Devils minor league club to NJ

[210]

It's easy to get an independent AHL owner to do what as NHL team wants...threaten to drop your affiliation with them and share an AHL team with another NHL parent. Independent AHL owners have no leverage anymore. It's do what the NHL wants or don't have a team.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

This already happened with Norfolk.

It's easy to get an independent AHL owner to do what as NHL team wants...threaten to drop your affiliation with them and share an AHL team with another NHL parent. Independent AHL owners have no leverage anymore. It's do what the NHL wants or don't have a team.

That leverage doesn't exist. No NHL team is going to share their AHL team with another. The days of the 1-1 close relationships and affiliations are here to stay, we won't see the world of two year affiliations with 7 teams in New England ever again. The only time we could ever see a shared affiliation again would be if an expansion team needs a year to get started like Vegas did. If you think that a NHL team would be willing to share their affiliation, you need to do some major reconsideration. When there's typically anywhere from 5-10 major developing prospects for your AHL team along with another 4-5 who are ready to be called up for injuries, no owner or GM is going to waste half the roster for any situation. The NHL is an old boys' club, but the line has previously been drawn well before that.

The Pacific Coast move and affiliation changes in that year changed how the AHL was run. This isn't the mid-2000s AHL where half the teams didn't care what their prospects were doing or where the affiliation was. No team, not even the apathetic Devils, would do anything to harm their precious prospects like sharing an affiliation. Heck, the Canucks are keeping their farm team on the other side of the continent to help ensure the prying eyes of Canuckland media won't destroy them before they're ready. And you think teams would be willing to share an affiliation? Get that Gambler's fallacy out of here and get real.

 

[210]

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried to be. Seriously. NHL teams hold all the power of the AHL now. The simple threat to an independent owner of never getting an affiliation again is enough to keep them in line and get the NHL what they want.

And before you say "no" again, what I suggest has already happened once in Norfolk. It will happen again if an independent AHL owner doesn't get in line.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried to be. Seriously. NHL teams hold all the power of the AHL now. The simple threat to an independent owner of never getting an affiliation again is enough to keep them in line and get the NHL what they want.

And before you say "no" again, what I suggest has already happened once in Norfolk. It will happen again if an independent AHL owner doesn't get in line.

The situation has changed. Teams were willing to share then, they aren't anymore. The NHL team can't jump ship because no other team would share an affiliation with them. They can't relocate because they don't own the team, they can't buy an expansion team because the 32nd and final franchise is earmarked for Seattle. It's not a credible threat anymore. We haven't seen a Norfolk since because the situation has changed. If what you were saying was true, then St. Louis would have their affiliate close to home because they forced San Antonio to give up the franchise under that threat. It's a fact that St. Louis heavily pursued that option with the two favored relocation markets being Kansas City and Indianapolis. But it didn't happen, because the circumstances you're describing don't exist anymore. And St. Louis very hesitantly signed into a deal to go to San Antonio because they had no where else to go. That's an independent AHL owner getting "out of line," and look what happened. Norfolk won't happen again because that situation doesn't exist anymore. St. Louis happened in the new AHL, your nonsensical Norfolk example happened in the old version of the league. Look at the difference. The league has changed.

When Norfolk was sold, there was the real threat they would be left without an affiliate. Sharing a farm team was commonplace at that time. AHL teams were still getting bought and sold, or having their long-term affiliations made. It was months before the Canadiens repurchased the Hamilton Bulldogs, the Falcons were very much up for sale or on the table as were the Portland Pirates, Albany Devils, and Binghamton was two years away from getting bought by Melnyk.

 

[Centrum Hockey]

The situation has changed. Teams were willing to share then, they aren't anymore. The NHL team can't jump ship because no other team would share an affiliation with them. They can't relocate because they don't own the team, they can't buy an expansion team because the 32nd and final franchise is earmarked for Seattle. It's not a credible threat anymore. We haven't seen a Norfolk since because the situation has changed. If what you were saying was true, then St. Louis would have their affiliate close to home because they forced San Antonio to give up the franchise under that threat. It's a fact that St. Louis heavily pursued that option with the two favored relocation markets being Kansas City and Indianapolis. But it didn't happen, because the circumstances you're describing don't exist anymore. And St. Louis very hesitantly signed into a deal to go to San Antonio because they had no where else to go. That's an independent AHL owner getting "out of line," and look what happened. Norfolk won't happen again because that situation doesn't exist anymore. That's my response to your idiotic Norfolk example. St. Louis happened in the new AHL, your pitiful Norfolk example happened in the old version of the league. Look at the difference. The league has changed.

