What will happen with Utica ?

go comets

Registered User
Jul 10, 2013
3,532
1,471
For the last time people, the Rangers are NOT moving their AHL affiliate anytime soon. They signed a deal with XL Center management to keep the Wolf Pack in Hartford at least through the 2017-18 season.

http://www.hartfordwolfpack.com/news/detail/rangers-spectra-by-comcast-spectacor-extend-wolf-pack-agreement-1

Not for nothing, but that is a one year extension... Dosent exactly say they are committed long term to Hartford.....

I'm sure Nighsquad will be all over it shortly......
 

Nightsquad

Registered User
Jan 25, 2014
834
100
It took longer than I expected for Nightsquad to repeat for the 500th time that the Rangers should relocate their AHL team to Albany. Seriously dude do you ever post about anything else?

Dude, of course I do. I have said before I think Utica would be a great spot for the Rangers. I have nothing but admiration for the fans of Utica. Esche with the help of DuRoss delivered for the people of Central NY's Mohawk Valley, more importantly for the City of Utica. Back in the day attended some games during the Utica Blizzard and Prowlers years when I was sent into nearby Rome. Games were fun, but the fans now are filling the old Auditorium, back then the place was lucky enough to be half filled. I like many figured the AHL was done. Other markets made come backs, Albany needs a chance to as well but only if its a team that wants to operate the right way, and the area is primarily a Ranger fan market. Utica is a VERY good market for its size, they should be proud... :thumbu:
 

GrGriffins

Registered User
Jan 30, 2017
1,260
607
Grand Rapids, MI
For the last time people, the Rangers are NOT moving their AHL affiliate anytime soon. They signed a deal with XL Center management to keep the Wolf Pack in Hartford at least through the 2017-18 season.

If the Rangers are so excited about having their AHL affiliate in Hartford, they why sign a 1 year deal for the past few seasons, instead of signing a multi-year agreement?

Rangers renewed with Hartford until 2017-18 season (next season). Vancouver agreement with Utica runs out after the 2017-18 season. Coincidence? What will happen in 2018-19 season?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

UticaHockey

Registered User
Feb 27, 2013
3,418
2,303
Utica, NY
If the Rangers are so excited about having their AHL affiliate in Hartford, they why sign a 1 year deal for the past few seasons, instead of signing a multi-year agreement?

Rangers renewed with Hartford until 2017-18 season (next season). Vancouver agreement with Utica runs out after the 2017-18 season. Coincidence? What will happen in 2018-19 season?

Vancouver's agreement in Utica runs out after 2018-19. It was a six year deal and next season is year five. Yes I know deals can be broken early but it was a six year agreement.
 

go comets

Registered User
Jul 10, 2013
3,532
1,471
Vvancouver's agreement in Utica runs out after 2018-19. It was a six year deal and next season is year five. Yes I know deals can be broken early but it was a six year agreement.

Correct, but I believe the first 5 years were gauranteed. There also may be a stipulation that another AHL team can finish the contract.
 

Biggie1083

Registered User
May 15, 2017
2
0
If the Rangers are so excited about having their AHL affiliate in Hartford, they why sign a 1 year deal for the past few seasons, instead of signing a multi-year agreement?

Rangers renewed with Hartford until 2017-18 season (next season). Vancouver agreement with Utica runs out after the 2017-18 season. Coincidence? What will happen in 2018-19 season?

They didn't sign just a one year deal. This was part of the 5 year deal they signed back in 2013. This contract consisted of three guaranteed years, and two one-year options. So, they did sign a multi-year deal. There is also talk that they started working on a new deal to stay in Hartford as soon as they sign the option to stay for this coming season.
 

210

Registered User
Mar 5, 2003
12,393
961
Worcester, MA
210sportsblog.com
Correct, but I believe the first 5 years were gauranteed. There also may be a stipulation that another AHL team can finish the contract.

I'm almost positive that was reported by someone, but I can't find an article that says it. In any case, there most likely would be a clause that allows Vancouver out of the lease if they find an AHL replacement. From what I understand it's a pretty standard clause.
 

