Sign in to follow this  
Brass

NHL back to Hartford?

Recommended Posts

Well, the problem isn't just getting an arena. The problem is Hartford's location which is in the middle of Boston and New York which means the the Bruins and the New York teams will try to prevent a team from moving to Hartford. Let's remember that Hartford came into the league as part of WHA merger. I don't see the league letting a team move there or expand there because of it's proximity to Boston and New York. The only way I see the league going back to Hartford is a rival league springs up and wants to set up shop there. Then the NHL might go there to try to stop a new league from forming. Like in the 70's when the NHL expanded into some WHA markets. With the size of the NHL now I don't see a rival league forming.

Unfortunatly that means Hartford isn't getting a team and will have to remain an AHL city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WHY do so many people think Hartford and Winnipeg should get NHL hockey again?

WHY do so many fail to realize that the teams they had are gone, and they aren't going to be replaced?

As a fan of the original Cleveland Browns, I completely sympathize with fans of the Whalers and Jets, and any other fans who've lost their team due to relocation. The Browns moving ripped the 'fan' completely out of me - now I see rooting for any sports team as akin to rooting for Microsoft to kick Cisco's asses.

That being said I've learned that sports is a business - first and foremost. And the NHL doesn't make sense in Hartford or Winnipeg, in 2005 or in 2015 for that matter. There are a number of other cities which have demographics that are better suited to the NHL's goal - putting asses in seats, selling merchandise, and getting their product on the air in the local TV market.

Why folks don't get that, I don't know...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Winnipeg is Canada the reason the Jets fialed they could not compete in the marketplace, with the salary cap perhaps now they can.

Hartford failed becuase it was in a small town in a crowded market, you have Boston 2 New York Teams and the Devils as well all nearby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hartford had their shot in the NHL with the Whalers

Winnipeg had their shot with the Jets

When they lost those teams they immeadiatly gained an AHL team which is the next best thing. They should be happy that they have the Wolf Pack and the Moose than to not have a hockey team at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WHY do so many people think Hartford and Winnipeg should get NHL hockey again?

WHY do so many fail to realize that the teams they had are gone, and they aren't going to be replaced?

As a fan of the original Cleveland Browns, I completely sympathize with fans of the Whalers and Jets, and any other fans who've lost their team due to relocation. The Browns moving ripped the 'fan' completely out of me - now I see rooting for any sports team as akin to rooting for Microsoft to kick Cisco's asses.

That being said I've learned that sports is a business - first and foremost. And the NHL doesn't make sense in Hartford or Winnipeg, in 2005 or in 2015 for that matter. There are a number of other cities which have demographics that are better suited to the NHL's goal - putting asses in seats, selling merchandise, and getting their product on the air in the local TV market.

Why folks don't get that, I don't know...

We don't get it because a lot of us around here were very loyal to the team, and it it was moderately successful, but a new owner (Pete "Rat Bastard" Karmanos) bought the team and moved them away from us.

It would be different if nobody gave a damn about the team, but people still support the Whalers around here to this day. That's why we keep bringing up topics on bringing them back - because people around here want the team back. They were all we had, and when investors such as this guy or Howard Baldwin try to bring a team back here, we throw our support behind them because we want the Whale back as well.

Maybe I don't know because I'm not from a major sports city, but if someone has the will (and the money) to tear down/renovate the Civic Center and bring us a new team, I'm sure that we will support them. It's not like anyone from the central Connecticut region has anything else to do anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this new guy thinks a 16,000 seat arena will appease the league to relocate there, he's nuts. That's smaller than some AHL arenas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how is this going to happen?

Expansion? The league is still coping with 30 teams. Adding another one (or two) will make matters worse with the league's financial situation still unstable, and expanding any time within the next, say, 15 years, would be a mistake until the league recovers from the strike.

Moving a team? Perhaps. But any team that moves is going to catch stiff competition from the Devils, Rangers, Islanders, and Bruins (or more specifically, the B's and the Rangers). I'm sure with the AHL expanding and moving westwards, the Rangers will also have something to say about having to move their farm team farther away*.

*EDIT: Unless they remain in Hartford -- Chicago has both an NHL and AHL team, and the later is owned by the Thrashers. But Hartford is not Chicago or Philadelphia for that matter.

If we're talking Winnipeg vs. Hartford, I'd rather see Winnipeg get a team if only because the market would be more spacious demographically and geographically.

Alas, any relocation or expansion would realistically favor a city like Oklahoma City, Houston, or Portland. While I'd love to see the Whale return, I doubt it'll happen so fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We don't get it because a lot of us around here were very loyal to the team, and it it was moderately successful, but a new owner (Pete "Rat Bastard" Karmanos) bought the team and moved them away from us.

It would be different if nobody gave a damn about the team, but people still support the Whalers around here to this day. That's why we keep bringing up topics on bringing them back - because people around here want the team back. They were all we had, and when investors such as this guy or Howard Baldwin try to bring a team back here, we throw our support behind them because we want the Whale back as well.

