Potential markets for potential NHL expansion beyond 32

[Big Z Man 1990]

Well, whole other kettle of fish, but the problems you see there could be easily avoided and create better inventory if they simply abolished the pure geographic alignment structure, accept that the league is simply too big to play everyone home/away, and make a structure that maximizes both TV times and quality inventory.

Like:
Wales: Smythe 4, Norris 4, Adams 4, Patrick 4
Campbell: Smythe 4, Norris 4, Adams 4, Patrick 4
> Only play games against 5 of the 8 divisions or 6 of the 8 divisions.

Or
Wales: Smythe 8, Patrick 8
Campbell: Norris 8, Adams 8
> 6 vs division (42), 3 vs conference (24), 1 vs non-conference (16).

By making the alignment/schedule based on geographic groups, you have to have a symmetrical allotment of teams and we don't. The NHL is configured as if we have 8 Pacific/8 Central in the West, 16 in the East and the line is between Nashville and Detroit.

The line of East/West is really in Nebraska. We really have 10 West teams and 22 East teams. That's why alignments always suck for a group of teams.

The NHL has everyone play everyone H/A because fans often want to go see a particular team come to their arena. Back during the 6-division era, fans often were disappointed because a particular team wasn't coming to their arena that year. While it was possible for every team to host all their in-conference rivals at least once a year during these seasons, not every team from the other conference would make trips there.

My proposed schedule format to go along with the 5-division alignment keeps the ability to have every team visit them at least once, and visit every other team at least once, in a given season, while putting a greater emphasis on division rivalries in order to keep travel costs down - a necessity in this time given revenue losses due to COVID-19.

 

[KevFu]

The NHL has everyone play everyone H/A because fans often want to go see a particular team come to their arena. Back during the 6-division era, fans often were disappointed because a particular team wasn't coming to their arena that year.

Yes, but that's dumb. The methodology to determine that fans wanted that was dumb. Following that feedback was dumb. And continuing the policy after looking at data is dumb.

West fans wanted to see PIT, WAS, TOR, MON, NYR, BOS, DET, PHI visit, and attendance goes UP 400 tickets per game. But they didn't consider that the other eight ALSO have to visit every year, and attendance goes DOWN 800 tickets when they do.

That's 3200 fewer tickets. AND in order to do home/away with everyone, they now have SEVEN MORE ROAD GAMES starting 1 to 3 time zones away.

East fans said the same thing, but only Chicago consistently helps the gate. New Vegas, Cup-winning St. Louis at times, sure, but overall, no one moves the needle. I'm sure the Canadian fans probably do enjoy the Canadian teams from the other conference visiting more, but they (and a couple American teams) pretty much sell out no matter whom they are playing.

And the teams with variable pricing (like BUF) prove to us that OPPONENT doesn't matter as much as the PRICE or "Day of the week" does.

The fans said they wanted to see everyone in the league every year, but were NOT asked what they were willing to give up to make it happen.

The fans ALSO want more division games / more conference games / more road games in their time zone / more hockey, period. But it's impossible to increase DIVISION games and NON-CONFERENCE GAMES at the same time. It's impossible to increase non-conference games and local time zone starts at the same time.

The fans, by data, want more games against historical franchises and less games against new ones. But it's impossible for everyone to play the popular teams a lot, and no one has to play the unpopular ones.

However, what you CAN do, is stop trying to play everyone, and max the value of all the games by dumping geography and going with the old MLB "interleague" model. Put a Smythe-Norris-Patrick-Adams division in each conference, and then play: 20 vs division, 40 vs conference; 18 rival division; 4 other non-conference (rotating).

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Yes, but that's dumb. The methodology to determine that fans wanted that was dumb. Following that feedback was dumb. And continuing the policy after looking at data is dumb.

West fans said they wanted to see everyone so that PIT, WAS, TOR, MON, NYR, BOS, DET, PHI visit each year. Attendance goes UP 400 tickets whenever they visit.
But they didn't consider that OTT, BUF, FLA, TB, NYI, NJD, CAR, CBJ ALSO have to visit every year, and Attendance goes DOWN 800 tickets when they do.

So the West teams are selling 3200 fewer tickets. AND in order to do home/away with everyone, they now have SEVEN MORE ROAD GAMES starting 1 to 3 time zones away.

