Did Bettman force the Preds to break off talks with Balsillie?

[Ez Street]

Canada sucks, Kansas City rules.

there simple enough.

(I'm kidding guys)

[STL FANATIC]

This is all I have to add.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ChDHPBLWAew

(It's a joke...)

[rams80]

When three markets failed in three years, that was okay.

I once saw someone advance a theory...(Not taking credit for this one.)

Take a look at the markets the IHL expanded into in the mid-90s when they were in "crazy AAAA, overpay for vets, become WHA 2, challenge the NHL?" mode.

Take a look at some of the markets the NHL expanded to/moved teams to in the mid-to late 90s.

Phoenix: had IHL team (Roadrunners), then Jets moved in as Coyotes.

Denver: had the Grizzlies, then the Nordiques moved in as the Avalanche

Atlanta: had the Knights, then the Thrashers were announced

Minnesota: had the Moose, then the Wild were announced

Cincinnati and Cleveland both had teams, then the Blue Jackets were announced.

Maybe there was a method to Bettman's madness (if we must blame him) back then, and that the method was to remove the IHL as a possible "threat" to the NHL by driving them out of markets.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Icecap-this is partly me being a devil's advocate, partly me comparing apples and oranges (from Canada's perspective), and maybe just a dollop of snarkiness.

Hamilton is home to the Calder Cup champion Bulldogs, right? The best North American pro team not in the NHL, right?

Are they treated like hometown heroes in town?

Is Copps Coliseum packed every night because it is professional hockey by golly? (and I know the answer to this one...)

[IceCap]

Icecap-this is partly me being a devil's advocate, partly me comparing apples and oranges (from Canada's perspective), and maybe just a dollop of snarkiness.

Hamilton is home to the Calder Cup champion Bulldogs, right? The best North American pro team not in the NHL, right?

Are they treated like hometown heroes in town?

Is Copps Coliseum packed every night because it is professional hockey by golly? (and I know the answer to this one...)

You answered your own question. To Canadian at least, and most definitely in regards to Hamilton, a city that's capable of supporting a NHL team, the AHL doesn't compare. It's minor league, and we know it. It's a sub-par product compared to what the city knows it's capable of getting. It's apples and oranges, as you yourself pointed out. If we're using AHL attendance as the measuring stick of a market's viability, then Toronto shouldn't have a team. Inevitable "THEN LETZ MOVE TEH LEAFZ!!1!11!!!one" jokes aside, we both know that Toronto is a great NHL market, and that to try and say otherwise, using the attendance figures of the Marlies as proof, would be foolish at best.

Simply put, the AHL is not the NHL, and Canadians, and most American hockey fans, know this. Especially if those Canadian fans are residents of a city that they know is capable of supporting a NHL team. But you knew this already, so why bring it up?

Also, I'm not buying into the AHL champ being the best hockey team in North America %100. I would like to see some kind of exhibition tournament where the top teams in the CHL (OHL/QMJHL/WHL) played the best of the AHL. If nothing else it should make for some great hockey.

The "Bettman stealing the IHL's thunder" theory is interesting. No doubt the IHL's success was used by Bettman when he proposed his plan to expand the NHL into "non-traditional" markets.

IMO however, I doubt Bettman ever saw the IHL as a threat to the NHL. The IHL had no real chance at going toe-to-toe with the NHL, and as ignorant of the game as Bettman is, he would have been smart enough to see that. I think Bettman was trying more to get on the success the IHL had found, but I don't think he was actively looking to eliminate them because he saw them as competition.

OT a little bit, but I wanted to clear something up between you and I. IMO Kansas City, St. Louis, Denver, etc... are all traditional hockey markets. I only say this so that perhaps you won't misunderstand what I mean the next time I make a distinction between "traditional" and "non-traditional" markets.

[rams80]

Icecap-this is partly me being a devil's advocate, partly me comparing apples and oranges (from Canada's perspective), and maybe just a dollop of snarkiness.

Hamilton is home to the Calder Cup champion Bulldogs, right? The best North American pro team not in the NHL, right?

Are they treated like hometown heroes in town?

Is Copps Coliseum packed every night because it is professional hockey by golly? (and I know the answer to this one...)

