Why is the KHL destroying European Hockey?

[obskyr]

What has relegation got to do with BC CSKA having far more money than any other team in the league? Would Real and Barca not dominate Spanish league if they removed relegation/promotion?

Just because KHL doesn't relegate anyone, doesn't change the fact SKA has more money than the rest of the league combined. KHL wouldn't be any worse or different if Tyumen in past years where yo-yoing with Novokuznetsk.

Would the Hawks and the Kings surivive in the NHL during the 00s? No, they'd fall to the AHL crashing and losing their money. In European leagues where the promotion/relegation system is applied since forever their future would be even less hopeful, they would play in crappy arenas spending seasons to compete for their place in the elite instead of the cup.

And what isn't clear with "the KHL trying to overcome the legacy of the old system"?

Closed membership is obviously not the only condition making a league viable and competitive, but it's surely one of the essential ones.

 

[ozo]

Would the Hawks and the Kings surivive in the NHL during the 00s? No, they'd fall to the AHL crashing and losing their money. In European leagues where the promotion/relegation system is applied since forever their future would be even less hopeful, they would play in crappy arenas spending seasons to compete for their place in the elite instead of the cup.

I don't see your point, because NHL and KHL are too different to draw any serious comparisions. One league has to survive on big league earnings, but second counts on oil/gas/government money.

You don't think Tyumen would be better off if they would have a legitimate chance of promotion which would also put pressure on them to invest in KHL-level facilities?

And once again, KHL is closed league already for five years, but I fail to see the mentioned competiveness.

 

[SoundAndFury]

Would the Hawks and the Kings surivive in the NHL during the 00s?

Absolutely, because here wouldn't be such thing as a rebuild. Teams would be run differently and that's it. Small market teams would be relegated because they have less money. And maybe Leafs because they are Leafs. But big market teams like Chicago and LA wouldn't have a slightest problem to stay up.

However, as Ozo said, "NHL and KHL are too different to draw any serious comparisons" - that absolutely is THE truth.

 

[Peter25]

A multinational league like the KHL has to be a closed league.

If Lev, Slovan, Dinamo Riga or Jokerit would finish last where would they be relegated? To the VHL?

 

[obskyr]

I don't see your point, because NHL and KHL are too different to draw any serious comparisions. One league has to survive on big league earnings, but second counts on oil/gas/government money.

You don't think Tyumen would be better off if they would have a legitimate chance of promotion which would also put pressure on them to invest in KHL-level facilities?

And once again, KHL is closed league already for five years, but I fail to see the mentioned competiveness.

Both leagues work in a similar way regardless the source of their money. No serious sponsors would care to support a VHL team. And a VHL team wouldn't be able to compete in the KHL as well, because they wouldn't even have players for major league hockey. That barrier separating majors and minors is already established, and that is why Lada isn't joining even though there's a place reserved for them.

Tyumen doesn't really need to compete for the KHL, it's a big and the fastest growing market in Russia that has chances to find corporate support for a KHL team. The only things they need are a big arena and a stable budget. Nothing else can motivate them to invest into their hockey infrastructure better.

As for the five years of closed system in the KHL, you can actually see real consequences of that. First of all in the bottom of the league. The league made it sure that joke teams like Khimik Voskresensk will never come back. The league, despite all the troubles, also secured the place for a valuable team like Avto. They already found more support and will surely catch with other clubs in the future. There's no way they could've made that with relegation, simply because they wouldn't attract sponsors. And I'm not reading tea leaves, that's exactly how the Bandy Superleague lost Murmansk.

 

[obskyr]

But big market teams like Chicago and LA wouldn't have a slightest problem to stay up.

AIK and Malmö Redhawks hold the biggest markets in Sweden. And they do have problems.

I agree, the idea of comparing North America to Sweden or even England is silly, there are too many big local markets in the US and Canada. But that's also why relegation would make even less sense in North America, if they were using it they'd have like 4 teams from Montreal and 3 teams from Toronto. No expansion would ever occur and hockey in North America would be just as marginal as hockey in Europe.

And what does it have to do with Russia? It actually makes more sense to compare Russia to the US, because it's a big country, and even more sense in the context of the continental market.

 

[vorky]

obskyr gave the best example why KHL needs closed system - example of Avtomobilist. Is not Ekaterinburg one of best russian cities? What is future of Ekaterinburg? There will be FIFA World Cup, huge investments into infrastructure. IMO this city has future and deserves KHL team. Yes, Avto had financial and arena problems, would be relegated if not closed league. If relegated, what would be club´s destiny - Khimik or Juventus (ITA soccer team)?? You know, Khimik was great club in past, played KHL for one season, had financial problems and does not exist anymore (seniors), has no chance to come back. Juventus relegated due to corruption/money issues, is back in Serie A.

