Too many New York teams?

[Crunchrulz]

My opinion on the attendance in Albany can be backed with numbers if you care to look them up. Others have posted about the lack of support from the Devils, which was an issue when the Devils were in Utica as well. Having attended games in Albany, it is a large building where many fans attend disguised as empty seats. Syracuse does have the University to contend with for media coverage and a few games a year scheduled at the same time, but still manages to average appx 5400 in an ancient building that holds appx 6100. Rochester's fan base has increased over the past couple of years. The big mistake they made was cutting ties to the Sabres for a couple of seasons. The Rochester Americans and Buffalo Sabres go together like peanut butter and jelly.

 

[Tommy Hawk]

My opinion on the attendance in Albany can be backed with numbers if you care to look them up. Others have posted about the lack of support from the Devils, which was an issue when the Devils were in Utica as well. Having attended games in Albany, it is a large building where many fans attend disguised as empty seats. Syracuse does have the University to contend with for media coverage and a few games a year scheduled at the same time, but still manages to average appx 5400 in an ancient building that holds appx 6100. Rochester's fan base has increased over the past couple of years. The big mistake they made was cutting ties to the Sabres for a couple of seasons. The Rochester Americans and Buffalo Sabres go together like peanut butter and jelly.

Albany has always been in the bottom of the attendance even when they were affiliated with Carolina and made the playoffs.

 

[Nightsquad]

Albany has always been in the bottom of the attendance even when they were affiliated with Carolina and made the playoffs.

Actually your incorrect, check the numbers on Albany's attendance through most of the 1990s. Even after they won the Calder Cup the previous year, back in 1995-1996 they drew 6101 per game that season. As the next decade progressed, yet the Devils product regressed with no playoff appearances in that span their attendance went down with it, fan apathy likely. Putting Carolina in Albany could be compared to putting a Florida AHL team in Rochester, crazy, yet people forget Rochester was on its way down like Albany was. Simply stating Albany's building excuse for low attendance is absurd. Albany uses the curtain, their attendance should be capped at the lower bowl which seats 6,500 which if Albany did draw that number again like they did in early 1990s they would be in the top 5 of AHL draws. That's not going to happen in Albany. Not even 100,000 people in city home to two D1 hockey teams 20 minutes away, and two (not 1 like Syracuse) DI college basketball teams. I am not a big fan of Smallbany NY but got to hand it to that market because even at its fan base bottomed out they still draw over 3000 while hosting losing teams for over a decade and then shined during Albany's first playoff appearance in many years....I say if they get the Rangers farm team down the road, many other AHL Northeast markets down the road will lose out to Albany....If Albany loses it won't be to Utica, Rochester, or Syracuse, Springfield, it would lose to a bigger city not one that's less on the ball like most of NY State or old New England. If the AHL Rangers land in Albany, ALBANY WANTS THEM, you will see that market strongly rebound!

 

[go comets]

Problem is the rangers want to be closer to NYC, not farther away. The rumors I'm hearing has the rangers eyeing Bridgeport. As far as the western movement, the initial push is supposed to be the California teams with the avalanche and coyotes. I would be surprised if western Canada Would be included in the initial expansion. Maybe if southern California works out and both the flames and canucks can find cities to support their teams. But they will more than likely to be us cities

 

[Tommy Hawk]

Actually your incorrect, check the numbers on Albany's attendance through most of the 1990s. Even after they won the Calder Cup the previous year, back in 1995-1996 they drew 6101 per game that season. As the next decade progressed, yet the Devils product regressed with no playoff appearances in that span their attendance went down with it, fan apathy likely. Putting Carolina in Albany could be compared to putting a Florida AHL team in Rochester, crazy, yet people forget Rochester was on its way down like Albany was. Simply stating Albany's building excuse for low attendance is absurd. Albany uses the curtain, their attendance should be capped at the lower bowl which seats 6,500 which if Albany did draw that number again like they did in early 1990s they would be in the top 5 of AHL draws. That's not going to happen in Albany. Not even 100,000 people in city home to two D1 hockey teams 20 minutes away, and two (not 1 like Syracuse) DI college basketball teams. I am not a big fan of Smallbany NY but got to hand it to that market because even at its fan base bottomed out they still draw over 3000 while hosting losing teams for over a decade and then shined during Albany's first playoff appearance in many years....I say if they get the Rangers farm team down the road, many other AHL Northeast markets down the road will lose out to Albany....If Albany loses it won't be to Utica, Rochester, or Syracuse, Springfield, it would lose to a bigger city not one that's less on the ball like most of NY State or old New England. If the AHL Rangers land in Albany, ALBANY WANTS THEM, you will see that market strongly rebound!

