Depends I guess, personally I would much prefer freezing temperatures over some of the temperatures seen in Phoenix. Really not a fan of the heat myself.
NHL move to Winnipeg 'a step back'
- Thread starter Melrose Munch
- Start date
- Status
Depends I guess, personally I would much prefer freezing temperatures over some of the temperatures seen in Phoenix. Really not a fan of the heat myself.
MayDay
Registered User
No they're not.
The new Canadian deals that get worked out next year may be, but currently, they are not.
MayDay
Registered User
Funny how two of the NHL's three wealthiest owners will be in two of the NHL's smallest markets - David Thomson in Winnipeg and Terry Pegula in Buffalo (the third is Philip Anscutz in LA).
Maybe the key to having a stable team in a small market is to have a ridiculously wealthy owner for whom a few million annually in operating profits or losses is basically pocket change.
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
How about some figures and sources? The new NBC/Versus deal to take effect next season is close in money to the current combined CBC HNIC/TSN/RDS deals. Both are around $200 million USD per year.
To the thread title, of course it is a 'step forward' for the NHL to move a team back to Winnipeg. Look forward to further relocations of NHL franchises to Canada in the next few years.
GHOST
Professional sports is one of those rare industries where a marketplace is blamed for not buying a mediocre product served up by a poorly managed & operated business. Instead of blaming the provider of the inferior product, we blame the marketplace for not buying it.
We have players who act entitled to play in front of packed arenas. Chris Mason, with his .892 save percentage, waxes on about how much he would love to play in a packed arena. Apparently oblivious that he could play a role in making that happen. He believes a sub 90 save percentage deserves the praise of a sold-out standing-room only crowd.
Ultimately, if Atlanta fans are to be blamed for the state of this franchise, then we must blame Jets' fans for what happened to their original franchise. I know that the truth is far more complex than that, but some of you insist on blaming easy targets, so let's at least be consistent about it.
We have players who act entitled to play in front of packed arenas. Chris Mason, with his .892 save percentage, waxes on about how much he would love to play in a packed arena. Apparently oblivious that he could play a role in making that happen. He believes a sub 90 save percentage deserves the praise of a sold-out standing-room only crowd.
Ultimately, if Atlanta fans are to be blamed for the state of this franchise, then we must blame Jets' fans for what happened to their original franchise. I know that the truth is far more complex than that, but some of you insist on blaming easy targets, so let's at least be consistent about it.
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
You can't blame Atlanta people or Atlanta fans. The majority of Atlanta people aren't hockey followers and that's a legitimate and justifiable choice and the relatively small number of Atlanta fans have done their best to support the team in spite of the setbacks, bad management etc.
It's not a personal affront to Atlanta hockey fans to say that the Atlanta market as a whole hasn't taken to hockey the way a successful NHL franchise requires, even if many emotionally invested Atlanta fans seem to take it that way.
In reality, hockey in Atlanta like any other Southern market was a long shot because it's not a market where a big % of the population is culturally familiar with hockey. Yes, if they had been immediately competitive it would have been somewhat different, yes if they had won a Cup by now it would have been somewhat different. But that's the exception, expansion teams tend to be riddled by poor performance and poor management for time spans of varying length after their inception. Atlanta, maybe comparable to the Oakland Seals here, couldn't last through that.
It's not a personal affront to Atlanta hockey fans to say that the Atlanta market as a whole hasn't taken to hockey the way a successful NHL franchise requires, even if many emotionally invested Atlanta fans seem to take it that way.
In reality, hockey in Atlanta like any other Southern market was a long shot because it's not a market where a big % of the population is culturally familiar with hockey. Yes, if they had been immediately competitive it would have been somewhat different, yes if they had won a Cup by now it would have been somewhat different. But that's the exception, expansion teams tend to be riddled by poor performance and poor management for time spans of varying length after their inception. Atlanta, maybe comparable to the Oakland Seals here, couldn't last through that.
That doesn't play the kind of role that some people think it does. It is the transient population that plays a more significant role. Plenty of hockey fans here. Just not enough Thrashers fans. Lots of Centre Ice subscribers who only go to the rink when THEIR team comes to town. I'm telling ya, if those people had been converted, attendance would've been at least top 15 every season. Even if that happened, this team still moves to Winnipeg right now.
By the way, as a long time Oilers fan, I know there are a lot of people that are glad there will be another place on the tundra to threaten to banish whiny players in the future.
OthmarAmmann
Omnishambles
why are you even bringing it up? do you have some alternative to propose, or just *****ing?
- Mar 10, 2010
- 34,895
- 31,337
I am from the Peg and i empathize with the Atlanta fans allot.......been there done that!
LeftCoast i am curious about your bolded statement above....why do you feel it is inevitable TNSE will have losses initially and have to stabilize? are you talking the cost of relocation (move etc)?
Buck Aki Berg
Done with this place
I guess the question here is this - how does the city of Winnipeg improve its image and visibility? What can TNSE do to disspell the myth of Winnipeg being a remote northern outpost to lure in players (and their wives)?
What responsibility does TNSE (or any owner) have to make its team an appealing road draw, and how can that be accomplished?
