Your 2012 National Hockey Lockout Thread

[cmm]

The Nassau Coliseum will be looking for a tenant

Wasn't that happening anyway?

Yes, that's why they'd want in on the rival hockey league. (Not being serious.)

[LMU]

Posted this on Facebook earlier:

Hey! If any of you are looking for any last-minute gift ideas for me, I have one. I'd like Gary Bettman, the NHL Commissioner, right here tonight. I want him brought from his happy holiday ego trip over there on Avenue of the Americas with all the other rich franchise owners and I want him brought right here, with a big ribbon on his head, and I want to look him straight in the eye and I want to tell him what a cheap, lying, no-good, rotten, four-flushing, low-life, snake-licking, dirt-eating, inbred, overstuffed, ignorant, blood-sucking, dog-kissing, brainless, dickless, hopeless, heartless, fat-ass, bug-eyed, stiff-legged, spotty-lipped, worm-headed sack of monkey he is! Hallelujah! Holy ! Where's the Tylenol?

[Sport]

I had a feeling this would happen, but that doesn't mean I'm not upset. I think really I'm just experiencing what it's like to be on the abusive end of an abusive relationship. It sucks.

[JayMac]

I am officially done. It's been real.

[IceCap]

What needs to happen at the NHL's head offices....

Warning. Language is NSFW.

http://youtu.be/me5OOPdBaW4

[Raymie]

Here's a serious logistical question I have.

Say the NHL ends up in limbo — no contract, yet it won't fold. Some outside force starts a new hockey league.

1. Do most arena contracts with teams have an exclusivity clause? (e.g. "No other professional hockey team can play in this arena for the duration of the contract.")

2. Are there enough professional-class arenas which the NHL does not occupy to create a modern hockey league in the United States and Canada? Markets like Nashville, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Boston, Winnipeg, and Montreal don't seem to have something capable waiting in the wings. (Some markets, like Chicago; Phoenix (!); Detroit; San Francisco; New Jersey; and Minnesota, do. Some of them are AHL or former NHL venues, too.)

[AHcreative]

Well

[rams80]

*checks out Hfboards*

Might want to invite that marksman over there too. Good Lord, look at all those dirtbags who actually think the players are the problem.

[DaytonBlue]

I would think if they were tenants there would be clauses about having to actually play or something, or that at some point these cities could file lawsuits to break the leases. Here in Memphis, the city thought about suing the NBA/Grizzlies during their lockout.

But many of the teams "lease" the buildings but basically own them. For example, the Scottrade Center in St. Louis is officially owned by the City of St. Louis, but the Blues pay nominal if any rent and control the building completely. I think the only reason it was set up as a lease was to avoid property taxes.

However, seeing as how the NHL is content on destroying itself, here are some realistic possibilities...

New Jersey...Izod Center

Detroit...Palace of Auburn Hills

Chicago...Allstate Arena

Hartford...XL Center

Quebec City...Colisee Pepsi

Minneapolis...Target Center

Vancouver...Pacific Coliseum

Some other possibilities that become a stretch...

Hamilton...Copps Coliseum

St. Charles, MO (St. Louis suburb) Family Arena (only holds 10K)

Long Beach (near LA)...Long Beach Arena

Seattle...Key Arena (only 12k for hockey)

Phoenix (they actually drew well at what's now U.S. Airways Center, I think the Coyotes would have been better off pulling a Brooklyn and playing in a building with 14k seats rather than moving to Glendale)

Nashville...Municipal Auditorium (maybe 10K for hockey)

Of course most of these buildings don't have many suites/club seats, etc., so the players in this new league would be making six figures at most and not seven.

[Gothamite]

Adrian Dater of the Denver Post just said on twitter that one "NHL depth player" (not on the Avs) he talked to said players were ready to play again, but Donald Fehr came in on Wednesday and told them that they could get more and to hold out.

If that's really true, then... well... it all

Even if that's true, I still won't blame the players. Why should they accept a terrible deal, after the owners needlessly picked this fight?

The owners are the ones who started this debacle. The owners are the ones who have been bargaining in bad faith. None of that magically went away when they slapped a lousy offer on the table.

The owners have to come way down on their demands before they can wriggle out of responsibility for their own mess.

[CubsFanBudMan]

There's already a league in place that plays in secondary arenas in major markets and smaller markets in general... the AHL. It also happens to be the top level going in North America right now. Some of you should look into it.

There's hockey to enjoy, you just might need to travel more (or perhaps less) than you're used to. Let Fehr and Bettman do their thing and go see a game.

[rams80]

But the Rivermen suck this year.

[Raymie]

And I have a CHL team closer to me than any AHL team — but it's still more than an hour away. (It plays in an arena that probably hosts as many high school finals as it does hockey games — it's a favorite of our state association, even though it's an hour or so outside of Phoenix in an area where it gets little more than local coverage).

[dfwabel]

Here's a serious logistical question I have.

