Which teams may get contracted?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
triggrman said:
Where corporations are expected to fill 75 or more luxury suites at cost over 100k a season.

Interesting model. And if a team can meet that goal? What happens if an existing team does not? Doesn't seem like a good model to use to base your league on. I think the modle has a little more to it than that.
 

likea

Registered User
Jul 9, 2004
599
0
The Iconoclast said:
That's a fair comment. How about we look at financials as well then? No, we probably don't want to do that as that would look even worse than the attendence.


lets look at their financials then

look at the years Mario has owner the team

he has made money with the Pens more years than he has lost money, he has also treated the team like a business venture instead od a personal toy like St. Louis (who loses 30 million a year)

Pittsburgh attendence is great for having the oldest arena in hockey and a hockey arena that was Opera house with a ton of obstructed seats

which you use to show why Winnipeg deserves a new team.................

Pittsburgh also gets some of the best TV ratings in both local and national games

your ignorant about Pittsburgh situation and you call for them to be eliminated...its nuts

while they do not have an arena guarenteed, the state has 90 million sitting around waiting to give it to them....plus the chance to get the arena with the slots money no matter who gets award the lic. is almost guarenteed....

Pittsburgh has had very good attendence levels and % of attendence along with great national and local TV ratings

the NHL would be dumb to allow them to leave

oh, and lets not forget...the Pens have very little luxery boxes and money coming in from them because of the arena

an opera house turned arena is a terrible place to see a hcokey game, they probably have 1000 obstructed view seats and they still get alot of people to come
 

Morbo

The Annihilator
Jan 14, 2003
27,100
5,734
Toronto
nomorekids said:
Montreal-Concord, New Hampshire
Ottawa-Portland, Oregon
Vancouver- Seattle, Washington
Calgary-Kansas City, Missouri
Edmonton- Houston, Texas

Toronto can stay.

:lol:

:handclap:
 

likea

Registered User
Jul 9, 2004
599
0
as of right now, i would not contract or move a single team

it takes years to build up a fanbase and if you look long term, it would be a huge mistake to move teams

alot of people need to realize that once a cap is put into place these teams will actually have a chance to compete for a playoff spot each and every year which will help fan interest and attendence
 

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
Wetcoaster said:
The Holy Grail for the NHL is US national TV contract. Putting teams in small markets in Canada do absolutley nothing to advance that goal and in fact hurt those chances.

The NHL markets to a corporate fan base and that does not exist in Wiinipeg. When the NHL sells advertsing it notes that the NHL has the highest per capita income of any of the major pro sports per bum in the seats and the highest percentage of corporate tickets.

Winnipeg does not have the population, business climate, corporate base, tax regime, arena size, etc. to support the return of the NHL.

Seems that business model might be shifting in the next few years, or is that reading too much into things? It appears that the NHL is resigned to the fact the "Holy Grail" is indeed a mythical icon at this point and that its time to get back to the solid foundation of what made the NHL great. Healthy franchises that allowed the fans to focus on the greatness of the game on the ice and not the game in the board room. Maybe its time for the league and the parasites that feed off of it to understand that its better to have a team in a city of 1 million hockey fans who live and breathe the sport than it is to have a team in a city of 3 million who don't care of a game is played or not? Seems like more sound model, especially when you're a gate driven enterprise. I'm not saying that Winnipeg is the right solution, but given a choice between Phoenix or Winnipeg the ownership made a huge error coming to the apathetic desert.
 

Jaded-Fan

Registered User
Mar 18, 2004
52,488
14,364
Pittsburgh
The Iconoclast said:
Seems that business model might be shifting in the next few years, or is that reading too much into things? It appears that the NHL is resigned to the fact the "Holy Grail" is indeed a mythical icon at this point and that its time to get back to the solid foundation of what made the NHL great. Healthy franchises that allowed the fans to focus on the greatness of the game on the ice and not the game in the board room. Maybe its time for the league and the parasites that feed off of it to understand that its better to have a team in a city of 1 million hockey fans who live and breathe the sport than it is to have a team in a city of 3 million who don't care of a game is played or not? Seems like more sound model, especially when you're a gate driven enterprise. I'm not saying that Winnipeg is the right solution, but given a choice between Phoenix or Winnipeg the ownership made a huge error coming to the apathetic desert.