When Norfolk was sold, there was the real threat they would be left without an affiliate. Sharing a farm team was commonplace at that time. AHL teams were still getting bought and sold, or having their long-term affiliations made. It was months before the Canadiens repurchased the Hamilton Bulldogs, the Falcons were very much up for sale or on the table as were the Portland Pirates, Albany Devils, and Binghamton was two years away from getting bought by Melnyk.

St Louis has had no interest what so ever in owning a ahl team.They did not want to own the Icecats or the RiverMen both times they where forced to buy the team. They where not forced into anything with San Antonio. No one wanted to own a team and absorb losses for them close to St Louis so they chose San Antonio. Blues add AHL affiliate in San Antonio — for next year

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

St Louis has had no interest what so ever in owning a ahl team.They did not want to own the Icecats or the RiverMen both times they where forced to buy the team. They where not forced into anything with San Antonio. No one wanted to own a team and absorb losses for them close to St Louis so they chose San Antonio. Blues add AHL affiliate in San Antonio — for next year

Absolutely incorrect. Former St. Louis Blues, Peoria Rivermen, and Scottrade Center owner Dave Checketts put them all up for sale in 2011 and Tom Stillman bought it from him the next year. The Rivermen were purchased by the Canucks and moved since the Blues wanted an affiliation with Chicago, and Peoria’s paid attendance was near the 2,000 mark. Their current status as an average member of the SPHL should speak to that market’s ability. The Icecats was 30 years and two ownership groups ago when a handful of teams cared about the AHL. Thanks for trying.

They were forced into San Antonio. They’ve actively been looking elsewhere for 2 years after they had a very public falling out with Chicago. Kansas City was the goal and Indianapolis was a close second. Links provided: Blues add AHL affiliate in San Antonio — for next year | St. Louis Blues | stltoday.com, St. Louis Blues AHL Nightmare Will End...Eventually,Blues add AHL affiliate in San Antonio — for next year,St. Louis Blues Playing Footsie With Kansas City Over AHL Team and everywhere else on the internet. Thanks for trying.

If what 210 and the other person was saying was true, St. Louis could have easily forced Chicago’s or San Antonio’s independent ownership out. Instead, we’re in this situation we’re currently in. New league situation means Norfolk won’t happen again. Thanks for trying.

 

[Centrum Hockey]

Absolutely incorrect. Former St. Louis Blues, Peoria Rivermen, and Scottrade Center owner Dave Checketts put them all up for sale in 2011 and Tom Stillman bought it from him the next year. The Rivermen were purchased by the Canucks and moved since the Blues wanted an affiliation with Chicago, and Peoria’s paid attendance was near the 2,000 mark. Their current status as an average member of the SPHL should speak to that market’s ability. The Icecats was 30 years and two ownership groups ago when a handful of teams cared about the AHL. Thanks for trying.

They were forced into San Antonio. They’ve actively been looking elsewhere for 2 years after they had a very public falling out with Chicago. Kansas City was the goal and Indianapolis was a close second. Links provided: Blues add AHL affiliate in San Antonio — for next year | St. Louis Blues | stltoday.com, St. Louis Blues AHL Nightmare Will End...Eventually,Blues add AHL affiliate in San Antonio — for next year,St. Louis Blues Playing Footsie With Kansas City Over AHL Team and everywhere else on the internet. Thanks for trying.

If what 210 and the other person was saying was true, St. Louis could have easily forced Chicago’s or San Antonio’s independent ownership out. Instead, we’re in this situation we’re currently in. New league situation means Norfolk won’t happen again. Thanks for trying.

Let's Go Blues • View topic - Rivermen Sale Imminent?
Weigh in here on Blues sale of Rivermen to Vancouver
If the blues wanted to own a ahl team there would be nothing stopping them

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

Let's Go Blues • View topic - Rivermen Sale Imminent?
Weigh in here on Blues sale of Rivermen to Vancouver
If the blues wanted to own a ahl team there would be nothing stopping them

Once again, no. The Blues were right to leave Peoria. Paid attendance was around 2,000 per night and during their best years it didn’t even get far past 5,000. It wasn’t meant to be their long-term home and they did well to get it off their hands. It would’ve been a wasted investment.