You can't really compare the attendances from back then to now. Completely different league now. Also back then I know that there were many AHL teams drawing over 10k per game, the Wolves and M Ads and Griffins were drawing 13k a game. Also back then teams like Hershey were playing in smaller arenas.

IF you go to the "modern" AHL, when they went to an almost 1 team per NHL team structure, Albany has been in the bottom, even when they were successful.

 

[axecrew]

What "fits"? You brought the "d" word in to rebuke a post which had no mention of or even veiled reference to the concept. You quoted him and responded to him with a post that had no connection at all to the post you were responding to. I know sometimes you and Tommy love to prolong an argument this way; it never ceases to amaze me how often you do this.

Fine....here so you will be happy....he said that because he doesn't live in a city he doesn't want them to have an AHL team because he doesn't care about that city. Fine.....the people in those cities don't CARE about utica and don't want them to have an AHL team anymore.
Not prolonging jack, just responding to comments made, don't want me to respond.....don't freakin comment....but also not going to argue semantics either.....bottomline is simple....he doesn't live there so he doesn't want a team there....who cares, the NHL is going to move their teams wherever the $&^% they want...end of story and it won't matter what any one person wants or likes.

 

[Tommy Hawk]

Fine....here so you will be happy....he said that because he doesn't live in a city he doesn't want them to have an AHL team because he doesn't care about that city. Fine.....the people in those cities don't CARE about utica and don't want them to have an AHL team anymore.
Not prolonging jack, just responding to comments made, don't want me to respond.....don't freakin comment....but also not going to argue semantics either.....bottomline is simple....he doesn't live there so he doesn't want a team there....who cares, the NHL is going to move their teams wherever the $&^% they want...end of story and it won't matter what any one person wants or likes.

Axe, I must disagree. It does matter what any one person wants or or likes. Those individuals happen to be the owners of the NHL teams. All of them. They decide where they want their AHL team, no one else does, not even the exalted Dave Andrews.

 

[Clinton Comets EHL]

Fine....here so you will be happy....he said that because he doesn't live in a city he doesn't want them to have an AHL team because he doesn't care about that city. Fine.....the people in those cities don't CARE about utica and don't want them to have an AHL team anymore.
Not prolonging jack, just responding to comments made, don't want me to respond.....don't freakin comment....but also not going to argue semantics either.....bottomline is simple....he doesn't live there so he doesn't want a team there....who cares, the NHL is going to move their teams wherever the $&^% they want...end of story and it won't matter what any one person wants or likes.

Never said that. Just simply said I care that Utica has a team because that is where I live. Didn't hate on other cities. Hope that all the people that want a team can have one.

TH says in later post that ultimately the NHL owners will decide. He is correct. Doesn't matter who lives there or where.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Problem is the rangers want to be closer to NYC, not farther away. The rumors I'm hearing has the rangers eyeing Bridgeport. As far as the western movement, the initial push is supposed to be the California teams with the avalanche and coyotes. I would be surprised if western Canada Would be included in the initial expansion. Maybe if southern California works out and both the flames and canucks can find cities to support their teams. But they will more than likely to be us cities

doubtful you'll see the Rangers eyeing Bridgeport, here's why, the Islanders own that market, and Nassau is not an option once the Islanders migrate to Barclays, go.

I also don't see Colorado being part of the expansion west, since it's apparently required that Cleveland has a franchise.

Rangers already have a deal w/ XL through 2017, so there's no real reason for the Wolf*Pack to replace the Sound Tigers in Bridgeport....

Calgary and Vancouver are locked in through 2018 or even later, if Utica has another 5 years as reported

Abbotsford seems to be done as a market professionally.

WHAT Becomes of Westward expansion if both Manchester and Worcester choose to stay put past 2016? some of you will have eggs benedict

 

[go comets]

doubtful you'll see the Rangers eyeing Bridgeport, here's why, the Islanders own that market, and Nassau is not an option once the Islanders migrate to Barclays, go.

I also don't see Colorado being part of the expansion west, since it's apparently required that Cleveland has a franchise.

Rangers already have a deal w/ XL through 2017, so there's no real reason for the Wolf*Pack to replace the Sound Tigers in Bridgeport....

Calgary and Vancouver are locked in through 2018 or even later, if Utica has another 5 years as reported

Abbotsford seems to be done as a market professionally.

WHAT Becomes of Westward expansion if both Manchester and Worcester choose to stay put past 2016? some of you will have eggs benedict

There are so many moving parts, I almost think it would be next to impossible to pull it off. Vancouver was very happy with the development of some of their young players in utica, with all the extra time saved with short trips. The flames also should see the same benefits in adirondack. It could literally take 5-10 years before anything happens.......more than likely two or three teams will try it and find out its not worth it. There is a reason why the ahl is based in the north east after all........

