California teams to stay at 68 games, for now

[LadyStanley]

http://www.democratandchronicle.com...nt-homogenizing-schedule-cali-teams/79638100/

The five California-based teams will continue to operate under their own NHL-backed agenda and play fewer games, 68, while the league's other 25 teams will still play 76.

In an ideal world, it's not what AHL president Dave Andrews would want. But for now, members of the league will live with it. They're content, at least in the short term, with the possible inequities in terms of competitive balance come playoff time.
...
"It's not a perfect situation, but the alternative was unacceptable," Andrews said.

The alternative — which the AHL faced head-on at last year's mid-winter Board of Governors meeting — was an alternative league.
...
If the AHL couldn't find a way to accommodate a Pacific Division with California teams playing only 68 games, then they'd start their own league. The AHL steadfastly believes an alliance with the NHL ensures long-term stability and profitability, and couldn't afford to lose the 30-for-30 set-up (one AHL affiliate for each NHL team). Getting the California teams to play 68 games was a victory for the core AHL, because those teams actually wanted closer to 60.
...
"We're not closer as of today, but we're not trying to be closer as of today," Andrews said at Monday's State of the League address during All-Star Classic festivities in Syracuse. "I think it's going to take us a little bit of time, and I think there's going to need to be movement downwards in terms of schedule length with the core of our league, the 25 teams, and maybe some movement upward with the other five teams."

Ah, the politics of compromise.

Click to read more...

 

[Goldenshark]

Good article but they need to sort that schedule out, I agree with the haters, it is bush league for some teams to play less than others. It's interesting to note that there are some other teams beyond the Cali teams that want less games. From the article it looks like they might compromise with a 72 game schedule someday in the future. I hope it's sooner rather than later.

 

[Agalloch]

Good article but they need to sort that schedule out, I agree with the haters, it is bush league for some teams to play less than others. It's interesting to note that there are some other teams beyond the Cali teams that want less games. From the article it looks like they might compromise with a 72 game schedule someday in the future. I hope it's sooner rather than later.

72 games would be good. I think it's the perfect compromise.

 

[Hurricane Ron]

Totally amazed by this decision to allow the California teams to continue playing less games than the rest of the league.

Since the bulk of the teams in the AHL are in the same geographic area with the exception of the teams in the Pacific Division and Charlotte in the Central, what harm would their be to a new AAA league starting up?

Would seem to me that the Charlotte, San Antonio and Austin markets could be swapped with the ECHL markets in Salt Lake, Boise and Anchorage and create an 8 team league in the West. Further expansion and/or other locations and options, could be pursued as well.

Not sure I understand the "fear" of the AHL to the possibility of there being another AAA Minor League

Years ago the NHL provided affiliations for AAA hockey in the AHL, CHL and WHL. The AHL and IHL both operated at the AAA level after that. As long as each team in AAA hockey has a NHL affiliation, not sure I understand the importance of them being in the same league.

Issues such as scheduling can be better handled when teams are in the same geographic area. Its incredible to me that in year two of the Pacific Division, one set of teams in the league (as well as the division itself) will continue to play a different number of games than the rest.

Will be interesting to see how this plays out in the coming years.

 

[royals119]

Totally amazed by this decision to allow the California teams to continue playing less games than the rest of the league.

Really? They have only had this schedule in place for half of a season. It doesn't seem amazing at all that they would at least wait until the completion of one full season before making any changes. Since they need to start working on the schedule prior to the summer meetings, they will need to hold off until next January to evaluate how it is working.

Since the bulk of the teams in the AHL are in the same geographic area with the exception of the teams in the Pacific Division and Charlotte in the Central, what harm would their be to a new AAA league starting up? Not sure I understand the "fear" of the AHL to the possibility of there being another AAA Minor League

Competition? No business wants to have a competitor who does exactly the same thing they are trying to do. Also, if this new AAA league did expand, without a compensating contraction in the current AHL then there wouldn't be enough affiliations to go around. The two leagues would be competing for NHL affiliations, and poaching each other's teams and players. Of course the AHL will do almost anything to prevent that.

Would seem to me that the Charlotte, San Antonio and Austin markets could be swapped with the ECHL markets in Salt Lake, Boise and Anchorage and create an 8 team league in the West.

It's not that simple. It only took 10-15 years to orchestrate the first 5 teams moving west. Convincing six more owners to change leagues might happen, but they again will likely wait a year or two to see how things shake out from the current setup. It would also require some affiliation shifts. Carolina is probably not looking to have their AAA team out west, and Dallas probably prefers to remain where they are. Colorado, Phoenix and Vancouver might be interested in those ECHL cities for AAA teams, but that doesn't work for your concept of keeping the current AHL northeast and midwest cluster together if they move their current teams.