East fans said the same thing, but only Chicago consistently helps the gate. New Vegas, Cup-winning St. Louis at times, sure, but overall, no one moves the needle. I'm sure the Canadian fans probably do enjoy the Canadian teams from the other conference visiting more, but they (and a couple American teams) pretty much sell out no matter whom they are playing.

And the teams with variable pricing (like BUF) prove to us that OPPONENT doesn't matter as much as the PRICE or "Day of the week" does.

The fans said they wanted to see everyone in the league every year, but were NOT asked what they were willing to give up to make it happen.

The fans ALSO want more division games / more conference games / more road games in their time zone / more hockey, period. But it's impossible to increase DIVISION games and NON-CONFERENCE GAMES at the same time.
It's impossible to increase non-conference games and local time zone starts at the same time.

The fans, by data, want more games against historical franchises and less games against new ones. But it's impossible for everyone to play the popular teams a lot, and no one has to play the unpopular ones.

However, what you CAN do, is stop trying to play everyone, and max the value of all the games by dumping geography and going with the old MLB "interleague" model. Put a Smythe-Norris-Patrick-Adams division in each conference, and then play: 20 vs division, 40 vs conference; 18 rival division; 4 other non-conference (rotating).

Z is correct, here..... Kev..... you have to keep in mind until 7 years ago.... Western parent clubs in the NHL populated markets IN New England..... the Worcesters, the Manchesters to name 2..... that era that began in the early 2000s ended 14-16 years later, hence the trend of Western clubs owning, if not operating their top affiliates all because of an off-handed comment by Brian Burke when he ran Anaheim back in 2005/06..... less games, too 68, instead of the 76 THE Majority of the league plays.

 

[KevFu]

Z is correct, here..... Kev..... you have to keep in mind until 7 years ago.... Western parent clubs in the NHL populated markets IN New England..... the Worcesters, the Manchesters to name 2..... that era that began in the early 2000s ended 14-16 years later, hence the trend of Western clubs owning, if not operating their top affiliates all because of an off-handed comment by Brian Burke when he ran Anaheim back in 2005/06..... less games, too 68, instead of the 76 THE Majority of the league plays.

I don't know what you're talking about. I understand the western NHL teams moved their AHL affiliates, I understand the west AHL affiliates play fewer games because of travel expenses.

That doesn't have anything to do with the NHL Home/Away schedule model being dumb because it is bad for business. It costs them money and you cannot argue otherwise, because the data proves it.

 

[KevFu]

Wait, are you saying that the Eastern NHL teams like seeing the Western teams because the Western teams' AHL affiliates were in the East 7 years ago? Like, people from Wooster were driving to Boston to see the Sharks visit? Or people from Cleveland were driving to Columbus to watch the Avalanche visit?

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

I don't know what you're talking about. I understand the western NHL teams moved their AHL affiliates, I understand the west AHL affiliates play fewer games because of travel expenses.

That doesn't have anything to do with the NHL Home/Away schedule model being dumb because it is bad for business. It costs them money and you cannot argue otherwise, because the data proves it.

yes it does.... care to explain why the trend has continued not just once, not twice, but three times in the last 7 years and that includes Vegas and San Antonio..... SSE controls that market..... Kev..... JUST Like Fertitta and Alexander have the control in Houston....over who plays there.... that's why the Wild bolted for Iowa....

 

[KevFu]

yes it does.... care to explain why the trend has continued not just once, not twice, but three times in the last 7 years and that includes Vegas and San Antonio..... SSE controls that market..... Kev..... JUST Like Fertitta and Alexander have the control in Houston....over who plays there.... that's why the Wild bolted for Iowa....

What trend are you talking about? I don't understand you.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Wait, are you saying that the Eastern NHL teams like seeing the Western teams because the Western teams' AHL affiliates were in the East 7 years ago? Like, people from Wooster were driving to Boston to see the Sharks visit? Or people from Cleveland were driving to Columbus to watch the Avalanche visit?

in an essence at the time, yes, in between the parent clubs visit, those prospects were being developed, and not every AHL team to this day plays every team in a given year, Kev, that's a 2 way street, both have to agree to it..... which is why the annual discussions over the master schedule were that heated, because all fans were tired of the same teams every year....no matter where the franchise was.... there was no equitable solution then.... that is and has likely continued, financially or otherwise, no matter the market size, franchise or what other parameter you use to make it equitable or fair for all....

