Ville de Québec Part X: Pousse mais pousse égal Gary! (Mod warning post #774)

[Killion]

I think the owners should have been given NHL expansion franchises in non-WHA cities and those surviving WHA cities should not have have been considered for expansion teams for the next 20-25 years....

There's a reason they supported a league other than the NHL: The NHL was too busy putting teams in Atlanta to pay attention to them.... I really don't know how one person can be so bitter on behalf of a bunch of whiny millionaires.

Maybe MLB should get rid of the Blue Jays. Surely Toronto doesn't deserve a team.

OK Gang, before WW3 breaks out over rojac's opinions & comments, lets just get something straight here and that is that he is not alone in those opinions as your quite likely aware. In fact at one time in some pockets of central Canada & in some 06 US markets that opinion shared by a majority of the fans themselves. Indeed, considerable objection to the 67/68 Expansion of 6 teams, let alone what followed in the 70's & beyond.

The NHL was reactive as opposed to being proactive when it came to Expansion right from the get-go. Expanded in 67/68 as there was a changing of the guard amongst the BOG's generation, they saw how successful the NFL had become with television & their lucrative broadcast contracts and were told by high ranking network execs that they had no hope of securing same without a national footprint.

Further driving all of it from the mid-50's on, several cities including LA threatening anti-trust suits if they didnt open up to Expansion along with the threat of a competitive league whereby the minor-pro WHL & the IHL were experimenting with an interlocking schedule in what were NHL sized markets & the league had to quash that possibility & fast. It still however wasnt enough. WHA is born. QC, Winnipeg & elsewhere who were denied entry "no matter what" essentially formed quite specifically to force Amalgamation as the ABA was conceived & hatched to do with the NBA by 2 Californian Lawyers, the same two Ben Hatskin of Winnipeg employed to draw up the WHA incorporation & charters, franchise agreements & so on.

Long & twisted tale, story, no need to go on at length here. But ya. rojac & many others simply preferred & would prefer a far smaller & free market NHL. Survival of the fittest, law of the jungle, just like real life in so many trades & professions. No safety nets, you make it or break it on performance alone. No Cap, no artificiality, none of this nonsense about parity. Spend to the Moon & if you cant you shouldnt be in the league. Right there you could kiss every single Canadian franchise goodbye but for Toronto, close thing for Montreal, Vancouver wiped out in either the 70's or 90's when Arthur Griffiths Jr. got into trouble with the new arena, the NBA, a failing CDN$ along with CanucksNation none too impressed with the product & ticket sales anemic. US market, massive Contraction & collapse.

So yes, its an opinion & philosophy that exists to this day, even amongst those who werent even around, born until the late 70's or 80's and didnt witness everything that went down. How the Islanders were created solely to block WHA incursion into the NY market; Atlanta a throw-in to balance the Division. You could go team x team x team with respect to Expansions and Relo's, turn over any rock & find something slimy crawling away. Some underhanded duplicitous deal made that benefited one or more members of "The Club".

So on some levels, easy to empathize with rojac, on others, not so much. He's entitled to his opinions. Bear that in mind please.

 

[Fugu]

So on some levels, easy to empathize with rojac, on others, not so much. He's entitled to his opinions. Bear that in mind please.

I think you're being too generous to his opinion, expanding it.

My impression, and rojac can correct me, is that he's taking a stance that those cities should be punished for the past actions. That's not free market thinking, imho.

 

[Killion]

I think you're being too generous to his opinion, expanding it.

My impression, and rojac can correct me, is that he's taking a stance that those cities should be punished for the past actions. That's not free market thinking, imho.

Perhaps so, but its an opinion held by some. Important to understand what its rooted in & where its coming from... I'll let the op speak for himself if he even wishes to pursuant to the latter.

 

[Fugu]

Perhaps so, but its an opinion held by some. Important to understand what its rooted in & where its coming from... I'll let the op speak for himself if he even wishes to pursuant to the latter.

It's always nice to get the historical background, Killy. Thanks.

 

[Killion]

It's always nice to get the historical background, Killy. Thanks.