 

[210]

There's a bigger issue for a new AAA hockey league...not enough qualified officials. That's why the AHL doesn't use two referees in all its games as it is now.

 

[Hurricane Ron]

Really? They have only had this schedule in place for half of a season. It doesn't seem amazing at all that they would at least wait until the completion of one full season before making any changes. Since they need to start working on the schedule prior to the summer meetings, they will need to hold off until next January to evaluate how it is working.

Competition? No business wants to have a competitor who does exactly the same thing they are trying to do. Also, if this new AAA league did expand, without a compensating contraction in the current AHL then there wouldn't be enough affiliations to go around. The two leagues would be competing for NHL affiliations, and poaching each other's teams and players. Of course the AHL will do almost anything to prevent that.

It's not that simple. It only took 10-15 years to orchestrate the first 5 teams moving west. Convincing six more owners to change leagues might happen, but they again will likely wait a year or two to see how things shake out from the current setup. It would also require some affiliation shifts. Carolina is probably not looking to have their AAA team out west, and Dallas probably prefers to remain where they are. Colorado, Phoenix and Vancouver might be interested in those ECHL cities for AAA teams, but that doesn't work for your concept of keeping the current AHL northeast and midwest cluster together if they move their current teams.

I know of no other league, in any sport, where one group of teams plays a different number of games than the others during the regular season. It will be two years of different schedules. Myself, I couldn't believe it when it first happened, so continuing the same amazes me.

I'm not talking about there being independent AAA teams in a league. I'm talking about NHL affiliations in both leagues. If there are western cities that would work better than eastern cities, then moves would be made. Not talking at all about poaching players. Teams move in the AHL. Would be no different if there were two leagues. As far as competition with another league, I don't see that occurring. There have been multiple AAA leagues in the past. No one is going to go into the core AHL geographic footprint and try and create a new league. But a new league of western teams does nothing to diminish the AHL product. In essence, you've got two leagues operating now, California teams and the rest of the AHL. The AHL would remain as the AAA league with the most teams, simply because of its geographic footprint.

I was unaware of a 10-15 year time frame on moving the teams west. Charlotte, Austin and San Antonio are currently on their own geographically. If part of the reason for the move of the teams to the west was to reduce travel costs, it would make more sense for these teams to move to locations out west, and if desired, Charlotte, Austin and San Antonio filled by teams in the ECHL where travel issues won't be so great. I wasn't considering the current NHL affiliations with these teams when I discussed them possibly moving.

The whole point of my post was just to show that there are other options available, besides what currently exists with one group of teams playing a different amount of games than the rest in the AHL.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

I know of no other league, in any sport, where one group of teams plays a different number of games than the others during the regular season. It will be two years of different schedules. Myself, I couldn't believe it when it first happened, so continuing the same amazes me.

I'm not talking about there being independent AAA teams in a league. I'm talking about NHL affiliations in both leagues. If there are western cities that would work better than eastern cities, then moves would be made. Not talking at all about poaching players. Teams move in the AHL. Would be no different if there were two leagues. As far as competition with another league, I don't see that occurring. There have been multiple AAA leagues in the past. No one is going to go into the core AHL geographic footprint and try and create a new league. But a new league of western teams does nothing to diminish the AHL product. In essence, you've got two leagues operating now, California teams and the rest of the AHL. The AHL would remain as the AAA league with the most teams, simply because of its geographic footprint.

I was unaware of a 10-15 year time frame on moving the teams west. Charlotte, Austin and San Antonio are currently on their own geographically. If part of the reason for the move of the teams to the west was to reduce travel costs, it would make more sense for these teams to move to locations out west, and if desired, Charlotte, Austin and San Antonio filled by teams in the ECHL where travel issues won't be so great. I wasn't considering the current NHL affiliations with these teams when I discussed them possibly moving.

The whole point of my post was just to show that there are other options available, besides what currently exists with one group of teams playing a different amount of games than the rest in the AHL.

you keep forgetting, Hurricane Ron, CAR wanted to have their affiliate closer to them when Charlotte went up a league,and also the cross effect of tht is the Checkers helped expand the sport across the Carolinas

Dallas owns Cedar Park, not Austin, even though it's Texas in name

why would SSE, consider taking the Rampage to the E?

 

[royals119]

I know of no other league, in any sport, where one group of teams plays a different number of games than the others during the regular season. It will be two years of different schedules. Myself, I couldn't believe it when it first happened, so continuing the same amazes me.

