Really strong attendance numbers

[AtlantaWhaler]

I have one very simple question? How do the Green Bay Packers survive in the NFL (very very very small market)? If Mr. Bettman worried MORE about a MAJOR TV contract instead of pimping a team at the Winter Classic, a gimmick ASG format or having a shootout the Atlanta's, Carolina's and others wouldn't constantly be in the red.

By having a tradition (a long one) of winning in the most popular league (by far) in America.

 

[TaketheCannoli]

I have one very simple question? How do the Green Bay Packers survive in the NFL (very very very small market)? If Mr. Bettman worried MORE about a MAJOR TV contract instead of pimping a team at the Winter Classic, a gimmick ASG format or having a shootout the Atlanta's, Carolina's and others wouldn't constantly be in the red.

It's probably doable. First thing that would have to happen is an NFL like arrangement over TV rights. Every team in the league would have to relinquish it's media rights to the NHL, just like the NFL. No more local media rights revenues. Immediately, that makes the national deals much more attractive and more expensive. Of course, I can't imagine the Red Wings, Rangers, Islanders, Leafs, Habs and Flyers agreeing to this.

 

[tarheelhockey]

HUGE sacrifice the league made...

You can't compare that to going to court and then owning the team for however long it has been. You just can't.

I'm not. The point was that you can't take attendance figures as an indisputable predictor for a market's viability. Whether it's a huge city like Chicago or a tiny one like Edmonton, people simply will not pay for a third-rate experience. And there's nothing wrong with that really... the onus is on the franchise to EARN its support.

 

[CC Chiefs*]

It's probably doable. First thing that would have to happen is an NFL like arrangement over TV rights. Every team in the league would have to relinquish it's media rights to the NHL, just like the NFL. No more local media rights revenues. Immediately, that makes the national deals much more attractive and more expensive. Of course, I can't imagine the Red Wings, Rangers, Islanders, Leafs, Habs and Flyers agreeing to this.

Then we are right back to big market vs small market. Which leads us to if the NHL isn't going to start generating revenues to share why is the responsiblity of the big markets to support the league? In other words if 95% of a big markets teams revenue is locally generated why should said owner be told what to do with his own generated revenue?

 

[Whileee]

Then we are right back to big market vs small market. Which leads us to if the NHL isn't going to start generating revenues to share why is the responsiblity of the big markets to support the league? In other words if 95% of a big markets teams revenue is locally generated why should said owner be told what to do with his own generated revenue?

Because those are the conditions of ownership of an NHL franchise. If a prospective owner doesn't like the rules, don't buy the team. If a current owner doesn't like the rules, find another purchaser. Perhaps the best gauge of success for the NHL is the availability of quality owners who are willing to purchase a team at a good value. With the current system, it is obvious that there is considerable interest for owning a franchise in a large and lucrative market. It is the smaller and/or less traditional markets where it has been difficult to find owners and investors. That speaks volumes for the current system, and for the size and geographic distribution of teams. If the system were altered substantially in favour of larger / more lucrative markets contraction would appear to be inevitable.

 

[TaketheCannoli]

Then we are right back to big market vs small market. Which leads us to if the NHL isn't going to start generating revenues to share why is the responsiblity of the big markets to support the league? In other words if 95% of a big markets teams revenue is locally generated why should said owner be told what to do with his own generated revenue?

Over and over again you repeat two mantras:

1. Bettman needs to pursue the BIG TV contract like the NFL.

2. Why should there be revenue sharing, which takes money from the big market teams?


The NFL has the ultimate revenue sharing. The League owns the media rights and splits the money up into 33 shares- 32 teams plus an equal share for the League office. I suspect if the setup was like the NFLs, it's possible there may be no other form of revenue sharing.

 

[Gnashville]

The Oilers paid into revenue sharing in 2006 and 2007 as well.

Calgary has likely paid into revenue sharing every year of the new CAB.

The only year That I read that Edmonton (net) paid was their cup finals year and it was minimal. All teams pay into the system some BTW.


Not that I'm doubting but I have yet to see any proof that Edmonton, Calgary and Ottawa have ever consistently paid into the system and since All 3 qualify that those teams have never taken from the system either (not one news story about them returning checks).
I have read stories where each of them lost money BTW.

I mean only southern teams get checks and only Canadian teams are forced to pay.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Take a breather!!

If it doesn't fit my agenda...then it doesn't fit yours either.

Put the two in perspective. The NHL allows more people to be part of an ownership 'group' than they usually allow. Compare that to going to court.....having their laundry aired out in public and eventually purchasing one of their own franchises.

How "drastic" was it that they allowed a few more people to be part of an ownership group than they typically allow?

Did they have to go to court? Did they have to buy back one of their own franchises? No, it never got that far. Local people stood up and answered the bell.

