JQK Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Ok, so we all know the NHL ain't gonna be playing next year.. maybe even the year after... and who knows if we even get the NHL back at all....My bet is that if we do get the NHL back, it will look vastly different than it does now... Don't be fooled, this looming lockout/strike is alot differnt than 1994.. this is an Extiction Level Event...Ok.. so, if we ever do get the NHL back... How will it look? Well, my guess is ALOT of teams are going to bite the dust...[[[EAST]]]New York {R}TorontoBostonMontrealNew York {I}PhiladelphiaNew Jersey (the only reason they will still be around is Steinbrenner's money)Tampa Bay[[[WEST]]]DetroitChicagoMinnesotaSt. LouisSan JoseColoradoVancouverEdmontonNow this puts Columbus, Anaheim, Florida, Washington, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Ottawa, Carolina, Atlanta, Nashville, Dallas, Los Angeles, Calgary, Phoenix out on their asses (even with the new arena coming to the 'Yotes)The NHL has put itself into a position that is in desperate need of correcting. This is only one idea of what might happen, if the NHL survives at all...What's yours? Stay Tuned Sports Podcast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC97 Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I see that nhl setup and I instantly think that old-school hockey is on its way back It would totally suck to lose all those teams.I don't really have an idea as to what will happen, but I've always been interested in the English Preimership Soccer set-up, in which there's two classes of leagues, the bad clubs from the good class move down, and the good clubs from the bad class move up, and so on.Might this be an answer?Throwing, say the top 15 clubs into like NHL 1, and the bottom 15 clubs into NHL 2, and at the end of the season the last 2 teams in NHL 1 move to NHL 2, and top two in NHL 2 move up to NHL 1.I'm thinking crazy here, I know, but you have to in these situations!If this was the case coming into this season the league would look like this:NATIONAL HOCKEY LEAGUEEast:BostonDetroitNew JerseyOttawaPhiladelphiaTampa BayTorontoWashingtonWest:AnaheimColoradoDallasEdmontonMinnesotaSt LouisVancouverNATIONAL HOCKEY LEAGUE 2East:AtlantaBuffaloCarolinaFloridaMontrealNY IslandersNY RangersPittsburghWest:CalgaryChicagoColumbusLos AngelesNashvillePhoenixSan JoseI'm crazy! --- Chris Creamer Founder/Editor, SportsLogos.Net "The Mothership" • News • Facebook • X/Twitter • Instagram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ez Street Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 interesting concept chris, i like that better than axing all those teams. @DavidStreeter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian in Boston Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 "Crazy" is right! A promotion/relegation set-up is NEVER going to fly with team owners in North America. These businessmen simply have too much money invested in their franchises to allow the vagaries of a winning or losing season determining which level they compete on. Additionally, sponsorship/advertising dollars are going to be mighty tough to line-up long-term, when the potential sponsor/advertisers don't know which level of play a team is going to be competing on from season to season.Frankly, faced with the financial uncertainty that seems to be looming for the NHL, many of the league's owners would most likely prefer to fold their teams, rather than agree to the promotion/relegation set-up. If they fold them, they'd at least score a major tax write-off. Promoting and relegating teams would strike North American owners as another headache involved with sports ownership.North American fans aren't going to be delighted with such a set-up either. Currently, if your favorite team isn't doing all that well, you might be frustrated, but at least you know that the club enjoys membership in a major league. If your team were to be relegated to MLB/NBA/NFL/NHL 2, it would be just another way of saying that your favorite squad was "minor-league". It's going to be mighty tough to sell that to fans. Case in point: Under Chris' scenario, the Mighty Ducks would compete in the NHL, while the Kings would be relegated. Depending upon how long the Kings' fortunes were down, you'd likely see an awful lot of rank-and-file fans in Southern California begin to focus almost exclusively on the team perceived as "Big League" (Anaheim) at the expense of the NHL2 squad (LA). That's just the mentality of the average North American sports fan. We want the "best", the "biggest", the "brightest" of everything.Bottom line: the only reason promotion/relegation works in European football is because it has been a part of the very fabric of league structures for years. It's never been part-and-parcel of the major North American sports landscape, and owners and fans of the "Big Four" leagues aren't about to embrace it now.If next season's NHL labor woes are as bad as expected, we'll likely see some franchises fold/relocate (though nowhere near 14 teams). However, that's about as radical a change as we're likely to see.Again, I say, "Crazy is right!" Brian in Boston Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yh Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I share in Chris's