Bad Expansion Cites that will become good hockey cites?

[ObeySteve]

2002-03 Season Revenues (in millions)

1. New York Rangers- $113
2. Dallas Stars- $108
3. Toronto Maple Leafs- $105
4. Philadelphia Flyers- $101
5. Detroit Red Wings- $89
6. Colorado Avalanche- $88
7. Boston Bruins- $84
8. Minnesota Wild- $79
9. Los Angeles Kings- $78
10. Chicago Blackhawks- $74

11. New Jersey Devils- $73
12. Montreal Canadiens- $71
13. St Louis Blues- $67
14. Columbus Blue Jackets- $66
15. Vancouver Canucks- $66
16. San Jose Sharks- $65
17. Tampa Bay Lightning- $65
18. Washington Capitals- $62
19. Ottawa Senators- $59
20. Anaheim Mighty Ducks- $59

21. Pittsburgh Penguins- $57
22. Florida Panthers- $57
23. Atlanta Thrashers- $57
24. Carolina Hurricanes- $57
25. New York Islanders- $56
26. Calgary Flames- $51
27. Buffalo Sabres- $50
28. Edmonton Oilers- $48
29. Nashville Predators- $46
30. Phoenix Coyotes- $43

------------------------------------------------------------------

2001-02 Season (in millions)

1. Detroit Red Wings- $114
2. Toronto Maple Leafs- $112
3. New York Rangers- $103
4. Philadelphia Flyers- $97
5. Dallas Stars- $96
6. Colorado Avalanche- $93
7. Boston Bruins- $87
8. Los Angeles Kings- $81
9. Chicago Blackhawks- $78
10. Montreal Canadiens- $75

11. San Jose Sharks- $71
12. St Louis Blues- $70
13. Florida Panthers- $67
14. Carolina Hurricanes- $67
15. Columbus Blue Jackets- $64
16. Minnesota Wild- $61
17. New Jersey Devils- $61
18. Washington Capitals- $61
19. Tampa Bay Lightning- $59
20. Pittsburgh Penguins- $59

21. Atlanta Thrashers- $58
22. Ottawa Senators- $57
23. Vancouver Canucks- $56
24. Nashville Predators- $53
25. New York Islanders- $51
26. Anaheim Mighty Ducks- $48
27. Calgary Flames- $47
28. Buffalo Sabres- $46
29. Edmonton Oilers- $43
30. Phoenix Coyotes- $42

==========================================

Combined Revenues in 2001-02 and 2002-03

1. Toronto Maple Leafs- $217
2. New York Rangers- $216
3. Dallas Stars- $204
4. Detroit Red Wings- $203
5. Philadelphia Flyers- $198
6. Colorado Avalanche- $181
7. Boston Bruins- $171
8. Los Angeles Kings- $159
9. Chicago Blackhawks- $152
10. Montreal Canadiens- $146

11. Minnesota Wild- $140
12. St Louis Blues- $137
13. San Jose Sharks- $136
14. New Jersey Devils- $134
15. Columbus Blue Jackets- $130
16. Tampa Bay Lightning- $124
17. Carolina Hurricanes- $124
18. Florida Panthers- $124
19. Washington Capitals- $123
20. Vancouver Canucks- $122

21. Ottawa Senators- $116
22. Pittsburgh Penguins- $116
23. Atlanta Thrashers- $115
24. New York Islanders- $107
25. Anaheim Mighty Ducks- $107
26. Nashville Predators- $99
27. Calgary Flames- $98
28. Buffalo Sabres- $96
29. Edmonton Oilers- $91
30. Phoenix Coyotes- $85

===========================================

Projected Best teams financially over past 3 seasons

1. Toronto Maple Leafs
2. New York Rangers
3. Detroit Red Wings
4. Philadelphia Flyers
5. Dallas Stars
6. Colorado Avalanche
7. Boston Bruins
8. Los Angeles Kings
9. Chicago Blackhawks
10. Montreal Canadiens

11. San Jose Sharks
12. St Louis Blues
13. Minnesota Wild
14. Tampa Bay Lightning
15. New Jersey Devils
16. Columbus Blue Jackets
17. Vancouver Canucks
18. Washington Capitals
19. Florida Panthers
20. Ottawa Senators

21. Carolina Hurricanes
22. Atlanta Thrashers
23. Pittsburgh Penguins
24. New York Islanders
25. Calgary Flames
26. Anaheim Mighty Ducks
27. Nashville Predators
28. Buffalo Sabres
29. Edmonton Oilers
30. Phoenix Coyotes

Source: Forbes.com

 

[chiavsfan]

Source: Forbes.com

That says a lot right there

 

[ObeySteve]

Yeah, that it's accurate....much more accurate than any "report" the NHL itself would put out.

