Back In The Game?

[gojetsgo]

(Part 2)

I also need more reason for the Lightning to move than sheer conjecture on your part.

I'll add a few small reasons

- The Lightning, despite changing ownership a year ago, is currently looking for another coowner to help pay the bills.

- They've recently laid off 30 employees

- They are now charging their own employees for parking

- They're delinquent on realty taxes owed to the county

- Their attendance has dropped by over 2000/game this past season

Translation: Things aren't completely rosy in Tampa.

However, it doesn't mean they are in danger of moving... yet.

[gojetsgo]

(Part 2)

Phoenix to Winnipeg.

Don't even bother arguing for the sake of the team because face it, why are they bankrupt?? Nuff said.

Buffalo and Ottawa also went bankrupt within the last decade. Should we move them? Moyes didn't file for Chapter 11 (assuming he had the legal right to do so, which is in doubt) solely because of the market.

Are you really disputing that Phoenix is a good candidate for relocation? If Bettman has his way and a new local owner is found, it will be the FOURTH ownership group since the team moved to Phoenix 12 years ago!

Richard Burke --> Steve Ellman --> Jerry Moyes --> ???????

The team has lost an estimated $400 million in that time. Ottawa and Buffalo never had it this bad.

Clearly your research did not include consulting any of the members of this fine community who actually hail from Winnipeg and state unequivocally that the NHL would not work there. There are not enough people to be able to support a NHL team for a full season at current ticket prices.

I would dispute the "unequivocally" part of this statement. And most of the rest of it too. It is laughable that you make these statements with such authority, despite drastically changing opinions on this topic taking place on this board, in the media, and pretty much everywhere else. People are starting to realize that the raw population of a city means less to a hockey team than the number of hockey fans in that city.

Your opinions about Winnipeg are just opinions - do not state them as fact. There are plenty of Winnipeggers who would wholeheartedly disagree with you.

[dfwabel]

Here is my 2 cents. I recently wrote an essay for my English class on Winnipeg needing an NHL team. If anyone would like to read it I can post a link or something. I did lots of research and yes, I team in Winnipeg would work. So would I team in Hamilton, Milwaukee, Salt Lake City, Seattle, Portland, Kansas City, Saskatchewan, Quebec and Hartford. Hockey is a niche sport and you can't force it upon someone. They either like it or not. This is why the NHL DOES NOT work in the south. Florida, Atlanta, Phoenix, Nashville and the New York Islanders should all be moved. Tampa will likely fail soon, so I will add them to the list too. The Islanders I see as a market that did not grow with the times. It no longer can support a team. Even though the team sucks, and even though they have a crappy arena, they still can't even get a bad sized crowd, they are just plain HORRIBLE.

Phoenix to Winnipeg.

Don't even bother arguing for the sake of the team because face it, why are they bankrupt?? Nuff said.

New York to Kansas City

Charles Wang plans on doing this anyway if the "Lighthouse Project" doesn't go through. And I think its safe to say that you can count on it not going through. Again, Nuff said.

Tampa Bay to Quebec

The Bolts started to do good after they won the cup, but the lockout didn't help them any. They are still living off of the "post championship buzz" but it's starting to wear off. Having a bad team this year didn't really help either. Eventually the team will have to sell and then it can move. With Lecavilier and St. Louis both being Quebec natives, this should help draw some fans in. Like I said, I team will work here because hockey is a niche sport and Quebec citizens love their hockey, and if you give them a second chance, trust me, they will not blow it.

Thats just a couple of the teams. If somebody wants, I can give reasons for any team to move, I just am tired right now and don't want to list a bunch of reasons for every team. Anyway, here is my proposal:

Toronto Hamilton Ottawa Montreal Quebec

Boston New York New Jersey Buffalo Harford

Philadelphia Pittsburgh Washington Columbus Carolina

Vancouver Calgary Edmonton Saskatchewan Winnipeg

Chicago Detroit Minnesota St. Louis Milwaukee

San Jose Los Angeles Colorado Dallas Kansas City

I may think about that and add in a couple expansion teams, because I think that the hockey market has grown enough for that too. Another story for another time though.

Josh, please send me a copy or at least try to PM me or so I can see why a city "needs" a pro franchise. I would like to see why a municipality "needs" team after being a sport management major, receiving a MS in Sport Management and seeing the wreckage publicaly financed facitiies do for the past 15 years.