Novokuznetsk, Slovan, Riga, Avto has had lowest budget, but KHL has supported them, all are in KHL, because league counts on them in future. Riga and Slovan are important from "not-russian league anymore" point of view. If KHL wanted, Riga could relegate this season (was last in West) and be replaced by Tyumen (with much bigger budget). Or Amur could relegate, but the hell, this is club which has sold all games since KHL started. Novokuznetsk and Khimik was at the same situation (more or less) - money issues. KHL did not see a future with Khimik, club is not in KHL anymore. On the other hand, KHL can see a future with Novokuzneck... who knows, maybe after a few yrs, KHL will change opinion. Avto was mentioned, had financial problems, but solved it, found new sponsor (TNK-BP etc). Would that happen if relegated to VHL last summer?

The most important think - players and budgets. KHL needs to increase minimal budgets. Impossible with relegation system, because KHL club with budget of 10 mil. euro would be replaced by VHL/euro club with 5 mil. euro. Great example is Czech rep. Lev had budget cca 19 mil. euro, the best czech league´s club cca 7 mil euro (??). Unreal to substitude Lev by another czech club within a summer. Plus there are conditions for arena, management, another rules of transfers. KHL is unique league in Europe, relegation is not possible here, the same like in NHL.

I agree with obskyr that KHL and NHL works at the same basics. The source if money is not important NOWADAYS. Funding KHL clubs by oil/regional money does not have to take forever (in today´s amount). Look at Traktor, they try to earn money from souvenirs. Yes, majority clubs dont care, but it is their problem. Believe me, they will change their mind in future. We need to understand that KHL want to challenge NHL, which clubs have budget of 80-100 mil. USD (??). KHL has not been challenging euro leagues with budget under 10 mil. USD. If you want to challenge NHL, you need to invest money. KHL can do it, has not problem to lose money for decades. The same model is in euro soccer.

Short-term goal of KHL is to establish itself at euro market, in hockey countries like Czech rep, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden, and Germany or Switzerland as well. So, you need invest money.

 

[Hesher]

Tatanik

I could more or less agree with post #184

One thing must to be said. Slovan´s departure has nothing/minimal to do with level of svk league. Look, if I was appointed as CEO of Gazprom, I know nothing about oil/gas bussiness, the Gazprom would fail immidiatelly. Why? Because I am amateur in gas bussiness... the same in slovak hockey league/clubs, they are govern by ppl who dont know what to do, they use sponsor money for own pocket not development of a game. Slovak league had NO tv deal in last 2-3 yrs when Slovan played here. Etc. Pls, dont go on with this topic.. you can claim whatever you want, your advisers seem to lie you.

Yes, that is good if young kids get chance in extraleague.

You are Lev´s hater, so I am not suprised. Nobody cares if fans at arena was from Bratislava, Prague, Kladno, Munchen or London.. was arena sold out? It was. Yes, Slovan had better attendance than Lev, but look at opinion of Slovan´s fans: "no marketing", "our PR sucks", "website sucks", "no info about transfers" "ticket prices", "auction" etc. Marketing of Lev is 10000000000% better, look here

The Slovak league wasn't very good with Slovan in it, without Slovan it is standing on its last legs. The next season looks to be the last in the current format. Teams are struggling to make ends meet, only 2 clubs are OK financially. It's not all Slovan's fault of course but them leaving didn't help one bit.

By the way there WAS a tv deal for the Slovak league.

 

[Pominville Knows]

The Slovak league wasn't very good with Slovan in it, without Slovan it is standing on its last legs. The next season looks to be the last in the current format. Teams are struggling to make ends meet, only 2 clubs are OK financially. It's not all Slovan's fault of course but them leaving didn't help one bit.

By the way there WAS a tv deal for the Slovak league.

Yeah but at the same time maybe one have to look at the larger picture if we want top notch hockey in Europe. How many people does Slovakia have, 5,5 million? This is probably just above the size of an average NHL city so what we're looking at here is to make Slovan utterly dominant in that country so we can maximize that teams roster and revenue at the expense of the future semi-professional domestic league there. This is a preference that has to be made. I'm definetely not the biggest European Union fan but in terms of club hockey the continent needs to be seen as one and the same market becouse north america is.

 

[Jussi]

Yeah but at the same time maybe one have to look at the larger picture if we want top notch hockey in Europe. How many people does Slovakia have, 5,5 million? This is probably just above the size of an average NHL city so what we're looking at here is to make Slovan utterly dominant in that country so we can maximize that teams roster and revenue at the expense of the future semi-professional domestic league there. This is a preference that has to be made. I'm definetely not the biggest European Union fan but in terms of club hockey the continent needs to be seen as one and the same market becouse north america is.

