How Many ECHL Teams are on Their Deathbeds?
- Thread starter Royalsflagrunner77
- Start date
Barclay Donaldson
Registered User
There really aren’t any in that bad of a situation. Manchester was out their on their own, everyone else is doing pretty okay.
Wheeling is the usual suspect, but they have very committed ownership and probably the most team-friendly lease in sports. They’ll be here for a while.
Rapid City has downward attendance and are not in a travel-friendly division. They might be in trouble but aren’t anywhere near as bad as Wheeling.
Kalamazoo is in a tough position being stuck with great AHL and college hockey options nearby, but they’re trending upwards. Many ECHL teams are like this. I think the lack of expansion this year can be more explained by the lack of suitable markets rather than stabilizing their teams.
The Predators announced an affiliation with the Everblades, which I consider surprising, as the past 2 years have seen their players assigned to Atlanta despite no "official" affiliation.
Atlantian
Registered User
Gladiators and their arena signed a two year lease. Rumor was we’d be affiliated with Nashville next season so no one knows what’s going on now. The deal must’ve fallen through.
Royalsflagrunner77
Registered User
Last I heard in Reading ownership is supposed to be switched from Gulati to the city beginning of June and they were still in talks to renew with Philadelphia. But were looking for a more beneficial deal with some more marketing capabilities .
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,590
- 6,501
I think that there's a whole lot of ECHL teams who may not survive the next 5 years. With the demise of Manchester leaving 26 teams, I wouldn't be surprised to see an ECHL at 20 teams or less starting the 2024-25 season.
Next to drop: Brampton after the 2019-20 season. Their subsidy from the city runs out and no one goes to their games. Other than that, all is rosy for them.
Next to drop: Brampton after the 2019-20 season. Their subsidy from the city runs out and no one goes to their games. Other than that, all is rosy for them.
Last edited:
Centrum Hockey
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2018
- 2,092
- 728
royals119
Registered User
Actually it isn't the city. It is the Berks County Convention Center Authority. That is a county wide entity that collects a tax on hotel rooms and event tickets and uses it to run the Santander Arena and the Performing Arts center (and pay off the bonds that were taken out to build the arena and renovate the theater). They have been hiring some people with impressive resumes so far, so hopefully they will turn it around and at least break even on team operations. They are also renovating the building next to the arena to put a restaurant in there and some other retail. The relationship with the city, and the parking authority, should improve next year. The current mayor lost in the primary, and the democratic nominee (who will likely win in a city that is 90% democrat) is a Royals season ticket holder. Also, the bridge construction is supposed to be complete in the fall, so it will be possible to get to and from the games without a long traffic backup. I'm hopeful things are looking up for next season.
CANADIENSFAN90
Registered User
crimsonace
Registered User
Wheeling's ownership is the local economic development corporation - an arm of the city government. The Nailers are a local asset and provide entertainment for the city and bring people into WesBanco Arena 36 nights a year. They're not going anywhere.
Rapid City has long been an outlier in both the CHL and ECHL. They're the only pro team in the area and Rushmore Plaza is a great barn. That said, because they're the only pro team in the area, there's a lot of access to local sponsors, which also help generate revenue.
Kalamazoo has VERY dedicated local ownership. The K-Wings have been owned by the same family since the beginning in 1974, which also owns Wings Event Center. They run the team as a community trust. They're always on the "endangered" list for fans who only look at attendance, but they've never been so.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,590
- 6,501
When the Cincinnati Cyclones rejoined the ECHL for the 06-07 season after a two year voluntary suspension, there were 25 teams in the league.
2006–07 ECHL season - Wikipedia
9 remain: Toledo, Cincinnati, Reading, Wheeling, Florida, Atlanta, South Carolina, Idaho and Utah
I'll give credit to 2 others (Stockton and Bakersfield) for remaining ECHL teams in different markets.
So 14/25 (56%) folded in a 13 year period. The ECHL has never had much stability and there's no reason to think that it ever will-unless the NHL takes a more aggressive position regarding their relationship with the ECHL.
2006–07 ECHL season - Wikipedia
9 remain: Toledo, Cincinnati, Reading, Wheeling, Florida, Atlanta, South Carolina, Idaho and Utah
I'll give credit to 2 others (Stockton and Bakersfield) for remaining ECHL teams in different markets.
So 14/25 (56%) folded in a 13 year period. The ECHL has never had much stability and there's no reason to think that it ever will-unless the NHL takes a more aggressive position regarding their relationship with the ECHL.
Last edited:
crimsonace
Registered User
One could say this is the most stable period minor pro hockey has ever had.
I grew up in the 1980s, attended the second-to-last game of the old Central Hockey League in 1984, saw that league fold, Indy & Salt Lake absorbed into the IHL (which gradually moved from "AA" to "AAA" status), the IHL go national and expand into a big-budget league with massive franchise movement every year ... while the Colonial (which changed names twice to the United and then International leagues), new Central, Western Pro, West Coast and East Coast leagues all started at the "AA" level, with lots of franchise movement between the different levels. The "AA" leagues basically all at some point had their remnants absorbed into the ECHL.
ECHL teams who replaced AHL teams: Adirondack (Stockton, but history traces back to the original Cincinnati Cyclones), Norfolk (via Bakersfield, ex-WCHL)
ECHL expansion teams: Maine-2018 (actually, from Alaska via WCHL), Worcester-2017, Indy-2014, Newfoundland-2018, Orlando-2012
ECHL teams that existed before 2005: Reading (former Columbus Chill), Atlanta, Florida, Greenville, South Carolina, Cincinnati, Toledo, Wheeling, Utah
Former CHL teams: Brampton, Jacksonville (via Evansville, also ex-UHL), Fort Wayne (also ex-UHL), Allen, Kansas City, Rapid City, Tulsa, Wichita
Former Co/U/IHL2 teams: Kalamazoo
Former WCHL teams: Idaho
A lot of these teams have a longer history, but were absorbed into the ECHL. With one league at each level and relatively little franchise movement compared to the past, it's a time of relative stability.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,590
- 6,501
I always enjoy exchanging ideas/thoughts on minor league hockey. I appreciate your response.