I am not sure that things are so simple. They never are. I genuinely believe that part of the present day challenges facing many of the major sports as far as growth is concerned is that salaries exploding caught them by surprise, and not only threatened viability of many franchises, but as a by product created imbalances, real or percieved, that turned off the general public and dampened growth. I do not know that you can judge enthusiasm in this region or that region or another region until that has been cured.
 

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
Jaded-Fan said:
I am not sure that things are so simple. They never are. I genuinely believe that part of the present day challenges facing many of the major sports as far as growth is concerned is that salaries exploding caught them by surprise, and not only threatened viability of many franchises, but as a by product created imbalances, real or percieved, that turned off the general public and dampened growth. I do not know that you can judge enthusiasm in this region or that region or another region until that has been cured.

Very good point. I don't think anyone has to worry about any teams moving for a few years after the dust settles. And I'm sure by then things will change and other teams will be the target for relocation.
 

futurcorerock

Registered User
Nov 15, 2003
6,831
0
Columbus, OH
tulsytrid1 said:
Such a good post I thought it should be up on the board again. :yo: :handclap:
http://www.hockeyresearch.com/mfoster/business/nhl_attn.html
The Jets never averaged over 13,600. Most of the teams you list moving rarely averaged under that figure
Actually this brings up a poignant side of the interest argument:

Note that average attendance has gone up, only to have it go down in the 01-02 season and then back up in 02-03
 
Last edited:

craig1

Registered User
Nov 1, 2002
4,207
0
Pittsburgh, PA
Visit site
The Iconoclast said:
That's a fair comment. How about we look at financials as well then? No, we probably don't want to do that as that would look even worse than the attendence.
Actually, the Pens set themselves up to be one of the more financially sound teams in the league over the past few years. It has been reported in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette over the past year that they were actually in the top 1/3 of the league financially. How did they do this? By not bloating their payroll at the expense of operating expenses. The most variable and volatile part of a teams budget is payroll. You can't skip out on fixed costs such as electricity, travel costs, and of course any residual debt service. The Pens, unlike the majority of the league, cut payroll to a level where they were able to operate at a Break-Even level (including operating costs that were forcasted for the coming lockout ,according to the team President). Other teams spent and lost, not even considering the approach the Pens took. They sacrificed a few years of being an on ice winner, and took the approach to do the inevitable rebuild and prepare for the financial hardships that were about to be faced by the league.


The Iconoclast said:
Do they have it yet? No they don't. Nothing is assured in this regard until the ground is broken, and even then its not a guarantee of anything. Just look at Phoenix..
Granted, nothing is guaranteed. But the governor has stated that whomever gets the Pittsburgh liscense must use part of the proceeds to reinvest in the region. What is the Pens competition for the liscence proposing? A parking gargage next to the slots parlor.....This competitor by the way is strictly opposed by Kevin McClatchy (Owner of the Pirates) and more importantly, The Rooney family (Owners of the Steelers) They have publicly stated their opposition to his plan.

The Pens want to build a state of the art, multipurpose arena, and develop the surrounding area with mulitfamily housing and shopping. The Pens own the land for this, which is conveniently located next to the current Mellon Arena....even more development potential for a city that would love the additional revenue.

Is it guaranteed? No, nothing is guaranteed. But the governor (who publicly vowed that no sports team will leave PA with him as the governor) picks the committee who chooses between a parking garage, opposed by the most powerful people in the city or a 1/2 Billion dollar community investment......



The Iconoclast said:
Well, you should be proud of that rival with Washington, as they are also a team most brought up for contraction or relocation. Maybe both teams can move and that "natural rivalry" can continue. BTW, when was the last time that the league or fans got all fired up over a Pittsburgh/Washington game? Just curious.
Quite often. The Pens and Caps were perrenial playoff foes until the Pens began to rebuild. I for one rarely have seen the Caps brought up for contraction...they have some of the deepest pockets in the leage to be exact in Big Teddy......


The Iconoclast said:
I might recommend you do the same. And while you're at it, also consider the idea while putting your personal feelings about the team you cheer for aside. Learn some objectivity.
I am objective. Why? because I was aware of the entire situation, instead of using conjecture to fill in the enormous chasms of information. I also find that I am qualified to at least understand the nature of a business and the financial implications held within. I am not privvy to specifics of each teams workings, but I am able to deduce quite a bit from not only the financial viability from Lemieux's very public purchase of the team, but I am able to understand and personally forcast what their probable income and expenses will be given public data and research.....heck, after all, it is what I do for a living.
 

grego

Registered User
Jan 12, 2005
2,390
97
Saskatchewan
With all that data for capacity there is nothing there to state capacity of the stadium at all. The Oilers may only be at about 17, 600 avg a game. But that is impressive, when that is a stadium with a stated 17,100 capacity. Which means it is rather hard for the team to improve their attendance. Since they are already getting into an overflow crowd.
 