 

[CJNewman]

There are so many moving parts, I almost think it would be next to impossible to pull it off. Vancouver was very happy with the development of some of their young players in utica, with all the extra time saved with short trips. The flames also should see the same benefits in adirondack. It could literally take 5-10 years before anything happens.......more than likely two or three teams will try it and find out its not worth it. There is a reason why the ahl is based in the north east after all........

I agree with a lot of what you say especially the part where 2-3 teams will try it. Getting 6 teams to all move at once and find markets where they can succeed long term is pretty much impossible. I don't agree that it won't work at all though. I think California can support 2 teams, buts that's about it 3 or 4 is pushing it. I think that Colorado and Utah are viable options possibly, but in the case of Colorado I think the only option that would work is the Avalanche, but a lot has to fall in place to happen. My perdiction is that Oklahoma City moves to Bakersfield, Manchester moves to Ontario, someone moves to Manchester not sure who, but they won't be without a team unless they choose to be, Phoenix/Portland swaps affiliates with Florida/San Antonio. Things I'm not sure about are where Winnipeg/St. John's goes. They are officially done there and Thunder Bay best case scenario won't be ready for 2-3 years if ever. The Sharks are going to announce their intentions on their future in Worcester in August. The Ducks are a big ? because their affiliation is ending with Norfolk and I have no clue how that will play out. With both Vancouver and Calgary having multiple years left on their agreements and just having the options to go west yet choosing to go east seem out of the picture also their is talk of a group involved with Calgary buying the GFCC at auction. Colorado is also a ? with them not owning their own team, but are the only team that makes since in Ft. Collins. At the end of the day it seems if 6 teams move out west New York might come out unaffected.

 

[Tommy Hawk]

There are many moving parts but it can happen in the blink of an eye. These contracts, both affiliation and arena, are easily broken by the team when they want to be broken.

The blues bailed in worcester, Calgary bailed in Omaha and QC, The River Rats moved on a moments notice,The Devils were tossed on a moments notice, Portland got tossed and now they are back, Florida was tossed from San Antonio, the Hawks left Norfolk before their deal was up, etc.

These guys really want to go, they will go and there is NOTHING that will stop them. And it will be 6 teams because that is the way the economics work. The economics doesn't work with 3 teams so "testing" would be a waste of time and money.

And as for California only being able to support 2 or 3 teams, get serious. San Jose area is nuts for anything Sharks related. Yo put their affiliate in an area on either the peninsula between San Jose and San Fran or in the area of say Fremont or even north near Pleasanton and they will go in droves.

In Southern Cal they can go to Ontario, Orange County, San Diego, etc.

Vancouver can go to Abbotsford. AZ can go to Tuscon or Scottsdale or who really cares because their fan base doesn't. Calgary can go to Idaho or anywhere in the Calgary area because the people there are nuts about hockey. I think Edmonton remains where they are in OKC.

This will happen when those teams decide to make it happen, not before and not after.

I think Colorado will stay were they are.

The locations that I think will lose teams are:
Syracuse
Utica
Adirondack
Binghamton
Springfield
Worcester
Portland
Bridgeport

I think that Manchester will keep a team as will Norfolk.

 

[CJNewman]

There are many moving parts but it can happen in the blink of an eye. These contracts, both affiliation and arena, are easily broken by the team when they want to be broken.

The blues bailed in worcester, Calgary bailed in Omaha and QC, The River Rats moved on a moments notice,The Devils were tossed on a moments notice, Portland got tossed and now they are back, Florida was tossed from San Antonio, the Hawks left Norfolk before their deal was up, etc.

These guys really want to go, they will go and there is NOTHING that will stop them. And it will be 6 teams because that is the way the economics work. The economics doesn't work with 3 teams so "testing" would be a waste of time and money.

And as for California only being able to support 2 or 3 teams, get serious. San Jose area is nuts for anything Sharks related. Yo put their affiliate in an area on either the peninsula between San Jose and San Fran or in the area of say Fremont or even north near Pleasanton and they will go in droves.

In Southern Cal they can go to Ontario, Orange County, San Diego, etc.

Vancouver can go to Abbotsford. AZ can go to Tuscon or Scottsdale or who really cares because their fan base doesn't. Calgary can go to Idaho or anywhere in the Calgary area because the people there are nuts about hockey. I think Edmonton remains where they are in OKC.

This will happen when those teams decide to make it happen, not before and not after.

I think Colorado will stay were they are.

