QC: Videotron Back to Back Sell Outs (Remparts) NHL Discussion Part 1

[Lady Stanley]

Regarding a better canadian TV deal, ask the broadcasters if they are happy with the NHL games, watching Toronto then Edmonton gettin beaten year after year.

That's the whole point the value of an 8th team is in rebooting the Canadian division to get playoff certainty every year. The fact 3 of Canada's biggest markets/cities Vancouver/Toronto/Montreal could go the next 3 years leading up to the next contract being signed without a sniff of the playoffs could be a disaster for that contract value/league.

I've explained the alignment numerous times and I promise you it is perfect.

Can West plays Can East 4 times per team. Each half of the division plays 6 times each.

It's far too logical to not do it.

It's not my preferred align btw, it's just the one the numbers allow.

 

[tucker3434]

That's the whole point the value of an 8th team is in rebooting the Canadian division to get playoff certainty every year. The fact 3 of Canada's biggest markets/cities Vancouver/Toronto/Montreal could go the next 3 years leading up to the next contract being signed without a sniff of the playoffs could be a disaster for that contract value/league.

I've explained the alignment numerous times and I promise you it is perfect.

Can West plays Can East 4 times per team. Each half of the division plays 6 times each.

It's far too logical to not do it.

It's not my preferred align btw, it's just the one the numbers allow.

And then what happens if the league cycles and Vancouver and Montreal rise to the top? Then you’re ensuring one of the two best teams in hockey can’t get past the 2nd round. And this is why you don’t realign divisions based on performance. It works itself out over the long run. Plus, none of the east coast Canadian teams would be excited about more 10PM starts on the west coast. Those dudes actually like sleeping in their own bed after a road game.

 

[Lady Stanley]

And then what happens if the league cycles and Vancouver and Montreal rise to the top? Then you’re ensuring one of the two best teams in hockey can’t get past the 2nd round. And this is why you don’t realign divisions based on performance. It works itself out over the long run.

Lol if you actually believe things are equal across the border with taxes and weather.

Regardless this happens every year, Tampa-Toronto being an obvious example. Two powerhouse Canadian teams would enhance the fandom, especially if people believe the winner is going to the final. Not to mention you're not forced to schedule around the NBA which is a massive gain.



It isn't about what fans want, it's about scheduling certainty. Rogers knows with certainty they'll have 6 weeks of playoff hockey with local teams, just as ESPN etc know they get 2 rounds of exclusively American hockey.

Plus, none of the east coast Canadian teams would be excited about more 10PM starts on the west coast.

As I said 33534543299 times, a Canadian division would open up more scheduling options.

830 MTN starts is doable for alberta teams.

The only big issue is vancouver, and again, Canadian thanksgiving, family day etc gives you more scheduling options.

You're adding 4 additional games to be played in the pacific timezone. That's once per team it's totally a non issue.

Those dudes actually like sleeping in their own bed after a road game.

As I also said 52304923-49 times, you're radically reducing north south travel, and again are given better scheduling options when hugging the 49th parallel. Minnesota/Seattle are easy travel trips.

 

[tucker3434]

Lol if you actually believe things are equal across the border with taxes and weather.

Regardless this happens every year, Tampa-Toronto being an obvious example. Two powerhouse Canadian teams would enhance the fandom, especially if people believe the winner is going to the final. Not to mention you're not forced to schedule around the NBA which is a massive gain.



It isn't about what fans want, it's about scheduling certainty. Rogers knows with certainty they'll have 6 weeks of playoff hockey with local teams, just as ESPN etc know they get 2 rounds of exclusively American hockey.








As I said 33534543299 times, a Canadian division would open up more scheduling options.

830 MTN starts is doable for alberta teams.

The only big issue is vancouver, and again, Canadian thanksgiving, family day etc gives you more scheduling options.

You're adding 4 additional games to be played in the pacific timezone. That's once per team it's totally a non issue.




As I also said 52304923-49 times, you're radically reducing north south travel, and again are given better scheduling options when hugging the 49th parallel. Minnesota/Seattle are easy travel trips.