Biggie1083

Registered User
May 15, 2017
2
0
I'm almost positive that was reported by someone, but I can't find an article that says it. In any case, there most likely would be a clause that allows Vancouver out of the lease if they find an AHL replacement. From what I understand it's a pretty standard clause.

The Rangers and Islanders have that stipulation in their contracts with Hartford and Bridgeport. They can opt out of their contracts as long as they can find some other AHL or NHL team to replace them.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,232
4,218
Auburn, Maine
The Rangers and Islanders have that stipulation in their contracts with Hartford and Bridgeport. They can opt out of their contracts as long as they can find some other AHL or NHL team to replace them.

LOGISTICALLY THOUGH, what NHL team opts out and there's no stipulation in either the Islander or Ranger contracts, Biggie, that unless either is sold or spun off that contract remains intact....

since Bridgeport has a 20 year contract you'd have a legal suit if the Islanders tried it since Webster Bank Arena is a stakeholder in the lease agreement that was signed in 2001, likely the same caveat applies to Hartford, since MSG actually owns the franchise, hence by what they did yesterday with the release of Gernander AND Chris Drury's installation as Wolf* Pack GM....

IT'S A DIFFERENCE, when the NHL Team is the O&O, rather than a private ownership entity, like in Portland, yes, that clause has been exercised but that's to protect the franchise, it didn't help when Springfield bought the franchise with intent to relocate it there, Florida and Cross Arena had to approve it, and a penalty fee was paid to break the lease when that sale was announced...

rarely do you see NHL Teams involved in affiliate legal issues, nor will they, as evidenced by the 2013 lease between the Pirates and Cross that essentially had been agreed to at the end of 2012, but never completed forcing the relocation in market despite renovations at Cross Arena notwithstanding even for 1 season.
 

axecrew

Registered User
Feb 6, 2007
2,284
593
LOGISTICALLY THOUGH, what NHL team opts out and there's no stipulation in either the Islander or Ranger contracts, Biggie, that unless either is sold or spun off that contract remains intact....

since Bridgeport has a 20 year contract you'd have a legal suit if the Islanders tried it since Webster Bank Arena is a stakeholder in the lease agreement that was signed in 2001, likely the same caveat applies to Hartford, since MSG actually owns the franchise, hence by what they did yesterday with the release of Gernander AND Chris Drury's installation as Wolf* Pack GM....

IT'S A DIFFERENCE, when the NHL Team is the O&O, rather than a private ownership entity, like in Portland, yes, that clause has been exercised but that's to protect the franchise, it didn't help when Springfield bought the franchise with intent to relocate it there, Florida and Cross Arena had to approve it, and a penalty fee was paid to break the lease when that sale was announced...

rarely do you see NHL Teams involved in affiliate legal issues, nor will they, as evidenced by the 2013 lease between the Pirates and Cross that essentially had been agreed to at the end of 2012, but never completed forcing the relocation in market despite renovations at Cross Arena notwithstanding even for 1 season.

Absolutely nothing you just said has anything to do with what is being talked about.
 

Clinton Comets EHL

Registered User
Feb 18, 2014
1,387
326
Absolutely nothing you just said has anything to do with what is being talked about.


Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH
LOGISTICALLY THOUGH, what NHL team opts out and there's no stipulation in either the Islander or Ranger contracts, Biggie, that unless either is sold or spun off that contract remains intact....

since Bridgeport has a 20 year contract you'd have a legal suit if the Islanders tried it since Webster Bank Arena is a stakeholder in the lease agreement that was signed in 2001, likely the same caveat applies to Hartford, since MSG actually owns the franchise, hence by what they did yesterday with the release of Gernander AND Chris Drury's installation as Wolf* Pack GM....