The Blues wanted to and actively tried to own and operate an AHL affiliate in Kansas City or Indianapolis. That is an irrefutable fact, Centrum. That didn’t happen. That’s is also a fact. They then made the late affiliation announcement that they would go to San Antonio, the only other one left without a dancing partner. They clearly wanted to have an affiliate. If it was possible to share an affiliation with another team to force San Antonio to sell, they would have. But, no one would share. As I said. Thanks for trying. The leverage you all seem to think exists doesn’t. This is proof of this. The entire situation of the league has changed. You wouldn’t use examples of what the AHL did in the 90s because the league has changed since then! It seismically changed in 2014-15. One for one affiliations, nationwide, and that’s how it operates now. Get used to it. Norfolk happened in January before the move. Multiple teams were for sale or had open affiliations, Anaheim leaving them was legitimately an option. It isn’t a possibility anymore.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Once again, no. The Blues were right to leave Peoria. Paid attendance was around 2,000 per night and during their best years it didn’t even get far past 5,000. It wasn’t meant to be their long-term home and they did well to get it off their hands. It would’ve been a wasted investment.

The Blues wanted to and actively tried to own and operate an AHL affiliate in Kansas City or Indianapolis. That is an irrefutable fact, Centrum. That didn’t happen. That’s is also a fact. They then made the late affiliation announcement that they would go to San Antonio, the only other one left without a dancing partner. They clearly wanted to have an affiliate. If it was possible to share an affiliation with another team to force San Antonio to sell, they would have. But, no one would share. As I said. Thanks for trying. The leverage you all seem to think exists doesn’t. This is proof of this. The entire situation of the league has changed. You wouldn’t use examples of what the AHL did in the 90s because the league has changed since then! It seismically changed in 2014-15. One for one affiliations, nationwide, and that’s how it operates now. Get used to it. Norfolk happened in January before the move. Multiple teams were for sale or had open affiliations, Anaheim leaving them was legitimately an option. It isn’t a possibility anymore.

actually, Kansas City wants nothing to do with hockey, BD, THAT'S WHY Independence and the Mavericks said absolutely not a chance of them being involved and the fallback was the Rampage over the 31st team once Vegas got control in Rosemont.... Wolves will never be a legitimate Chicago franchise, otherwise get yourself a Chicago arena OR A MAILING ADDRESS

 

[JMCx4]

... The Blues wanted to and actively tried to own and operate an AHL affiliate in Kansas City or Indianapolis. That is an irrefutable fact, Centrum. ...

An "irrefutable fact" screams for an irrefutable source. I don't know about the possible Indy partnership, but the purported AHL ownership of a Blues affiliate in KC as reported at the time was Lamar Hunt Jr. and former Blues D-man Tom Tilley - NOT the Blues themselves: Missouri Mavericks deny report outlining plans to take over AHL team for St. Louis Blues.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

An "irrefutable fact" screams for an irrefutable source. I don't know about the possible Indy partnership, but the purported AHL ownership of a Blues affiliate in KC as reported at the time was Lamar Hunt Jr. and former Blues D-man Tom Tilley - NOT the Blues themselves: Missouri Mavericks deny report outlining plans to take over AHL team for St. Louis Blues.

Having LHJr. own the team was the plan once they realized that they could do anything due to the lack of leverage. It was once Colorado Eagles announced they would be the 31st AHL, after several years of needing to be convinced by Avalanche ownership. The Avs wanted to own the franchise, but the only way Eagles ownership would budge would be if they controlled everything like they did in the EC. There’s about 50 articles out there explicitly stating it.

Having LHJr. own the team didn’t work because he’s independent. He didn’t want to answer to a higher power, possibly destroy his business model, along with paying the EC exit fee.

actually, Kansas City wants nothing to do with hockey, BD, THAT'S WHY Independence and the Mavericks said absolutely not a chance of them being involved and the fallback was the Rampage over the 31st team once Vegas got control in Rosemont.... Wolves will never be a legitimate Chicago franchise, otherwise get yourself a Chicago arena OR A MAILING ADDRESS

Kansas City has a well supported ECHL team and has been strongly linked with both the USHL and NAHL in the past, there’s even two planned arenas going up right now. That’s pretty significant interest in hockey. And Wolves have been one of the top drawing AHL teams for years, doesn’t matter if they have a Chicago address or not. You don’t blast the Ottawa Senators saying they should be the Kanata Senators, don’t do it here.