I don’t care if it’s equal. That’s sports. Figure it out. Both the oilers and the leafs have been close over the last several years. They haven’t failed because they’re Canadian. They’ve failed because they didn’t make the right acquisitions. Holland or Dubas could’ve traded a couple of 2nds for Devon Toews and his $4m salary and put either team in a much better spot for a cup. But they didn’t. Someone else did. Tough. Get better. If you can’t beat the teams across from you, you don’t deserve to be there. I think the actual Canadian teams would agree with that.

You’re trading regular season viewers for potential postseason viewers, maybe. We know that viewership for a regular season game between Ottawa and Vancouver is going to drop because the away fans are either still at work or already in bed, depending on where the game is. Start the game at 8:30? Great, now everyone is miserable. I’m sure the home town fans would love having their home games run until 11:30 on a Tuesday. And the oilers made the WCF just last year. So Rogers got to have their cake and eat it too.

You’re offering a postseason hedge that I’m not sure they’d even want, much less pay for. They might like that there’s a chance, albeit a slim one, that Toronto and Edmonton could be in the SCF next year, and the risk of years like this one is worth it to them.

Do the players want to reduce their north south travel? I think if you polled the players, they probably don’t mind an occasional trip to Miami in February. And I’m very confident they’d prefer it over a trip to Winnipeg.

In short, players aren’t going to want it and nobody is going to pay them enough to deal with it, so it’s DOA.

 

[Lady Stanley]

I don’t care if it’s equal. That’s sports. Figure it out. Both the oilers and the leafs have been close over the last several years. They haven’t failed because they’re Canadian. They’ve failed because they didn’t make the right acquisitions.

They didn't get the right players? How on earth are you suggesting this in the context of a cap and weather issue? Like this just makes no sense.

Holland or Dubas could’ve traded a couple of 2nds for Devon Toews and his $4m salary and put either team in a much better spot for a cup.

Guy couldn't even finish the season, O'riley was excellent.

But they didn’t. Someone else did. Tough. Get better. If you can’t beat the teams across from you, you don’t deserve to be there. I think the actual Canadian teams would agree with that.

Like I said they have a 10-20 million dollar cap disadvantage, due to taxes and weather. Your boot strapping narrative doesn't make any sense.

You can look at the roster and see a pretty much constant 10-20% over payment on every Canadian roster.

You’re trading regular season viewers for potential postseason viewers, maybe. We know that viewership for a regular season game between Ottawa and Vancouver is going to drop because the away fans are either still at work or already in bed, depending on where the game is. Start the game at 8:30? Great, now everyone is miserable.

Are you lying or just not reading what I've posted? I'm seriously requesting an answer.

Vancouver versus east games would be just 4 extra games a year in Vancouver. With the differences in the Canadian viewing audiences/no nba, you can easily schedule them for afternoon games.

Again it has no affect on habs and leafs games, as it's so popular regardless.

8:30 was specifically for alberta games.

Not to mention the East West rivalries would likely be incredibly intense if they routinely meet in the playoffs and are fighting for playoff slots. Canada is a single market, more comparable to California. When your local market teams are squaring off you get far far more media engagement.

I mean this is very very basic sociology.

I’m sure the home town fans would love having their home games run until 11:30 on a Tuesday.

Unless the games like I said would be on a friday/saturday/holiday weekend.

This doesn't work in the states because of NBA and football. It's not a problem in Canada.

And the oilers made the WCF just last year. So Rogers got to have their cake and eat it too.

That's 1 singular year. As I said it's scheduling certainty that is the concern. Knowing your marketing and scheduling months in advance is worth a ton of money.


That's ignoring the breakdown of the math.

A canadian cup window could easily be 1/4th as long as an American window.

That's basically what we're seeing with both the Leafs and Oilers/

2-3 years with franchise players, versus American teams have 7-10 year windows.

The salary cap hasn't even been around that long and it's firmly established that Canadian windows of contendership are incredibly narrow.

You basically have to trade away your future and get a 2-3 year window before your UFA problem gets out of control.

You’re offering a postseason hedge that I’m not sure they’d even want, much less pay for. They might like that there’s a chance, albeit a slim one, that Toronto and Edmonton could be in the SCF next year, and the risk of years like this one is worth it to them.

Every owner in Canada in one way or another admitted that they're at a steep disadvantage due to climate and taxes.