For all of those who "wish" teams tp move I give you one website which spells all the public perils out clearly:

www.fieldofschemes.com

Plus, there are numerous books which show that publicaly financed stadiums/arenas are a waste of tax dollars in both the short term and long term. Have you ever noticed why most BCS conference schools don't get public support for renovations? Colleges rarely (ask or get) public money, yet you expect state dollars to go to build a new arena? Most of that comes from hotel taxes, so why expect little towns with little to offer aside from an arena to get major trade shows/conferences as opposed to major cities i.e. Chicago which people want to visit and spend their money, plus their company will eat the hotel and car taxes.

[tp49]

The Islanders I see as a market that did not grow with the times. It no longer can support a team. Even though the team sucks, and even though they have a crappy arena, they still can't even get a bad sized crowd, they are just plain HORRIBLE.

Really now a market that can no longer support a team? You claim to have researched this. Did you really? Seems to me like you didn't research the situation on Long Island much at all.

First of all the fans, and yes there are plenty of Islander fans on Long Island, will come out once ownership puts a competitive (read winning) product on the ice. Islander fans in the last 15 years have dealt with the John Spano debacle (thanks Gary Bettman for doing your due dilligence on that one) the fishstick jerseys and many, many years of mismanagement on the hockey operations side (thanks Mike Milbury.) The last time the Islanders went anywhere in the playoffs was 1993. This past season they finished dead last. Dead last and there isn't much hope that hockey operations will do the right thing with the #1 draft pick.

Second the Nassau Colisseum is a horrible arena. The team is also locked into a severely unfavorable lease agreement with Nassau County. Wang, while keeping the team on Long Island has shown a complete lack of business sense in that he remained way too loyal to Mike Milbury for far too long allowing him to run amok and rid the franchise of any promising player they had. Wang also did such wonderful things as signing Alexi Yashin to a 10 year contract and Rick DiPietro to a 13 year deal. Sure they made the playoffs a couple of times in the last 10 years but they got bounced in the first round. Then instead of giving us a real hockey staff after firing Milbury he hires Garth "Freakin" Snow as GM. Now, why don't the fans show up again? If Snow drafts Tavares makes some sensible offseason moves and with Wang shows a committment to putting a winning product on the ice the fans will come back.

The Islanders would have their new arena already if Wang would remove his head from his derriere and realize that "The Lighthouse" is too much for the area. If he just wanted to build a new arena it would have already passed through all of the governmental red tape and a building would either have opened or would be about to open. Both the county and the Town of Hempstead have said as much that if it was just the building the environmental review would be done. Wang however, is greedy. He fails to see that Uniondale/Hempstead is not a tourist mecca nor would support the large hotel he wants to build on the site. He must also have forgotten that within two miles of the Colisseum site is Nassau County's main shopping area with two major shopping malls. Yet he wants to build a mega mall. All of these elements require an extensive environmental review and has to go through two different governments to gain approval. This takes time.

Therefore, they cannot draw even by your standard a "bad sized crowd" except for games against the Rangers because the team has sucked for a generation and the arena sucks. New York wants winners. The Islanders haven't had a winner in way more years than I'd like to count. It's hard to go out and support an organization that refuses to support themselves. At least I got to see them win their 4 Stanley Cups.

[The_Admiral]

A successful Phoenix market would be huge for the NHL. There is so much to gain from that enormous market. There is little to gain from another Canadian market.

Yeah, but we're not talking about why a team should move to Phoenix rather than Hamilton. They've had years to make it work and they've failed. No, the league does NOT have a lot to gain from a Phoenix team. Just because Phoenix ranks high in population doesn't mean it's an "enormous market" for hockey.

It's a shame that there have been so many Canadians making asses of themselves with hyperbolic anti-Bettman rhetoric that it's been matched by people who are tripping over themselves to justify why an organization that has failed for thirteen years just needs one more chaaaaaance.

[-kj]

Unless we're talking about team logos, this thread is pointless. Please bring it around to that purpose. Otherwise, discuss the evils of hockey south of Minnesota in this thread. Thanks.

[CC97]

If you're gonna put hockey somewhere, why put it in an already saturated hockey market? You're not going to grow the game in an area that is already crazy about hockey, and has several teams to root for

So... Devils to Kansas City then John?

