Why did NHL chose Hartford over Cincinnati in 1979?

[Eric Cartman22]

Four WHA teams were accepted into the NHL in the merger in 1979. Edmonton, Winnipeg, Quebec, and Hartford made it. Edmonton led the league in attendance, Quebec was second, and Winnipeg was third. I always just assumed Hartford was fourth but the Cincinnati Stingers actually had slightly better attendance. Does anyone know why Hartford made it instead of Cincinnati?

Click to read more...

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

Four WHA teams were accepted into the NHL in the merger in 1979. Edmonton, Winnipeg, Quebec, and Hartford made it. Edmonton led the league in attendance, Quebec was second, and Winnipeg was third. I always just assumed Hartford was fourth but the Cincinnati Stingers actually had slightly better attendance. Does anyone know why Hartford made it instead of Cincinnati?

Cincinnati only had better attendance than New England in the final year of the WHA. Before that, New England drew in the 8.000-9.000 range while Cincinnati peaked in the mid-7.000s. The NHL interpreted this as the Whalers having the potential to draw well in the NHL given the range while Cincinnati likely hit their attendance glass ceiling in that mid-7.000 range. That was about it, the NHL in this period looked at attendance in the market and not much else.

 

[Centrum Hockey]

Cincinnati only had better attendance than New England in the final year of the WHA. Before that, New England drew in the 8.000-9.000 range while Cincinnati peaked in the mid-7.000s. The NHL interpreted this as the Whalers having the potential to draw well in the NHL given the range while Cincinnati likely hit their attendance glass ceiling in that mid-7.000 range. That was about it, the NHL in this period looked at attendance in the market and not much else.

If Houston made it to the end of 1979 would the NHL have likely chosen the Aeros instead as the 4th team.

 

[Eric Cartman22]

Cincinnati only had better attendance than New England in the final year of the WHA. Before that, New England drew in the 8.000-9.000 range while Cincinnati peaked in the mid-7.000s. The NHL interpreted this as the Whalers having the potential to draw well in the NHL given the range while Cincinnati likely hit their attendance glass ceiling in that mid-7.000 range. That was about it, the NHL in this period looked at attendance in the market and not much else.

That makes sense, I probably should’ve looked at the attendance for the earlier years of the WHA. The NHL owners probably regret it a bit in hindsight with how important tv is now but I can see why they did it.

 

[Albatros]

Hartford's owner was also league president leading the negotiations, I don't think it was ever going to be any other team. The NHL wasn't interested in the markets anyway, more so they wanted to get rid of their competitors.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

That makes sense, I probably should’ve looked at the attendance for the earlier years of the WHA. The NHL owners probably regret it a bit in hindsight with how important tv is now but I can see why they did it.

I don’t think the NHL would have worked in Cincinnati either. Too small of a market for the NFL, MLB and the NHL as well. No hockey team has ever drawn well there in the history of the city

While it was a merger, make no mistake. The NHL was buying them out to get rid of the competition. The WHA helped out the players and exponentially increased salaries, and the NHL wasn’t having it. Three of the four WHA teams relocated, and the fourth was a signature away from relocating in two separate occasions.

 

[Centrum Hockey]

Hartford's owner was also league president leading the negotiations, I don't think it was ever going to be any other team. The NHL wasn't interested in the markets anyway, more so they wanted to get rid of their competitors.

Jacobs hated the whalers being in New England and Houston had the Fairly new at the time Summet arena and the potential of the market. If Houston made it to the end they would have had the support of the NHL power players

 

[Albatros]

Jacobs hated the whalers being in New England and Houston had the Fairly new at the time Summet arena and the potential of the market. If Houston made it to the end they would have had the support of the NHL power players

Houston had a shot as a part of a larger merger in 1977, but were left off the 1978 talks and subsequently folded. No one saw potential in them at that point.

 

[Eric Cartman22]

I don’t think the NHL would have worked in Cincinnati either. Too small of a market for the NFL, MLB and the NHL as well. No hockey team has ever drawn well there in the history of the city

While it was a merger, make no mistake. The NHL was buying them out to get rid of the competition. The WHA helped out the players and exponentially increased salaries, and the NHL wasn’t having it. Three of the four WHA teams relocated, and the fourth was a signature away from relocating in two separate occasions.

Good point, I totally forgot about the Reds. It probably isn’t big enough for three teams.