Do the players want to reduce their north south travel? I think if you polled the players, they probably don’t mind an occasional trip to Miami in February. And I’m very confident they’d prefer it over a trip to Winnipeg.

It really doesn't matter what the players think. If they don't want to play in Canada it has no affect on the value of a Canadian division. You're literally just further describing the reason Canadian teams can't compete.

In short, players aren’t going to want it and nobody is going to pay them enough to deal with it, so it’s DOA.

I just don't get how you can type this, you literally state how players don't want more time in the north and then immediately relocate the goalposts a sentence later to state they aren't at a steep disadvantage in the first place.

 

[KevFu]

That's the whole point the value of an 8th team is in rebooting the Canadian division to get playoff certainty every year. The fact 3 of Canada's biggest markets/cities Vancouver/Toronto/Montreal could go the next 3 years leading up to the next contract being signed without a sniff of the playoffs could be a disaster for that contract value/league.

I've explained the alignment numerous times and I promise you it is perfect.

It's just really horrible for the other 24 teams if you're doing 4 divisions of eight.

It'd say if you're willing to do West to East in a division together, then ditch Eastern and Western Conferences, and do the zipper format... Four divisions of four in each conference: Each with a West, Central, and two eastern divisions.

Ditch the Home/Away with everyone in the league... each team can play FIVE divisions (the fifth being non-conference but rivalry: West vs West, Central vs Central, etc) in 4 games each for 76 games. Half the remaining teams is six, so one each for 82 games.

Something like:

VAN, SEA, EDM, CAL (Wales) vs SJ, LA, ANA, VGK (Campbell)
WIN, MIN, DAL, NASH (Wales), vs CHI, STL, COL, ARZ (Campbell)
MON, OTT, BOS, TOR (Wales) vs NYR, NYI, NJD, PHI (Campbell)
BUF, DET, TB, FLA (Wales) vs CAR, WAS, PIT, CBJ (Campbell)

You'd get 4x every Canada matchup, but still 4x every team in your time zone for the current Western Conference teams.

Which is a lot better than forcing the other 24 teams into three divisions like the did during 2021.

 

[tucker3434]

They didn't get the right players? How on earth are you suggesting this in the context of a cap and weather issue? Like this just makes no sense.



Guy couldn't even finish the season, O'riley was excellent.



Like I said they have a 10-20 million dollar cap disadvantage, due to taxes and weather. Your boot strapping narrative doesn't make any sense.

You can look at the roster and see a pretty much constant 10-20% over payment on every Canadian roster.



Are you lying or just not reading what I've posted? I'm seriously requesting an answer.

Vancouver versus east games would be just 4 extra games a year in Vancouver. With the differences in the Canadian viewing audiences/no nba, you can easily schedule them for afternoon games.

Again it has no affect on habs and leafs games, as it's so popular regardless.

8:30 was specifically for alberta games.

Not to mention the East West rivalries would likely be incredibly intense if they routinely meet in the playoffs and are fighting for playoff slots. Canada is a single market, more comparable to California. When your local market teams are squaring off you get far far more media engagement.

I mean this is very very basic sociology.



Unless the games like I said would be on a friday/saturday/holiday weekend.

This doesn't work in the states because of NBA and football. It's not a problem in Canada.


That's 1 singular year. As I said it's scheduling certainty that is the concern. Knowing your marketing and scheduling months in advance is worth a ton of money.


That's ignoring the breakdown of the math.

A canadian cup window could easily be 1/4th as long as an American window.

That's basically what we're seeing with both the Leafs and Oilers/

2-3 years with franchise players, versus American teams have 7-10 year windows.

The salary cap hasn't even been around that long and it's firmly established that Canadian windows of contendership are incredibly narrow.

You basically have to trade away your future and get a 2-3 year window before your UFA problem gets out of control.

Every owner in Canada in one way or another admitted that they're at a steep disadvantage due to climate and taxes.



It really doesn't matter what the players think. If they don't want to play in Canada it has no affect on the value of a Canadian division. You're literally just further describing the reason Canadian teams can't compete.





I just don't get how you can type this, you literally state how players don't want more time in the north and then immediately relocate the goalposts a sentence later to state they aren't at a steep disadvantage in the first place.