You answered your own question. To Canadian at least, and most definitely in regards to Hamilton, a city that's capable of supporting a NHL team, the AHL doesn't compare. It's minor league, and we know it. It's a sub-par product compared to what the city knows it's capable of getting. It's apples and oranges, as you yourself pointed out. If we're using AHL attendance as the measuring stick of a market's viability, then Toronto shouldn't have a team. Inevitable "THEN LETZ MOVE TEH LEAFZ!!1!11!!!one" jokes aside, we both know that Toronto is a great NHL market, and that to try and say otherwise, using the attendance figures of the Marlies as proof, would be foolish at best.

Simply put, the AHL is not the NHL, and Canadians, and most American hockey fans, know this. Especially if those Canadian fans are residents of a city that they know is capable of supporting a NHL team. But you knew this already, so why bring it up?

Also, I'm not buying into the AHL champ being the best hockey team in North America %100. I would like to see some kind of exhibition tournament where the top teams in the CHL (OHL/QMJHL/WHL) played the best of the AHL. If nothing else it should make for some great hockey.

My only contention about the AHL being a greatly inferior game to the NHL stems from comparing Rivermen rosters at the start of the season with Blues rosters at the end of the season. (And I will confess that that has probably more to do with the Blues being horrible the last two years than anything else.)

I did add the "professional" qualifier to my argument. It would be great hockey, though.

The "Bettman stealing the IHL's thunder" theory is interesting. No doubt the IHL's success was used by Bettman when he proposed his plan to expand the NHL into "non-traditional" markets.

IMO however, I doubt Bettman ever saw the IHL as a threat to the NHL. The IHL had no real chance at going toe-to-toe with the NHL, and as ignorant of the game as Bettman is, he would have been smart enough to see that. I think Bettman was trying more to get on the success the IHL had found, but I don't think he was actively looking to eliminate them because he saw them as competition.

The only other "proof" I've seen on that front is that when it came to affiliating with teams, the NHL did seem to be freezing out the IHL for much of the mid-to-late 90s. I agree the IHL had no real chance, and the fact that the people calling the shots thought they did is probably the big reason why that league is "no longer with us".

OT a little bit, but I wanted to clear something up between you and I. IMO Kansas City, St. Louis, Denver, etc... are all traditional hockey markets. I only say this so that perhaps you won't misunderstand what I mean the next time I make a distinction between "traditional" and "non-traditional" markets.

It's ok. The way I've seen some other folks speak online, though, you'd think Kansas City was on the equator or something.

[Viper]

As has already been stated many times over by now, Gary Bettman is completely clueless about the future prospects (or lack thereof) of his league's growth in America, and this episode is just the latest example of this. That said, given the recent, much more ominous and highly scrutinized woes of the leagues Bettman sees as the NHL's peers - MLB (steriods and Barry Bonds), the NFL (Michael Vick's dogfighting ring) and the NBA (referee gambling/fixing scandal) - Bettman may also be the embodiment of the old adage that sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.

[jkrdevil]

The "Bettman stealing the IHL's thunder" theory is interesting. No doubt the IHL's success was used by Bettman when he proposed his plan to expand the NHL into "non-traditional" markets.

IMO however, I doubt Bettman ever saw the IHL as a threat to the NHL. The IHL had no real chance at going toe-to-toe with the NHL, and as ignorant of the game as Bettman is, he would have been smart enough to see that. I think Bettman was trying more to get on the success the IHL had found, but I don't think he was actively looking to eliminate them because he saw them as competition.

I know I said I wouldn't respond to you again but I have to point out one thing. You do realize the NHL's growth into "non-traditional markets" started well before Bettman. The Sharks, Sens (although Ottawa isn't a non-traditional market) and Tampa Bay all came in before Bettman became the commish. Florida and Anaheim came in his first full year in office and while I'm not sure on the time line based on other expansion process I'm assuming started before or as he came into the league. The Minnesota move to Dallas follows the same timeline. So as you can see the process was under way before Bettman under Ziegler and Stein. It was a plan of the league to expand it's presence for television and Bettman was hired with orders to secure a a US TV deal. Which by the way he did deliver on getting the first national US network tv deal for the league in 20 years (an important thing to note when discussing the league's current TV problems).