Minor league hockey has consolidated significantly in the past 20 years. In 1998-99 there were 108 teams playing minor league hockey.
Minor League Hockey Attendance
Now there are 67. AHL(31) ECHL (26) SPHL (10). I refuse to count the FHL. That is a 38% reduction. However, it's a more significant decrease than that.
In 1998-99, the NHL had 27 franchises. Assuming 1 AAA affiliate per NHL team, there were 81 (108-27) other minor league franchises. Now with 31 NHL teams-once again with the one AAA affiliate per NHL team assumption-there are 36 (67-31) other minor league franchises.
The decrease in non AAA franchises in the past 20 years is 55%! (45/81)
Viewing transferred franchises (Alaska, Columbus, etc) as a continuation of a franchise doesn't cut it in my view in terms of "stability".
Perhaps it's a bit more stable in terms of leagues as the consolidation has only left 3 leagues (AHL/ECHL/SPHL) vs. 6 (IHL/UHL/AHL/WCHL/ECHL/CHL).
The secular trend of minor league hockey in terms of franchises, attendance or any other measure of which I'm aware has been horrible in the past 20 years. There isn't much more consolidation (folding of teams) to occur. I'll still guess that the non AHL contingent of minor league teams is less than 30 in 5 years. Too many trouble spots and not enough potential expansion spots for further shrinkage not to occur.
Last edited:
PCSPounder
Stadium Groupie
If you split the difference and pull the "promoted cities" out of consideration, the decrease in the last ten years is noticeably less than the previous ten.
Which is to say there was overexpansion and resulting contraction.
Otherwise, if you examine previous leagues going a LOT further back, you'll find that there's NEVER been solid stability at this level of hockey as opposed to, say, baseball. When we tell you the last 10 years is as stable as any, damn right it's a relative term.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,590
- 6,501
How is Brampton not in trouble? Their subsidy runs out next season and their (real) attendance is next to nothing.
Barclay Donaldson
Registered User
Brampton's attendance has been pretty stable, even going back to their CHL days. They're at least back for next year, which in minor league hockey is never a guarantee. There seems to be at least one more Canadian EC team joining them in a few years when Trois-Riviéres assuredly joins.
210
Registered User
Brampton's reported attendance:
13-14 (CHL): 2233, 9th of 10 teams
14-15 (ECHL): 2572, 26th of 28
15-16: 2784, 26th of 28
16-17: 3108, 22nd of 27
17-18: 3019, 23rd of 27
18-19: 2816, 24th of 27
A franchise averaging those numbers and about to lose their subsidy would certainly qualify as at least "in trouble"...
13-14 (CHL): 2233, 9th of 10 teams
14-15 (ECHL): 2572, 26th of 28
15-16: 2784, 26th of 28
16-17: 3108, 22nd of 27
17-18: 3019, 23rd of 27
18-19: 2816, 24th of 27
A franchise averaging those numbers and about to lose their subsidy would certainly qualify as at least "in trouble"...
Barclay Donaldson
Registered User
My point stands in that their attendance has been stable and in the 2000-3000 range for their entire existence. Wheeling has existed for much longer with far worse attendance. Kalamazoo was in the low 2000s range as of 2 to 3 years ago, and they're still alive and kicking. Brampton is averaging 300 less than Reading and 200 less than Maine, and neither of those two are on this "List of Troubled Teams," are they?
210
Registered User
Barclay Donaldson
Registered User
The subsidy was for $500,000 annually for 3 years. Not a small sum by any means, but that's far smaller than the average ECHL team's annual budget. The loss of the subsidy is offset almost entirely by Brampton increasing attendance 400-500 people per game. Brampton has only made playoffs twice since making the CHL switch. Norfolk increased their attendance from an abysmal 2600 to 3600 from 17-18 to 18-19 while also increasing commercial revenues streams. Kalamazoo didn't really change too much and still increased attendance 500 people per game over 2 years. There's precedent for teams toppling over and drowning, but there's also precedent for teams changing their fortunes the opposite way without much forewarning.
210
Registered User
So Brampton has had a drop in attendance the last two seasons and you think they will have a 16% increase just because their subsidy is going away?
Barclay Donaldson
Registered User
Norfolk experienced a 30% drop in attendance over 2 years and then increased it by 1000 people the next season. Kalamazoo experienced a 30% drop over 3 years and recently pumped it back up by 500 people over the past 2 years. Those are two teams that are or were in a similar situation to Brampton, there are examples or teams reversing the trend or destroying the trend like Norfolk recently did. I'm not saying it's likely or probable, but writing them off is foolish. Cincinnati has increased attendance by 800 people per game over the last two years. Indy has increased attendance 600 people per game over the last two years. Both those teams were experiences worrying decreases in attendance and bucked the trend. It has happened before in the ECHL. This is minor pro hockey, make it a good experience with reasonably priced tickets and a competitive team and attendance will come. Brampton made playoffs this season for only the second time in their ECHL history.
210
Registered User
I didn't write them off. I posted their numbers, and then added: A franchise averaging those numbers and about to lose their subsidy would certainly qualify as at least "in trouble". That's far from writing them off.
And the list of teams in minor league hockey that crashed and burned is a lot longer than the handful that managed to save themselves. (Plus I wish we had some Norfolk fans on here because the one I do know says that Norfolk reported number for last season is not close to accurate)