That’s because my goal here isn’t to help out the Canadian franchises, nor is it the NHL’s. There are 25 teams outside of Canada that get a vote and if your main selling point here is giving Canadian franchises an express lane to a cup, you’re going to get 25 nays.

If you can tell me how this will take in enough additional money to make the other 25 go for it, I’m all ears. But the additional revenue from Rogers for 1 extra round of Canadian playoffs, split 32 ways, is not going to cut it.

 

[rojac]

If players don't want to play in Canada (probably more accurately phrased as "some Canadian cites") then maybe there be fewer Canadian teams and not more.

 

[CTHabsfan]

Obviously there is at least one Canadian team I'd like to see in the playoffs, but why do we need any? Canadians are real hockey fans and will still watch the playoffs even if there is not a Canadian-based team playing, right? I mean it's not like they are Floridans!

 

[rojac]

Obviously there is at least one Canadian team I'd like to see in the playoffs, but why do we need any? Canadians are real hockey fans and will still watch the playoffs even if there is not a Canadian-based team playing, right? I mean it's not like they are Floridans!

I know an awful lot of Canadian hockey fans who stop watching once their team is out. And if I did keep watching, I'd be primarily watching some other team that I liked -- be it Canadian or American. In fact, I despise the whole concept of American and Canadian teams.

I wonder if those Canadian hockey fans who insist on cheering for the last Canadian team standing take a pro-Canadian stance in their other consumer choices? That is, if you have t he choice between a product made in Canada and one made elsaewhere, do they choose the Canadian product?

 

[Lady Stanley]

That’s because my goal here isn’t to help out the Canadian franchises, nor is it the NHL’s. There are 25 teams outside of Canada that get a vote and if your main selling point here is giving Canadian franchises an express lane to a cup, you’re going to get 25 nays.

The Canadian contract is the top concern for the league. It for 3 decades was the American contract, and now times have changed. What you're arguing is that it's just an afterthought for the league if rogers/bell is happy.

If you can tell me how this will take in enough additional money to make the other 25 go for it, I’m all ears. But the additional revenue from Rogers for 1 extra round of Canadian playoffs, split 32 ways, is not going to cut it.

It's 3 rounds of Canadian hockey versus the current situation where there can be none. Not to mention greatly increasing the odds Vancouver/Montreal/Toronto are in the playoffs and going deep.

If you don't think that is of massive value I really don't know what to say.




The benefit to US/ESPN is better scheduling options. More odds two big American markets playoff against each other.

Some of the Central teams effectively get to move east.

Better options for strengthening regional markets.

Seattle/San Jose/LA/Anageim would all play eachother 6 times each.

A lot of American pacific timezone hockey.

 

[kgboomer]

After following when the owners and NHLPA worked to re-align the divisions, TV contracts were never in the equation. It was mostly all about traveling time, costs and time zone. I just don't see them working to re-align just because Rogers and Canadian fans have hurt feeling. And I am a Canadian fan, I would really hate this new Canadian division.

 

[Lady Stanley]

It's just really horrible for the other 24 teams if you're doing 4 divisions of eight.

The big benefit to the league is getting Canadian teams to bite the east west bullet.

Not just the literally travel/timezone issue, but the scheduling issue.

Have 4 relatively small Canadian teams in the Western conference isn't a benefit to the league.

The "but Toronto" argument doesn't apply to the west.

ESPN is paying for a pacific division with 3 Canadian teams 2 of which are in the mountain timezone.

It'd say if you're willing to do West to East in a division together, then ditch Eastern and Western Conferences, and do the zipper format... Four divisions of four in each conference: Each with a West, Central, and two eastern divisions.

Ditch the Home/Away with everyone in the league... each team can play FIVE divisions (the fifth being non-conference but rivalry: West vs West, Central vs Central, etc) in 4 games each for 76 games. Half the remaining teams is six, so one each for 82 games.

Something like:

VAN, SEA, EDM, CAL (Wales) vs SJ, LA, ANA, VGK (Campbell)
WIN, MIN, DAL, NASH (Wales), vs CHI, STL, COL, ARZ (Campbell)
MON, OTT, BOS, TOR (Wales) vs NYR, NYI, NJD, PHI (Campbell)
BUF, DET, TB, FLA (Wales) vs CAR, WAS, PIT, CBJ (Campbell)

You'd get 4x every Canada matchup, but still 4x every team in your time zone for the current Western Conference teams.