Important to understand history in order to understand how we arrived where were at, what might be the shape of things to come. Though I disagree with the posters opinion to censor it wouldnt be fair, far from democratic. Its controversial, "old school" for sure, but it exists & is valid on some levels though like you & many others I would vehemently disagree with the notion that any given market should be "punished" for having the temerity to challenge the NHL's supremacy as the best league in North America, the World itself. On the contrary, I almost always back the little guys, the under-dogs'.

 

[blueandgoldguy]

If Rojac's opinion were to come to fruition, that is, if the WHA cities should have been punished by not be allowed entry into the league, then the WHA or some form of it would continue to exist to this day. Places like Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Halifax, Ottawa, Hamilton, possibly Vancouver (which might be too small for this super-elite NHL) and medium-sized and smaller markets in the US like St. Louis, Columbus, Milwaukee, Twin Cities, Omaha, Nashville, Tulsa, Denver plus a few others (maybe secondary teams in large markets that play second fiddle ie. Anaheim or third fiddle ie. Islanders or Devils) that couldn't compete in this super league free-for-all NHL would form a new league sprinkled with the odd NHL star or near-star lured with more money, a slightly larger sprinkling of 3rd and 4th line NHLers and mostly comprised of top-level AHLers who are no longer signed to contracts by NHL clubs and regarded as too old for the show.

While I doubt we would consistently see sellouts at the various arenas as we do for NHl teams, I'm sure the teams could draw in the 12,000-15,000 range with ticket prices at 50 - 75 % of current NHL prices (think this is a gimme as those cities realize they will never be a part of the NHL and this is the best they will get). Team salaries, the biggest portion of team expenses, would be considerably smaller, as most players would be making a few hundred Gs a season (slightly more than a typical AHLer) with a few making a couple million and a superstar player making let's say close to ten million (gotta overpay to get him to play here vs. the NHL). With most salaries skewing toward the lower end overall team salaries could be kept at a manageable level.

NHL teams like Toronto would suffer in this new super league revenue-wise believe it or not. Do you honestly think they would pull in $200 million in revenues with a league reduced to half or one-third it's current size. Good luck pulling in similar tv and radio revenues not to mention comparable corporate sponsorships when a good portion of your national tv audience choose to watch their local WHA team or whatever the league is called on a Saturday night.

 

[Nordskull]

I think the owners should have been given NHL expansion franchises in non-WHA cities and those surviving WHA cities should not have have been considered for expansion teams for the next 20-25 years. I don't see why fans who supported a league other than the NHL should be rewarded by the NHL. Of course, if Toronto and Montreal were the only Canadian cities with NHL franchises, I would be perfectly happy.

It sickens me that the NHL not only let Winnipeg into the league but then returned there. And then there's Quebec, a city the NHL owners had pretty much forced down their throats to get the 1979 merger and has had not one but two failed NHL teams. If Quebec gets another NHL franchise, there will be a team that I hate more than Winnipeg. Although, I may hate Quebec less if they name a new team something other than the Nordiques or Bulldogs.

Hate the team if you want, its part of the game. Like we'll care.

And for your info, its gonna be Nordiques. You should know that.

Lastly, if I resume you point, if you can't win the cup, buy it.

 

[Killion]

...and you an ex Wexford boy shame shame...

Wexford? As in Wexford Raiders?.. meh. We used to hammer those teams into the ground. Right into next week. Dont worry about Wexford.... Ya, real scary. You kiddin me? Simply didnt have the population base to keep up at the AAA (though in my day no AAA, called AA - THL/MTHL) & for a time, astonishingly, had a Jr.B (Warriors) & Tier II Jr.A Teams. Easy pickens for my team (and teams') from Toronto proper. Felt kinda badly for them.... oh, they tried. But unfortunately had to resort to the lowest common denominator and resorted to violence after the score was like 5-zip after 10 minutes of play.... so we had to beat them up as well.... wheres the fun in that?... Heck, I used to (and still in fact do when visiting) get a nose bleed if I went east of about Leslie along Lawrence or Sheppard, anywhere north of Steeles, west of Keele. Wexford, Richmond Hill, Etobicoke, thats serious Boonies Man. Small market suburbia. Felt like Bowie in The Man Who Fell to Earth.

 

[GuelphStormer]

i have nothing to add other than this has been a very fun and interesting reading since rojac's post.