They had plans to build a new arena
Many arenas are part of "shopping malls"
Hartford met every demand Karmanos made
The NHL....seemingly did nothing.

You are aware of when the 'seven year itch' clause came into effect?? It's weird...you support Karmanos...but if you swap his name for 'Balsillie'....there seems to be a PILE of reasons why the very same actions should not have been allowed.

I don't know how to do the separate quotes thingy, so I'll just adress each of your points down here.

First off, the point I was trying to make was not that the NHL breaking its own rule to effectively save the Edmonton franchise is a big deal (though I do think it is, as you correctly assumed).

My point is that you can't just gloss over something that doesn't fit with your agenda or beliefs or whatever.

The people on here with the mindset that "Canada>U.S. Markets X1000000!!!!" are not going to like the fact that the NHL had to step in to save one of Canada's most successful franchises from moving by breaking its own rules.

You can't just say it is no big deal, in large part because I suspect that many on here would be very angry with the NHL if the Oilers had moved the Houston. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Second, no, there were no concrete plans to build an arena, no, most modern arena's are not part of shopping malls, yes, Karmanos had his demands meet and still moved, and I have still yet to hear what the NHL "could" have done to block it. This is not intended as an insult, I honestly do not know (and I think that if there had been a way, they would indeed done so).

Third, please don't assume I support Karmanos. I don't. I think he is a snake, and hope that he sells the team to a local owner.

Also, the comparison to Jim Balsillie is moot, because Jim Balsillie never actually owned any of the teams he tried to move. That's why the NHL hates the guy, he has tried several times to move teams that were not his.

Karmanos owned the team, and while it was underhanded and morally wrong, he was allowed to move the team.

Also, no, I am not aware of this seven itch clause, though a google search showed that it has something to do with an American movie from eh '50s. Could you please explain it?

 

[CC Chiefs*]

Over and over again you repeat two mantras:

1. Bettman needs to pursue the BIG TV contract like the NFL.

2. Why should there be revenue sharing, which takes money from the big market teams?


The NFL has the ultimate revenue sharing. The League owns the media rights and splits the money up into 33 shares- 32 teams plus an equal share for the League office. I suspect if the setup was like the NFLs, it's possible there may be no other form of revenue sharing.

Maybe just maybe if GB worried more about a Major TV contract than suspending star players for missing ASG's and saving weak faltering franchises the NHL could have a completely different system with a real revenue sharing plan.

How does a city of 101000 people support an NFL team? Pete Rozelle wasn't an idiot worrying about saving his failing experiments and worried about making the NFL into a great business with a great TV contract. And GB not so much.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Maybe just maybe if GB worried more about a Major TV contract than suspending star players for missing ASG's and saving weak faltering franchises the NHL could have a completely different system with a real revenue sharing plan.

Gary Bettman's far more competent than you'd have us believe, and he's more than capable of doing both things simultaneously. But you knew that.

 

[Jeffrey93]

I don't know how to do the separate quotes thingy, so I'll just adress each of your points down here.

First off, the point I was trying to make was not that the NHL breaking its own rule to effectively save the Edmonton franchise is a big deal (though I do think it is, as you correctly assumed).

My point is that you can't just gloss over something that doesn't fit with your agenda or beliefs or whatever.

The people on here with the mindset that "Canada>U.S. Markets X1000000!!!!" are not going to like the fact that the NHL had to step in to save one of Canada's most successful franchises from moving by breaking its own rules.

You can't just say it is no big deal, in large part because I suspect that many on here would be very angry with the NHL if the Oilers had moved the Houston. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

I'm not upset the Jets left....or the Nordiques. That is what had to happen. If it had to happen in Edmonton...then it had to happen. The bottom line is it didn't have to happen because there were Owners.
To flip this...if you support what the NHL has done in Phoenix...then you are doing the same thing you are accusing me of doing. You NEED to say the NHL saved the Oilers...so then you can make the claim that they are justified in saving the Coyotes as well.
In all honesty...I don't need to say the NHL didn't save the Oilers to stick with some agenda you think I have. I don't believe the NHL should bend over backwards to save brutal markets. Edmonton wasn't a brutal market and the NHL didn't bend over backwards to save it.

Second, no, there were no concrete plans to build an arena, no, most modern arena's are not part of shopping malls, yes, Karmanos had his demands meet and still moved, and I have still yet to hear what the NHL "could" have done to block it. This is not intended as an insult, I honestly do not know (and I think that if there had been a way, they would indeed done so).