What *several* teams to root for? Kitchener/Waterloo/Hamilton is Leafs and Leafs only... sure you could argue the Sabres are an option, maybe even the Red Wings, but it is a very small amount of people that are willing to go through customs every time they want to see their team play.

Southern Ontario may be Leafs country, but it becomes a second opportunity for Torontans (or whatever the hell name you give yourselves) and southern Ontarians to watch NHL hockey. Especially since it's difficult to obtain Leafs tickets, it'll be somewhat easier to obtain Coyotes tickets.

You assume the NHL is going to stick them in the same Division, nay Conference, as the Leafs. I don't. Especially if they are owned and operated by one Jim Balsillie.

Otherwise, they also have a second opportunity to watch NHL hockey. It's called Buffalo.

Torontonians*

I wasn't arguing against sticking a team in Southern Ontario because of the Leafs, I was debunking John's claims that people in Southern Ontario already have several teams to support. While Toronto, Buffalo, Detroit may all be within driving distance, heading from London to Buffalo or Detroit isn't exactly like going from Newark to Manhattan. I did the cross border trip for a game once, took me longer to get through customs (twice) than it did to watch the game... rams80 likely wouldn't understand, I doubt he has to present a passport every time he heads over to Kansas City or Chicago to see a game. "Anything to declare?", "I bought a program, t-shirt", "Can I see your receipt?" *sigh*

[Jamikel]

Okay.

Moose>>>>>Jets

Name is better.

Logo is MUCH better.

I prefer the Jets colors, but I'm also sick of pro sports teams taking the lazy route and wearing red, white, and blue. The Moose in green, perhaps? The NHL could certainly use more green.

Sure the Jets name has history, but it's a history that eventually led them to end up wandering in the desert for (what must feel to Canadians like) 40 years.

And while I'm on the subject of Canadian sports identities, why don't the Tiger-Cats just change their name to the Tigers already. You don't hear about the Rockies wanting to be called the Rocky-Mounts to avoid confusion with the old hockey team, do you?

[BallWonk]

Unless we're talking about team logos, this thread is pointless. Please bring it around to that purpose. Otherwise, discuss the evils of hockey south of Minnesota in this thread. Thanks.

You're absolutely right: Hockey south of Minnesota is evil, and all hockey "fans" of teams south of Minnesota are poseurs. Except for Washington. CAPS RULE PENS SUCK!

Oh, wait, is that not helping? Sorry.

(Penguins fans: The above was a joke. No death threats, please.)

Anyway, back on topic, I wanted to pose the question of what is the best defunct franchise logo. But then I realized I pretty much only like one defunct NHL logo very much at all, and sadly it's the Whalers. (One hates to feed into the Whaler cult.) I can't stand the generic-ness of the Jets logo -- it's got all the virtues of the Caps "Capilals" logo, though admittedly a hockey stick makes a more effective letter J than a letter T. The North Stars had a great logo for the time, but it doesn't age well for me and would need significant, if minor, tweaks to modernize it. And much as I love the old Nordiques uniforms, that was about liking light blue and fleur-de-lis. Great uniforms, but a middling, dated logo.

So if you could move any one struggling or questionable team, in order to maximize the positive effect on NHL logos, what would it be? I submit Tampa Bay to Hartford. Nothing against Tampa Bay, nothing for Hartford, but that would be one heck of a logo upgrade for the league. Phoenix to Winnipeg would be a logo downgrade for me.

[rams80]

(Part 2)

Phoenix to Winnipeg.

Don't even bother arguing for the sake of the team because face it, why are they bankrupt?? Nuff said.

Buffalo and Ottawa also went bankrupt within the last decade. Should we move them? Moyes didn't file for Chapter 11 (assuming he had the legal right to do so, which is in doubt) solely because of the market.

Are you really disputing that Phoenix is a good candidate for relocation? If Bettman has his way and a new local owner is found, it will be the FOURTH ownership group since the team moved to Phoenix 12 years ago!

Richard Burke --> Steve Ellman --> Jerry Moyes --> ???????

The team has lost an estimated $400 million in that time. Ottawa and Buffalo never had it this bad.

Clearly your research did not include consulting any of the members of this fine community who actually hail from Winnipeg and state unequivocally that the NHL would not work there. There are not enough people to be able to support a NHL team for a full season at current ticket prices.