[IceCap]

I know I said I wouldn't respond to you again but I have to point out one thing.

And I was happier because of it.

J/K, you're all right, for a Devils fan

The "Bettman stealing the IHL's thunder" theory is interesting. No doubt the IHL's success was used by Bettman when he proposed his plan to expand the NHL into "non-traditional" markets.

IMO however, I doubt Bettman ever saw the IHL as a threat to the NHL. The IHL had no real chance at going toe-to-toe with the NHL, and as ignorant of the game as Bettman is, he would have been smart enough to see that. I think Bettman was trying more to get on the success the IHL had found, but I don't think he was actively looking to eliminate them because he saw them as competition.

....You do realize the NHL's growth into "non-traditional markets" started well before Bettman. The Sharks, Sens (although Ottawa isn't a non-traditional market) and Tampa Bay all came in before Bettman became the commish. Florida and Anaheim came in his first full year in office and while I'm not sure on the time line based on other expansion process I'm assuming started before or as he came into the league. The Minnesota move to Dallas follows the same timeline. So as you can see the process was under way before Bettman under Ziegler and Stein. It was a plan of the league to expand it's presence for television and Bettman was hired with orders to secure a a US TV deal. Which by the way he did deliver on getting the first national US network tv deal for the league in 20 years (an important thing to note when discussing the league's current TV problems).

I'm well aware that expansion into the non-traditional markets began under Ziegler. Like I explained in an other thread, you can compare the NHL's 90's expansion to the fall of the Soviet Union.

Ziegler was like Gorbachev. He saw something that needed to be done, he developed a plan, and he decided to take a slow and steady approach as to not shock the system.

Then Bettman, representing Boris Yeltsin, comes in, and in a fit of opportunistic stupidity, he changes everything overnight, shocking the system.

As for the TV deal thing, you could have have given Bozo the Clown the commissionership and a deal would have been reached. The 90's were the peak of sports on network television. The NHL was late to the dance, but it would have happened just due to the changing nature of the business, whether Bettman was commish or not.

As for the current US TV deal, I actually don't blame Bettman for that. VS was the superior deal. ESPN may reach more homes, but what's the point when the network won't advertise the games, and their talking heads are telling the audience not to watch?

VS on the other hand offered $70 million (IIRC) and top billing for the league. The ratings from the OLN/VS seasons are about on par with that of the later ESPN years, so obviously ESPN's greater reach was being negated by the network themselves.

The only thing that I'll criticize about the current US TV deal is the lack of games on NBC. Having your All-Star Game, playoffs (later rounds at least), and championship series on one of the "Big Four" networks says a lot. I would like to see the NHL push for the NBC to to air the ASG, the Conference Finals, and the Stanley Cup Finals on NBC, and to get NBC to commit to them (no cutaways for horse racing). For now the regular season being primarily on VS works, but they need to get their "top" games on NBC.

[HedleyLamarr]

Since the All-Star Game is on a Sunday, it's very likely that NBC will air the All-Star Game. Versus will likely handle the Saturday events (YoungStars Game, Skills competition).....

[jkrdevil]

Since the All-Star Game is on a Sunday, it's very likely that NBC will air the All-Star Game. Versus will likely handle the Saturday events (YoungStars Game, Skills competition).....

No, it's not likely at all since the All-Star game is part of the Versus contract.

[HedleyLamarr]

Since the All-Star Game is on a Sunday, it's very likely that NBC will air the All-Star Game. Versus will likely handle the Saturday events (YoungStars Game, Skills competition).....

No, it's not likely at all since the All-Star game is part of the Versus contract.

Doesn't matter to me, I'll be at the game....

[DEAD!]

I'm well aware that expansion into the non-traditional markets began under Ziegler. Like I explained in an other thread, you can compare the NHL's 90's expansion to the fall of the Soviet Union.

Ziegler was like Gorbachev. He saw something that needed to be done, he developed a plan, and he decided to take a slow and steady approach as to not shock the system.

Then Bettman, representing Boris Yeltsin, comes in, and in a fit of opportunistic stupidity, he changes everything overnight, shocking the system.

ummm .... down with capitalism?