IT'S A DIFFERENCE, when the NHL Team is the O&O, rather than a private ownership entity, like in Portland, yes, that clause has been exercised but that's to protect the franchise, it didn't help when Springfield bought the franchise with intent to relocate it there, Florida and Cross Arena had to approve it, and a penalty fee was paid to break the lease when that sale was announced...

rarely do you see NHL Teams involved in affiliate legal issues, nor will they, as evidenced by the 2013 lease between the Pirates and Cross that essentially had been agreed to at the end of 2012, but never completed forcing the relocation in market despite renovations at Cross Arena notwithstanding even for 1 season.



Absolutely nothing you just said has anything to do with what is being talked about.


I read this 7 times and cannot comprehend a single sentence.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,232
4,218
Auburn, Maine
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH
LOGISTICALLY THOUGH, what NHL team opts out and there's no stipulation in either the Islander or Ranger contracts, Biggie, that unless either is sold or spun off that contract remains intact....

since Bridgeport has a 20 year contract you'd have a legal suit if the Islanders tried it since Webster Bank Arena is a stakeholder in the lease agreement that was signed in 2001, likely the same caveat applies to Hartford, since MSG actually owns the franchise, hence by what they did yesterday with the release of Gernander AND Chris Drury's installation as Wolf* Pack GM....

IT'S A DIFFERENCE, when the NHL Team is the O&O, rather than a private ownership entity, like in Portland, yes, that clause has been exercised but that's to protect the franchise, it didn't help when Springfield bought the franchise with intent to relocate it there, Florida and Cross Arena had to approve it, and a penalty fee was paid to break the lease when that sale was announced...

rarely do you see NHL Teams involved in affiliate legal issues, nor will they, as evidenced by the 2013 lease between the Pirates and Cross that essentially had been agreed to at the end of 2012, but never completed forcing the relocation in market despite renovations at Cross Arena notwithstanding even for 1 season.



Absolutely nothing you just said has anything to do with what is being talked about.


I read this 7 times and cannot comprehend a single sentence.

then you don't understand what the lease contracts are between the team and the arena, 6768, that's one thing insiders are good for catching and explaining and one thing posters like wildcat and 210 are known for, so it helps to fill in gaps between seasons and/or games because it AFFECTS THE FANBASE, as a whole, but Portland is a great example of what I said, because I had the same issues at times as to what it means, it's something that will glaze your eyes at times, but it helps to know that, and what it means to that franchise and its fanbase. Each deal is different but I do not believe that the clause we're talking about really exists or can be exercised when it's up for renewal as could be the case in Hartford at the end of next season, yes, it's been exercised but Portland has never been an O&O, it's been a private owner, both times, whether it was Anderson/Duross in the fifteen years the first team was here, or the Ebrights/Petrovek/Cain era from 1992-2015, each time the clause was exercised it was always an affiliation change, and nothing to do with the franchise itself as a whole.
 

DudeWhereIsMakar

Bergevin sent me an offer sheet
Apr 25, 2014
15,596
6,619
Winnipeg
Would make more sense to put the Comets in Victoria and if they want move the Royals to Nanaimo.

But wouldn't mind seeing the Canucks AHL team in Vancouver. I just think they should spread their fan base a little further outside Vancouver or maybe even put the Comets in California.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,232
4,218
Auburn, Maine
Would make more sense to put the Comets in Victoria and if they want move the Royals to Nanaimo.

But wouldn't mind seeing the Canucks AHL team in Vancouver. I just think they should spread their fan base a little further outside Vancouver or maybe even put the Comets in California.

never happen under the divisional alignment either
 

Tommy Hawk

Registered User
May 27, 2006
4,223
104
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH
LOGISTICALLY THOUGH, what NHL team opts out and there's no stipulation in either the Islander or Ranger contracts, Biggie, that unless either is sold or spun off that contract remains intact....

since Bridgeport has a 20 year contract you'd have a legal suit if the Islanders tried it since Webster Bank Arena is a stakeholder in the lease agreement that was signed in 2001, likely the same caveat applies to Hartford, since MSG actually owns the franchise, hence by what they did yesterday with the release of Gernander AND Chris Drury's installation as Wolf* Pack GM....