 

[axecrew]

actually, Kansas City wants nothing to do with hockey, BD, THAT'S WHY Independence and the Mavericks said absolutely not a chance of them being involved and the fallback was the Rampage over the 31st team once Vegas got control in Rosemont.... Wolves will never be a legitimate Chicago franchise, otherwise get yourself a Chicago arena OR A MAILING ADDRESS

Absolutely hutch! And neither will the Chicago Dogs independent league baseball team playing in Rosemont...nor will the Golden State Warriors without Oakland in their name or The "Los Angeles" Angels in Anaheim OR GOD FORBID...The "NEW YORK" Giants and Jets...who...GASP...don't even play in the state of New York.
Get over yourself and worry about where your ECHL team plays,before you guys piss away another team.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

Absolutely hutch! And neither will the Chicago Dogs independent league baseball team playing in Rosemont...nor will the Golden State Warriors without Oakland in their name or The "Los Angeles" Angels in Anaheim OR GOD FORBID...The "NEW YORK" Giants and Jets...who...GASP...don't even play in the state of New York.
Get over yourself and worry about where your ECHL team plays,before you guys piss away another team.

“BUT WHAT YOU DIDN’T know is that CHICAGO has been home to many minor pro teams, Axecrew...But there was no pre-existing franchise, I bet YOU DIDN’T know about how they joined from the IHL b.c. I bet you also didn’t know how Chicago Blackhawks OWN THAT market, how could they ever be their own market if there is another team close by...?”

It’s also not his ECHL team, he’s waiting for the AHL Pirates to come back because Portland, Maine deserves nothing less. Better to wait for something that never returns than to support what you have, the Monarchs did that and look how great they’re doing.

 

[210]

The Blues want nothing to do with owning an AHL franchise. They only owned one when they didn't really have much of a choice (ironically it was the same franchise in two different cities). Push comes to shove the Rampage ownership, which is an NBA team looking to fill dates in its building, will do whatever the NHL wants it to do.

 

[Tommy Hawk]

The Blues want nothing to do with owning an AHL franchise. They only owned one when they didn't really have much of a choice (ironically it was the same franchise in two different cities). Push comes to shove the Rampage ownership, which is an NBA team looking to fill dates in its building, will do whatever the NHL wants it to do.

True but the NHL won't push them or Cleveland because there are too many buildings housing NHL and NBA teams. The NBA owners could make trouble for those NHL owners because, like the NH owners, the NBA owners is a good ol' boys club.

 

[210]

It's not as big an issue as you'd think...

Shared NBA-NHL Arenas in 2018-19 - Arena Digest

 

[Nightsquad]

Folks stop calling owners of AHL teams owners, I am very offended by this! The NHL, AHL, and any professional sports organization needs to act more like the NBA and refer to their owners as Governors. I find the NBA to be the gold standard of how its conducts itself......NOT!!!!!!! Lol now I got your attention professional hockey needs to stay clear from the NBA and their crackpot leadership and their "offended" players. These players whom make more money then the average person who not only cant afford to often attend an NBA game but also many who go to work for an "owner" of a respective business.

Lastly, whatever structure model changes professional hockey undergoes in the years to come the Leafs, Marlies, and Growlers arrangement cant be ignored. This may very well signal that shift the ECHL has been waiting for, and has paid its dues. Also many dont like for obvious reasons the dual affiliation arrangement. The dual affiliation arrangement in the ECHL could be beneficial to a club in the saturated northeast. An ECHL club in New England, New York, NJ, or Pennsylvania could be attractive to fans in those areas where there are many NHL clubs. Fans in certain parts of CT for example can be Bruins fans and many could better identify as Rangers fans. Just like in NJ many identify as Devils fans but many identify as Flyers fans if you happen to be from south Jersey as in Trenton. Some food for thought, chew on it but dont choke.