I would dispute the "unequivocally" part of this statement. And most of the rest of it too. It is laughable that you make these statements with such authority, despite drastically changing opinions on this topic taking place on this board, in the media, and pretty much everywhere else. People are starting to realize that the raw population of a city means less to a hockey team than the number of hockey fans in that city.

Your opinions about Winnipeg are just opinions - do not state them as fact. There are plenty of Winnipeggers who would wholeheartedly disagree with you.

1) My point was bankruptcy alone is not a reason to move the team. You have to provide better support for a move than that.

2) Query: Why are you no longer living in Winnipeg? How many others are like you?

More importantly, from a practical economic standpoint....Winnipeg would have to build another arena to get a NHL team because the new one is too small. You could sell out the arena at the moment every night, and be in the bottom 5 teams in NHL attendance. How well do you think that will go over. On top of that, it's not exactly cheap to watch NHL games in Canada. Not all "hockey fans" have the disposable income to shell out top dollar for 41 NHL home games a year regardless of how the team does, and I distinctly doubt that in a metro population of under 700,000 there are enough with that kind of coin. If the arena stays the same, however, the team would likely have to win the Stanley Cup every year just to break even. Since that is not happening, 1) You will see the team begin to collapse into red ink, 2) the team will be unable to skate a team that does more than compete for a lower playoff seed at best, and at worst hovers in the nether reaches of the standings. How many people are willing out shell out for the length of a NHL season at Canadian prices for that?

[rams80]

To gojetsgo. Response posted in other thread.

[STL FANATIC]

It's a shame that there have been so many Canadians making asses of themselves with hyperbolic anti-Bettman rhetoric that it's been matched by people who are tripping over themselves to justify why an organization that has failed for thirteen years just needs one more chaaaaaance.

But it hasn't failed for 13 years. When that team arrived in Phoenix, when they were a competitive franchise, there was a strong showing of support. Since then, the ownership has done just about everything wrong.

I guess I'd put it this way.

Put this team in Hamilton for the last 13 years, and after the brief honeymoon and collapse of a competitive franchise, and they wouldn't be in any better shape. They really wouldn't. And in Hamilton, you don't have much to strive for, because even getting them into better shape would mean the most miniscule increase in league revenue.

Phoenix has shown the potential to support the team, and they're would certainly be a large reward for making it work in Phoenix.

If the league gave it it's best shot and hockey failed in Phoenix that'd be one thing.

But the actions of the ownership group for the last 8 years hardly constitute anyone's best shot.

[CC97]

Put this team in Hamilton for the last 13 years, and after the brief honeymoon and collapse of a competitive franchise, and they wouldn't be in any better shape. They really wouldn't. And in Hamilton, you don't have much to strive for, because even getting them into better shape would mean the most miniscule increase in league revenue.

Why would it be a minuscule increase in league revenue? You go from a team that (from the sounds of it) doesn't draw very well, likely isn't bringing in a lot of television viewers, and just as likely isn't setting merchandise sales records to one that potentially packs the arena every night, increases television ratings (look at the ratings for any playoff game with a Canadian team vs one without), and is also selling across the country (they'll sell merchandise for every Canadian team in most nation-wide big box stores)... good for the NHL, better for the NHLPA, best for fans. Yay.

[Gothamite]

So if you could move any one struggling or questionable team, in order to maximize the positive effect on NHL logos, what would it be? I submit Tampa Bay to Hartford. Nothing against Tampa Bay, nothing for Hartford, but that would be one heck of a logo upgrade for the league. Phoenix to Winnipeg would be a logo downgrade for me.

Well put. I think that might be the single best upgrade the League could do.

[STL FANATIC]

Put this team in Hamilton for the last 13 years, and after the brief honeymoon and collapse of a competitive franchise, and they wouldn't be in any better shape. They really wouldn't. And in Hamilton, you don't have much to strive for, because even getting them into better shape would mean the most miniscule increase in league revenue.

Why would it be a minuscule increase in league revenue? You go from a team that (from the sounds of it) doesn't draw very well, likely isn't bringing in a lot of television viewers, and just as likely isn't setting merchandise sales records to one that potentially packs the arena every night, increases television ratings (look at the ratings for any playoff game with a Canadian team vs one without), and is also selling across the country (they'll sell merchandise for every Canadian team in most nation-wide big box stores)... good for the NHL, better for the NHLPA, best for fans. Yay.