IT'S A DIFFERENCE, when the NHL Team is the O&O, rather than a private ownership entity, like in Portland, yes, that clause has been exercised but that's to protect the franchise, it didn't help when Springfield bought the franchise with intent to relocate it there, Florida and Cross Arena had to approve it, and a penalty fee was paid to break the lease when that sale was announced...

rarely do you see NHL Teams involved in affiliate legal issues, nor will they, as evidenced by the 2013 lease between the Pirates and Cross that essentially had been agreed to at the end of 2012, but never completed forcing the relocation in market despite renovations at Cross Arena notwithstanding even for 1 season.



Absolutely nothing you just said has anything to do with what is being talked about.


I read this 7 times and cannot comprehend a single sentence.

So here's the scoop and translation. There are contracts between teams and arenas. Apparently Hutch thinks some were signed for 20 years and that the NHL teams do not get involved in arena contracts, except when they do. And the arena contracts cannot be broken, unless they are broken.

Every single contract ever written by a half a$$ competent person will have some sort of clause concerning if one of the parties does not fulfill their contractual obligations. Most time the writer of the contract tries to get away with a lot of crap. Read your credit card agreements, your mortgage, etc. Read everything and see the Crap in the agreements.
 

Cacciaguida

Registered User
Jan 11, 2010
1,620
327
Ottawa
Would make more sense to put the Comets in Victoria and if they want move the Royals to Nanaimo.

But wouldn't mind seeing the Canucks AHL team in Vancouver. I just think they should spread their fan base a little further outside Vancouver or maybe even put the Comets in California.

Nanaimo has no arena (though it would be a decent spot for a team) and the Royals will not just let themselves be uprooted.

My choices would be either Abbotsford or Chilliwack. Sacramento if California is still on the table.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,232
4,218
Auburn, Maine
Nanaimo has no arena (though it would be a decent spot for a team) and the Royals will not just let themselves be uprooted.

My choices would be either Abbotsford or Chilliwack. Sacramento if California is still on the table.

I no longer believe the league wants to subsidize travel expenses to outposts like St. John's or Abbotsford
 

axecrew

Registered User
Feb 6, 2007
2,284
593
I no longer believe the league wants to subsidize travel expenses to outposts like St. John's or Abbotsford

How would abbotsford be considered an "outpost" now???? There's only 6 teams out west now and 5 of them are probably about a 2-2 1/2 hour flight.
 

Tommy Hawk

Registered User
May 27, 2006
4,223
104
I no longer believe the league wants to subsidize travel expenses to outposts like St. John's or Abbotsford

So here's the thing, the eastern teams wont travel anyway so who cares. And if the Canucks do put their team near vancouver, I doubt they will need the league to subsidize any travel as they will draw like crazy and be able to afford the travel expenses.

Also, the salary savings for the canucks could also easily pay for the travel.

How would abbotsford be considered an "outpost" now???? There's only 6 teams out west now and 5 of them are probably about a 2-2 1/2 hour flight.

The two Texas teams are outposts, closest team is Des Moines followed by Rockford, Chicago, Milwaukee, Charlotte.

Thing is, the California teams are not exactly close to each other as well. The people on this board need to face the fact that their league of taking 4 hours to bus to the opponent and every mid sized town having an AHL team is long gone.

The management and fans in Utica have shown that they can support a team and some of these teams struggling in their current markets would look at Utica as a landing place.
 

Sports Enthusiast

Not Here To Be Liked
Sep 19, 2010
19,972
134
Middle of nowhere
The western teams fly everywhere, even out West. So Abbotsford wouldn't be a big deal anymore but can they get a better lease than last time?

Speaking of Cal-i-forn-i-a what will they do if that state decides to secede from the union? I mean it really is a crazy state lol
 

Hoodaha

Registered User
Aug 8, 2014
923
0
The western teams fly everywhere, even out West. So Abbotsford wouldn't be a big deal anymore but can they get a better lease than last time?

Speaking of Cal-i-forn-i-a what will they do if that state decides to secede from the union? I mean it really is a crazy state lol

The California teams take the bus.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->