 

[Killion]

i have nothing to add other than this has been a very fun and interesting reading since rojac's post.

Indeed. Hockey elitism is nothing new, as old as the hills, part of its DNA even in amateur between municipalities & suburbs. Farther up the rung you go from Junior through pro the more virulent & feral it at times can become. Pride's involved. Be it the old Guelph Biltmores vs close rival the Kitchener Rangers or what have you. Many who experienced the so called Golden Era of 6 teams, tail end of it at least do indeed have "issues" with how the league hurriedly expanded, relo's and to where theyve gone; and yes, including WHA Amalgamation. The NHL's entire business model.... And you know what? Thats allowed. So long as whomevers posts are respectful good to go.

 

[New User Name]

Wexford? As in Wexford Raiders?.. meh. We used to hammer those teams into the ground. Right into next week. Dont worry about Wexford.... Ya, real scary. You kiddin me? Simply didnt have the population base to keep up at the AAA (though in my day no AAA, called AA - THL/MTHL) & for a time, astonishingly, had a Jr.B (Warriors) & Tier II Jr.A Teams. Easy pickens for my team (and teams') from Toronto proper. Felt kinda badly for them.... oh, they tried. But unfortunately had to resort to the lowest common denominator and resorted to violence after the score was like 5-zip after 10 minutes of play.... so we had to beat them up as well.... wheres the fun in that?... Heck, I used to (and still in fact do when visiting) get a nose bleed if I went east of about Leslie along Lawrence or Sheppard, anywhere north of Steeles, west of Keele. Wexford, Richmond Hill, Etobicoke, thats serious Boonies Man. Small market suburbia. Felt like Bowie in The Man Who Fell to Earth.

I thought you were an old Raider boy....guess I was wrong

MOD

 

[New User Name]

Indeed. Hockey elitism is nothing new, as old as the hills, part of its DNA even in amateur between municipalities & suburbs. Farther up the rung you go from Junior through pro the more virulent & feral it at times can become. Pride's involved. Be it the old Guelph Biltmores vs close rival the Kitchener Rangers or what have you. Many who experienced the so called Golden Era of 6 teams, tail end of it at least do indeed have "issues" with how the league hurriedly expanded, relo's and to where theyve gone; and yes, including WHA Amalgamation. The NHL's entire business model.... And you know what? Thats allowed. So long as whomevers posts are respectful good to go.

Elitism is not unique to hockey ya know. Youth baseball and football in the states can be brutal.

 

[powerstuck]

Eh, if time travel was invented, maybe, just maybe we could have flown back in time and told WHA to not merge with NHL, but keep working hard and compete.

Who knows, maybe today we would have two leagues competing each other instead of offering us night after night a product that satisfies less and less.

 

[DowntownBooster]

It sickens me that the NHL not only let Winnipeg into the league but then returned there. And then there's Quebec, a city the NHL owners had pretty much forced down their throats to get the 1979 merger and has had not one but two failed NHL teams. If Quebec gets another NHL franchise, there will be a team that I hate more than Winnipeg. Although, I may hate Quebec less if they name a new team something other than the Nordiques or Bulldogs.

Tell us how you really feel rojac. Not sure why it sickens you that the NHL let Winnipeg into the league. Maybe you're just upset that Jim Balsillie was unable to bring a team to Waterloo. Just as the AFL merger with the NFL was a good thing, so was the WHA merger with the NHL. It forced the NHL to change how they operated plus brought an exciting brand of hockey to the league. Not only that, we got to witness the great Edmonton Oilers with Wayne Gretzky and all the Stanley Cup championships they won. The only drawback was that the merger didn't happen in 1976 instead of 1979 as it would have been great to have included the Houston Aeros (with Gordie Howe and sons) and Cincinnati Stingers as part of the deal.