The NHL can't block moves. But they didn't even try to force him to sell or anything. They seemingly didn't do a thing.
Arenas aren't part of shopping malls? This whole Westgate Center thing seems to be all the talk in Glendale.....I wonder what it is...is it shopping?
Hartford had plans to build a new arena....Karmanos wanted his losses covered by the City until the new arena was built. The City said no to that...as they should have.

Third, please don't assume I support Karmanos. I don't. I think he is a snake, and hope that he sells the team to a local owner.

Also, the comparison to Jim Balsillie is moot, because Jim Balsillie never actually owned any of the teams he tried to move. That's why the NHL hates the guy, he has tried several times to move teams that were not his.

Karmanos owned the team, and while it was underhanded and morally wrong, he was allowed to move the team.

Also, no, I am not aware of this seven itch clause, though a google search showed that it has something to do with an American movie from eh '50s. Could you please explain it?

If you buy an NHL team you sign that you won't move your franchise for 7 years. It is what Bettman wanted Balsillie to sign in Pittsburgh (that had no arena) so he walked away.

I'm not sure how you claim Balsillie tried to move teams that weren't his. He followed the NHL rules to prepare for that if it were required after the sale.

 

[CC Chiefs*]

Gary Bettman's far more competent than you'd have us believe, and he's more than capable of doing both things simultaneously. But you knew that.

Then where's said TV contract? Oh yes we have OLN. That was a HUGE move.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Then where's said TV contract? Oh yes we have OLN.

You also know that it takes two interested parties to have a contract. And you also know about NBC. And you also know that "OLN" hasn't been "OLN" for a few years now. Are you deliberately trying to frustrate?

 

[CC Chiefs*]

You also know that it takes two interested parties to have a contract. And you also know about NBC. And you also know that "OLN" hasn't been "OLN" for a few years now. Are you deliberately trying to frustrate?

I was under the impression ESPN wanted the NHL back? But now they have NBA so I'm not sure it will work.

 

[kdb209]

I was under the impression ESPN wanted the NHL back? But now they have NBA so I'm not sure it will work.

No. They had a $60M option for the '05-'06 season which they elected not to exercise - effectively making the NHL a free agent who then signed with OLN/Versus for $65M. Reports had it that ESPN was only interested then in a zero up front rights fee revenue sharing deal similar to the one the League had signed with NBC.

 

[Gnashville]

I'm not sure how you claim Balsillie tried to move teams that weren't his. He followed the NHL rules to prepare for that if it were required after the sale.

He took season ticket deposit for a franchise he did not own. He never intended on owning the Nashville Predators one bit. Leipold had already stopped the sale when Baldy broke the LOI by altering it and yet he took the deposits anyways.

How can a thread started about positive attendance in most NHL markets get hijacked into another selfish "this place does not deserve hockey" and "I deserve a team in my backyard" thread.

 

[TaketheCannoli]

Maybe just maybe if GB worried more about a Major TV contract than suspending star players for missing ASG's and saving weak faltering franchises the NHL could have a completely different system with a real revenue sharing plan.

How does a city of 101000 people support an NFL team? Pete Rozelle wasn't an idiot worrying about saving his failing experiments and worried about making the NFL into a great business with a great TV contract. And GB not so much.

Maybe if the teams in the largest markets agreed to relinquish their rights and media revenues to the League, then the NHL Would be able to do those things. On the other hand, knowing how much you dislike revenue sharing, the salary cap and small markets., there is another way, contraction.

If the league was reduced to:
Toronto, Montreal, New York Rangers, Philadelphia, Detroit, Los Angeles, Pittsburgh and Vancouver you would no longer need to worry about the rest. The players however would lose most of their jobs, TV rights fees would be much smaller and player salaries would be reduced
On the other hand, people like you would be happy. Would this happiness finally get you to break down and buy season tickets?

 

[CC Chiefs*]

Maybe if the teams in the largest markets agreed to relinquish their rights and media revenues to the League, then the NHL Would be able to do those things. On the other hand, knowing how much you dislike revenue sharing, the salary cap and small markets., there is another way, contraction.

If the league was reduced to:
Toronto, Montreal, New York Rangers, Philadelphia, Detroit, Los Angeles, Pittsburgh and Vancouver you would no longer need to worry about the rest. The players however would lose most of their jobs, TV rights fees would be much smaller and player salaries would be reduced
On the other hand, people like you would be happy. Would this happiness finally get you to break down and buy season tickets?

I could care less if the NHL had 60 teams as long all 60 support the league equally.

Back to the OP the attendance may be up but without a Major TV contract the BIG market teams are keeping it afloat.

