Jump to content

NHL Anti-Thread: Bad Business Decision Aggregator


the admiral

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's been reported Graeme Roustan will be bidding for a team to fill his arena in Markham.

Going to be a pricey venture paying off MLSE.

Oh yeah, the Toronto team that's going to play out West.

Crazyspin.gif

It would be a thing of sublime beauty for the Western Conference teams to vote to reject Markham on the grounds that it's too much of a travel burden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quebecor announced it will apply for an expansion franchise, with president and CEO Pierre Dion saying it had "all the ingredients" to bring back the Nordiques.

"Quebec is an extraordinary market," Dion said in French. "We know in the province of Quebec, hockey is a religion. We are all, as individuals, hockey maniacs."

BID REJECTED

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well at least I'm relatively certain the new Vegas club won't institute zip code blackouts on ticket purchases for visiting fans.

They probably won't have many home games from late November to December too. NFR (rodeo) will boot them out around Thanksgiving for two weeks, their will be a NCAA holiday tournament to be booked and to end the year UFC come in on the last Saturday night.

Are they demo'ing the MGM Grand Garden Arena once the new arena opens?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's been reported Graeme Roustan will be bidding for a team to fill his arena in Markham.

Going to be a pricey venture paying off MLSE.

Oh yeah, the Toronto team that's going to play out West.

Crazyspin.gif

It would be a thing of sublime beauty for the Western Conference teams to vote to reject Markham on the grounds that it's too much of a travel burden.

If the money's straight....

From a business/money-making standpoint a second team in Toronto is a no brainer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well at least I'm relatively certain the new Vegas club won't institute zip code blackouts on ticket purchases for visiting fans.

They probably won't have many home games from late November to December too. NFR (rodeo) will boot them out around Thanksgiving for two weeks, their will be a NCAA holiday tournament to be booked and to end the year UFC come in on the last Saturday night.

Booted out for two months for rodeos and college basketball? This sounds like a terrific place to have a Big Four franchise! Perhaps the NHL will be freethinking enough to also put a team in a city with no arena.

I don't see the National Final Rodeo leaving the Thomas and Mack Center, since it brings in a chunk of money to UNLV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't we just do what they did in the first expansion... divide the league up by seniority, old teams in the east, new teams in the west.

PROBLEM SOLVED!

How's about ditch the 2 conferences & go 3? 11 teams in each... Playoffs could be seeded 1-16 from across the board, maybe even in a fixed bracket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Markham decided against building their opulent cash-hole.

It did sort of I think. I live here (Thornhill which is a part of Markham; don't ask, it's confusing- the west side of Yonge St. is Vaughan) & I replied my mailer with a No vote, whatever that meant.

I've read local buzz that a deal is merely simmering until better launch conditions. Traffic would be chaos. I've seen Kanata up close & how much of a traffic grind it is for Ottawa; Markham would have worse traffic than New Delhi with where they want to place it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Red Wings won the Western Conference 6 times in 20 years. There was no reason for them to move. Meanwhile the Blue Jackets had to move east for the health of the franchise and also we're the eastern most team. It should've been us all along.

I was thinking the Red Wings are probably ready to come back to the West by now.

But if not, leagues do bad alignments all the time ... when they have leverage ... so making Quebec pay $500 million to play in the West for "a while" isn't out of the question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if not, leagues do bad alignments all the time ... when they have leverage ... so making Quebec pay $500 million to play in the West for "a while" isn't out of the question.

Right, which is how Bud Selig and assorted dumb:censored:s went about switching the Astros into the AL and having constant interleague play just to placate the freaking Texas Rangers. They forced it upon the new Astros owner as part of the sale. We might see Quebec in the Pacific Division.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if not, leagues do bad alignments all the time ... when they have leverage ... so making Quebec pay $500 million to play in the West for "a while" isn't out of the question.

Right, which is how Bud Selig and assorted dumb:censored:s went about switching the Astros into the AL and having constant interleague play just to placate the freaking Texas Rangers. They forced it upon the new Astros owner as part of the sale. We might see Quebec in the Pacific Division.

So what's keeping the Coyotes from moving to Quebec?

Edited by DustDevil61
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gary Bettman with the stone of Glendale in a pneumatic vise, insisting there's still some blood in there.

Although the stone has finally fought back in this case. He may have finally wrung Glendale dry. I mean they're even exploring their options with regard to finding a new event manager before the court put its injunction in place. They seem to be expecting the 'Yotes to be leaving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's been reported Graeme Roustan will be bidding for a team to fill his arena in Markham.

Going to be a pricey venture paying off MLSE.

Roustan is a bit of a con-man. in fact I believe he's been convicted of fraud. He has no money with which to do this, and he's on the outs with NHL anyway for making some extravagant in regards to being in the running for purchasing the Montreal Canadiens....

