Relocation, Expansion, Realignment

[roast]

:lol :lol :lol :lol

The Company that runs the Arrowhead Pond is buying the Ducks to keep them in Anaheim. They would lose millions if there is no Pro Team at the Pond.

The Ducks aren't going anywhere.

Why don't you pick on a team that doesn't have a nice arena?...Pittsburgh...

Have you ever been to the Civic Arena? Its actually a great place for watching hockey, the only drawback being the dome ceiling as it can not support new musical acts and a severe lack of new luxury boxes.

 

[mr gib]

I disagree strongly. No more 4th line muckers = less clutching and grabbing and more ice time for star players. I say get rid of the fourth line of forwards.

hey crusty boy we agree on something - reduce roster size for sure - and less games

 

[nyr7andcounting]

Of course, with fewer teams there would be less of a difference between the best and worst players in the league. But, I don't think there would be that much of a difference that you would notice.

In the opinion of someone who played in the league back when there were fewer teams, and that sees the talent that is available now, his opinion is that there is already a much higher talent level in the league, top to bottom, and that is in part responcible for the problems we see today.

I'll take his opinion over yours. Nothing personnal...

But his opinion does not relate to contraction or over-expansion, which has lead to decreased talent and excitement league wide. His opinion is talking simply about the fact that athletes and equiptment today are better than they were 20 years ago, which is true for any sport worldwide. I agree. Problem is this opinion is geared towards arguing for the increase of the size of the rink, or even playing 4 on 4 hockey the whole game. He's talking about how increase in overall talent is "clogging" up the ice.

I am talking simple numbers. For x amount of minutes every game there are players on the ice that have little to no talent and wouldn't be near the league if it weren't for expansion. This leads to bad play and lack of talent on the ice for y amount of minutes per game. If you had a few less teams, x minutes would be filled by more talented players who would provide more talent on the ice for those minutes...thus more entertainment, more flow and possible more scoring.

The fact that the talent level has risen is obvious, and that's why I do agree with those who say the ice needs to be bigger. Players are too big and too fast today to be playing in such a small area. But, that has nothing to do with the fact that some of the players in the league don't have enough talent to score goals or create entertainment, even if they are given the chance to do so on a bigger ice surface. There is a certain amount of NHL players at which adding more only decreases the overall level of entertainment, and I believe that number was met a couple of teams ago.

 

[McDonald19]

No offense to those teams fans, but teams that would be contracted before FLA would be ANA, CAR, PIT, and any other bottom feeder that can't draw crowds or can't financially support itself. I even think the NJD should/could relocate as it's ridiculous if you can't sellout consistently if you in the cup. If FLA won the cup, I guarantee you for the first half of the next season as well as the playoff run during that year, FLA would sellout every game, no matter how bad they are the next season.

Anaheim can sell out games the same as Florida. It just takes winning.

Pittsburgh is the only team that should consider relocating, and that is only if they can't get a new arena in the next 5 years.

 

[McDonald19]

Have you ever been to the Civic Arena? Its actually a great place for watching hockey, the only drawback being the dome ceiling as it can not support new musical acts and a severe lack of new luxury boxes.

Never been there, have nothing against it...I'm just going by what Mario Lemieux has said about the team desperately needing a new arena.

 

[Brewleaguer]

Want a way to fix the game on ice. Get the teams into the right markets. have fair division competition and alignment and things will grow for the sport.

Relocation
- Anaheim moves to Las Vegas
- Florida moves to Houston

Expansion
- Winnipeg
- Quebec

Realignment

Toronto - Ottawa - Montreal - Quebec
Boston - Buffalo - Pittsburgh - Columbus
Philadelphia - New Jersey - NY Islanders - NY Rangers
Tampa Bay - Atlanta - Carolina - Washington

Detroit - St. Louis - Chicago - Nashville
Colorado - Dallas - Houston - Minnesota
Los Angeles - San Jose - Las Vegas - Phoenix
Vancouver - Calgary - Edmonton - Winnipeg

To do such an endeavor, NHL will have to reduce the team roster size to 20 and game roster to 16 skaters and 2 goalies. This will help with the talent pool in the league and having only 3 full forward lines will force coaches to demand uptempo hockey since they can't mix and match lines.

and oh yeah, fix the financial system and rules.