Maybe I don't know because I'm not from a major sports city, but if someone has the will (and the money) to tear down/renovate the Civic Center and bring us a new team, I'm sure that we will support them. It's not like anyone from the central Connecticut region has anything else to do anyway.

Lots of folks were fiercely loyal to the Browns, a team with much greater tradition, much greater revenue, with a much bigger total fan base... and they left.

While I agree that Karmanos and those of his ilk should be forced to sell their teams before relocating them, no matter how many people give a damn or don't give a damn, if an owner is going to realize better financial results in City B over City A, the team's heading to City B.

I'm all for Hartford, Winnipeg, or any other city that wants one to get an NHL franchise. But it isn't in the cards. Guys like Baldwin don't have the jack to be players in the 21st century NHL, and anyone with the will to build a new arena won't have the backing necessary to get the job done in those cities. Pittsburgh's still in play only because the state and city think they've found a way to make casino operators who want to do business in Pittsburgh pay the entire bill for the Pens new arena. Connecticut doesn't have that kind of leverage, and Manitoba is, well, Manitoba - not exactly tourist central.

But let's assume that the sun rose in the west one day, and poof! A financial wizard enters the picture with unlimited resources to spend on an arena, shopping and parking complex, smack-dab in the middle of Hartford. He buys the Penguins, the Thrashers, or some other team that doesn't have a long-term lease commitment to fulfill, and announces his intent to move them to Hartford. Not... so... fast there... Bucky.

First the NHL's Board of Governors would have to approve the move by either a 2/3 or 3/4 vote (not sure which) - a feat in and of itself, as it'd be one helluva sales pitch to convert 20 fellow owners into thinking that Hartford, a team that left the NHL, is a better market from which they can share certain revenues with the other clubs than, say, Oklahoma City, Kansas City, Houston, Salt Lake City, or about 30 or so other markets. But let's say even that hurdle gets cleared. BOOM! The Boston Bruins, as holders of territorial rights that cover Hartford, would have the right to veto no matter what the owners vote was, killing the deal. And I'm sorry, but no matter how much hue and cry the fans might put up, the Bruins ownership isn't going to give up the slice of the pie they gained when the Whalers moved here to Raleigh.

I hate to be a curmudgeon, but the folks of Hartford, Winnipeg, Quebec City, etc., need to come to the realization that there's no way - NO WAY - the NHL is coming back to their towns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you kidding, Winnipeg's demographics are better suited to Hockey than at least 5 NHL cities. As, to a lesser extent, does Hartford & Quebec. If you have an 18,000-20,000 seat arena like Florida but only draw 10,000-12,000 a game, how is that better than cities like Winnipeg & Quebec who have 16,000 seat arenas that sell out every game.

The reason teams like Quebec & Winipeg left town was because of the economics of the old NHL. However, with the new economic reality of the NHL teams like Winnipeg would thrive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Boston Bruins, as holders of territorial rights that cover Hartford, would have the right to veto no matter what the owners vote was, killing the deal.

Boston has territorial rights to Connecticut, I would think the Rangers would since their AHL affiliate is based in Hartford, guess not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mod Edit: Not too smart to call out another poster when you yourself haven't read the post you were criticizing very carefully.

Sorry The Mad Mac,

youcan'tseeme

Edited by youcan'tseeme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Boston Bruins, as holders of territorial rights that cover Hartford, would have the right to veto no matter what the owners vote was, killing the deal. 

Boston has territorial rights to Connecticut, I would think the Rangers would since their AHL affiliate is based in Hartford, guess not.

The Islanders have Bridgeport Sound Tigers as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hartford had their shot in the NHL with the Whalers

Winnipeg had their shot with the Jets

When they lost those teams they immeadiatly gained an AHL team which is the next best thing. They should be happy that they have the Wolf Pack and the Moose than to not have a hockey team at all.

Yah Hartford, Winnipeg and quebec had there shot. but so did colarado ( had the Rockies and theb Spurs of the WHA) , atlanta, minnesota, and if you count old team so did Ottawa ( orginal sens, nand the nationals, civics of the WHA). so with the exceptions of atlanta the others are as strong or stronger then the previous NHL franchise. People are saying Kansas City they had a shot and how long did that last. so lets see Colarado has a had 3 pro teams, ottawa has had 4, minnesota and Atlanta 2 so why can't hartford winnipeg and quebec get a second chance, if they get proper venues and owners?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hartford had their shot in the NHL with the Whalers

Winnipeg had their shot with the Jets

When they lost those teams they immeadiatly gained an AHL team which is the next best thing. They should be happy that they have the Wolf Pack and the Moose than to not have a hockey team at all.