Because they'll just buying merchandise for the new team in place of Merchandise for the Leafs or someone else. They'll just watch the Hamilton game versus flipping on the Sens game. The gate revenue is the only area likely to be see a real spike.

But I think well operated team in Phoenix could more than match that.

[rams80]

Put this team in Hamilton for the last 13 years, and after the brief honeymoon and collapse of a competitive franchise, and they wouldn't be in any better shape. They really wouldn't. And in Hamilton, you don't have much to strive for, because even getting them into better shape would mean the most miniscule increase in league revenue.

Why would it be a minuscule increase in league revenue? You go from a team that (from the sounds of it) doesn't draw very well, likely isn't bringing in a lot of television viewers, and just as likely isn't setting merchandise sales records to one that potentially packs the arena every night, increases television ratings (look at the ratings for any playoff game with a Canadian team vs one without), and is also selling across the country (they'll sell merchandise for every Canadian team in most nation-wide big box stores)... good for the NHL, better for the NHLPA, best for fans. Yay.

Outside of ticket sales, though, how much of that revenue is genuinely new revenue, and how much of that is simply money redirected from other teams? Is TSN/CBC/fill in Canadian sports broadcaster here going to air more games in total or simply keep the same number? Another Canadian team won't have that dramatic an effect on US TV ratings, so you must be discussing Canadian tv. How much of that jersey and merchandise money would have been spent of Leafs, Sabres, Red Wings or some other team's gear anyway prior to Southern Ontario getting a team?

[gojetsgo]

(Part 2)

Phoenix to Winnipeg.

Don't even bother arguing for the sake of the team because face it, why are they bankrupt?? Nuff said.

Buffalo and Ottawa also went bankrupt within the last decade. Should we move them? Moyes didn't file for Chapter 11 (assuming he had the legal right to do so, which is in doubt) solely because of the market.

Are you really disputing that Phoenix is a good candidate for relocation? If Bettman has his way and a new local owner is found, it will be the FOURTH ownership group since the team moved to Phoenix 12 years ago!

Richard Burke --> Steve Ellman --> Jerry Moyes --> ???????

The team has lost an estimated $400 million in that time. Ottawa and Buffalo never had it this bad.

Clearly your research did not include consulting any of the members of this fine community who actually hail from Winnipeg and state unequivocally that the NHL would not work there. There are not enough people to be able to support a NHL team for a full season at current ticket prices.

I would dispute the "unequivocally" part of this statement. And most of the rest of it too. It is laughable that you make these statements with such authority, despite drastically changing opinions on this topic taking place on this board, in the media, and pretty much everywhere else. People are starting to realize that the raw population of a city means less to a hockey team than the number of hockey fans in that city.

Your opinions about Winnipeg are just opinions - do not state them as fact. There are plenty of Winnipeggers who would wholeheartedly disagree with you.

1) My point was bankruptcy alone is not a reason to move the team. You have to provide better support for a move than that.

2) Query: Why are you no longer living in Winnipeg? How many others are like you?

More importantly, from a practical economic standpoint....Winnipeg would have to build another arena to get a NHL team because the new one is too small. You could sell out the arena at the moment every night, and be in the bottom 5 teams in NHL attendance. How well do you think that will go over. On top of that, it's not exactly cheap to watch NHL games in Canada. Not all "hockey fans" have the disposable income to shell out top dollar for 41 NHL home games a year regardless of how the team does, and I distinctly doubt that in a metro population of under 700,000 there are enough with that kind of coin. If the arena stays the same, however, the team would likely have to win the Stanley Cup every year just to break even. Since that is not happening, 1) You will see the team begin to collapse into red ink, 2) the team will be unable to skate a team that does more than compete for a lower playoff seed at best, and at worst hovers in the nether reaches of the standings. How many people are willing out shell out for the length of a NHL season at Canadian prices for that?

Answer to your query: I'm in Alberta for school. There are all sorts of reasons people need to leave where they're from... don't assume it's cause there were "no jobs" in Manitoba. FYI, Manitoba's economy is emerging as one of the strongest during this recession. This includes the LOWEST unemployment rate in the country... so much for Manitoba's "weak" economy. Feel free to read some articles on the subject.