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

What trend are you talking about? I don't understand you.

the trend of NHL teams owning and operating affiliates, that trend... which is why the Pacific Division was adopted by the AHL starting in 2014/2015..... then add in Anaheim buying Norfolk to transfer them to San Diego, Arizona completed an option to buy Springfield's 2nd franchise to place it in Tucson... which is why Springfield responded by acquiring Portland's franchise after 25 years in 2015/2016.... the Vegas/San Antonio/Henderson discussion is still a topic here, as well...

 

[KevFu]

in an essence at the time, yes, in between the parent clubs visit, those prospects were being developed, and not every AHL team to this day plays every team in a given year, Kev, that's a 2 way street, both have to agree to it..... which is why the annual discussions over the master schedule were that heated, because all fans were tired of the same teams every year....no matter where the franchise was.... there was no equitable solution then.... that is and has likely continued, financially or otherwise, no matter the market size, franchise or what other parameter you use to make it equitable or fair for all....

Sure. But AHL teams don't play everyone in a year because of the finances involved of travel. AHL teams don't bring in enough revenue to support being continental.
The AHL's schedule inequity isn't about selling tickets, it's about fairness. Everyone WANTS to play the same number of games, but play locally and not travel as much. And there's no way to do it in the AHL. In Baseball, they have TWO LEAGUES, PCL and IL. They don't play until the World Series. There used to be two leagues in hockey, too: The IHL in the West and AHL in the East.


NHL teams can afford to travel, and playing everyone home/away is bad for business. That can't be argued. There's data.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Sure. But AHL teams don't play everyone in a year because of the finances involved of travel. AHL teams don't bring in enough revenue to support being continental.
The AHL's schedule inequity isn't about selling tickets, it's about fairness. Everyone WANTS to play the same number of games, but play locally and not travel as much. And there's no way to do it in the AHL. In Baseball, they have TWO LEAGUES, PCL and IL. They don't play until the World Series. There used to be two leagues in hockey, too: The IHL in the West and AHL in the East.


NHL teams can afford to travel, and playing everyone home/away is bad for business. That can't be argued. There's data.

WHY did the IHL Fail....... FINANCES

 

[KevFu]

So why are you saying "Do what makes less money" is a good idea for the NHL?

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

So why are you saying "Do what makes less money" is a good idea for the NHL?

let me put it this way, Kev: why did SSE sell the Rampage to Vegas as the most recent example....

 

[KevFu]

I don't care about the irrelevant AHL gibberish. NHL teams playing Home/Away with everyone in the league is dumb. (Show your work, Kev!) Okay, here we go...

The fans said "PIT isn't coming to town? I wanted to see Crosby!" Owners thought "We sell more tickets when PIT brings Crosby!"

Arizona, 2018-19 season, attendance...

vs Western Conference: 14,223 per game
vs PIT: 14,757 (+534 tickets!)
vs TOR: 17,125 (+2902 tickets!)
vs BOS: 16,386 (+2163 tickets!)

See? This is great. THIS is why we want to guarantee that everyone plays everyone home/away!
Except...

vs FLA: 11,912 (-2311)
vs NJD: 12,636 (-1587)
vs NYI: 11,640 (-2583)
vs OTT: 13,988 (-235)
vs TBL: 13,623 (-600)

So when you add all the non-conference games up.

Western Conference: 14,223
Non-Conference: 13,624 (-601 per game, 16 games)

They sell 9,609 FEWER TICKETS for non-conference games. So why are they playing MORE OF THEM than before?

AND they play 3 to 7 more road games starting at 4 pm or 5 pm AZ time.
The old model was 9 vs East, plus 4 at DET/CBJ. SEA/VGK replaced DET/CBJ. They could be playing 8 or 9, instead they play 16.


Do you have any questions?

 

[KevFu]

I did that about 7 years ago for the entire league. It worked out to about +420 for marquee teams, and -850 for the others, a loss of -430 on average for the teams that don't just sell out anyway.