Yah Hartford, Winnipeg and quebec had there shot. but so did colarado ( had the Rockies and theb Spurs of the WHA) , atlanta, minnesota, and if you count old team so did Ottawa ( orginal sens, nand the nationals, civics of the WHA). so with the exceptions of atlanta the others are as strong or stronger then the previous NHL franchise. People are saying Kansas City they had a shot and how long did that last. so lets see Colarado has a had 3 pro teams, ottawa has had 4, minnesota and Atlanta 2 so why can't hartford winnipeg and quebec get a second chance, if they get proper venues and owners?

Please tell me you're not presuming that Winnipeg and Hartford are peers of much larger communities such as Denver and Atlanta, are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hartford had their shot in the NHL with the Whalers

Winnipeg had their shot with the Jets

When they lost those teams they immeadiatly gained an AHL team which is the next best thing. They should be happy that they have the Wolf Pack and the Moose than to not have a hockey team at all.

Actually, Winnipeg was rewarded the Minnesota IHL franchise and became an AHL franchise once the move happened.

Winnipeg didn't automatically get a team.

As far as Hartford goes, the territory is hot and ready for the NHL again, but initially failed as an AHL team until it was fully marketed right by the Rangers.

But I do agree with another post that said that the teams failed because of the old economics of the game AS well as the exchange rate, which nearly killed Edmonton and Calgary at the time too. Outside of Montreal and Toronto, all the Canadian teams were going after strong Canadian-born players who wanted to stay in country rather than teams in the States, so used Geography and benefits that you couldn't get in the states to lure players to come or stay as opposed to American teams that would just readily toss out money as if it were going out of style...

...hence the problems that the NHL had to fix during the lockout.

And if we're talking about asses in the seats, then maybe we should really rethink Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Atlanta, half of Dallas's games, Phoenix and Anaheim even having franchises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hartford had their shot in the NHL with the Whalers

Winnipeg had their shot with the Jets

When they lost those teams they immeadiatly gained an AHL team which is the next best thing. They should be happy that they have the Wolf Pack and the Moose than to not have a hockey team at all.

Yah Hartford, Winnipeg and quebec had there shot. but so did colarado ( had the Rockies and theb Spurs of the WHA) , atlanta, minnesota, and if you count old team so did Ottawa ( orginal sens, nand the nationals, civics of the WHA). so with the exceptions of atlanta the others are as strong or stronger then the previous NHL franchise. People are saying Kansas City they had a shot and how long did that last. so lets see Colarado has a had 3 pro teams, ottawa has had 4, minnesota and Atlanta 2 so why can't hartford winnipeg and quebec get a second chance, if they get proper venues and owners?

You could probably add San Francisco/San Jose to that list with the Seals and the IHL Spiders.

Miami(Florida) has also had a WHA team as well at one point in time, as did Phoenix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hartford had their shot in the NHL with the Whalers

Winnipeg had their shot with the Jets

When they lost those teams they immeadiatly gained an AHL team which is the next best thing. They should be happy that they have the Wolf Pack and the Moose than to not have a hockey team at all.

Yah Hartford, Winnipeg and quebec had there shot. but so did colarado ( had the Rockies and theb Spurs of the WHA) , atlanta, minnesota, and if you count old team so did Ottawa ( orginal sens, nand the nationals, civics of the WHA). so with the exceptions of atlanta the others are as strong or stronger then the previous NHL franchise. People are saying Kansas City they had a shot and how long did that last. so lets see Colarado has a had 3 pro teams, ottawa has had 4, minnesota and Atlanta 2 so why can't hartford winnipeg and quebec get a second chance, if they get proper venues and owners?

Please tell me you're not presuming that Winnipeg and Hartford are peers of much larger communities such as Denver and Atlanta, are you?

The point is that if Minnesota, Atlanta, Denver, etc... all got second chances, why not Winnipeg and/or Hartford? The fan bases in those cities were just as loyal as those in Minnesota, Atlanta, and Denver. Besides the NHL has a history of giving cities second chances. Your own Blues are St. Louis' second chance at an NHL team. St. Louis eagles anyone?

Under the new economic structure a team in Winnipeg would be just fine, and would probablly have better attendence, better ratings, and generate more revenue then most American teams, as are all the Canadian teams these days. Not sure if Hartford would survive givin the proximity to the Bruins, Rangers, Islanders, and to a lesser extent the Devils. It is, however, a location that should be seriously considered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is, however, a location that should be seriously considered.

And this coming from a city and a business entity that's falling over to build an arena.

How many times do we have to endure Pittsburgh New Arena talks before the team FINALLY leaves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please tell me you're not presuming that Winnipeg and Hartford are peers of much larger communities such as Denver and Atlanta, are you?

The point is that if Minnesota, Atlanta, Denver, etc... all got second chances, why not Winnipeg and/or Hartford?

That was exactly yh's point. It's not a case of "deserving a second chance" or whatever, but a simple matter of economics, based on market size and saturation.

(As for the Blues... you're seriously going to count the Eagles' one season in the 30s, during the infancy of the NHL, against St. Louis? That's a stretched argument if ever I've heard one.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this