Mountain Dude

Guest
Carolina
Pittsburgh
Florida
Atlanta
Washington
You could probably lose one team in california
 

bleedgreen

Registered User
Dec 8, 2003
23,848
38,583
colorado
Visit site
no ones answered the question yet. who is going to pay for these teams to just go away? the nhl? unlikely. before someone answers the question, this thread, like all contraction threads...is useless.
 

grego

Registered User
Jan 12, 2005
2,390
97
Saskatchewan
If they let a team go bankrupt I am not sure what the precendent would be for that. In general professional leagues are too proud to let a team do that, but I do not know what they could do to stop it a team chose that route. It would require for a team to have lost more through the years then the team is worth, and for the owner to have not proped the team up with their own money. If there was a team or two in that situation where the team debt was more then they were worth, then I can't see how they couldn't just bite bullet and let the team fold in bankruptcy.

That would be a decision on a team level, though and not at the NHL level.
 

muddycreek*

Guest
Sounds like everyone is afraid of Nashville! Hey hocky snobs...ya skeert to come to Nashville? How about CONTRACTING the top five or six payroll teams! Detroit first so we can listen to their hockey snobs cry and whine along with the thug players they have! :handclap:
 

Steve L*

Registered User
Jan 13, 2003
11,548
0
Southampton, England
Visit site
rt said:
Old location - New Location


Edomonton - Provo, Utah

Calgary - Tijuana, Mexico

Montreal - Carson City, Nevada

Toronto - Santa Fe, New Mexico

Boston - Honolulu, Hawaii

New York R. - Little Rock, Arkansas

New York I. - El Paso, Texas

Philadelphia - San Jaun, Peurto Rico

Detroit - Garden Grove, California

Chicago - Oklahoma City

:razz:

I prefer Philadelphia - Southampton, England :D although not having a rink could be a minor problem.
 

Steve L*

Registered User
Jan 13, 2003
11,548
0
Southampton, England
Visit site
PanthersRule said:
Teams that could/should move:

New Jersey
Carolina
Anaheim
while I hate to defend NJ, they are having a new arena built so they are out of the question.
Carolina and Anaheim were my 2 votes. No fans would miss them apart from their respective supporters.
 

Chaos

And the winner is...
Sep 2, 2003
7,968
18
TX
Edmonton- Abilene
Montreal- Midland
Ottawa- Killeen
Calgary- Laredo
Vancouver- San Angelo
Toronto- Odessa

Bonus points to whoever can tell me what all those cities have in common(besides all being in Texas :D )
 
Last edited:

nyrmessier011

Registered User
Feb 9, 2005
3,358
4
Charlotte/NYC
Contraction:

Phoenix
Carolina
Florida
Anaheim
San Jose

Rellocation:

Pittsburgh
Buffalo

You will all find out soon that even with a harcd cap, teams will fold. Hopefully it happens (sorry to the fans they do have for saying that). The talent is too spread around 30 teams...24 would be perfect, and those 6 teams that would dissapear are dragging the league down financially.
 

CantHaveTkachev

Legends
Nov 30, 2004
49,653
29,455
St. OILbert, AB
Chaos said:
Edmonton- Abilene
Montreal- Midland
Ottawa- Killeen
Calgary- Laredo
Vancouver- San Angelo
Toronto- Odessa

Bonus points to whoever can tell me what all those cities have in common(besides all being in Texas :D )

i got it!

they don't know what Hockey is
 

Matt Foley*

Guest
Chaos said:
Montreal- Midland
Toronto- Odessa

All I can say is that would one heck of a rivalry in the Permian Basin. That would keep the Midland / Odessa rivalry going well after high school football season has ended. ;)
 

NJD Jester

Registered User
Nov 14, 2003
960
0
DC
www.njdevilsbook.com
nyrmessier011 said:
Contraction:

Phoenix
Carolina
Florida
Anaheim
San Jose

Rellocation:

Pittsburgh
Buffalo.

Can you explain to me how the New York Islanders are not on either of these lists? And don't give me the "history" B.S. -- the Penguins' run is a hell of a lot more recent than the Trottier/Bossy/Potvin years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->