Going from 9 games to 16 non-conference home games = a loss of about 52,000 tickets sold total.

The number of road games out of time zone increased from 234 games to 480 games before Vegas.
It grew to 496 with Vegas, and will grow to 512 with Seattle.

 

[TheLegend]

I don't care about the irrelevant AHL gibberish. NHL teams playing Home/Away with everyone in the league is dumb. (Show your work, Kev!) Okay, here we go...

The fans said "PIT isn't coming to town? I wanted to see Crosby!" Owners thought "We sell more tickets when PIT brings Crosby!"

Arizona, 2018-19 season, attendance...

vs Western Conference: 14,223 per game
vs PIT: 14,757 (+534 tickets!)
vs TOR: 17,125 (+2902 tickets!)
vs BOS: 16,386 (+2163 tickets!)

See? This is great. THIS is why we want to guarantee that everyone plays everyone home/away!
Except...

vs FLA: 11,912 (-2311)
vs NJD: 12,636 (-1587)
vs NYI: 11,640 (-2583)
vs OTT: 13,988 (-235)
vs TBL: 13,623 (-600)

So when you add all the non-conference games up.

Western Conference: 14,223
Non-Conference: 13,624 (-601 per game, 16 games)

They sell 9,609 FEWER TICKETS for non-conference games. So why are they playing MORE OF THEM than before?

AND they play 3 to 7 more road games starting at 4 pm or 5 pm AZ time.
The old model was 9 vs East, plus 4 at DET/CBJ. SEA/VGK replaced DET/CBJ. They could be playing 8 or 9, instead they play 16.


Do you have any questions?

Kev...

The number bumps you show for certain teams because Arizona is loaded with transplants from those particular areas. (In TOR’s case a big part of it is because of Austin Matthews)

That’s part of the problem we have in Arizona, and at the same time it’s also part of the reason why the home and home series is a benefit.

 

[GindyDraws]

The answer is simple... The Portland Pirates must return to the AHL for balance to resume in the universe.

Otherwise, he won't shut up.

 

[gstommylee]

NHL isn't going to go to a 5 division league.

 

[mouser]

I did that about 7 years ago for the entire league. It worked out to about +420 for marquee teams, and -850 for the others, a loss of -430 on average for the teams that don't just sell out anyway.

Going from 9 games to 16 non-conference home games = a loss of about 52,000 tickets sold total.

The number of road games out of time zone increased from 234 games to 480 games before Vegas.
It grew to 496 with Vegas, and will grow to 512 with Seattle.

I find it a bit odd you want to prioritize the most popular NHL teams selling more tickets to the disadvantage of the lower market NHL teams. While at the same time pushing for lower tier NCAA schools to not be dominated by their big money making partners.

 

[Kimota]

I think the whole "Adding a TV market drives the TV contract revenue up" is misunderstood by people. It is a description of a path that was shortened to the point it is misleading.

The 1990s expansion to the large southern/western cities to boost TV contracts wasn't because "Phoenix is 6 million viewers, valued at X; Miami is 8 million, valued at X" like an itemized menu the NHL could say "Okay, that's 137 million total people in the footprint, you owe us X for the rights."

TV could say "Your product only appeals to the people in the Northeast. Why would we give you $200 million when half the country doesn't care?"

Expansion increases TV dollars because expansion increases the number of quantifiable viewers with a vested interest in your product, because each team has a fan base. You're giving people in those markets a reason to like hockey.

But those fan bases are still not interested in hockey. It's not like the ratings are blockbusters in Phoenix. lol I understand what you are saying in theory but it has not resulted in that much success.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

The answer is simple... The Portland Pirates must return to the AHL for balance to resume in the universe.

Otherwise, he won't shut up.

wrong, JD.... THE way it worked was no matter the market.... EVERY Team and fan was polled and nothing changed.....no matter the market size, franchise, one would agree to it, the other wouldn't reciprocate not even today do you see Springfield, Bridgeport, Hartford, or Providence play any of the California based, Tucson, Colorado, or even Utah.... in fact, it wasn't until last season or 2,a Portland-based team played a Western club in their arena, which was Utah.... the only one of the IHL-5 (after the Grizzlies left for Cleveland) did a Portland-based team play a Western addition since 2001, and that was Manitoba....

it has been, and continues to be the most common complaint against the AHL and its master schedule.