The locations that I think will lose teams are:
Syracuse
Utica
Adirondack
Binghamton
Springfield
Worcester
Portland
Bridgeport

I think that Manchester will keep a team as will Norfolk.

I literally LOLed at your comments. In all seriousness no sarcasm or harassment have you done any research on this subject. Ran a google search check other websites because I have many times over. See I am a fan of the Adirondack team and we knew the Phantoms were going to move for years now so I have done plenty of research on the subject of teams lease and affiliation agreements and which markets would be potential competition on attracting a new team instead of Glens Falls. With that. Being said I can say that their isn't one possible scenario you stated of happening. Like I said I'm not looking to fight or anything and this is America and the First Ammendment gives you the right to free speech, but seriously if your going to comment on something please do a little research so you can know what your talking about.

 

[wildcat48]

Portland is not going anywhere.... They will simply get a new affiliate. Team just signed a new long-term lease, new owner is committed to Portland with local ties both through his business and hockey. Portland hasn't been this secure since the Ebright's owned the team.

 

[Tommy Hawk]

Portland is not going anywhere.... They will simply get a new affiliate. Team just signed a new long-term lease, new owner is committed to Portland with local ties both through his business and hockey. Portland hasn't been this secure since the Ebright's owned the team.

All of you seem to fail to realize that for everyone of the the poor teams in the northeast that if their affiliation leaves and they fail to find another team they will be gone. This is not because of the league but because they financially cannot survive. Iowa had a lease for the arena when they folded. Did that save their team? Nope.

If the NHL teams want to move, they will, regardless of arena leases or affiliation agreements. I really do not give a darn where they move because wherever you think they will, they won't. Abbotsford was a surprise move for the Flames. No one had an inkling that Worcester was moving to Peoria until the info started leaking out. Same with Charlotte. And how about all the Devils rumours, They were going to Trenton, the Atlantic City, the Utica, then Albany then who really cares. Who thought St. Louis was going to sell their team?

So do all the research you want but when you have been following the AHL for years you will find that the affiliation agreements, the arena agreements, and any other agreements do not mean squat. How many of these AHL owners do you think would turn down $3-5 million for their team? I do know that the Hershey, Chicago, Grand Rapids, Milwaukee, Lake Erie, Lehigh Valley, and Rockford owners wouldn't. Throw Charlotte and Hamilton in there as well since the Hamilton owner has close ties to Montreal like Charlotte does to Carolina.

Teams owned by their western NHL teams are excluded. NHL teams that would need to acquire a team or force a team to move are Anaheim and Arizona. The others can move whenever they want to move.

 

[Tommy Hawk]

I literally LOLed at your comments. In all seriousness no sarcasm or harassment have you done any research on this subject. Ran a google search check other websites because I have many times over. See I am a fan of the Adirondack team and we knew the Phantoms were going to move for years now so I have done plenty of research on the subject of teams lease and affiliation agreements and which markets would be potential competition on attracting a new team instead of Glens Falls. With that. Being said I can say that their isn't one possible scenario you stated of happening. Like I said I'm not looking to fight or anything and this is America and the First Ammendment gives you the right to free speech, but seriously if your going to comment on something please do a little research so you can know what your talking about.

So did you get your information on GF moving when the owners announced before they even went to GF that it was only temporary and they were waiting for the arena in Lehigh Valley?

And if you had done any research at all on lease agreements and affiliation agreements you would have noticed that they are broken or renegotiated more often than than axe's english. In 4 years the Flames broke them twice which is why everyone has warned GF.

 

[go comets]

All of you seem to fail to realize that for everyone of the the poor teams in the northeast that if their affiliation leaves and they fail to find another team they will be gone. This is not because of the league but because they financially cannot survive. Iowa had a lease for the arena when they folded. Did that save their team? Nope.

If the NHL teams want to move, they will, regardless of arena leases or affiliation agreements. I really do not give a darn where they move because wherever you think they will, they won't. Abbotsford was a surprise move for the Flames. No one had an inkling that Worcester was moving to Peoria until the info started leaking out. Same with Charlotte. And how about all the Devils rumours, They were going to Trenton, the Atlantic City, the Utica, then Albany then who really cares. Who thought St. Louis was going to sell their team?

So do all the research you want but when you have been following the AHL for years you will find that the affiliation agreements, the arena agreements, and any other agreements do not mean squat. How many of these AHL owners do you think would turn down $3-5 million for their team? I do know that the Hershey, Chicago, Grand Rapids, Milwaukee, Lake Erie, Lehigh Valley, and Rockford owners wouldn't. Throw Charlotte and Hamilton in there as well since the Hamilton owner has close ties to Montreal like Charlotte does to Carolina.