What responsibility does TNSE (or any owner) have to make its team an appealing road draw, and how can that be accomplished?
worstfaceoffmanever
These Snacks Are Odd
You could easily find 15,015 people in Winnipeg that would go watch an NHL hockey game. The question is if they would be willing to pay $75-80 a pop to go see one, which is what the club would have to charge on the average if they wanted to be able to spend to build a competitive team and still be profitable.
Canada wants more NHL teams. Canada has the money to pay for them - given the amount of money that's leeched off of the Canadian teams now. We're just cutting out the (greedy) middlemen in the states.
Win - Win. And now there is a 7th franchise in Canada. An extra 'nipple' for those who need it...
BTW - your avatar is woefully out of date. The Stig is about as welcome on Top Gear as NHL teams are in the south!
Doc Scurlock
Registered User
- Nov 23, 2006
- 1,211
- 6
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
You can't run a franchise on transplants only. As you say many tend to stick with their original teams and many also just don't give a damn about hockey even if they are from the Northeast, the Upper Midwest or even Canada.
And the demographics of the local population do not favor hockey at the best of times.
You'd need to mobilize the population groups receptive to hockey to a degree only a very successful team could and that's a pretty tall order given the usual fate of expansion teams.
GoJetsGo55
Registered User
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
If the NHL wants to have a Big League image in the US, and believes, I think rightfully, that that also means having a close to equal number of US-based teams (in virtually all the major cities) as do the other major professional leagues, then for the NHL that essentially means actually having a larger league, because about 1/5 of the NHL teams are based in Canada.
So for instance, for the NHL just to have 26 US-based teams, whereas the other leagues have 29 - 32 US-based teams, that means that with 6 - 8 Canadian-based teams the NHL would then have a 32-34 team league.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with that scenario, especially if the number of US-born players continues to grow. The NHL has players coming from Canada, all over Europe, and the US, so I don't think there's any reason why there couldn't be a sufficient talent base to full more teams. The problem is with finding good owners who want to put teams in more US cities and work hard to make those franchises successful.
So for instance, for the NHL just to have 26 US-based teams, whereas the other leagues have 29 - 32 US-based teams, that means that with 6 - 8 Canadian-based teams the NHL would then have a 32-34 team league.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with that scenario, especially if the number of US-born players continues to grow. The NHL has players coming from Canada, all over Europe, and the US, so I don't think there's any reason why there couldn't be a sufficient talent base to full more teams. The problem is with finding good owners who want to put teams in more US cities and work hard to make those franchises successful.
CorbeauNoir
Registered User
- Apr 13, 2010
- 928
- 154
You people are seriously starting to give me a headache...
RAW ATTENDANCE ISN'T ANYWHERE NEAR AS IMPORTANT AS AMOUNT SPENT PER SEAT. A 20000-SEAT ARENA IS POINTLESS WHEN YOU'RE CONSTANTLY GIVING AWAY TICKETS TO FILL IT
What about that statement is so impossible for people to comprehend?
Hockey most definitely does. The Thrashers didn't.
By the way, my apologies for even discussing this with you. You have preconceived notions that already rule your mind and all of this is a waste of electrons and time.
Last edited:
RandR
Registered User
- May 15, 2011
- 1,910
- 423
And if the Coyotes ever made it to the finals while still in Phoenix, the heat in Phoenix in June is far less conducive to hockey than the cold of Winnipeg in January.
HankTheTank
Registered User
pretty hilarious for a guy who for his whole journo career has been a massive shill for the Senators front office.
How is Winnipeg objectively that much worse of a market than Ottawa? Yes the arena revenues are going to be lower but Ottawa isn't exactly a glamourous destination either.
How is Winnipeg objectively that much worse of a market than Ottawa? Yes the arena revenues are going to be lower but Ottawa isn't exactly a glamourous destination either.
JackBurton
Registered User
- Jun 30, 2010
- 464
- 0
I take it you've never been to Canada during hockey season? $75-$80 to see an NHL game would be a dream in most of Canada. Hell, I'd be willing to travel from Ontario and spend a week vacation in the Peg just to see an NHL game for less than $600.
If people have $80, and there's a ticket for sale, it will be bought. Canadian don't need convincing to see a hockey game. Times have changed from the 90's. I don't think anyone would take a team for granted now., outside of T.O. and Montreal.
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
Well, we can only work with the reality we have and in the reality we have the Thrashers were (technically and practically still are) Atlanta's NHL franchise.
Again, we don't really have evidence that actually shows the NHL working in Atlanta, we have a lot of woulda, shoulda, coulda about the Flames and the Thrashers.
I think Atlanta will get another shot down the line some time but I'd hope for relocation rather than expansion as that could get the team the almost instant competitiveness it needs.
That's the whole US, not just one state. Hockey just doesn't work in the US like they do in Canada when people breath and live for hockey.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
HC Dynamo Pardubice @ Ocelari Trinec - Pardubice leads series 3-2Wagers: 1Staked: $15.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Tappara Tampere @ Pelicans Lahti - Tappara leads series 2-1Wagers: 1Staked: $15.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Eisbaren Berlin @ Pinguins Bremerhaven - Eisbaren Berlin leads series 3-1Wagers: 1Staked: $15.00Event closes- Updated:
-