Penguins in the market for Phil Kessel.

Are you implying that this is a precursor to the Penguins relocating...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having watched this stupid league shoot itself in the foot for about 16 years, I will tell you how this 3-on-3 thing will go. Through October, a lot of games will be decided before the shootout. Everyone will ooh and ahh over how dynamic this 3-on-3 hockey is. Columnists will even opine that regulation hockey should go to 4-on-4 so there's always more open ice! But by American Thanksgiving, coaches will have adjusted, and 3-on-3 overtime will be even safer than 4-on-4 was (consider that no one ever pleads for more open ice in playoff overtime, which is much more likely to end in five minutes than it is to end in fifty), and overtime will become nothing but twenty-second shifts of harmless dump-and-chase to make sure that everyone is Playing Our Kind Of Mistake-Free Hockey and other such crap, and then the number of shootouts will go way up, and general managers will wring their hands once more about how there must be something done about this damned shootout, even though the shootout is not the problem and never has been the problem because you don't have to do it if you knock it the :censored: off with the limp-dick dump-and-chase crap.

INTERPOLATION: I went to a Blackhawks game this year in March. They played the Oilers and won 2-1 in the shootout. The game itself was a total turdburger, which any of you could have intuited from the fact that it was a Blackhawks game in the second half of the regular season and the Oilers were involved. Derek Roy scored early off a deflection from Yakupov, Ben Scrivens stopped a bunch of shots, most of which were the usual blue-line bloops the Hawks fling when they don't want to challenge a goalie too much, but then one from Seabrook finally went in late. Nothing happened in overtime because nothing ever does, then the newly acquired Antoine Vermette won it in the shootout. Finally, something that night was really exciting! Purists, schmurists, let's see you sit through a live hockey game, allegedly the most exciting live sport, where very little of consequence happens and be totally fine with going home with a tie. That shootout was a godsend in terms of excitement. Even if the Hawks had lost, it would have been preferable to ending that game by saying nobody won and nobody lost. That's not even true, because 21,000+ of us would have lost for having sat through that sucky game with no true outcome. I wouldn't want every game to end this way, but Crawford and Scrivens were having objectively great nights and something had to give. I don't think that's the case every night; it certainly couldn't have been the case for those Panthers/Coyotes teams that would go to between 18 and 20 a year. Shootouts should be legal and rare. Just like abortions!

Anyway, there were 170 shootouts last year. I'll take the over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having watched this stupid league shoot itself in the foot for about 16 years, I will tell you how this 3-on-3 thing will go. Through October, a lot of games will be decided before the shootout. Everyone will ooh and ahh over how dynamic this 3-on-3 hockey is. Columnists will even opine that regulation hockey should go to 4-on-4 so there's always more open ice! But by American Thanksgiving, coaches will have adjusted, and 3-on-3 overtime will be even safer than 4-on-4 was (consider that no one ever pleads for more open ice in playoff overtime, which is much more likely to end in five minutes than it is to end in fifty), and overtime will become nothing but twenty-second shifts of harmless dump-and-chase to make sure that everyone is Playing Our Kind Of Mistake-Free Hockey and other such crap, and then the number of shootouts will go way up, and general managers will wring their hands once more about how there must be something done about this damned shootout, even though the shootout is not the problem and never has been the problem because you don't have to do it if you knock it the :censored: off with the limp-dick dump-and-chase crap.

INTERPOLATION: I went to a Blackhawks game this year in March. They played the Oilers and won 2-1 in the shootout. The game itself was a total turdburger, which any of you could have intuited from the fact that it was a Blackhawks game in the second half of the regular season and the Oilers were involved. Derek Roy scored early off a deflection from Yakupov, Ben Scrivens stopped a bunch of shots, most of which were the usual blue-line bloops the Hawks fling when they don't want to challenge a goalie too much, but then one from Seabrook finally went in late. Nothing happened in overtime because nothing ever does, then the newly acquired Antoine Vermette won it in the shootout. Finally, something that night was really exciting! Purists, schmurists, let's see you sit through a live hockey game, allegedly the most exciting live sport, where very little of consequence happens and be totally fine with going home with a tie. That shootout was a godsend in terms of excitement. Even if the Hawks had lost, it would have been preferable to ending that game by saying nobody won and nobody lost. That's not even true, because 21,000+ of us would have lost for having sat through that sucky game with no true outcome. I wouldn't want every game to end this way, but Crawford and Scrivens were having objectively great nights and something had to give. I don't think that's the case every night; it certainly couldn't have been the case for those Panthers/Coyotes teams that would go to between 18 and 20 a year. Shootouts should be legal and rare. Just like abortions!

Anyway, there were 170 shootouts last year. I'll take the over.

I'll cut that number in half and take the under.

You're right that coaches will try a safe way to play this, but that's gonna be tough, especially at home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.