That is true, it is a unique situation, but if you accept that fact that they did it, it seems obvious that they would give it a year to see what happens before changing it. They at least need the data from a full season to analyze what the actual affects were.

I'm not talking about there being independent AAA teams in a league. I'm talking about NHL affiliations in both leagues. If there are western cities that would work better than eastern cities, then moves would be made. Not talking at all about poaching players. Teams move in the AHL. Would be no different if there were two leagues.

I know you weren't talking about it, but it would be an issue if another league came along. Right now the AHL has control over how many teams exist at the AAA level, and they require all their teams to affiliate with one NHL team. If another league came into existence and say Colorado decided to put a team in that league, and end their affiliation with San Antonio in the AHL, suddenly the San Antonio owners either have to go independent, or fold their team. They have lost their investment - their franchise is suddenly worthless. Or if any team decides they aren't happy about something with their current affiliate, under the current system they have to either work it out, or switch to another AHL team. With your scenario the new league could offer them to buy a new franchise for half of what an AHL team costs, and suddenly their former AHL partner is left with no affiliate, and a possibly worthless franchise.

As far as competition with another league, I don't see that occurring. There have been multiple AAA leagues in the past. No one is going to go into the core AHL geographic footprint and try and create a new league. But a new league of western teams does nothing to diminish the AHL product.

Yes, there were multiple teams in the past, and they competed for NHL affiliations, players, new cities, etc, and that is part of the reason the IHL was merged into the AHL in the first place. I'm not talking about competing for fans, I'm talking about competing for resources like affiliations, arena leases, players, sponsors, etc.

In essence, you've got two leagues operating now, California teams and the rest of the AHL. The AHL would remain as the AAA league with the most teams, simply because of its geographic footprint.

No, you don't. You have one league where 5 teams play a shorter schedule. It is weird, but it is not two leagues. Having two leagues would create many other problems. An unbalanced schedule is minor compared to those issues.

I was unaware of a 10-15 year time frame on moving the teams west.

The Kings in particular have been trying to get this done since at least 2001. They bought the Monarchs, but they immediately starting talking about how it would be better if they were closer.

Charlotte, Austin and San Antonio are currently on their own geographically. If part of the reason for the move of the teams to the west was to reduce travel costs, it would make more sense for these teams to move to locations out west,

The main reason for the move was to get the AHL team closer to the NHL team. Moving Charlotte and Austin west doesn't help those NHL teams.

and if desired, Charlotte, Austin and San Antonio filled by teams in the ECHL where travel issues won't be so great. I wasn't considering the current NHL affiliations with these teams when I discussed them possibly moving.

Charlotte moved from the ECHL to the AHL, and they are successful there. Yes, all three teams would have closer opponents in the ECHL, but the NHL and AHL affiliates would be further apart in at least two of the three. Hence the likely need to swap affiliates, which is a rather large barrier to making this move,even if anyone wanted to do it.

The whole point of my post was just to show that there are other options available, besides what currently exists with one group of teams playing a different amount of games than the rest in the AHL.

Yes, there are other options, but this one isn't better, for a lot of reasons. Did you think the AHL didn't consider this from every angle? The NHL owners who forced the move west even proposed forming a separate league. The AHL owners realized what you haven't, that would be bad, for many reasons, so they compromised and went with the unbalanced schedule. They know is isn't the ideal situation, but given a choice between that and two separate leagues, the unbalanced schedule is clearly a better choice - for the reasons above, and others we haven't discussed here.

 

[Hurricane Ron]

Appreciate the thoughtful responses to my earlier post.

I realize the Texas Stars are in Cedar Park, TX, but I referred to Austin as the location since Cedar Park is a suburb.

The two of you are more familiar with the issues/conditions the AHL is operating under, than I am.

I grew up watching AAA hockey in the old Central Hockey League. I can remember when the WHL, CHL and AHL were AAA leagues. While I can see the advantages to having one AAA league, I also know that there were advantages to having several AAA leagues, particularly at the fan level. Rivalries were huge among nearby cities, and teams played similar schedules. At least back then, you'd play every team in the league!

I appreciate the opportunity to have expressed my thoughts on the matter. Will be interesting to see what the next five years brings in regards to AAA hockey.