That makes absolutely no sense for the future of Slovakian hockey. Instead of multiple clubs developing players, you'd have one. Really? Even if one's only interest in "what's good for KHL is the only thing that matter", then logic dictates that it would serve the KHL more to have strong domestic leagues all over the Europe that can provide infinitely more potential players for KHL clubs, than diluted leagues with teams in poor financial shape and teams and players of lower quality that they cannot produce players capable of playing at KHL level.

 

[Pominville Knows]

That makes absolutely no sense for the future of Slovakian hockey. Instead of multiple clubs developing players, you'd have one. Really? Even if one's only interest in "what's good for KHL is the only thing that matter", then logic dictates that it would serve the KHL more to have strong domestic leagues all over the Europe that can provide infinitely more potential players for KHL clubs, than diluted leagues with teams in poor financial shape and teams and players of lower quality that they cannot produce players capable of playing at KHL level.

I dont think development will suffer at all. I mean since when do teams in say Finlands second division Mestis not develop players? I would think that they are actually better at giving young players the chance then teams in SM-Liiga, this is probably how it has worked everywhere in Europe since the dawn of time.
In the future the larger SM-Liiga teams would take this role, while still of course competing for the domestic championship. Mestis teams has never had a problem operating this way, so it's not like it's something un-doable. Besides we have no choice, the KHL is the future and makes the decisions.

 

[vorky]

Lets have a look at transfer rules

1) IIHF rules (euro league vs KHL)

Players of SM-Liiga have cheap KHL release clauses as Jussi has talked many times. So, SM-Liiga clubs get no money if player under contract moving to KHL.

I can see similar situation in czech league. SHL/NLA is another case, players does not have cheap KHL release clauses or they does not have release clauses at all. Salak case, I can imagine SHL club got big money from SKA.

Interesting, cheap release KHL clauses are in leagues where KHL clubs are based (Slovakia, Czech rep, Finland).


2) VHL/KHL transfer rules

Written in KHL Regulations, Bylaws.

VHL club can trade its player under contract to KHL club for money. It is de facto transfer or loan. So, VHL clubs can get money for releasing players to KHL team.


Sum up, would not be better for SM-Liiga (czech league) to be part of KHL/VHL transfer rules instead of IIHF transfer rules? SM-Liiga can choose between cheap KHL release clauses (if IIHF) or situation when SM-Liiga club can ask money from KHL club for releasing player under contact (if KHL/VHL). You know, SM-Liiga player does not need KHL clause anymore because there are KHL transfer rules (like NHLPTA). Different among KHL transfer rules and NHLPTA is that SM-Liiga club can not ask for more money for releasing player to NHL than fixed sum of 200-300 000 USD. On the other hand, KHL transfer rules allows SM-Liiga to ask for more/less money (depends on quality of player).

 

[Jussi]

I dont think development will suffer at all. I mean since when do teams in say Finlands second division Mestis not develop players? I would think that they are actually better at giving young players the chance then teams in SM-Liiga, this is probably how it has worked everywhere in Europe since the dawn of time.
In the future the larger SM-Liiga teams would take this role, while still of course competing for the domestic championship. Mestis teams has never had a problem operating this way, so it's not like it's something un-doable. Besides we have no choice, the KHL is the future and makes the decisions.

They haven't developed break-out stars like Pärssinen and Hentunen for years anymore. About half the clubs in Mestis have to rely on farm deals with SM-Liiga clubs anyway. There's very few Mestis clubs developed players that SM-Liiga clubs would be interested in.

Fans would not be nearly as interested in watching "farm teams" in SM-Liiga, thus causing drops in attendance->less money for teams. Diluted product means smaller tv contract->less money for teams.

 

[jore]

Lets have a look at transfer rules

1) IIHF rules (euro league vs KHL)

Players of SM-Liiga have cheap KHL release clauses as Jussi has talked many times. So, SM-Liiga clubs get no money if player under contract moving to KHL.

Wrong. SM-liiga teams are making big money from KHL-transfers for players under contract. The player may have a release clause on his own contract so he can move for free between seasons, but teams are happily selling players to KHL during the season for fees not attainable from any other player transfers like movement to NHL.

 

[Jussi]

Wrong. SM-liiga teams are making big money from KHL-transfers for players under contract. The player may have a release clause on his own contract so he can move for free between seasons, but teams are happily selling players to KHL during the season for fees not attainable from any other player transfers like movement to NHL.

Nope, those cheap release clauses or even free are becoming the norm among players these days, just like Kekäläinen said. It's those few instances of sudden breakout players where teams can cash in.