 

[thom]

So I guess the Montreal Canadiens of the 1970s was not exciting.The 1980s brought 7 to 6 games which became a joke.You had 12 -15 100 pts players another joke.Im mean Dennis Muruk and Lanny Mcdonald had more goals than Guy Lafleur.Grant Fuhr had a 3.45 gaa with Oilers and won a vezina-For me whole era was a joke just my opinion

 

[DowntownBooster]

So I guess the Montreal Canadiens of the 1970s was not exciting.The 1980s brought 7 to 6 games which became a joke.You had 12 -15 100 pts players another joke.Im mean Dennis Muruk and Lanny Mcdonald had more goals than Guy Lafleur.Grant Fuhr had a 3.45 gaa with Oilers and won a vezina-For me whole era was a joke just my opinion

The Montreal Canadiens of the 1970's were an exciting team indeed. However, let's not forget that for a while there, everytime they played the Washington Capitals it seemed like the score was 10-0 for Montreal. The point was that the WHA was the source for a hybrid of a European/North American style of play which was spearheaded in large part by the Winnipeg Jets. Glen Sather of the Edmonton Oilers patterned his team after the Jets style of play in the WHA. This is not to say that I didn't appreciate the Canadiens of the 1970's as they proved that finese could win over brawn (Philadelphia Flyers).

 

[rojac]

If Rojac's opinion were to come to fruition, that is, if the WHA cities should have been punished by not be allowed entry into the league, then the WHA or some form of it would continue to exist to this day. Places like Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Halifax, Ottawa, Hamilton, possibly Vancouver (which might be too small for this super-elite NHL) and medium-sized and smaller markets in the US like St. Louis, Columbus, Milwaukee, Twin Cities, Omaha, Nashville, Tulsa, Denver plus a few others (maybe secondary teams in large markets that play second fiddle ie. Anaheim or third fiddle ie. Islanders or Devils) that couldn't compete in this super league free-for-all NHL would form a new league sprinkled with the odd NHL star or near-star lured with more money, a slightly larger sprinkling of 3rd and 4th line NHLers and mostly comprised of top-level AHLers who are no longer signed to contracts by NHL clubs and regarded as too old for the show.

While I doubt we would consistently see sellouts at the various arenas as we do for NHl teams, I'm sure the teams could draw in the 12,000-15,000 range with ticket prices at 50 - 75 % of current NHL prices (think this is a gimme as those cities realize they will never be a part of the NHL and this is the best they will get). Team salaries, the biggest portion of team expenses, would be considerably smaller, as most players would be making a few hundred Gs a season (slightly more than a typical AHLer) with a few making a couple million and a superstar player making let's say close to ten million (gotta overpay to get him to play here vs. the NHL). With most salaries skewing toward the lower end overall team salaries could be kept at a manageable level.

NHL teams like Toronto would suffer in this new super league revenue-wise believe it or not. Do you honestly think they would pull in $200 million in revenues with a league reduced to half or one-third it's current size. Good luck pulling in similar tv and radio revenues not to mention comparable corporate sponsorships when a good portion of your national tv audience choose to watch their local WHA team or whatever the league is called on a Saturday night.

Words have been put in my mouths by others. I have no objection to NHL expansion. I even said that I would have given the WHA owners expansion franchises in other cities. And I'm not sure if the WHA would have survived much longer anyways.

My dislike of Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa, Winnipeg, and Quebec having NHL franchises is more based on the idea that to a a large percentage of North American sports fans they make the NHL look minor league. I personally think that only Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver are big league cities. Although as a former Olympic city, Calgary sits on the edge as does Ottawa as the nation's capital.

But I will not deny that teams in those cities do generate revenues, so perhaps those revenues do offset any possible effect on the league's image.

 

[Buck Aki Berg]

My dislike of Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa, Winnipeg, and Quebec having NHL franchises is more based on the idea that to a a large percentage of North American sports fans they make the NHL look minor league. I personally think that only Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver are big league cities. Although as a former Olympic city, Calgary sits on the edge as does Ottawa as the nation's capital.

But I will not deny that teams in those cities do generate revenues, so perhaps those revenues do offset any possible effect on the league's image.

Why do you have such a concern for the league's image in that respect? I get that a league with a good image has a better TV deal and increased visibility, but if you're able to watch all the hockey you want and get all the news that you need, why is it necessary for the fans to be concerned with the league's image in terms of the markets they choose?