 

[lifelonghockeyfan]

The NHL owners didn't want ANY old WHA teams joining the NHL. The owners would have preferred to add expansion teams at a inflated fee. But the league was worried about anti trust laws so they needed a US city
Not really sure why Hartford was picked, probably because they the ownership was more stable.
The Canadians owner David Molson headed the expansion committee. As a businessman and politician he was "forced" to accept the Quebec Nordiques, as he said. "If I Quebec didn't get a NHL franchise I would be most hated man in Quebec"
Ben Haskins owner of the Winnipeg Jets apparently "convinced" Molson to award two western cities, Edmonton and Winnipeg by telling Mr. Molson, "If the Jets and Oilers aren't admitted into the NHL, you will never sell another beer west of Ontario."

 

[Hoser]

Four WHA teams were accepted into the NHL in the merger in 1979. Edmonton, Winnipeg, Quebec, and Hartford made it. Edmonton led the league in attendance, Quebec was second, and Winnipeg was third. I always just assumed Hartford was fourth but the Cincinnati Stingers actually had slightly better attendance. Does anyone know why Hartford made it instead of Cincinnati?

The Whalers were quite easily one of the most financially stable WHA clubs. The problem here is that you're cherry-picking a statistic without context.

The Whalers' attendance was lower than the Stingers in '78-'79 only because the roof of the Hartford Civic Center collapsed after a snowstorm in January, 1978. The Whalers were forced to play temporarily out of the Springfield Civic Center in Springfield, Massachusetts for two years, including the first half of their inaugural '79-'80 NHL season. The Springfield Civic Center's seating capacity was only about 7,500. They were consistently playing in front of near-capacity crowds in Springfield, and had been in Hartford before the incident with the arena roof.

Of the four teams that merged into the NHL the only one that was ever in serious doubt was the Nordiques; the Whalers, Oilers and Jets were quite comfortably the top three teams the NHL wanted to allow in.

 

[Oheao]

Houston had a shot as a part of a larger merger in 1977, but were left off the 1978 talks and subsequently folded. No one saw potential in them at that point.

I wonder what would have happened had the 1977 merger happened. Instead of the 21 team era there'd have been 24 teams (+ Cleveland, Cincinnati, Houston). The lack of competition may have prevented them from folding but I also wonder if the league could have sustained that many teams at the time. One notable advantage is that the 4 division format would have been more balanced at 6 teams each instead of having 1 division with 6 teams.

 

[Jumptheshark]

Ownership and Gordie Howe

Houston was the team most thought would go in, but I think there was some trouble at both the ownership level and arena contract

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

The NHL had just failed in Ohio at that time, and they weren't willing to try it again so soon. It wouldn't be until 1997 that the NHL decided to try my home state again, but instead of placing the team in Cincy or CLE, they chose Columbus, which had no big 4 teams at that time (the MLS had not yet become the sensation it is now).

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

Lots of reasons, a big one being that they won the AVCO cup, had Gordie Howe and one of the most stable ownerships in the WHA.

 

[adsfan]

Good point, I totally forgot about the Reds. It probably isn’t big enough for three teams.

Barclay and you are right. Cincinnati is a big baseball town! They had the first pro team starting in 1869 and went 65-0. The Reds were charter members of the NL in 1876. They were kicked out after the 1881 season for playing games on Sundays and selling beer. Cincinnati was and is a very Germanic town, hence the importance of beer sales to their fans. The Reds moved to the American Association (founded in Cincinnati) for 1882 and won their pennant. They rejoined the NL for the 1890 season. The Reds have won 5 World Series and lost 4.

A bunch of hockey teams have failed there; Mohawks (AHL, then IHL in the 1950s), Swords (AHL early 1970s), Stingers (WHA '73-'79; CHL '79-'80), Tigers (CHL '81-'82) and Ducks (AHL '97-'05). The Cyclones have been a success, playing from '90-'20 in the ECHL or the IHL.

The Mohawks won a record 5 IHL Turner Cups in a row as a farm team for Montreal. The next season ('57-'58) they lost in round 1 of the playoffs. They folded in 1958. I don't know if Montreal withdrew their affiliation or if attendance fell off or why they folded.