Anyway, I just posted that to show which teams have the most cashflow, which is a better showing of a team's potential than profit (which takes into account money SPENT).

How much a team spends can change with a CBA, but the amount of money coming in won't change much....so showing franchise revenues is a good measurement of how well teams are doing in general.

 

[blitzkriegs]

I guess you can't be a purist and want the Original 6 NHL back again

Toronto, Montreal, Boston, Detroit, Chicago, NYR

Any expansion after that was bad expansion IMO ..

Right. Because a such a 'purist' was alive pre-1967 to witness Original 6 NHL games. Please...

Are you that angry that since 1967 the 'storied' leafs have yet to win a cup while several of those expansion teams have???

 

[DougKnowsBest]

That's 4 major teams within a two hour radius (Reds, Indians, Browns, Bengals), in two other sports that easily outdraw hockey overall down south. Don't know why you're getting so defensive. Plus collegiate athletics, another big draw in the U.S. right? Point is hockey is doing quite well there, which is good to see.

You forgot a team, we have this basketball team with this guy named Lebron James on it. So thats 5 major teams within 2 hour drive, plus Ohio State's programs which it can not be stressed enough how much attention is paid to all 36 varsity sports programs. We are a hockey hot-bed waiting to explode. The Cbj are building Ice rinks all over central ohio. and people fill them up every day, evan without a nhl this year.

 

[shakes]

or the historic franchise in Pittsburgh.

say what? I don't think historic would be a word I would use to describe Pittsburgh's NHL franchise.

If you'd like, we can talk about the Cardinals and the Blue Jays. Because that conversation would be just as relevent to this thread as the one that we're having now.

Well, the Jays have won more world series in the past 20 years than the Cardinals have...

 

[The Nemesis]

San Jose has real potential, supported lousy and good hockey teams, large population base. best population of Disposable income of any NHL city. largest adult rec league in the USA is a at logitech ice, now with 4 sheets of ice there might be enough interest to develop some talent for at least NCAA Div 1 player. currently san jose st still just a 'club team'. Jr Sharks do well in large tourneys.

cons: San Jose second banana to San Francisco, any team even NHL Raiders and baseball A's are considered second class to SF giants and 49ers. most media here thinks hockey=soccer.

Yes, a club team for which averaging 90% capacity and 10 sellouts represents the worst turnout in the team's history. San Jose is a great hockey city with passionate and LOUD fans. Of course it helps that the team is fun to watch.

 

[Mess]

Right. Because a such a 'purist' was alive pre-1967 to witness Original 6 NHL games. Please...

Right it was a great time for Hockey when nearly all players on all the 6 teams were Hall-of-Famers ..

Made for really bad hockey Hockey .. right ..

Chicago : Stan Mikita, Bobby Hull, Phil Esposito, Glen Hall (G)
Montreal: Jean Beliveau, Henri Richard, John Ferguson, Rogatien Vachon (G)
Toronto: Dave Keon, Frank Mahovlich, Tim Horton, Johnny Bower (G), Terry Sawchuk (G)
Detroit : Gordie Howe, Alex Delvecchio, Norm Ullman, Doug Harvey, Roger Crozier (G)
Boston: Bobby Orr, Johnny Bucyk, Derek Sanderson, Gerry Cheevers (G), Bernie Parent (G)
NYR : Rod Gilbert, Vic Hadfield, Jean Ratelle, Bernie "Boom-Boom" Geoffrion, Ed Giacomin (G)

1967 pre-expansion had some of the greatest legends to ever play the game ..

Every game was like watching World Cup like teams playing each other..