Yeah this is closer to my preference, it just seems completely out of reach.


The benefit of my suggestion is that you're not doing that radical of a change.

You're splitting each division into 2 halfs, and gluing them to the next division.

The bolded are the big changes that would grab headlines, everything else is closer to status quo.

Keeping in mind the top halfs play the bottom halfs only 4 times.

So while it looks like Minnesota/Dallas is getting completely screwed they're still only playing 12 games in what is now the pacific conference. But they are making less trips to Canada.


Within each half a team plays eachother 6 times

Pacificwest	Northeast	north missipipppi	metro
los angeles	toronto	chicago	new york
seattle	montreal	detroit	long island
san jose	ottawa	buffalo	new jersey
anaheim	quebec	boston	columbus
Wagonwest	Northwest	south Mississippi	south metro
colorado	vancouver	nashville	phillidelphia
vegas	edmonton	florida	carolina
dallas	calgary	tampa	pittsburg
minnesota	winnipeg	st louis	washington

EDIT: Again no massive jumps, if you work out the numbers everything is very status quo

If quebec happen it already forces the biggest change, the mississipi is an odd one but bedard just immediately becomes the equalizer, that makes central/atlantic teams give up on the leafs/habs/

Which is a lot better than forcing the other 24 teams into three divisions like the did during 2021.

If you go 6 and 4 within your division format that is radically easier to stomach, there's really no comparison when you look at the actual numbers.

I promise you this isn't what I want, but it is what the math supports.

 

[Lady Stanley]

After following when the owners and NHLPA worked to re-align the divisions, TV contracts were never in the equation. It was mostly all about traveling time, costs and time zone. I just don't see them working to re-align just because Rogers and Canadian fans have hurt feeling. And I am a Canadian fan, I would really hate this new Canadian division.

If you split each division you can actually get travel to go down for most teams.

18 games against 3 teams, 16 against 4 is a massive drop in travel, when you factor in the flexibility it gives you.




�

Pacificwest	Northeast	north missipipppi	metro
los angeles	toronto	chicago	new york
seattle	montreal	detroit	long island
san jose	ottawa	buffalo	new jersey
anaheim	quebec	boston	columbus
____________________ Wagonwest	____________________ NorthEast	_____________________ south mississipi	__________________ southmetro
colorado	vancouver	nashville	phillidelphia
vegas	edmonton	florida	carolina
dallas	calgary	tampa	pittsburg
minnesota	winnipeg	st louis	washington

 

[tucker3434]

The Canadian contract is the top concern for the league. It for 3 decades was the American contract, and now times have changed. What you're arguing is that it's just an afterthought for the league if rogers/bell is happy.



It's 3 rounds of Canadian hockey versus the current situation where there can be none. Not to mention greatly increasing the odds Vancouver/Montreal/Toronto are in the playoffs and going deep.

If you don't think that is of massive value I really don't know what to say.




The benefit to US/ESPN is better scheduling options. More odds two big American markets playoff against each other.

Some of the Central teams effectively get to move east.

Better options for strengthening regional markets.

Seattle/San Jose/LA/Anageim would all play eachother 6 times each.

A lot of American pacific timezone hockey.

The Canadian tv deal is $440m/yr. American deal is $625m/yr. Canadian is obviously stronger per capita, but the American deal is still kicking a good chunk of change in. And it’s coming due only a few years after the Canadian deal. There’s a lot more to this than keeping Rogers/Bell happy.

But if this is something they actually value, they can drop it in as an option in the next deal. Then the NHL can debate it once actual numbers are known. As a preemptive move on the part of the NHL, guessing that it might please Rogers/Bell and bring a better tv deal, no way. At very best, you’ve destroyed your negotiating position by giving them what they want before you even sit down at the table.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

I thought the arena was an issue? I.e. poor for hockey?

I honestly think the league wants to blue ball these markets a little to get the expansion fees up.

Could see $1.5 billion price tag being the next round of expansions.

Especially if QC bids a billion on the yotes.

Keeping in mind as I've said again and again, a Canadian vision with 3 rounds of hockey would push up the value of the next Canadian deal.

