gwh
Registered User
- Mar 4, 2013
- 3,688
- 622
Yet the US NHL players get dunked every year in the IIHF worlds.
Team valuation is based on cashflow. Good hockey is based on player skills.
Europe should put a division in NHL
- Thread starter MrThomas
- Start date
Yet the US NHL players get dunked every year in the IIHF worlds.
Team valuation is based on cashflow. Good hockey is based on player skills.
Butch 19
Go cart Mozart
Butch 19
Go cart Mozart
At the pool I can also do the triple lindy.wow - the rare triple negative! Congrats
DowntownBooster
Registered User
Whether or not teams from those leagues join to form a super league, the biggest difference between that scenario and the NHL having a European division is that none of those teams will be required to cross the Atlantic ocean in order to play another team.
S.S. Giggy
RIP 1974-2011
IamNotADancer
Registered User
- Feb 16, 2017
- 2,435
- 2,730
And I never said otherwise. Also, last time I checked I never made a difference between US and Canadian teams. both countries form the NHL and I referred to this when I said "North America". Canada does not get "dunked" on every year. Still, that wasn't my point. Cash flow is the point, and for cash to flow there has to be interest. The general population has no interest in hockey, that goes for the US and Europe. The thing is though, even the smallest niche sport in the US can still support a constant cash flow due to the sheer size of the US population. Of course it also helps to have Canada next door.
We as hockey fans overvalue our sport more often than not when it comes to interest from the populace.
RageQuit77
Registered User
I think it would be nearly impossible make rational schedules for a season without also re-arrangement of current division and conference system, and amounts of games played between teams. It would likely require that European Division and NA divisions would play most of season in partial isolation from each others and that to be possible, fair, would require that there are enough teams in Europe. Maybe there would be two playoffs spots to compete for or something like that, while most of their games would be within the division against divisional teams.
In principle I support the idea of expansion, but there are many many serious practical difficulties with it, drafts being not the least of them. Eagerness of European players to move NA is traditionally on much higher level than what would be expected from NA prospects eagerness to move to Europe.
- Dec 2, 2007
- 17,268
- 2,214
Unless Europe can sustain NHL-level budgets and build their own business out there, basically overtaking existing teams, it won't work very well. NA audiences won't watch many games being played at 1pm during a work day or earlier depending on time zones. We've already seen how hard it is with the Olympics and getting viewers.
Don't get me wrong, it'd be cool to be fully international. But it isn't likely to happen at the NHL-level.
Dogewow
Such Profile
- Feb 1, 2015
- 2,883
- 291
Did you stop to think about the travel, divisional/conference imbalance and logistics of putting an entire division across the pond? At minimum, there is a 4-5 hour difference between east coast teams. Just take 30 seconds to think about it, you'll realize that a European division in the NHL isn't going to work. Forget about how popular hockey may be in Europe.
Until humanity can invent a form of fast travel that is practical financially to use, then this idea is pure fantasy.
Mr Positive
Cap Crunch Incoming
- Nov 20, 2013
- 36,050
- 16,451
Crede777
Deputized
- Dec 16, 2009
- 14,642
- 4,165
Europe should form a continental league comprised of the more successful SHL, Liiga, Superliga, DEL, NLA, and maybe some other cities (in England perhaps or France). This league would rival the KHL.
Then after a few years the NHL could incorporate the most successful teams like it did the WHA.
Then after a few years the NHL could incorporate the most successful teams like it did the WHA.
I won't even go to the logistics of it, which are hard as they are.
The games in Europe work the same way as NHL outdoor games work. If there's too many they lose their attraction. It's easy to fill a hockey stadium when you bring your biggest local talent for couple of games, but try to do it 41 times a year for one team and you run into trouble to bring people in.
Also there's just not enough corporate sponsors for European teams. When NHL is negotiationg deals with companies like Geico can claim that they gain nothing out of the European market as they have no market share here. Not sure how much current owners would appreciate teams that would only eat their current cake, but wouldn't add anything to it when it comes to revenue.
Finns should also look no further than Jokerit. They were maybe the most popular team in Liiga and they have now played 4 full seasons in the KHL and have managed to rack up 57 million euros in losses, 15 million last year alone. There's only so much money the Russian oligarchs are willing to lose. I think Peter Regin might be their most expensive player and he makes like $ 650k a year. Now imagine how hard it would be to pay for real NHL talent. There's also the issue that no one would want to play here because of the taxes. Why would any star play in Finland when you would have to pay 46% income taxes + 8,25% in other pension and unemployment insurance fees? No free agent would ever choose to play here when they have the option to play in no state income tax -states. And that's not even going in the life style issues that there would be for their families.
There's just no way of making NHL teams viable in Europe.
The games in Europe work the same way as NHL outdoor games work. If there's too many they lose their attraction. It's easy to fill a hockey stadium when you bring your biggest local talent for couple of games, but try to do it 41 times a year for one team and you run into trouble to bring people in.
Also there's just not enough corporate sponsors for European teams. When NHL is negotiationg deals with companies like Geico can claim that they gain nothing out of the European market as they have no market share here. Not sure how much current owners would appreciate teams that would only eat their current cake, but wouldn't add anything to it when it comes to revenue.