 

[blitzkriegs]

Right it was a great time for Hockey when nearly all players on all the 6 teams were Hall-of-Famers ..

Made for really bad hockey Hockey .. right ..

Chicago : Stan Mikita, Bobby Hull, Phil Esposito, Glen Hall (G)
Montreal: Jean Beliveau, Henri Richard, John Ferguson, Rogatien Vachon (G)
Toronto: Dave Keon, Frank Mahovlich, Tim Horton, Johnny Bower (G), Terry Sawchuk (G)
Detroit : Gordie Howe, Alex Delvecchio, Norm Ullman, Doug Harvey, Roger Crozier (G)
Boston: Bobby Orr, Johnny Bucyk, Derek Sanderson, Gerry Cheevers (G), Bernie Parent (G)
NYR : Rod Gilbert, Vic Hadfield, Jean Ratelle, Bernie "Boom-Boom" Geoffrion, Ed Giacomin (G)

1967 pre-expansion had some of the greatest legends to ever play the game ..

Every game was like watching World Cup like teams playing each other..

You weren't even ALIVE to evaluate the competition. Your dropping names of HOF players sure, but you didn't see them play. So, how do YOU know the Orig Six was better?

sorry kid...

 

[The Nemesis]

You weren't even ALIVE to evaluate the competition. Your dropping names of HOF players sure, but you didn't see them play. So, how do YOU know the Orig Six was better?

sorry kid...

I have to agree with this. Everyone has to face facts that the "good old years" get romanced so much by people that it's almost impossible to make any sort of subjective argument on them unless you were alive to see it being played. I won't say that guys like Richard, Sawchuck, Mikita, etc. weren't great players, but the NHL is open to a far wider pool of talent now than it was back then, so it would stand to reason that the overall talent level of the league would be higher, and thus mitigate some of the high-level talent of today's stars. You can't tell me that Richard could score today like he did in his time, or that Sawchuck would set all those goaltending records between 21st century pipes any more than you can tell me that Ilya Kovalchuk or Pavel Bure (in his prime) couldn't have scored 100 goals in a season playing in the Original 6 era, or that Patrick Roy or Dominik Hasek couldn't have had twice as many shutouts as Sawchuck did.

Until they can ice a team of HOFer clones to compete in today's league, there has to be a stop to the "oh the original 6 was way more talented hockey than today's league"

 

[Shizuka]

You forgot a team, we have this basketball team with this guy named Lebron James on it. So thats 5 major teams within 2 hour drive, plus Ohio State's programs which it can not be stressed enough how much attention is paid to all 36 varsity sports programs. We are a hockey hot-bed waiting to explode. The Cbj are building Ice rinks all over central ohio. and people fill them up every day, evan without a nhl this year.

Woops...forgot about B-ball, sorry! And glad to hear you guys doing so well in Columbus. If you end up getting the #1 this year, if the rumours hold true about a draft lottery...with Zherdev, Nash, and Crosby...yikes.

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

say what? I don't think historic would be a word I would use to describe Pittsburgh's NHL franchise.

well they're certainly not in a montreal, toronto(although they've done much much more than them since '67), boston's league, not many teams can match what they've accomplished.

2 stanley cups, multiple division titles, multiple pearsons, 3 harts, 11 art rosses, 2 conn smythes, president's trophy all have been won by this franchise or someone that played for the franchise. not to mention they had one of the greatest offenses ever assembled. they have more history than you think.

 

[jeffbear]

as for research, yes it includes all the comp'ed tickets that have been floating around to inflate the canes attendance figures and get fans to come out to the building.

Well, if you did the research that you claim to have done, then you are aware that the comp'ed tickets to which you refer were almost exclusively distributed in the Hurricanes first two seasons in North Carolina ... when they were playing in lame duck Greensboro with no real local support at all. IMO 90% of the problems I end up having with statements about the Hurricanes' finances is that observers just can't seem to throw out those first two seasons when the Canes were playing an hour and a half from their real fan base and operating under a marketing plan so simple-minded and arrogant that is boggles the mind.