Everything looks good except:

"Relocation
- Anaheim moves to Las Vegas
- Florida moves to Houston

Expansion
- Winnipeg
- Quebec"

Send Anaheim to Winnipeg
Send Florida to Quebec
Send Atlanta to.....Windsor??? lol
Send Carolina back to Hartford

Put Detroit in the east and Winnipeg in the west.

 

[djhn579]

But his opinion does not relate to contraction or over-expansion, which has lead to decreased talent and excitement league wide. His opinion is talking simply about the fact that athletes and equiptment today are better than they were 20 years ago, which is true for any sport worldwide. I agree. Problem is this opinion is geared towards arguing for the increase of the size of the rink, or even playing 4 on 4 hockey the whole game. He's talking about how increase in overall talent is "clogging" up the ice.

I am talking simple numbers. For x amount of minutes every game there are players on the ice that have little to no talent and wouldn't be near the league if it weren't for expansion. This leads to bad play and lack of talent on the ice for y amount of minutes per game. If you had a few less teams, x minutes would be filled by more talented players who would provide more talent on the ice for those minutes...thus more entertainment, more flow and possible more scoring.

The fact that the talent level has risen is obvious, and that's why I do agree with those who say the ice needs to be bigger. Players are too big and too fast today to be playing in such a small area. But, that has nothing to do with the fact that some of the players in the league don't have enough talent to score goals or create entertainment, even if they are given the chance to do so on a bigger ice surface. There is a certain amount of NHL players at which adding more only decreases the overall level of entertainment, and I believe that number was met a couple of teams ago.

I'm with Ruff. From his comments, I get that there were very good atheletes then, and there were people that could barely skate. He says "It has caused a bottleneck because there are a lot of darn good skaters." That implies that the game was more entertaining then because you had mis-matches in the amount of talent each player had, I don't feel you have as much of a mis-match today.

And as I tried to point out, those players you say get so few minutes and would/should not be in the league today have a negligible effect on the game since they are on the ice for little of the game. The game is clogged up because everyone can skate, and everyone is talented.


I just don't buy that the talent is watered down, and you are saying the average talent is higher today in one paragraph, and that it has decreased in another? Which is it?



Why do you really want contraction?

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

you mean places like edmonton and calgary? places were hockey is a tradition and where they can't afford to compete in the league and when they don't make the playoffs they can't get into the top 20 in the league in attendance? you mean places like boston that over the last three seasons is behind tampa and washington of the southeast division and not in the top 20 in attendance. you mean traditional hockey markets like that?

are you suggesting that the franchise in colorado is not better off there than in quebec city? you will find that pheonix is in much better shape in pheonix than they were in winnipeg with a brand new building. by the way...you mention dallas as the only southern market that is non-traditional and has panned out. its only because like most sports markets, the team that wins, draws. they have won the cup and been a cup contender every year since they arrived in dallas. they have missed the playoffs just once. swap dallas and pheonix win-loss records and pheonix is the successful franchise. the team in dallas was a competitive team when it moved. the pheonix team was not when it left winnipeg. hartford never came close to winning anything. atlanta, florida and tampa are brand new teams.
give them a chance to win some and compete some and you will find that they are good hockey markets as well. certainly tampa showed the last two seasons with a good team that they can make money and fill the building. you really want to dump that franchise in order to move another team back into another small canadian market like Quebec City?

This gets close to something I posted on another thread...
Comparing Denver and Atlanta - both had and lost teams in the 70s. Both got teams in the last 10-12 years. Denver is held up as an ideal market, never considered for relocation/contraction, even mainstream media place it up there with Detroit/Philly. Atlanta is considered a struggling market. Southern city, non-traditional, etc. Yet, if the Nords had moved to ATL, won the Cup in their first year and been at or near the top of the league ever since, and the league expanded to COLO and the team had a few good young players but never made the playoffs, who's to say the roles wouldn't have been reversed?