premiership league idea but I agree with Brian that it's impractical. Unless there's a drastic change in tides, I think the league is in for a landscape-changing work stoppage which will be followed by a contracted NHL. I think John's setup seems most likely although I'm not so sure about Tampa surviving - Washington seems more likely to stay in the mix. The question then becomes what happens to the AHL and the former NHL cities? My guess is that there is going to be a mad landrush for AHL franchises trying to plug into former NHL cities. This of course results in ECHL teams moving into the bigger now-former AHL markets and the smaller hockey markets getting totally hosed in the process. Is this good for hockey? I think not, and that's why I think this isn't an NHL problem but a problem for the entire sport and more should be done to try and resolve this problem before everyone ends up losing something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkrdevil Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 JQK,No Buffalo, No Ottawa.Those 2 teams are in fianacial stability, and are great hockey markets.In fact the only reason why Buffalo went in to bankruptcy was because thier owners were crooks. It had nothing to do with the team, the owners were stealing money from adelphia. Also hopefully Pitt. can get a new arena, because that too is a great hockey market that shouldn't go.Also, Chris' idea wouldn't work. No one would like it, your making it like high school sports. Not a way to get fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJR Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I agree with Brian that a promotion/relegation setup wouldn't work.I see the teams that drop out of the NHL moving into the WHA at the AAAA level, not competing with the NHL, but not minor-league either. This gives two healthy leagues covering a lot of markets.It would probably work, but the NHL will try to kill the WHA again even if they're not in direct competition. FantasyHockeySim.com || DetroitHockey.Net || DetroitHockey.Net FHL || cjr.dev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habsfannova Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Ottawa has a billionaire (Canadian dollars, not sure in American dollars....)owner and is here to stay.The thing is, Edmonton and Calgary WANT the strike, and will stay if a hard cap is in place. They know that the fan base is there and that the fans will stay on and are in favour of the strike.HOWEVER, that is not true in the southern markets. Carolina, Anaheim, Phoenix, Nashville, Atlanta, and Florida are TOAST. (And may the league will be better without them!) Even if they survivie the short term, they will lose tons of fans.On the sad side, the only real danger in the northeast/Canada is Pittsburgh, and that's the arena stuff. Hopefully they can stay.So, if those 6 above die(Woo!), then the divisions will be to my perfection: 24 teams! Probably arranged as followed:NortheastMontreal OttawaTorontoBostonBuffaloNew York (Made sense becasue of the Original 6 thing)AtlanticPittsburghNew JerseyLong IslandPhilidelphiaWashingtonTampa BayCentralDetroitColumbusMinnesotaDallasChicagoSt. LouisPacificLASan JoseColoradoEdmontonCalgaryVancouverExcepting a return by the Nords/Jets/Hamilton, this is the perfect set up for me, and is entirely possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Clemente Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Well, the main problem with JQK's design is that it gets rid of my FOUR FAVORITE TEAMS!!! (and I might add, the only four I root for.)--Roger "Time?" Clemente. Follow me on Twitter if you care: @Animal_Clans.My opinion may or may not be the same as yours. The choice is up to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-kj Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Habs: You're expecting St. Louis to also go under? Buy some t-shirts and stuff at KJ Shop! KJ Branded | Behance portfolio POTD 2013-08-22 On 7/14/2012 at 2:20 AM, tajmccall said: When it comes to style, ya'll really should listen to Kev. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ez Street Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 don't shoot me but you have colorado playing in 2 divisions. @DavidStreeter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkrdevil Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 yea habs, i like your idea but it don't make sense. the 2 previous statements plus the Rangers being in a different divisions from thier 3 biggest rivals. The thing is in any realignment you can't split up any part of the current atlantic division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habsfannova Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 You guys just solved the problems: I put Colorado in the Central instead of St. Louis. D'oh!Yeah, but someone had to go into the NE. Don't know how to solve that. Maybe just have one big division in the East and West. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Clemente Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Why not just two 15 team divisions?