 

[rojac]

Tell us how you really feel rojac. Not sure why it sickens you that the NHL let Winnipeg into the league. Maybe you're just upset that Jim Balsillie was unable to bring a team to Waterloo. Just as the AFL merger with the NFL was a good thing, so was the WHA merger with the NHL. It forced the NHL to change how they operated plus brought an exciting brand of hockey to the league. Not only that, we got to witness the great Edmonton Oilers with Wayne Gretzky and all the Stanley Cup championships they won. The only drawback was that the merger didn't happen in 1976 instead of 1979 as it would have been great to have included the Houston Aeros (with Gordie Howe and sons) and Cincinnati Stingers as part of the deal.

Well, I was never a fan of the Oilers or Gretzky (but I don't deny his talent -- just not a fan), so the lack of the Oilers doesn't bother me one bit.

And as for Winnipeg, I mentioned it in another post. I don't consider Winnipeg a big league city and thus, it makes the NHL look minor league. I also have a huge dislike of recycling team names - as I feel it is an attempt to cash on a legacy that does not belong to the new team. I also think it makes sports fans look dumb and unimaginitive.

And as for Balsillie bringing a team to Waterloo, that was never a real possibility and even if it was, I would have serious doubts about supporting a team he had anything to do with. And if I did put those doubts aside, I would probably only attend if the Leafs were in town -- meaning a maximum of three times during the regular season.

 

[rojac]

Why do you have such a concern for the league's image in that respect? I get that a league with a good image has a better TV deal and increased visibility, but if you're able to watch all the hockey you want and get all the news that you need, why is it necessary for the fans to be concerned with the league's image in terms of the markets they choose?

Because I would like the league to do well. And it is not necessary for the fans to be concerned with the league's image. On the other hand, it is something that concerns me. But I guess if not all fans are concerned with it, I'm not allowed to be.

 

[GuelphStormer]

Words have been put in my mouths by others. I have no objection to NHL expansion. I even said that I would have given the WHA owners expansion franchises in other cities. And I'm not sure if the WHA would have survived much longer anyways.

My dislike of Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa, Winnipeg, and Quebec having NHL franchises is more based on the idea that to a a large percentage of North American sports fans they make the NHL look minor league. I personally think that only Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver are big league cities. Although as a former Olympic city, Calgary sits on the edge as does Ottawa as the nation's capital.

But I will not deny that teams in those cities do generate revenues, so perhaps those revenues do offset any possible effect on the league's image.

interesting. what current US cities would you similarly say detract from the league's image?

im also curious if you think a team in KW would enhance or detract from that image.

 

[New User Name]

Because I would like the league to do well. And it is not necessary for the fans to be concerned with the league's image. On the other hand, it is something that concerns me. But I guess if not all fans are concerned with it, I'm not allowed to be.

What's extremely ironic with that is, it is the cities you dislike having teams that ARE NOT a problem and it is cities that I guess you like that are a problem..............and being financially helped by the teams in the cities you dislike.
You have a somewhat strange outlook on things.


If a guy that is in the top 20 richest in the world (worth 23 billion) isn't worried about having the leagues image tarnished by little ole Winnipeg, not sure if your concerns are really relevant.

 

[oilers9799]

Words have been put in my mouths by others. I have no objection to NHL expansion. I even said that I would have given the WHA owners expansion franchises in other cities. And I'm not sure if the WHA would have survived much longer anyways.

My dislike of Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa, Winnipeg, and Quebec having NHL franchises is more based on the idea that to a a large percentage of North American sports fans they make the NHL look minor league. I personally think that only Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver are big league cities. Although as a former Olympic city, Calgary sits on the edge as does Ottawa as the nation's capital.

But I will not deny that teams in those cities do generate revenues, so perhaps those revenues do offset any possible effect on the league's image.

I'm from Edmonton and saying Calgary and Montreal aren't 'big league' cities might be one of the stupidest things I've read on this forum.

Are you aware that Calgary is home to the second most headquarters in Canada and is "big league" enough for Goldman Sachs, Bank of China, JP Morgan, McKinsey, etc. to have offices...

I'm not even going to bother bringing in the fact that these cities are amongst the biggest revenue generators in the NHL...

 

[Brodie]

Alright, this has been a blast but it's time to get back on topic now.

Thread limit reached. Closed.

In the new thread: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1632677