That said I'm all for leaving teams where they are (not hating on the Avs ) - no contraction, what have you. Some posters are correct that movement will happen, but it's all business, not about "let's get hockey back where it belongs."

 

[Roughneck]

Move or contract Nashville.

Disband Tampa Bay.

I don't need to backup my statements either!

(that's for you nmk and Sotnos )

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

Panthers to Houston. Hurricanes to Seattle.

 

[mr gib]

"----I just don't buy that the talent is watered down, and you are saying the average talent is higher today in one paragraph, and that it has decreased in another? Which is it?---"


defensive systems and the trap - neutral zone obstruction not called -

 

[gobolt7]

That I can see.

Count me in as one of the people on here who could care less if there was a Tampa, Carolina, Phoenix, Atlanta et al. These are not traditional hockey markets and there is only ONE place where a non-traditional market has panned out for the benefit of the league: Dallas.

Everywhere else in the south can up and vaporize for all I care. Frankly, My NHL does not include the Southeast Division and I dont care who doesnt like it. Hockey needs to return to traditional markets: Winnipeg, Quebec, Hartford... shoot, why not Saskatchewan and Milwalkee even. Places where people, yknow, PLAY HOCKEY.

Gee, Tampa really let the league down with their cup run. I bet the league really wishes that move could have panned out a little bit better. As a matter of fact, the league really be disgusted with the fact that 4 of the 5 teams in the southeast division have represented the east in the finals the past 9 years. Wow, those non-traditional markets in the southeast really let the league down, didn't they?

 

[rwilson99]

I think that its too easy to fall for that talent watered down theory. A lot of people forget that the Capitals got Peter Bondra because they were the only team to hear about him and scout him. That would never happen now.
Let me also add that players take much better care of themselves and a good player often has a career that is several years longer than what they were 15 years ago. .

None of the talent watered down theorists have told me where Marty St. Louis would catch on in a 21-team league either.

Cut from Calgary, a team that hadn't made the playoffs in 3 years, St. Louis caught on with what was considered at the time to be the worst run franchise in all of pro sports as a 4th line role player. He would have had no chance in the old NHL,.

Similarly Gretzky would have never caught on in a 16-team, pre-WHA merger league either.

Expansion has been very good to the league.

 

[mr gib]

None of the talent watered down theorists have told me where Marty St. Louis would catch on in a 21-team league either.

Cut from Calgary, a team that hadn't made the playoffs in 3 years, St. Louis caught on with what was considered at the time to be the worst run franchise in all of pro sports as a 4th line role player. He would have had no chance in the old NHL,.

Similarly Gretzky would have never caught on in a 16-team, pre-WHA merger league either.

Expansion has been very good to the league.

no one's going anywhere - the deal will happen next week - they'll be an intense 30 or so games - they'll call the freaking rool book and all will be well -

 

[Biggest Canuck Fan]

If I could, I would contract by 4 teams.

Atlanta, Carolina, Anahiem and Florida.

No offense to any of those markets fans or organizations, but it is a waste IMO to have teams where they are just not wanted.

Atlanta: Will never support a team unless they are winning, and look at the Braves? They win all the time and still don't sell out with lower than $10 ticketsor even the playoffs?!?!?. So what hope is there for an NHL francise unless it wins consistently?

Carolina: Totally the owners fault. Went from bad to worse!! First 3 seasons I think the average attendace was 7,000, but there were nights when only 3,000 showed up. And Karamnos is saying Hartford was worse? Why not wait until the new arena was built?!?! Oh tis owner should be shot seriously.

Anahiem: Team built on the success of a movie... need I say more?

Florida: Question, how many Latin Americans play hockey in the NHL? How many are enrolled in Hockey in the Miami area? I don't have the numbers, but let's put it this way... NFL, Football and Cuban politics are more poular sports than Hockey.

Get rid of these teams, disperse the talent and lets move on with a healthy 26 team league.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

None of the talent watered down theorists have told me where Marty St. Louis would catch on in a 21-team league either.

Cut from Calgary, a team that hadn't made the playoffs in 3 years, St. Louis caught on with what was considered at the time to be the worst run franchise in all of pro sports as a 4th line role player. He would have had no chance in the old NHL,.

