as traditional? How many players do you have to produce? Does it have to snow there? And if that's the case it's more climactic than tradition anyway.

 

Precisely. St Louis is close to chicago geographically, so yeah, I'd consider it a hockey market. The NHL considers it a hockey market, and more importantly bernie federko, John davidson, brett hull, and handful of alumni that live in St louis consider it a great hockey market. I'll take their word on St Louis over anyone on this message board.

 

I don't see where anyone did.

 

Of course it's a hockey market. The whole point is that the arrival of the Blues has helped build a strong hockey community in St. Louis, which was traditionally not a hockey hotbed 40 years ago, evidenced by the lack of NHL products originating from there. Today, St. Louis is still not a hockey factory the way Massachussetts, Michigan or Minnesota are, but the growth of the game in St. Louis is correlated with the existence of the St. Louis Blues.