--Roger "Time?" Clemente. Follow me on Twitter if you care: @Animal_Clans.My opinion may or may not be the same as yours. The choice is up to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkrdevil Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 You guys just solved the problems: I put Colorado in the Central instead of St. Louis. D'oh!Yeah, but someone had to go into the NE. Don't know how to solve that. Maybe just have one big division in the East and West.Put Pittsburg in, they were there before the 3 team divisions.The Rangers have to be in Atlantic, it makes no sense to have them and the Devils in different divisions when the play 5 miles apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirjtc2 Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 My take is that we could lose about 10 teams in a worst case scenario.Ottawa was going to be one, but with Melnyk in the owner's box, they're safe for the time being. Buffalo also has a new moneybags owner, but they're in a small market; so their survival is murkier.Pittsburgh is dead without a new arena.In the south, there are no fans in the seats if the team's not winning. Look at Carolina for instance. In Washington, the team has choked so many times before that they know failure will happen, so they don't even show up at playoff games anymore. It pains me to say this as a Caps fan, but I really don't see any of the teams in the Southeast Division staying around if the work stoppage lasts a year or more. Same story with Nashville.The Midwest teams are all on relatively solid ground (except MAYBE Columbus), as are Colorado and Dallas.The only Canadian team I see in trouble is Calgary. With so many losing seasons, and the more successful Oilers just up the road, the Flames' days may be numbered too.All three California teams are in some degree of trouble, but forced to choose I'd say the Ducks would be first to go.So, to recap, 11 teams: Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Washington, Atlanta, Carolina, Tampa Bay, Florida, Nashville, Columbus, Calgary and Anaheim are all in trouble as I see it. (Of course I could be wrong...in fact, I KNOW I'm wrong. )JPK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC97 Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 So, to recap, 11 teams: Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Washington, Atlanta, Carolina, Tampa Bay, Florida, Nashville, Columbus, Calgary and Anaheim are all in trouble as I see it. (Of course I could be wrong...in fact, I KNOW I'm wrong. )JPKLast time I checked columbus was hockey mad, selling out every game, etc. That was last season tho, I haven't been following. --- Chris Creamer Founder/Editor, SportsLogos.Net "The Mothership" • News • Facebook • X/Twitter • Instagram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTank Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 I cant see this thing going nucelar tehre may be a few montsh without hockey but I cant imagine both sides being so stupid to shut down the sport for a year. www.sportsecyclopedia.com For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zer0dotcom Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 Thats quite true of the Blue Jackets. For an expanion tema that could use some work, they have some dedicated fans there. Minnisota's got some support too.I'm in that group that ignores the unpleasent possibilities and hopes that this all gets resolved with minimal work stoppage and some actual hockey will occur next season. I don't know much about the CBA negotiations, except I wouldn't want Bettman on my side. I just don't want this to turn into another Major League Basbeall situation, took me long enough to get back into baseball after that one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JQK Posted October 31, 2003 Author Share Posted October 31, 2003 Listen, all i did was provide a "worst case scenario", could it be less drastic than this? absolutly. In fact, it most likely will not be anywhere near what i posted. But i think for the health of the league, some teams, alot of teams, have to go.Even if it means my beloved Devils? Well, it'll be hard, but yes, even if my Devils have to go, for the health of the league, i'd be for it.The NHL has been doing poorly for years now... 79% of it's revenue goes to players salaries, that's unhealthy. The ticket prices everywhere in the league are proposterous. In NJ it's $90 for lower bowl, and most of the upper bowl seats are between $75-$40 dollars. There are very few seats for $35, and there are about 50 seats for $22 all the way up in the corner (there ain't a bad seat at the CAA though...)Fans aren't showing up at alot of these arenas, not because they don't support their team, but because they can't afford it. I would go to every Devils game if i could, but i can't afford to spend that much money on a ticket...The salaries need to be cut way down (which won't happen), the ticket prices need to be cut down (which won't happen).The TV Contract brings in basically no money to the NHL, the Teams need to pay for the players contracts, so they up the ticket prices, the fans don't show up because ofthe ticket prices, and so the owners now have to pay out-of-pocket. Thats the road to financial ruin, and the NHL is going dead-ahead.Have the league shut down for two years (which is most likely going to happen) and just get everything fixed. This needs to happen. Stay Tuned Sports Podcast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.