 

[vorky]

Wrong. SM-liiga teams are making big money from KHL-transfers for players under contract. The player may have a release clause on his own contract so he can move for free between seasons, but teams are happily selling players to KHL during the season for fees not attainable from any other player transfers like movement to NHL.

If we speak about SHL, I agree. I am not so sure about SM-Liiga.

 

[Pominville Knows]

They haven't developed break-out stars like Pärssinen and Hentunen for years anymore. About half the clubs in Mestis have to rely on farm deals with SM-Liiga clubs anyway. There's very few Mestis clubs developed players that SM-Liiga clubs would be interested in.

Fans would not be nearly as interested in watching "farm teams" in SM-Liiga, thus causing drops in attendance->less money for teams. Diluted product means smaller tv contract->less money for teams.

You got it right, the SM-Liiga teams will lose revenue, and will to a higher degree becouse of this have to rely on own prospects. How much they will lose remains to be seen though.

 

[Yakushev72]

I don't see your point, because NHL and KHL are too different to draw any serious comparisions. One league has to survive on big league earnings, but second counts on oil/gas/government money.

You don't think Tyumen would be better off if they would have a legitimate chance of promotion which would also put pressure on them to invest in KHL-level facilities?

And once again, KHL is closed league already for five years, but I fail to see the mentioned competiveness.

Competitiveness with the NHL? The NHL will celebrate the 100th anniversary of its existence in just 4 short years (2017). To put it in perspective, the NHL was formed just a few days from the date when Bolshevism was introduced to Russia. The KHL is still in its infancy, and in no way are the KHL executives focusing on some sort of imaginary competition with a league that is so firmly entrenched. Just from a business standpoint, their goal is clearly to bring the league to a point where an additional infusion of non-revenue funding is not needed.

In bringing the KHL to a full and steady stream of revenue, absolutely no purpose is served by a relegation system. Going to the VHL, under current conditions, will serve only to deplete whatever funding a team has. Establishing stable franchises, even if that means weeding some out, is the only way to arrive at a place where revenues can be stabilized and forms of revenue-sharing can be established. Until a revenue balance exists that supports equal competition (as opposed to the SKA's and Ak Bars'), some outside money will continue to flow in.

 

[Jussi]

Competitiveness with the NHL? The NHL will celebrate the 100th anniversary of its existence in just 4 short years (2017). To put it in perspective, the NHL was formed just a few days from the date when Bolshevism was introduced to Russia. The KHL is still in its infancy, and in no way are the KHL executives focusing on some sort of imaginary competition with a league that is so firmly entrenched. Just from a business standpoint, their goal is clearly to bring the league to a point where an additional infusion of non-revenue funding is not needed.

In bringing the KHL to a full and steady stream of revenue, absolutely no purpose is served by a relegation system. Going to the VHL, under current conditions, will serve only to deplete whatever funding a team has. Establishing stable franchises, even if that means weeding some out, is the only way to arrive at a place where revenues can be stabilized and forms of revenue-sharing can be established. Until a revenue balance exists that supports equal competition (as opposed to the SKA's and Ak Bars'), some outside money will continue to flow in.

I can't be the only one who thinks that lowering the salary cap would help immensely in that?

 

[ult]

I can't be the only one who thinks that lowering the salary cap would help immensely in that?

I think everyone here is already aware that you're a hater and dreaming of the day when KHL collapses. No need to point it out.

 

[Jussi]

I think everyone here is already aware that you're a hater and dreaming of the day when KHL collapses. No need to point it out.

I don't hate the league itself, I have objections to certain ways they're proceeding in some matters. Are you seriously of the opinion that a lower salary cap would not benefit all teams in the league?

 

[Pominville Knows]

I don't hate the league itself, I have objections to certain ways they're proceeding in some matters. Are you seriously of the opinion that a lower salary cap would not benefit all teams in the league?

Yeah if one wants to bring it to the level of SM-Liiga it's a great idea.

 

[Jussi]

Yeah if one wants to bring it to the level of SM-Liiga it's a great idea.

Because dropping the salary cap to 20 million dollars would bring it to SM-Liiga level...

 

[Pominville Knows]

Because dropping the salary cap to 20 million dollars would bring it to SM-Liiga level...

It was a rethoric remark.

 

[zorz]

After Slovan's departure, Slovak league is pretty much done. It looks like very soon 1 or 2 most important teams will will leave for some other league (ebel or something like that) and that's prettty much it. Will be end of hockey for the rest of the country IMO. Slovak league is the weakest league out of all relevant leagues and it has had problems before already, so that's probably reason why it goes so fast. Other countries which join KHL will probably slowly follow.

I'd be glad if it didn't happen, but from the facts I'm seeing, I think KHL won't have any positive impact on hockey in countries that join it.
I'm not going to say it will have negative impact, but it's quite possible too, just hard to predict at this point.