Teams owned by their western NHL teams are excluded. NHL teams that would need to acquire a team or force a team to move are Anaheim and Arizona. The others can move whenever they want to move.

Portland having a contract with the Owners does not mean it will be a ahl team. Like you said, if there's no parent club then there's no players. I actually think portland will be one city that will be left out along with Norfolk. Both teams have longer bus trips than most north east teams. Montreal and Hamilton is no sure thing... There have been rumors of them leaving. Carolina is happy with Charlotte. I see utica, bingo,adirondack also having trouble keeping a affiliate. I'm sure the devils will leave Albany once the west movement starts.

 

[Tommy Hawk]

Portland having a contract with the Owners does not mean it will be a ahl team. Like you said, if there's no parent club then there's no players. I actually think portland will be one city that will be left out along with Norfolk. Both teams have longer bus trips than most north east teams. Montreal and Hamilton is no sure thing... There have been rumors of them leaving. Carolina is happy with Charlotte. I see utica, bingo,adirondack also having trouble keeping a affiliate. I'm sure the devils will leave Albany once the west movement starts.

I agree Hamilton may not be around but mostly because I think they will be moving closer to Montreal but the same owner will still own the team. If the NHL expands to Quebec I think they will put their farm team close as well, as they had in the past.

I think the Devils will move to wherever they can get the best deal as will many other clubs which is why I agree with the teams you posted. Money talks and suckers walk and bringing in 4500 people per game usually provides more revenue than bringing in 3500 people per game.

 

[mmazz22]

Comet why do you think Bingo will have a hard time?
Remember they are locally owned.
Ottawa leaves then someone has to sell.
You on the other hand should worry about Utica/van.
Who knows what will happen.
Living through the B Rangers bolting out of no where anything is possible despite contracts in place.

 

[go comets]

Comet why do you think Bingo will have a hard time?
Remember they are locally owned.
Ottawa leaves then someone has to sell.
You on the other hand should worry about Utica/van.
Who knows what will happen.
Living through the B Rangers bolting out of no where anything is possible despite contracts in place.

just the fact that its one of the smaller arenas in the ahl. i belive bingo is in the bottom third of the league in attendance. the problem will be the larger citys wanting a team and out bidding the smaller citys ie: bingo and utica for a parent club. the advantage bingo and utica have is less travel and arena expences...... its going to be tough.....
it really dosent have much to do with bingos operation......

 

[mmazz22]

What does attendance matter to the farm as long as they are getting thier affiliation paid.
As long as there is 30 franchises and a local doesn't sell there will always be a team
That Texas thing in my opinion won't happen again.

 

[go comets]

What does attendance matter to the farm as long as they are getting thier affiliation paid.
As long as there is 30 franchises and a local doesn't sell there will always be a team
That Texas thing in my opinion won't happen again.

think about it... manchester averaged around 5600 a game last year, vrs bingos 3900 and uticas 3400. thats alot of extra income... more income equals being able to pay the parent club more........ i do know uticas arena expences are almost nill as esche runs the arena also.... but theres only so much......

 

[mmazz22]

Why would a local owner from Bing want to own a team in Manchester?
Senseless.
Your atty numbers are useless, you don't know how many are actually paid.
What kind of rent I. That hot shot arena in Manchester compared to our two dumps?
Now if a local owner sold to a Manchester interest ok maybe.
Took a3 million Return on his initial investment.
That's different
But no teams aren't going to just shift
Your problem is you have a farm team that owns the franchise.
Less control less local ties

 

[Tommy Hawk]

What does attendance matter to the farm as long as they are getting their affiliation paid.
As long as there is 30 franchises and a local doesn't sell there will always be a team
That Texas thing in my opinion won't happen again.

That Teas thing won't happen again until an NHL teams wants their own franchise and none of the private owners are willing to sell. The AHL is just like the NHL where the NHL teams may not be all buddy buddy but they would not stand in the way of the NHL team getting what it wants.

If AZ wants a team and no one is willing to sell, their current affiliate would need to, solely for financial reasons, find another NHL team for the affiliation. Failing that, what do you think is going to happen?

And where would the NHL team rather have their affiliate - Manchester in a new arena or one of these other locations if the economics are the same.

 

[mmazz22]

If there is no owner in pretty Manchester then it really doesn't matter what an Nhl team wants unless it wants to buy a team and put it there.
And no Texas isn't happening agsin.
What makes these teams valuable is that there is only 30 of them.
The board of governors is not going to devalue their investments in allowing conditional franchise loopholes.
You want a team you gotta buy an existing one.
Just like minor league baseball.