Say the NHL ends up in limbo — no contract, yet it won't fold. Some outside force starts a new hockey league.

1. Do most arena contracts with teams have an exclusivity clause? (e.g. "No other professional hockey team can play in this arena for the duration of the contract.")

2. Are there enough professional-class arenas which the NHL does not occupy to create a modern hockey league in the United States and Canada? Markets like Nashville, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Boston, Winnipeg, and Montreal don't seem to have something capable waiting in the wings. (Some markets, like Chicago; Phoenix (!); Detroit; San Francisco; New Jersey; and Minnesota, do. Some of them are AHL or former NHL venues, too.)

I would think if they were tenants there would be clauses about having to actually play or something, or that at some point these cities could file lawsuits to break the leases. Here in Memphis, the city thought about suing the NBA/Grizzlies during their lockout.

But many of the teams "lease" the buildings but basically own them. For example, the Scottrade Center in St. Louis is officially owned by the City of St. Louis, but the Blues pay nominal if any rent and control the building completely. I think the only reason it was set up as a lease was to avoid property taxes.

However, seeing as how the NHL is content on destroying itself, here are some realistic possibilities...

New Jersey...Izod Center

Detroit...Palace of Auburn Hills

Chicago...Allstate Arena

Hartford...XL Center

Quebec City...Colisee Pepsi

Minneapolis...Target Center

Vancouver...Pacific Coliseum

Some other possibilities that become a stretch...

Hamilton...Copps Coliseum

St. Charles, MO (St. Louis suburb) Family Arena (only holds 10K)

Long Beach (near LA)...Long Beach Arena

Seattle...Key Arena (only 12k for hockey)

Phoenix (they actually drew well at what's now U.S. Airways Center, I think the Coyotes would have been better off pulling a Brooklyn and playing in a building with 14k seats rather than moving to Glendale)

Nashville...Municipal Auditorium (maybe 10K for hockey)

Of course most of these buildings don't have many suites/club seats, etc., so the players in this new league would be making six figures at most and not seven.

Which was why I honestly asked 'LightsOut' that question. Regardless of where the games would be played, most of the franchises would still not be sustainable with the revenues.

Luxury seating, gate revenue, and advertising barely sustains teams currently. Half of those buildings would give the revenues to the owner (Pistons, Suns), so a new league would be where the old teams were. A new league with teams in smaller buildings may even end up giving money BACK to the old NHL owners in terms of rent/management fees. Taking AEG out of it, Jacobs (Bruins) owns Delaware North, MLSE operates where the Marlies play and sites managed by Specator/Global Spectrum. revenues would still trickle to Snider.

If a team has the arena operating contract, they typically form a separate company for that specific operation and control the building for hockey and non-hockey events.

[Sodboy13]

I feel it's critical to note that players were told by the ownership side on Wednesday that bringing Donald Fehr back into negotiations would be "a dealbreaker". They wanted players to sign off on a multi-year, legally-binding collective bargaining agreement without running it by their lead negotiator. This wasn't about negotiating in good faith; this was about suckering the players and trying to neuter their union leader via a skeezy end-around. This wasn't about finding resolutions; this was about trying to win a battle in the PR war. These past three days were a charade, plain and simple, and the owners' leadership is apparently under the mistaken impression that Bob Goodenow is still running the show on the players' side.

'em all. Let it all burn to the ground.

[Sport]

I've been to 3 Cincinnati Cyclones games this year. They've all been fun, but it's just not the same. I miss the daily news, the day-to-day schedule, watching the ebbs and flows of a team over the course of a season, the being at work and having a game to look forward to that night, the best players in the world playing my favorite sport, etc. I don't get that with the ECHL.

We're going to cancel a season for no good reason and it'll take something major to get me back. Firing Bettman would be a start.

[Kevin W.]

Bettman's not at issue here. He's just doing what the owners tell him to do. His successor will be the same.

The fault for this lays on the greedy :censored:ers like Jacobs.

[Sport]

I understand Bettman's role with the owners, I just don't like him and wish he wasn't the one running my sport's highest league.

[Sodboy13]

Bettman's not at issue here. He's just doing what the owners tell him to do. His successor will be the same.

The fault for this lays on the greedy :censored:ers like Jacobs.

Bettman says owners pressured him on make whole but he refused. Remember that, people who keep insisting he's just a messenger in all this.

Bettman is far from the only problem here. But I'm certainly not going to absolve him of guilt.

[IceCap]

Indeed. The idea that Gary Bettman's a powerless figurehead is just as baseless as the idea that he's a dictator. He works for the owners, yes. His job, however, is to run the league. So while the owners are his employers he's still entrusted to develop policy and lead them in cases such as a lockout or strike.

It's more like a problem that feeds itself. The owners and Bettman are two like-minded entities that just reinforce each others' policies and actions. A new NHL Commissioner may be more of the same. It's also possible, though, that he brings a new way of doing things to the table and that's enough to break the self-feeding cycle by forcing the owners to consider that new way of doing things.