 

[mmazz22]

I had talked to an independent team owner before the season started and they were not happy with the way the schdule shook down. Buttttt the Cali teams were prepared to bolt and the AHL wanted no part of that. So sadly it is what it is until everyone compromises and plays 72. But you have teams like say Hershey who would lose a ton of income with two lost home games . This is huge for them. In say Binghamton if we lose a Wednesday home game big deal, 2500 or so tickets sold isn't a huge loss, but in places like again say Hershey its huge.

 

[Hoodaha]

I had talked to an independent team owner before the season started and they were not happy with the way the schdule shook down. Buttttt the Cali teams were prepared to bolt and the AHL wanted no part of that. So sadly it is what it is until everyone compromises and plays 72. But you have teams like say Hershey who would lose a ton of income with two lost home games . This is huge for them. In say Binghamton if we lose a Wednesday home game big deal, 2500 or so tickets sold isn't a huge loss, but in places like again say Hershey its huge.

I'd much rather that they had compromised on a 72 game season, but as a California fan, I'm more than happy to settle for whatever length these Cali teams want to push for - since it means I get to see amazing AHL hockey. It's been awesome so far.

 

[MM658]

Wouldn't the overhead of starting/running a new league -- one consisting of a whopping five teams, at that -- be unnecessarily burdensome for the five Pacific-tails-that-are-wagging-the-dog?

If I were Andrews, I think I'd call their bluff. Worst case, I'd have to back down at the last minute. Any other outcome re-asserts league sovereignty.

 

[aparch]

If I were Andrews, I think I'd call their bluff. Worst case, I'd have to back down at the last minute. Any other outcome re-asserts league sovereignty.

The rules for the new AAA league were baked in the CBA after the latest lockout. I have a feeling the Pacific Five were almost to the breaking point, and that's why Norfolk was stripped of it's AHL franchise and given an ECHL franchise. Andrews called their bluff. They didn't back down. And likely some backpedaling had to be done.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

The rules for the new AAA league were baked in the CBA after the latest lockout. I have a feeling the Pacific Five were almost to the breaking point, and that's why Norfolk was stripped of it's AHL franchise and given an ECHL franchise. Andrews called their bluff. They didn't back down. And likely some backpedaling had to be done.

no, remember Anaheim a) has solely been an affiliate going back to 95/96, and the Pacific has been on the drawing board since 2006.

b) how much or what agreement was struck between Anaheim and Edmonton once the decision by EDM/Prodigal to dissolve their partnership in OKC, AND The decision to flip the Condors franchise to Norfolk in return for San Diego joining the AHL.

 

[axecrew]

no, remember Anaheim a) has solely been an affiliate going back to 95/96, and the Pacific has been on the drawing board since 2006.

b) how much or what agreement was struck between Anaheim and Edmonton once the decision by EDM/Prodigal to dissolve their partnership in OKC, AND The decision to flip the Condors franchise to Norfolk in return for San Diego joining the AHL.

Huh?

 

[Bobby Smash]

Cali still has a few cities open if the Canucks and Coyotes want in. Fresno and Sacramento are probably the best ones available.

But I'm curious how the logistics. For exampe when a player from Bakersfield gets called to Edmonton, how long does it take? I'm pretty sure there aren't any non stop flights. At least ANA, LA, and SJ can have guys drive to their call up.

 

[LadyStanley]

But I'm curious how the logistics. For exampe when a player from Bakersfield gets called to Edmonton, how long does it take? I'm pretty sure there aren't any non stop flights. At least ANA, LA, and SJ can have guys drive to their call up.

Without traffic, it's two hours of driving from Bakersfield to LAX. From there, easy connections to wherever. (LAX-YEA non-stop is about 3.5 hours.) So, I'd allow a minimum of 8 hours to get from Bakersfield to Edmonton.
Bakersfield has a small international airport, that is served by American/US Airways and United; look to be early morning, mid-day and late afternoon flights. (Most common flight destinations seem to be SFO and PHX.)

 

[LadyStanley]

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...rain-construction-will-start-in-the-bay-area/

And will the California Bullet train scheduled to build the first segment between Bakersfield and San Jose, SJC might be a timely future option for flights.

 

[GKJ]

Cali still has a few cities open if the Canucks and Coyotes want in. Fresno and Sacramento are probably the best ones available.

But I'm curious how the logistics. For exampe when a player from Bakersfield gets called to Edmonton, how long does it take? I'm pretty sure there aren't any non stop flights. At least ANA, LA, and SJ can have guys drive to their call up.

The Sharks are eventually going to move their AHL team to Sacramento, I think.

 

[LadyStanley]

The Sharks are eventually going to move their AHL team to Sacramento, I think.

Given they've got a package for Sharks STH to get Barracuda tickets for $100/season, I don't think they're going anywhere.