Similarly Gretzky would have never caught on in a 16-team, pre-WHA merger league either.

Expansion has been very good to the league.

1st off, it was 7 years between playoff appearances for Calgary...

A talent like St. Louis doesn't go unnoticed so even if Tampa hadn't taken a chance on him, someone else would've. Expansion had nothing to do with that.

The only thing expansion has done is water down the league where teams have less stars...

The only reason Gretzky went to the WHA is because he could play professional hockey at 17...even if the Oilers didn't merge into the NHL, he would've been drafted eventually. Thankfully for us, it didn't happen!

 

[Hawker14]

Similarly Gretzky would have never caught on in a 16-team, pre-WHA merger league either.

wow, i wonder how bobby orr caught on.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

If I could, I would contract by 4 teams.

Atlanta, Carolina, Anahiem and Florida.

No offense to any of those markets fans or organizations, but it is a waste IMO to have teams where they are just not wanted.

Atlanta: Will never support a team unless they are winning, and look at the Braves? They win all the time and still don't sell out with lower than $10 ticketsor even the playoffs?!?!?. So what hope is there for an NHL francise unless it wins consistently?

Carolina: Totally the owners fault. Went from bad to worse!! First 3 seasons I think the average attendace was 7,000, but there were nights when only 3,000 showed up. And Karamnos is saying Hartford was worse? Why not wait until the new arena was built?!?! Oh tis owner should be shot seriously.

Anahiem: Team built on the success of a movie... need I say more?

Florida: Question, how many Latin Americans play hockey in the NHL? How many are enrolled in Hockey in the Miami area? I don't have the numbers, but let's put it this way... NFL, Football and Cuban politics are more poular sports than Hockey.

Get rid of these teams, disperse the talent and lets move on with a healthy 26 team league.

forgot about Nashville and Pittsburgh

anyways, Atlanta had their chance with the Flames...failed then and now

 

[dw2927]

My two cents:

Contract Nashville, Carolina, Anaheim and Florida...

Tampa remains to hold onto the Florida market..
Atlanta remains as the only team in the South (besides Florida and all of those displaced northerners)

LA remains as the NHL presence in southern california

 

[Muleskinner]

no13matssundin wrote.......

******These are not traditional hockey markets and there is only ONE place where a non-traditional market has panned out for the benefit of the league: Dallas.*******

ONE place??? How about Columbus? They have panned out quiet well. They sell out almost every game even though they have had some major growing pains as a new franchise starting from scratch. They have drafted very well and their young talent will soon emerge. The fans, not just in Columbus but in the state of Ohio have embraced this team. This is one place that Bettman got right in expansion.

 

[Flukeshot]

I think that if Las Vegas got an NHL team all betting in LV for that league would be off. This is what I have heard before at least.

The NHL is probably the only major league that LV would be willing to sacrifice betting on though.

 

[Biggest Canuck Fan]

I think that if Las Vegas got an NHL team all betting in LV for that league would be off. This is what I have heard before at least.

The NHL is probably the only major league that LV would be willing to sacrifice betting on though.

There is no way that town would stop betting.

If anything the NHL should embrace betting and make a a revenue stream.

 

[Hoek]

Who the hell bets on hockey? Too many games and too much randomness within each game to make it worth it. Unless you bet on series or something.

 

[Flukeshot]

I think it is for legal reasons, of course. Fear of game fixing etc. Meh, like I said I'm not sure, but has Las Vegas ever had a pro team before? It is one of the larger markets in the US and one of the fastest growing cities.

 

[Hoek]

Las Vegas Thunder of the IHL.

But yeah it would be for that. Just wondering why anyone would bet on hockey though. I see the lines in the paper all the time, but it just doesn't make as much sense as football betting to me. With so many games to choose from it just seems absurd to put money on any single one in an 82 game season, especially when you're talking about margins of 1 or 2 goals. There's a lot more riding on the NFL games each week that just adds to the thrill of putting money on it.

But what do I know. I sure as hell don't gamble, and it's not the most logical enterprise in the world.