Sum it up ... the Canes have had FIVE completely different sets of ticket price schemes since they moved to NC in 1998. That's almost one per season ... and is as clear an indication I can give someone from outside the market of just how out of touch with the market that the Canes front office has been. Shoot, they could have saved every penny they've spent over the last 7 years on marketing for all the good it's done them ... because they did next to no market research before moving here and still don't understand their target demographic.

Karmanos has been a great friend to US hockey on the bantam, junior and minor league level, but he's been a lousy NHL owner.

 

[f1nn]

I don't understand why noone has really talked about Dallas... before I moved here I was bummed bc I didn't think there was a lot of hockey in Dallas.. sure maybe an NHL team but not many ppl would care right? wrong.. when I moved here on the first day my schools hockey director came to my house and talked to me about the teams and everything.. and there is 100+ travel teams in the Dallas Metroplex up from about 20 10-20 years ago... why has the number gone up so much? The stars.. ever sicne they hsowed up hockey is continually growing in dallas... there is a GREAT fanbase and believe it or not Dallas is a AWESOME hockey city AND the team actually makes money and doesn't lose it! lol

 

[Habsaku]

You are mistaken .. I watched the Leafs last Stanley Cup win on the family B&W TV ..

George Armstrong put the puck into the empty net to give the Leafs a 3-1 lead and their 11th Stanley Cup.

, your older then David!

 

[jb**]

i don't know why i bother, but here goes.


you've "done some research", huh? care to elaborate? just asking because i live here and can vouch for the existence of a pretty hardcore fanbase. and i'm talking hockey fans, not just Canes fans.

we had the misfortune to have 2 horrible years after our cup run, cutting into some of the bandwagoners. that, plus the boring hockey that was being played didn't help the situation. i'm pleased to inform you however that with a new coach and improved play the last bit of 04, plus the prospect of a new CBA, our future looks pretty bright.

How does the future look bright? Your attendence is a joke, your team, well that speaks for itself. Hardcore fan base, what all 20 of you. Hockey will never be a draw in Carolina, Atlanta, Florida, and Tampa IMO. If thewy win they will draw for a little while but won't sustain the attendence.It will be a little better in Florida because of the NOrthern transplants. the NHL needs to build around its niche and stop trying to be a national sport becuase it probably won't IMO. IT will always have their strong markets and that is were they should build upon. Stop trying to force hockey down the markets it won't survive. The owners are to blame since they approved the expansion and pocketed all the expansion fees. Contraction is part of the solution

 

[Meanashell11]

Right it was a great time for Hockey when nearly all players on all the 6 teams were Hall-of-Famers ..

Made for really bad hockey Hockey .. right ..

Chicago : Stan Mikita, Bobby Hull, Phil Esposito, Glen Hall (G)
Montreal: Jean Beliveau, Henri Richard, John Ferguson, Rogatien Vachon (G)
Toronto: Dave Keon, Frank Mahovlich, Tim Horton, Johnny Bower (G), Terry Sawchuk (G)
Detroit : Gordie Howe, Alex Delvecchio, Norm Ullman, Doug Harvey, Roger Crozier (G)
Boston: Bobby Orr, Johnny Bucyk, Derek Sanderson, Gerry Cheevers (G), Bernie Parent (G)
NYR : Rod Gilbert, Vic Hadfield, Jean Ratelle, Bernie "Boom-Boom" Geoffrion, Ed Giacomin (G)

1967 pre-expansion had some of the greatest legends to ever play the game ..

Every game was like watching World Cup like teams playing each other..

EDM: Gretzky, Messier, Fuhr, Kurri, Coffey, Anderson, Lowe, Ranford. Not too shabby!

 

[Mess]

EDM: Gretzky, Messier, Fuhr, Kurri, Coffey, Anderson, Lowe, Ranford. Not too shabby!

Yes that is the exception to every rule .. right there ..

Now a days you could add 10 smaller market teams together and not get the talent of the Oilers teams of the 1980's .. Thus the watered down league comments ..





.

 

[canes-sth]

How does the future look bright? Your attendence is a joke, your team, well that speaks for itself. Hardcore fan base, what all 20 of you.

Again with the self-hating NHL fans. It cracks me up.

Do the Canes need to put a better product on the ice than they did the last 2 years? Absolutely, but they are not alone.