 

[canuckster19]

I honestly don't know how much longer Toronto can keep doing this. This spring will be 6 seasons in which the team missed the playoffs and 7 years since a playoff game was last played in the city. That is the second longest drought in the league (behind the Panthers) and it is coupled with the longest cup drought lasting what will be 44 years. To add to the misery, the team finished 29th overall last year and is 28th this year with no signs of improvement in sight and no first round picks. Fans are frustrated and the question is whether tickets will stop being bought. The team has been booed regularly for the past three years, chants have started for Wilson's head, upper management is booed while walking down the street, and stuff is frequently thrown on the ice (the most famous of which has been waffles, although garbage and jerseys have also been reportedly been thrown as well). This is the worst the team has been since the 1980s, if not the worst it has been in its 93 year history, and whether us Leaf fans want to admit it or not, the team cannot sell out forever with these results.

Ushers could kick fans in the nuts upon entering the game and Leafs fans will still sellout, the waiting list is just that long. People are probably born and die before ever getting season tickets.

 

[Crazy_Ike]

You also know that it takes two interested parties to have a contract. And you also know about NBC. And you also know that "OLN" hasn't been "OLN" for a few years now. Are you deliberately trying to frustrate?

Do you really have to ask?

ITT: people who are outright angry that the league is succeeding.

 

[CC Chiefs*]

Do you really have to ask?

ITT: people who are outright angry that the league is succeeding.

Succeeding? Why are people sooooooo quick to forget 6 years later we were supposed to have 30 healthy franchises?

 

[AllByDesign]

Ushers could kick fans in the nuts upon entering the game and Leafs fans will still sellout, the waiting list is just that long. People are probably born and die before ever getting season tickets.

Yeah. They tried the "get kicked in the junk" promo here at a Moose game. Oddly enough it was when the Marlies were in town. Many Leaf fans attend those games. I suppose they did that to give them that 'authentic' Toronto feeling.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

I'm not upset the Jets left....or the Nordiques. That is what had to happen. If it had to happen in Edmonton...then it had to happen. The bottom line is it didn't have to happen because there were Owners.
To flip this...if you support what the NHL has done in Phoenix...then you are doing the same thing you are accusing me of doing. You NEED to say the NHL saved the Oilers...so then you can make the claim that they are justified in saving the Coyotes as well.
In all honesty...I don't need to say the NHL didn't save the Oilers to stick with some agenda you think I have. I don't believe the NHL should bend over backwards to save brutal markets. Edmonton wasn't a brutal market and the NHL didn't bend over backwards to save it.

The NHL can't block moves. But they didn't even try to force him to sell or anything. They seemingly didn't do a thing.
Arenas aren't part of shopping malls? This whole Westgate Center thing seems to be all the talk in Glendale.....I wonder what it is...is it shopping?
Hartford had plans to build a new arena....Karmanos wanted his losses covered by the City until the new arena was built. The City said no to that...as they should have.

If you buy an NHL team you sign that you won't move your franchise for 7 years. It is what Bettman wanted Balsillie to sign in Pittsburgh (that had no arena) so he walked away.

I'm not sure how you claim Balsillie tried to move teams that weren't his. He followed the NHL rules to prepare for that if it were required after the sale.

My point is lost on you, so I guess I will stop trying.

I don't think that the Phoenix and Edmonton situations are comparable. The NHL never ran out of suitors for Phoenix (though Ice Edge was the only serious suitor, and it is very debatable if you want to consider them such), and didn't have to break an established rule to keep them in the market (although they did strongarm Glendale).

I support what the NHL did in Phoenix. Had Jim Balsillie been allowed to do what he was trying to do, then the League as a whole would have suffered greatly.

Also, no, the NHL can not force owners to sell teams. Are you operating under the assumption that the majority of owners want to move their teams right now?


Also, you point out in your post that the city refused to cover Karmanos' losses until a new arena was built. That right there is probably a major reason why the NHL did not "try" to stop the move from Hartford.

Honestly, looking at it, talks for a new arena broke down. They didn't get a new arena to replace their crappy one, so they moved. It has happened dozens of times in the world of sports, and is one of the main reasons for relocation.

My point is, you can't compare Karmanos and Balsillie. Both are snakes, but one was in his as an owner to move his team.

The other is a guy who put on sale season tickets for the Hamilton Predators before he had even bought the team, and tried to circumvent league rules to allow to purchase a team. I really don't see the comparison.

EDIT: Hartford fans, if I am incorrect about anything posted here, please come and correct me. Thank you.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Succeeding? Why are people sooooooo quick to forget 6 years later we were supposed to have 30 healthy franchises?

Why do you care? I have never, ever had the impression from your posts that you even expected there to be 30 healthy franchises in the first place.

 

[CC Chiefs*]

Why do you care? I have never, ever had the impression from your posts that you even expected there to be 30 healthy franchises in the first place.

Because I hated to be lied to as why we lost a SEASON. SOOOOOOOO many forget what was shoved up our butts as to why a lockout was needed.