 

[Centrum Hockey]

Folks stop calling owners of AHL teams owners, I am very offended by this! The NHL, AHL, and any professional sports organization needs to act more like the NBA and refer to their owners as Governors. I find the NBA to be the gold standard of how its conducts itself......NOT!!!!!!! Lol now I got your attention professional hockey needs to stay clear from the NBA and their crackpot leadership and their "offended" players. These players whom make more money then the average person who not only cant afford to often attend an NBA game but also many who go to work for an "owner" of a respective business.

Lastly, whatever structure model changes professional hockey undergoes in the years to come the Leafs, Marlies, and Growlers arrangement cant be ignored. This may very well signal that shift the ECHL has been waiting for, and has paid its dues. Also many dont like for obvious reasons the dual affiliation arrangement. The dual affiliation arrangement in the ECHL could be beneficial to a club in the saturated northeast. An ECHL club in New England, New York, NJ, or Pennsylvania could be attractive to fans in those areas where there are many NHL clubs. Fans in certain parts of CT for example can be Bruins fans and many could better identify as Rangers fans. Just like in NJ many identify as Devils fans but many identify as Flyers fans if you happen to be from south Jersey as in Trenton. Some food for thought, chew on it but dont choke.

I doubt fans in the northeast echl markets care about developing AHL prospects people whould rather see there local team try to win games how did this approach work out?

 

[mmazz22]

Centrum 100% right! When we (Binghamton) was in the UHL after 20 AHL years and we were the farm team for Rochester and Springfield it was awful. Like a real slap in the face to a lose players to Rochester our number one rival at the time. I could have cared less and actually preferred to not help the AHL teams we used to play. Selling the promotions to the AHL will not work in former AHL markets. Its a slap in the face honestly. In leagues below the AHL it should be about selling the local team and thats it.

 

[Tommy Hawk]

It's not as big an issue as you'd think...

Shared NBA-NHL Arenas in 2018-19 - Arena Digest

That's over a third of them. That is a lot of power especially when you look at the actual franchises.

 

[210]

That's over a third of them. That is a lot of power especially when you look at the actual franchises.

Look at who owns most of the buildings those NHL and NBA teams share.

 

[Nightsquad]

Centrum 100% right! When we (Binghamton) was in the UHL after 20 AHL years and we were the farm team for Rochester and Springfield it was awful. Like a real slap in the face to a lose players to Rochester our number one rival at the time. I could have cared less and actually preferred to not help the AHL teams we used to play. Selling the promotions to the AHL will not work in former AHL markets. Its a slap in the face honestly. In leagues below the AHL it should be about selling the local team and thats it.

The AHL was a much different league then as it is now. Manchester promoting their players as development for the AHL was stupid. Good players no matter where they are at will advance. Lets be honest, the Devils have been in shambles for years now. The NJ get mediocre fan support in Newark, they play in the shadows of the Rangers and Islanders. Their AHL squads have mostly been dull for many years. Gone are the days of Binghamton, Hershey, and Rochester as flagship AHL franchises. The AHL operates differently, and its role has changed. Heck most of the markets in the ECHL are bigger then Binghamton and Manchester and most of the arenas of the ECHL are gems compared to the old but loveable Broome County Veterans Memorial Coliseum. The Growlers and the Maple Leafs have changed the face of the ECHL, and advanced its role. The ECHL is not the rough and tumble shenanigans of the United League, its a legit professional league. The league develops the individual skill set, the AHL develops the systems and organizational skills.

 

[GindyDraws]

Absolutely hutch! And neither will the Chicago Dogs independent league baseball team playing in Rosemont...nor will the Golden State Warriors without Oakland in their name or The "Los Angeles" Angels in Anaheim OR GOD FORBID...The "NEW YORK" Giants and Jets...who...GASP...don't even play in the state of New York.
Get over yourself and worry about where your ECHL team plays,before you guys piss away another team.

But, but, but, the Mariners AREN'T the Portland Pirates! And that's bad! And I'll tell you that's bad because it's bad since they have "Maine" in their name, not Portland! And they are the "Mariners", not "Pirates"! Mariners are not Pirates!

You wanna be like Manchester, and blow your shot at having hockey for many years?

 

[Tommy Hawk]

Look at who owns most of the buildings those NHL and NBA teams share.

Co