But lets just contract the teams at the bottom of the attendance list each season. In 02-03, there would have been 10 teams beneath the Canes on that list. Yeah, 2 bad years sucks for attendance. What next? Ice is cold?

Anyway, keep chopping off the bottom of the attendance list. Eventually they'll get back to 6 teams, but guaranteed it won't be the Original 6.

 

[jb**]

Again with the self-hating NHL fans. It cracks me up.

Do the Canes need to put a better product on the ice than they did the last 2 years? Absolutely, but they are not alone.

But lets just contract the teams at the bottom of the attendance list each season. In 02-03, there would have been 10 teams beneath the Canes on that list. Yeah, 2 bad years sucks for attendance. What next? Ice is cold?

Anyway, keep chopping off the bottom of the attendance list. Eventually they'll get back to 6 teams, but guaranteed it won't be the Original 6.

IMO there is not a market for hockey below Philadelphia, at times it will draw but on a whole it will notvsustain itself to survive. what was your average attendence? 12-13 thousand as best last year?They don't need to go back to 6 but 20-22 would be best for the league and we probably wouldn't be in this mess we have today. Having ahrdcore fan base of lets say 10-12 thousand won't cut it. Certain teams that don't have a good team will still draw very well and sell out because they play in a hockey market while others wont because they don't. It is that simple.

 

[WC Handy*]

IMO there is not a market for hockey below Philadelphia, at times it will draw but on a whole it will notvsustain itself to survive.

Colorado? St Louis? Dallas? San Jose?

 

[jb**]

Colorado? St Louis? Dallas? San Jose?

Look at a map, obviously geography was not your strong point

 

[canes-sth]

what was your average attendence? 12-13 thousand as best last year?

Yes it was, but that's my point about contracting based on a snapshot. There have been teams with that range of avg attendance each year, but it's not always the Canes.

Look at the teams that finished beneath the Canes (since that's the target du jour) attendance wise in either 01-02 or 02-03. Isles, Boston, Chicago, New Jersey, Pittsburgh, Buffalo are all in there during those seasons. Just a few teams that meet your N of Philly criteria.

If Raleigh or wherever can't support a team, so be it. But new hockey markets have to have time to mature. I could share all the positive signs about the STH retention rate during the lockout and the growth of youth hockey, but I know those sorts of things are lost on some folks. They'd rather spend their time deciding if college hoops or NASCAR is what is keeping us away from hockey.

In any event, I think relocation makes much more sense than contraction. The NHL can't afford to spend that kind of money just so every team can cut a 4th liner or 2 and improve "the product" even if it will bring the fans in droves.

(And um, yeah - the Canes aren't an expansion team. Just thought I'd mention that again.)

 

[WC Handy*]

Look at a map, obviously geography was not your strong point

Here ya go...

http://www.crh.noaa.gov/mpx/images/us-map.gif

Which of those 4 cities are north of Philly again?

 

[jb**]

Yes it was, but that's my point about contracting based on a snapshot. There have been teams with that range of avg attendance each year, but it's not always the Canes.

Look at the teams that finished beneath the Canes (since that's the target du jour) attendance wise in either 01-02 or 02-03. Isles, Boston, Chicago, New Jersey, Pittsburgh, Buffalo are all in there during those seasons. Just a few teams that meet your N of Philly criteria.

If Raleigh or wherever can't support a team, so be it. But new hockey markets have to have time to mature. I could share all the positive signs about the STH retention rate during the lockout and the growth of youth hockey, but I know those sorts of things are lost on some folks. They'd rather spend their time deciding if college hoops or NASCAR is what is keeping us away from hockey.

In any event, I think relocation makes much more sense than contraction. The NHL can't afford to spend that kind of money just so every team can cut a 4th liner or 2 and improve "the product" even if it will bring the fans in droves.

(And um, yeah - the Canes aren't an expansion team. Just thought I'd mention that again.)

The teams you mentioned haven't drawn that well lately but the circumstances are different, chicago bad ownership-they have drawnn well previously, same with Boston, they are tired of their cheap owners, Isle need a new arena, NJ-not much of an argument from me there, buffalo we all know their circumstances recently,