 

[Jets4Life]

The NHL owners didn't want ANY old WHA teams joining the NHL. The owners would have preferred to add expansion teams at a inflated fee. But the league was worried about anti trust laws so they needed a US city
Not really sure why Hartford was picked, probably because they the ownership was more stable.
The Canadians owner David Molson headed the expansion committee. As a businessman and politician he was "forced" to accept the Quebec Nordiques, as he said. "If I Quebec didn't get a NHL franchise I would be most hated man in Quebec"
Ben Haskins owner of the Winnipeg Jets apparently "convinced" Molson to award two western cities, Edmonton and Winnipeg by telling Mr. Molson, "If the Jets and Oilers aren't admitted into the NHL, you will never sell another beer west of Ontario."

Unfortunately, that is not true.

What really happened is around March of 1979, the NHL took a merger vote. It was 12-5 in favor of absorbing the four WHA clubs, however, for the merger to proceed, the NHL needed 13 clubs or more to agree to it. It was reported that 2 of the 5 clubs who voted against a merger were Montreal and Vancouver. Montreal was owned by Molson, and Vancouver only sold Molson products at their games.

In retaliation, a boycott of all Molson products was implemented. Even worse for Molson, a bomb threat was called in to their Quebec City plant. Around the same time, someone after hours had shot up windows to the Winnipeg Molson plant. Faces with an angry public, and declining beer sales. Molson urged to public to be patient, and helped convince the NHL to vote again.

This vote finished 14-3, with only Los Angeles, Toronto, and Boston voting against the merger. At the end of the day, it was the beer boycott across Canada that led to the Oilers, Jets, Nordiques, and Whalers being admitted to the WHA.

 

[Digital Kid]

I strongly, strongly, strongly recommend reading Howard Baldwin's book for all the answers to these questions. Very interesting read. For two years between the first merger attempt and the final one, Baldwin was telling the stronger WHA owners to start signing anyone and everyone they could free agent-wise (especially from the folding Houston Aeros) to strengthen their rosters for eventual NHL admittance. Of course, the NHL pillaged the rosters in the eventual merger agreement.

 

[Fenway]

The Whalers were quite easily one of the most financially stable WHA clubs. The problem here is that you're cherry-picking a statistic without context.

The Whalers' attendance was lower than the Stingers in '78-'79 only because the roof of the Hartford Civic Center collapsed after a snowstorm in January, 1978. The Whalers were forced to play temporarily out of the Springfield Civic Center in Springfield, Massachusetts for two years, including the first half of their inaugural '79-'80 NHL season. The Springfield Civic Center's seating capacity was only about 7,500. They were consistently playing in front of near-capacity crowds in Springfield, and had been in Hartford before the incident with the arena roof.

Of the four teams that merged into the NHL the only one that was ever in serious doubt was the Nordiques; the Whalers, Oilers and Jets were quite comfortably the top three teams the NHL wanted to allow in.

Plus the Hartford Civic Center would reopen in 1980 with 4,000 more seats and they had the backing on the still-dominant insurance industry in the city.

 

[powerstuck]

Honestly I don't think back then when the merger was negotiated that ''attendance'' had much to do.

Heck, the way the new NHL ''welcomed'' the WHA clubs it meant that only the strongest of the WHA owners, the ones who wanted to survive, were to join the NHL.

Originally, they didn't even wanted Quebec to be part of the deal, it was 3 horse race, and the Canadian teams (Habs, Leafs and Canucks) didn't wanted none of the Canadian teams (Jets and Oilers) joining, but we all know how that went.

 

[crobro]

I read somewhere a while back that in order to legally get the 4 in the NHL Edm,Winn,QC and Hart

The NHL negotiated a deal with the owners of the stingers and the Baby Bulls to pay them $250.000 a year for 30 years

in Hindsite it could be one of the shrewdest business deals ever for the two owners.

the worst business deal

Nelson Skalbania folding the Indianapolis ice a few months before the negotiated payoff which would of included Skalbania as well.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Honestly I don't think back then when the merger was negotiated that ''attendance'' had much to do.

Attendance is always a factor, but rarely THE factor that fans think it is. Unless there's a wildly dramatic difference in support between two teams, usually the predictors of success are the terms of their lease and the depth of their owners' pockets.

In the short term, regardless of attendance a team with a good rink deal and a wealthy owner will at least be a stable presence. If that were to change, they can always be relocated. On the other hand, taking a team with high attendance but a shaky arena deal or a flaky owner is asking for real trouble.