We could see the next Canadian deal being as large as the current american deal. Which would mean each team is getting $40 mil a year(a billion over 25 years)

Atlanta's arena was fine. Spirit was the issue, they didn't even want to own the team but it was a precondition of owning their main targets, the arena and the NBA team.

The current owners have never expressed interest in hockey either, just clarifying their arena/ownership potential.

 

[KevFu]

The big benefit to the league is getting Canadian teams to bite the east west bullet. Not just the literally travel/timezone issue, but the scheduling issue.

Have 4 relatively small Canadian teams in the Western conference isn't a benefit to the league. The "but Toronto" argument doesn't apply to the west.

ESPN is paying for a pacific division with 3 Canadian teams 2 of which are in the mountain timezone.

With 4 divisions the west Division would be cal 3/vegas/seattle/colorado and 2 central teams.

This, a four 8-team divisions, one entirely Canadian, to me is DOA.

You're not going to get the whole league on board with forcing Dallas and Minnesota into a division with five Pacific teams; and five Eastern teams joining CHI, STL, NASH. The whole reason they ditched six divisions was to FIX THAT.

The ONLY WAY the US teams -- of whom you'd need 17 yes votes from -- agree to something like that, would be if they're cut into the Canadian TV deal at a MUCH MUCH higher rate than now; which I don't see how revenue from 7 or 8 teams playing each other more creates enough revenue to pay off all 32 teams.

The MLB style - where two conferences play only 19 teams a lot, and virtually ignore half the "far away" teams - is probably the only way to accomplish what you want.

Yeah this is closer to my preference, it just seems completely out of reach.

The benefit of my suggestion is that you're not doing that radical of a change.

You're splitting each division into 2 halfs, and gluing them to the next division.

The bolded are the big changes that would grab headlines, everything else is closer to status quo.

Keeping in mind the top halfs play the bottom halfs only 4 times.

So while it looks like Minnesota/Dallas is getting completely screwed they're still only playing 12 games in what is now the pacific conference. But they are making less trips to Canada.

No one really cares about the TRAVEL part of it that much. Tired legs aren't fun, but don't cost teams money. Bad road TV start times DOES cost teams money on the media rights.

The "Radical" change of the MLB style: East to West in each conference; stop playing everyone twice and only play non-conference by time zone...

It LOOKS radical, but the schedule ISN'T that radical, and the change is what everyone WANTS.

Take Vancouver for example:
- STAY at 4 each against EDM, CAL, SEA, SJ, LA, ANA, VGK. (Good time zones!)
- INCREASE from 2 to 4 each against MON, OTT, TOR (better for Canadian TV deal).

They also go to 4 against BOS, BUF, DET, TB, FLA (20 total instead of 10) but play the other 12 Eastern teams 6 total games per year instead of 24 total. They play half the central 4 times (definitely vs Winnipeg), and the other half...seldomly.

Teams are playing in the other time zones the same amount as before, just against hand-picked opponents instead of "Everyone." Because people CARE about Vancouver vs Montreal more than they care about Montreal vs Dallas, and Vancouver versus Columbus.

And the US teams who ARE rivals with Canadian ones (Like Boston, Buffalo, Detroit, Minnesota and Seattle) don't LOSE GAMES vs their old rivals. Everyone is playing their current division rivals FOUR TIMES going forward. (Unless an Arizona relocation forces that to change)

 

[Lady Stanley]

The Canadian tv deal is $440m/yr. American deal is $625m/yr. Canadian is obviously stronger per capita, but the American deal is still kicking a good chunk of change in. And it’s coming due only a few years after the Canadian deal. There’s a lot more to this than keeping Rogers/Bell happy.

That's a pretty fast slight of hand. First it was signed 10 years ago and kicked in 9 years ago.

Inflation alone will give opportunity for growth.

This is the whole point, how much is it worth for a Canadian division to rogers-bell?

You got 2ish years to sign a new deal. Going into negotiations with the 3 biggest Canadian markets in potential rebuilds is a bit crazy.

If you don't think Canadian division isn't easily worth a $100 million a year I got a bridge to sell.

But if this is something they actually value, they can drop it in as an option in the next deal. Then the NHL can debate it once actual numbers are known. As a preemptive move on the part of the NHL, guessing that it might please Rogers/Bell and bring a better tv deal, no way.