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

The AHL is the only minor league with teams in California - 5 to be exact.

This gives me an idea. The California team with the most points earned in head-to-head games against in-state rivals should earn a traveling trophy every year. I would call the AHL version the Gretzky Cup because Wayne Gretzky truly popularized hockey in California during his tenure with the LA Kings. The NHL teams in the state can compete for their own trophy, the Golden State Cup.

I think a key reason the AHL arrived in California was the sport's rising popularity in the face of the Kings winning the Stanley Cup twice in three years. Fans in California wanted better minor league product than the ECHL teams that were present for years. And 5 of the NHL's Pacific teams took notice and wanting closer AHL affiliations, chose to move their AHL affiliates to California.

I think hockey's popularity in California will soon lead to the 7 NCAA D1 FBS schools in the state - Cal, UCLA, Stanford, USC, Fresno State, SJSU, SDSU - to launch varsity ice hockey programs.

I'm glad this AHL in California thing is working out. 3 Pacific/Mountain Time teams in the NHL - Arizona, Colorado and Vancouver - still have their AHL affiliates in the East. Vancouver will likely move theirs to Abbotsford, Arizona and Colorado could follow the other five Pacific teams to California.

I think San Jose should move their AHL affiliate to the new arena the Warriors are building in SF, so that Arizona or Colorado could use Sacramento. The only other market in California that could potentially get an AHL team is Fresno.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

The AHL is the only minor league with teams in California - 5 to be exact.

This gives me an idea. The California team with the most points earned in head-to-head games against in-state rivals should earn a traveling trophy every year. I would call the AHL version the Gretzky Cup because Wayne Gretzky truly popularized hockey in California during his tenure with the LA Kings. The NHL teams in the state can compete for their own trophy, the Golden State Cup.

I think a key reason the AHL arrived in California was the sport's rising popularity in the face of the Kings winning the Stanley Cup twice in three years. Fans in California wanted better minor league product than the ECHL teams that were present for years. And 5 of the NHL's Pacific teams took notice and wanting closer AHL affiliations, chose to move their AHL affiliates to California.

I think hockey's popularity in California will soon lead to the 7 NCAA D1 FBS schools in the state - Cal, UCLA, Stanford, USC, Fresno State, SJSU, SDSU - to launch varsity ice hockey programs.

I'm glad this AHL in California thing is working out. 3 Pacific/Mountain Time teams in the NHL - Arizona, Colorado and Vancouver - still have their AHL affiliates in the East. Vancouver will likely move theirs to Abbotsford, Arizona and Colorado could follow the other five Pacific teams to California.

I think San Jose should move their AHL affiliate to the new arena the Warriors are building in SF, so that Arizona or Colorado could use Sacramento. The only other market in California that could potentially get an AHL team is Fresno.

you were told tht SJ has no interest in splitting the Sharks and Barracuda, I don't see Arizona (which is perilous until the Coyotes are stable enough legally to even entertain running an affiliate), you're forgetting where does Colorado or Arizona, and I don't foresee the Spurs ownership (who own/operate the Rampage) being bullied the way Anaheim did to Norfolk.

Abbotsford and Fresno are no go's, why? Vancouver tried tht w/ wht is now Stockton's owners,the Flames, and the city wants nothing to do w/ any pro franchise after the buyout was excersized.... VAN then bought wht had been SPR/WOR/PEO/UTI, and Esche operates the Comets.

Fresno went the NAHL ROUTE (the Monsters) after THE Falcons collapsed mid-season.

 

[Hoodaha]

you were told tht SJ has no interest in splitting the Sharks and Barracuda, I don't see Arizona (which is perilous until the Coyotes are stable enough legally to even entertain running an affiliate), you're forgetting where does Colorado or Arizona, and I don't foresee the Spurs ownership (who own/operate the Rampage) being bullied the way Anaheim did to Norfolk.

Abbotsford and Fresno are no go's, why? Vancouver tried tht w/ wht is now Stockton's owners,the Flames, and the city wants nothing to do w/ any pro franchise after the buyout was excersized.... VAN then bought wht had been SPR/WOR/PEO/UTI, and Esche operates the Comets.

Fresno went the NAHL ROUTE (the Monsters) after THE Falcons collapsed mid-season.

Fresno has two arenas and I'm sure fans would prefer the AHL to NAHL. I see no record of Fresno in the NAHL this year, in any event.

 

[Hoodaha]

I do see a WSHL team in Fresno. They do not play in either Selland Arena or Sav-Mart Center. It appears they play in a smaller venue.