 

[USApegger]

The NHL owners didn't want ANY old WHA teams joining the NHL. The owners would have preferred to add expansion teams at a inflated fee. But the league was worried about anti trust laws so they needed a US city
Not really sure why Hartford was picked, probably because they the ownership was more stable.
The Canadians owner David Molson headed the expansion committee. As a businessman and politician he was "forced" to accept the Quebec Nordiques, as he said. "If I Quebec didn't get a NHL franchise I would be most hated man in Quebec"
Ben Haskins owner of the Winnipeg Jets apparently "convinced" Molson to award two western cities, Edmonton and Winnipeg by telling Mr. Molson, "If the Jets and Oilers aren't admitted into the NHL, you will never sell another beer west of Ontario."

Ben Haskin, did not own the jets in 1979

 

[dkitson16]

A brief history of the WHA merger and Cincinnati and Houston.

Cincinnati was a leading candidate for the 1974 expansion. Kansas City, to be owned by son of Rangers owner, beat them out for last spot. Cincinnati were allegedly promised a spot in proposed 1976 expansion. The NHL later disputed that and planned to expand to Seattle and Denver.

August 77 - NHL led by Harold Ballard in Toronto reject merger with 6 WHA teams including Cincinnati and Houston. Bitter, New England and Cincinnati lead the charge to sign underage players. SPorts Illustrated list those 2 teams as most likely to join the NHL. Harold Ballard has a really good day.

November 77 - Houston goes into bankruptcy and sold.

February 78 - WHA gives teams permission to seek individual entry into NHL without fear of lawsuit - Houston, Edmonton, Cincinnati and New England express interest. Quebec and Winnipeg soon express interest.

April 78 - Houston announce season ticket drive (7,000) for NHL, Cincinnati announces season ticket drive (5,000) to stay alive.

May 78 - Houston ticket drive falls short. Announce they will withdraw from WHA and focus on buying and merging with a struggling NHL team, likely Cleveland or Colorado.

June 78 - Cincinnati meets its season ticket goal to survive.

June 78 - Merger proposal has Edmonton Quebec and New England at first and Winnipeg joining two years later. Cincinnati also wants in. Aetna Insurance (largest shareholder in Hartford) presents plan to NHL for 4 or 5 teams to join NHL. Can't get deal done before WHA agreement (allowing teams to join NHL without indemnifying remaining WHA teams) expires. No merger.

July 78 - Cincinnati owner reveals Of the 26 professional teams operating at the time Cincinnati had the lowest gate receipts, worse than Cleveland.

Dec 78 - Aetna Insurance of Hartford agreed to underwrite the merger costs of all the WHA clubs and save NHL harmless from future liabilities as a result of the merger (ie anti-trust lawsuit from remaining WHA teams).

Dec 78 - NHL President Ziegler says 5 teams including Cincinnati still possible. All present to NHL expansion committee.

Jan 79 - Cincinnati let it be known they were no longer interested in a merger. Houston seeks to buy Atlanta Flames. Later lose out to Calgary.

Mar 79 - Bill DeWitt of Cincinnati said was not interested in NHL on terms they were offering. Salary escalation and cost of entry no longer made it a viable proposition.

Mar 79 - NHL rejects merger with Edmonton, Winnipeg, Quebec and Hartford. Ballard in Toronto and Molson Breweries in Montreal largely blamed. Vancouver, Boston and LA also voted no. Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver stood to lose TV revenue. Boston didn't want a market invasion. Not sure what LA's issue was.

Mar 79 - Beer protests, gunshots and bomb threats lead Montreal (Molson Breweries) to change vote. Vancouver also changes vote with scheduling concessions given by NHL. Harold Ballard has a really bad day.

 

[Hoser]

Mar 79 - NHL rejects merger with Edmonton, Winnipeg, Quebec and Hartford. Ballard in Toronto and Molson Breweries in Montreal largely blamed. Vancouver, Boston and LA also voted no. Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver stood to lose TV revenue. Boston didn't want a market invasion. Not sure what LA's issue was.

The Kings' Jack Kent Cooke opposed the merger because he believed that more teams in the league meant he'd lose a number of home dates against the league's biggest draws (the Original Six teams). Attendance in LA was otherwise tepid.

Cooke's decision-making was also affected by goings-on in his personal life: his first wife filed for divorce in 1977. Delaying a merger until after the divorce settlement may have entitled him to keep the proceeds from the merger. He ended up selling the Kings (and the Lakers, and The Forum) to Jerry Buss shortly after the merger was approved anyway.