The MTS Centre can be expanded relatively painlessly to about 16,000 seats for NHL hockey. True, that would still be the smallest in the NHL. However, the concept of larger arena = more revenues is outdated... here's why: Suppose the arena was indeed 18,000 seats. Those extra 2,000 seats are well known to be a) the most expensive to add (when building an arena in the first place), the hardest to fill when the team isn't selling out, and c) generate the least amount of revenue for the team (i.e. cheap seats).

It is actually easier to get 15,000 people to a game in a 15,000 seat arena than it is to get 15,000 in a 20,000 seat arena. Scarcity drives up demand (force people to buy their tickets ahead of time) and allows the team to charge more per seat.

Bottom 5 in attendance?... attendance is always a shady number as teams give away gobs of seats when they can't sell out (example: The Panthers' free ticket for everyone in Florida promotion). The important figure is REVENUE generated by gate receipts as that is the only number that takes into account how much people actually pay for tickets.

Based on 07-08 numbers, HALF the teams in the league generate $850,000 USD per game or less. With a

15,000 seat arena (even though 16,000 is plausible if the NHL were to return)

the loonie at 80 cents (presently trading at 86.5 cents)

consistent sellouts (my opinion is that they would have no problems selling out, yours obviously differs)

an average ticket price of $75 CDN (approximately has been charged for NHL PRESEASON games at MTSC)

The team would generate 900,000 USD. That's better than half the teams in the league.

A modestly expanded MTSC could easily generate the revenue (close to 1,000,000 per game) that the financially comfortable teams in the NHL generate.

I state these figures because people often say, "with a 15,000 seat arena you'd have to charge an average of $120/ticket and Winnipeggers will never pay that." I firmly believe that there is indeed enough wealth in Winnipeg to fill 15 or 16,000 seats at $75 average per ticket.

In contrast, Phoenix and Florida generated $500,000 per game or less in 07-08, despite announced crowds of approx 15,000. That means that the effective average ticket price in those markets is $33. I firmly believe Winnipeg could blow these guys out of the water in revenue.

[CC97]

Put this team in Hamilton for the last 13 years, and after the brief honeymoon and collapse of a competitive franchise, and they wouldn't be in any better shape. They really wouldn't. And in Hamilton, you don't have much to strive for, because even getting them into better shape would mean the most miniscule increase in league revenue.

Why would it be a minuscule increase in league revenue? You go from a team that (from the sounds of it) doesn't draw very well, likely isn't bringing in a lot of television viewers, and just as likely isn't setting merchandise sales records to one that potentially packs the arena every night, increases television ratings (look at the ratings for any playoff game with a Canadian team vs one without), and is also selling across the country (they'll sell merchandise for every Canadian team in most nation-wide big box stores)... good for the NHL, better for the NHLPA, best for fans. Yay.

Outside of ticket sales, though, how much of that revenue is genuinely new revenue, and how much of that is simply money redirected from other teams? Is TSN/CBC/fill in Canadian sports broadcaster here going to air more games in total or simply keep the same number? Another Canadian team won't have that dramatic an effect on US TV ratings, so you must be discussing Canadian tv. How much of that jersey and merchandise money would have been spent of Leafs, Sabres, Red Wings or some other team's gear anyway prior to Southern Ontario getting a team?

TSN/CBC would likely air more games, yes, ratings would not simply be redirected - there's a lot of national pride in this country especially when it comes to hockey, I'm sure there's a lot of people across Canada (not in BC) that are tuning into Vancouver/Chicago rather than Boston/Carolina simply for the fact that the Canucks are a Canadian team.

Sure there'd be a lot of merchandise flipping going on (Coyotes instead of Leafs) however I'd be surprised if there weren't a lot of merchandise in-addition-tos (Coyotes as well as, I dunno, Flames)... but then again that might just be the type of people I hang out with and know.

Yes, I'm referring to the Canadian ratings numbers - the networks in Canada pay more for the rights to air games than the U.S. networks do anyways (at least they did the last I heard) and the ratings are higher or at least on-par (even with a population a tenth the size). To me, that is quite relevant.

[BrySmalls]

Make it happen.

[The_Admiral]

I still insist the Jets could've made white breezers work. Whiteout on ice.