Finns should also look no further than Jokerit. They were maybe the most popular team in Liiga and they have now played 4 full seasons in the KHL and have managed to rack up 57 million euros in losses, 15 million last year alone. There's only so much money the Russian oligarchs are willing to lose. I think Peter Regin might be their most expensive player and he makes like $ 650k a year. Now imagine how hard it would be to pay for real NHL talent. There's also the issue that no one would want to play here because of the taxes. Why would any star play in Finland when you would have to pay 46% income taxes + 8,25% in other pension and unemployment insurance fees? No free agent would ever choose to play here when they have the option to play in no state income tax -states. And that's not even going in the life style issues that there would be for their families.
There's just no way of making NHL teams viable in Europe.
Untapped revenue streams.
This isn't so much about the fans as the owners. This is why there is so much interest in China. The league doesn't care about the quality of hockey out there, they want that 1.3 billion person market that has almost no saturation right now.
Maplebeasts
I See Demons!!!!!
No. The travel would be atrocious and scheduling would be a nightmare. Games in Europe would have trash TV ratings in NA.
TomasHertlsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
By allowing the winner of the Stanley Cup to play against the winner of the Gagarin Cup, the NHL would be demonstrating that they are not in any way equal.
Start with the good. Europe has extremely passionate fans and enough of them in enough cities to sustain a NHL division, certainly.
Yet what they also tend to have is a culture wherein fans don't pay a lot of money for tickets to see a game. That's a real problem.
The NHL is a gate-driven league that is largely marketed to white collar fans now. The blue collar crowd can't afford to go to very many hockey games anymore. There are a couple of exceptions in markets where the teams have been bad for a long time, but most NHL cities keep ticket prices very high.
The bottom line is that the money that teams make from tickets is extremely important to league revenues, far more important than advertising or television contracts. The prevailing economic model for hockey in North America and Europe may not be compatible, at least for the present.
Any city can draw for a major event, where there are only one or two games total (like Helsinki, with Laine and Barkov in town). What about growing a strong season ticket base, for both major draws/stars on the weekend, as well as Tuesday night against a team you don't care about very much?
This is before you deal with the travel issue, not just the strain on the teams and players, but the fans who watch games. To work, road trips are going to have to be long. You'll only go to Europe/North America once per season and you are going to be there for a while. As a fan, if your team is playing a third or a quarter of its games while you are asleep or working, your investment in the team is going to be seriously hindered. We are living in an on-demand world, but sports is the last bastion for live televised events.
What happens when a player gets traded across divisions? How many players are going to be on board with that? That's a major lifestyle change, one that isn't yours to make, like it is when you voluntarily change leagues.
Yet what they also tend to have is a culture wherein fans don't pay a lot of money for tickets to see a game. That's a real problem.
The NHL is a gate-driven league that is largely marketed to white collar fans now. The blue collar crowd can't afford to go to very many hockey games anymore. There are a couple of exceptions in markets where the teams have been bad for a long time, but most NHL cities keep ticket prices very high.
The bottom line is that the money that teams make from tickets is extremely important to league revenues, far more important than advertising or television contracts. The prevailing economic model for hockey in North America and Europe may not be compatible, at least for the present.
Any city can draw for a major event, where there are only one or two games total (like Helsinki, with Laine and Barkov in town). What about growing a strong season ticket base, for both major draws/stars on the weekend, as well as Tuesday night against a team you don't care about very much?
This is before you deal with the travel issue, not just the strain on the teams and players, but the fans who watch games. To work, road trips are going to have to be long. You'll only go to Europe/North America once per season and you are going to be there for a while. As a fan, if your team is playing a third or a quarter of its games while you are asleep or working, your investment in the team is going to be seriously hindered. We are living in an on-demand world, but sports is the last bastion for live televised events.
What happens when a player gets traded across divisions? How many players are going to be on board with that? That's a major lifestyle change, one that isn't yours to make, like it is when you voluntarily change leagues.
Last edited:
Channelcat
Unhinged user
A 31-team Nhl is already bloated in its current form. Any suggestion to expand it even more even to Europe, well, not a very good idea.
Butch 19
Go cart Mozart
PatrikBerglund
Registered User
- May 29, 2017
- 4,628
- 2,654
Burke the Legend
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2012
- 8,317
- 2,850
This. Probably the only logical way to do it. Form a European major league of like only 8 of the biggest clubs. If this can generate serious interest they should be able to better sponsorships, more gate revenue, and land decent TV contracts boosting their revenue. If they can get up to at least 40 million revenue per club then you are starting to approach NHL level and will be able to bid on NHL level talent and things get serious. They still have to do some growingto get closer but at least now there's a valid comparison and logic for a merger.
robertmac43
Forever 43!
- Mar 31, 2015
- 23,423
- 15,543
Do they? What are KHL attendance rates like? I just cannot see the interest for an entire division, it would just need too much to go into it.
robertmac43
Forever 43!
- Mar 31, 2015
- 23,423
- 15,543
What if they made a league that was similar to the Champions League in Soccer? 8 Teams from North America play, 8 teams from the KHL and other leagues? They could have different ways of qualifying; for instance President Trophy winner, SC winner, finalist, etc. To make it extra diverse they could have the Mem cup winner and Calder Cup winner as well... I don't really know, just some diverse hockey tournament thing,... lol
Ad
Latest posts
-
Confirmed with Link: Avs acquire Casey Mittelstadt for Bo Byram
- Latest: Avsavsavsavsavs
-