This is the radical difference between no division and a division. Whatever the sway is for the deal, playoff certainty is radically powerful. Not just the games themselves but the lead into those playoffs. Bobble head talk, must see rivalries etc.

At very best, you’ve destroyed your negotiating position by giving them what they want before you even sit down at the table.

Their position is simple, why is either company bidding for a hockey contract, why is hockey a must have thing? They're paying to watch/teams Canadian teams win a cup.

 

[Lady Stanley]

This, a four 8-team divisions, one entirely Canadian, to me is DOA.

I'm not agree to that. The Canadian division was a big deal when it hit and that was despite being cut off the knees zero less divisional play.


I don't see the math of not boosting the rogers-bell contacts

You're not going to get the whole league on board with forcing Dallas and Minnesota into a division with five Pacific teams

Not the whole league just 30 of the owners

kidding aside they're already in a conference with 7 pacific teams and 3 mountain.

This is why the jump isn't as extreme as it sounds. Yes if you put them in the current pacific division it'd be an absolute train wreck. But when you use the 6 and 4 format it's very different.

; and five Eastern teams joining CHI, STL, NASH. The whole reason they ditched six divisions was to FIX THAT.

They get screwed no doubt, but not any worst than whatever team would have to move west if QC relocates.

Central teams going east isn't a major problem, it's a preference for teams like St Louis as it means less games in pacific division which is 1 or 2 hours in the wrong direction.

The ONLY WAY the US teams -- of whom you'd need 17 yes votes from -- agree to something like that, would be if they're cut into the Canadian TV deal at a MUCH MUCH higher rate than now; which

Almost all the metro teams would be neutral or aggressively for, Detroit-Boston-Chicago(bedard) is very appealing, when you get bedard in your arena 3 times a season.

The same with Jersey/Islanders getting Rangers 3 times a season. There's give and take for most teams.

California-Seattle would be great for TV, as the regional matchups would be relatively easy to sell having the same time zone and higher probability of meeting in the playoffs.

I don't see how revenue from 7 or 8 teams playing each other more creates enough revenue to pay off all 32 teams.

It's about the national deal. It gives you a chance for a $1.3 billion combined deal.

That's huge for team valuations.

That's not to mention all the selfish owners who get something they want.

No one really cares about the TRAVEL part of it that much. Tired legs aren't fun, but don't cost teams money. Bad road TV start times DOES cost teams money on the media rights.

Bad road times and match ups no one cares about, sure.


I suggest going through the table I worked out, a whole lot of owners will see money. Not just the Canadian teams.

- STAY at 4 each against EDM, CAL, SEA, SJ, LA, ANA, VGK. (Good time zones!)
- INCREASE from 2 to 4 each against MON, OTT, TOR (better for Canadian TV deal).

They also go to 4 against BOS, BUF, DET, TB, FLA (20 total instead of 10) but play the other 12 Eastern teams 6 total games per year instead of 24 total.

Teams are playing in the other time zones the same amount, just against hand-picked opponents instead of "Everyone." Because people CARE about Vancouver vs Montreal more than they care about Montreal vs Dallas, and Vancouver versus Columbus.

I love that in principle but it's a much bigger leap than simply screwing over minnesota/dallas versus sending Detroit to the central.

Someone gets screwed, Minni-Dallas only get half screwed.

And the US teams who ARE rivals with Canadian ones (Like Boston, Buffalo, Detroit, Minnesota and Seattle) don't LOSE GAMES vs their old rivals. Everyone is playing their current division rivals FOUR TIMES going forward. (Unless an Arizona relocation forces that to change)

The alignment I'm suggesting would cost some rivalries but radically improve others.

When you play the same 3 teams 6 times a year and routinely meet in the playoffs you're gonna have nothing but blood baths in every division.



Not sure if you remember the covid season, but the hatred was visible and entertaining.

 

[kgboomer]

Not the whole league just 30 of the owners

Someone gets screwed, Minni-Dallas only get half screwed.

Nothing is that simple... the owners agreed on re-alignment in 2012 and the players union rejected it. They had to re-do it. Beside, you will also have to convince the most powerful owner, Jeremy Jacobs of the Boston Bruins, Chairman of the Board of Governors and of the Executive Committee, who seem to really, really want to be in the same division as Montreal and Toronto.