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

NHL isn't going to go to a 5 division league.

Like I said, the Central time teams are going to complain about Arizona being moved into the Central Division. Losing 1 hour coming home from Denver at any point in the season or Phoenix during non-DST portions is bad enough. But during DST, Central time teams would lose 2 hours coming home from Phoenix, and they don't want an increased frequency of that. Dividing the West into 3 divisions and keeping the East at 2 while making all non-division matchups home-and-homes would help matters.

Keep in mind the ECHL used to have 3 divisions in the East and only 2 in the West. So there's precedent for such an arrangement.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

Like I said, the Central time teams are going to complain about Arizona being moved into the Central Division. Losing 1 hour coming home from Denver at any point in the season or Phoenix during non-DST portions is bad enough. But during DST, Central time teams would lose 2 hours coming home from Phoenix, and they don't want an increased frequency of that. Dividing the West into 3 divisions and keeping the East at 2 while making all non-division matchups home-and-homes would help matters.

Keep in mind the ECHL used to have 3 divisions in the East and only 2 in the West. So there's precedent for such an arrangement.

They have never complained about Colorado being in the Division. And the mountain time teams of Edmonton and Calgary have never complained about playing games an hour later against PST teams. Never mind the scheduling issues you're creating with this, you're trying to come up with a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. Time zones are not the end all, be all for the NHL. Having even divisions with non-insane scheduling is.

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

Scheduling issues? What scheduling issues?

My proposed schedule format is simple. Everyone plays 2 games (home-and-road) against everyone not in their division - 48 for Eastern teams, 52 for Central teams, and 54 for Mountain/Pacific teams. Eastern teams would play 34 division games (6*5 + 1*4), Central teams would play 30 division games (5*6), and Mountain/Pacific teams play 28 division games (4*7).

Claim the problem doesn't exist all you want. It would exist if Arizona is put in the Central, just like it existed when Minnesota was in the Northwest, Dallas was in the Pacific, and Detroit and Columbus were in the West. All of these problems were fixed in 2013. The NHL should not have to allow a problem like this to exist again.

And it's been stated before that the NHL doesn't care about even divisions. If they did, Detroit would have had to wait another 4 years to move East after the 2013 realignment. The NHL was content to have 16 in the East and 14 in the West prior to 2017.

You also ignored, quite deliberately, that I said that the ECHL set a precedent by having been a 5-division league in the past.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

Scheduling issues? What scheduling issues?

My proposed schedule format is simple. Everyone plays 2 games (home-and-road) against everyone not in their division - 48 for Eastern teams, 52 for Central teams, and 54 for Mountain/Pacific teams. Eastern teams would play 34 division games (6*5 + 1*4), Central teams would play 30 division games (5*6), and Mountain/Pacific teams play 28 division games (4*7).

Claim the problem doesn't exist all you want. It would exist if Arizona is put in the Central, just like it existed when Minnesota was in the Northwest, Dallas was in the Pacific, and Detroit and Columbus were in the West. All of these problems were fixed in 2013. The NHL should not have to allow a problem like this to exist again.

And it's been stated before that the NHL doesn't care about even divisions. If they did, Detroit would have had to wait another 4 years to move East after the 2013 realignment. The NHL was content to have 16 in the East and 14 in the West prior to 2017.

You also ignored, quite deliberately, that I said that the ECHL set a precedent by having been a 5-division league in the past.

That's an uneven schedule. It goes directly against the all-even scheduling plans the NHL has had since their decision to expand from 30 eventually until 34.

The problem doesn't exist. Do you see GMs complaining about having to go back an hour for the time zone? Show me any GM or coach complaining about this. I will wait

That's the ECHL. Not the NHL. The ECHL also has owners owning multiple teams, up to half of their home dates being specialty event nights, the complete inability as of right now to expand to 32 teams despite them saying that is their eventual goal. So you're saying since it happens at some level of pro hockey that it could happen in the NHL. The ECHL is taking any teams they can get right now. If that is your logic, then I eagerly await NHL teams implementing blue Geirco posts. I also eagerly await them going to no divisions like in the SPHL. Because there is precedence!