Oh, and also convincing him to have a team in Quebec. He didn't seem to think much of the Quebec market when Vegas was given a team.

 

[Lady Stanley]

Nothing is that simple... the owners agreed on re-alignment in 2012 and the players union rejected it. They had to re-do it

That's part of why the 6 and 4 matchups is important.

. Beside, you will also have to convince the most powerful owner, Jeremy Jacobs of the Boston Bruins, Chairman of the Board of Governors and of the Executive Committee, who seem to really, really want to be in the same division as Montreal and Toronto.

I'll raise you a bedard.

Oh, and also convincing him to have a team in Quebec. He didn't seem to think much of the Quebec market when Vegas was given a team.

That's another situation all together. They have no choice.

This is substantially worst than the thrashers situation.

At least the thrashers were still playing in an nhl arena at the end of the season.

They could have spent a season in a smaller arena before locating.

The yotes already tried that.

 

[CTHabsfan]

�

Pacificwest	Northeast	north missipipppi	metro
los angeles	toronto	chicago	new york
seattle	montreal	detroit	long island
san jose	ottawa	buffalo	new jersey
anaheim	quebec	boston	columbus
____________________ Wagonwest	____________________ NorthEast	_____________________ south mississipi	__________________ southmetro
colorado	vancouver	nashville	phillidelphia
vegas	edmonton	florida	carolina
dallas	calgary	tampa	pittsburg
minnesota	winnipeg	st louis	washington

The "Mississippi" and "Metro" divisions are really bad. Boston would still get screwed by having their closet division rival 450 miles away, but you could at least move them and Buffalo into a division with Florida and Tampa to get them all in the Eastern Time Zone (of course Detroit gets screwed even more). The Metro needs to have Columbus in the same division as Pittsburgh and Philadelphia in the same division as New Jersey. Better yet, leave the current divisions alone (the Coyotes aren't moving to Quebec).

 

[tucker3434]

That's a pretty fast slight of hand. First it was signed 10 years ago and kicked in 9 years ago.

Inflation alone will give opportunity for growth.

This is the whole point, how much is it worth for a Canadian division to rogers-bell?

You got 2ish years to sign a new deal. Going into negotiations with the 3 biggest Canadian markets in potential rebuilds is a bit crazy.

If you don't think Canadian division isn't easily worth a $100 million a year I got a bridge to sell.






This is the radical difference between no division and a division. Whatever the sway is for the deal, playoff certainty is radically powerful. Not just the games themselves but the lead into those playoffs. Bobble head talk, must see rivalries etc.





Their position is simple, why is either company bidding for a hockey contract, why is hockey a must have thing? They're paying to watch/teams Canadian teams win a cup.

These deals are staggered. It’s unlikely they’ll ever expire at the same time, so somebody is always going to be last. Covid suppressed the US deal a bit so it’s not even as strong as it could’ve been.

Then let them put that $100m on paper and let the owners vote on it. Split evenly, that works out to $3.125m/yr. I doubt the American owners are going for it at that price but I guess you could try.

They’re paying to watch hockey. Championships are never guaranteed.

 

[Lady Stanley]

The "Mississippi" and "Metro" divisions are really bad.

Metro is identical as it is now.

The Mississppi gets Chicago/Bedard in exchange for leafs and habs

Boston would still get screwed by having their closet division rival 450 miles away, but you could at least move them and Buffalo into a division with Florida and Tampa to get them all in the Eastern Time Zone (of course Detroit gets screwed even more).

Putting 3 O6 teams together offsets the whole thing. Boston-Chicago(with bedard) are two big fish.

The Metro needs to have Columbus in the same division as Pittsburgh and Philadelphia in the same division as New Jersey. Better yet, leave the current divisions alone (the Coyotes aren't moving to Quebec).

The metro is still the metro division clumbus will play 4 teams 4 times each and the other 6 times each.

 

[edog37]

We live in a world where Green Bay Wisconsin can support an NFL team. Of course in some alternate reality the NFL could thrive in Tuscaloosa.

The reason the NFL isn't in Tuscaloosa though is because of the U of Alabama. That market is taken. It's the same reason there's no NFL team in Columbus, OH or Austin TX.

Green Bay is a historical outlier. So many things had to go right.