Locked Out

Jntg4 · Oct 17, 2012

DewsSox79 said:
:fire:

:yeah:

Diehardfan · Oct 17, 2012

DewsSox79 said:
expanding would eliminate teams that are not so far from collapse to be able to move to one of those cities. you have atleast 4 teams right now that need to be moved (combination or not) those 4 teams need to be moved to the cities that would generate interest...after that where do you expand? kind of ironic how they speak of expanding when their more recent expansion teams are on the bubble. than again its the NHL.

And that surprises you, Dews?

Jntg4 · Oct 17, 2012

Whoever mentioned combining teams... again, contraction has no chance of happening as long as a PA exists, same as merging.

The last time two NHL teams merged as far as I remember is the Cleveland Barons into the Minnesota North Stars, that was a while ago my friends, don't remember the exact year and too lazy to look it up, but I'd suggest the late 70's. Long time ago. The PA in its current form was not even 15 years old yet then, and nowhere near as strong.

It would take HUGE concessions to the players to get them to even consider allowing a subtraction of teams.

Jntg4 · Oct 17, 2012

Relocation I'm all for.

I think in a perfect world scenario for the league we see this:
Dallas to Seattle (when new stadium is done)
Florida to Toronto-area, probably Markham, possibly Hamilton (new stadium ground breaking soon)
New York to Brooklyn (Islanders, minor relocation to Barclay's, small capacity for hockey but stay in big market)
Phoenix to Quebec (Colisee Pepsi for a few years before new stadium done)

Think NHL would like to keep presence in Anaheim although they haven't drawn well, same with New Jersey and Colorado (just need a good team here), but Carolina could eventually be on the block too. Lightning are safe for now imo.

DewsSox79 · Oct 17, 2012

Jntg4 said:
Relocation I'm all for.

I think in a perfect world scenario for the league we see this:
Dallas to Seattle (when new stadium is done)
Florida to Toronto-area, probably Markham, possibly Hamilton (new stadium ground breaking soon)
New York to Brooklyn (Islanders, minor relocation to Barclay's, small capacity for hockey but stay in big market)
Phoenix to Quebec (Colisee Pepsi for a few years before new stadium done)

Think NHL would like to keep presence in Anaheim although they haven't drawn well, same with New Jersey and Colorado (just need a good team here), but Carolina could eventually be on the block too. Lightning are safe for now imo.

Im glad you dont run the NHL.

Jntg4 · Oct 17, 2012

DewsSox79 said:
Im glad you dont run the NHL.

Why, you don't see those as good hockey markets? I certainly do, and the ones I moved are piles of shit.

But then again, we do have Bettman running it now, right? He's about as incompetent as it gets.

DewsSox79 · Oct 17, 2012

I love how the NHL moves teams than moves other franchises back to replace the moved. jets to Phx/ Thrashers back to Jets/ north stars to Dallas than introduce the wild....hell nordiques move to Colorado and they are probably going to move another team back as the nordiques. very stupid league

Jntg4 · Oct 17, 2012

DewsSox79 said:
I love how the NHL moves teams than moves other franchises back to replace the moved. jets to Phx/ Thrashers back to Jets/ north stars to Dallas than introduce the wild....hell nordiques move to Colorado and they are probably going to move another team back as the nordiques. very stupid league

Well, the bigger problem was letting those teams (besides Quebec) leave to shitty markets in the first place.

However, as I'm sure you know, the Canadian teams were being forced to leave not by lack of support, but by a very weak Canadian dollar at the time that they couldn't compete with the American teams financially anymore. Honestly, the league should have found a way to keep them, seeing that all of these are last 90's relocations, except for Minnesota to Dallas which I believe was after the 92-93 season. Not sure what the story was with Minnesota again, but whatever.

Fact of the matter is that leaving those markets is worse than coming back to them, coming back to them is fine. Of course, the Peg still needs a bigger stadium, but times are different now to where piece of shit markets like Phoenix don't appeal the them.

Now, the one I can't believe you didn't mention was expanding back to Atlanta after the Flames left. We knew all along that Atlanta was not a hockey market but we made that mistake twice.

As for Quebec, Winnipeg, and Minnesota, it wasn't a lack of support that kept them from staying. In Quebec, in addition to the Canadian dollar, there was a pretty interesting background story to that. The PA and news coverage of the team was done only in French, so it was hard to gain any form of support from the extra 10% of Quebec natives that speak English as their primary language.

The only downside of Quebec if they handle it right is the risk that comes with a city of only 500K in population, while Denver is around 5,500,000, so you can see why they moved there. However, it wouldn't be the lowest population Canadian NHL city, (metro area is now over 750K), as it is bigger than Winnipeg (metro area is bigger than the Peg's metro area anyway). Regina, Saskatchewan, is able to supply the Saskatchewan Roughriders of the CFL pretty exception crowds with a population of only 194K.

We know from the past that there is definitely interest in hockey there, and that may be all it takes. Just remember it was the Canadian Dollar and the Denver market size that cost them their team last time, not a lack of support.

Jntg4 · Oct 17, 2012

Clarification, it wasn't a lack of support, but their final season did draw under league average of 15,866/game with a mark of 14,397/game per hockeydb. Ottawa, Hartford, and Boston were the real attendance strugglers in that division (especially Ottawa)

HawkWriter · Oct 18, 2012

According to twitter...https://twitter.com/TSN_Sports/lists/hockey

NHLPA made 3 counter proposals. Bettman came out and said the proposals were a "step back" and "no where close" to what the NHL previously offered.

DewsSox79 · Oct 18, 2012

jesus

DewsSox79 · Oct 18, 2012

Jntg4 said:
Well, the bigger problem was letting those teams (besides Quebec) leave to shitty markets in the first place.

However, as I'm sure you know, the Canadian teams were being forced to leave not by lack of support, but by a very weak Canadian dollar at the time that they couldn't compete with the American teams financially anymore. Honestly, the league should have found a way to keep them, seeing that all of these are last 90's relocations, except for Minnesota to Dallas which I believe was after the 92-93 season. Not sure what the story was with Minnesota again, but whatever.

Fact of the matter is that leaving those markets is worse than coming back to them, coming back to them is fine. Of course, the Peg still needs a bigger stadium, but times are different now to where piece of shit markets like Phoenix don't appeal the them.

Now, the one I can't believe you didn't mention was expanding back to Atlanta after the Flames left. We knew all along that Atlanta was not a hockey market but we made that mistake twice.

As for Quebec, Winnipeg, and Minnesota, it wasn't a lack of support that kept them from staying. In Quebec, in addition to the Canadian dollar, there was a pretty interesting background story to that. The PA and news coverage of the team was done only in French, so it was hard to gain any form of support from the extra 10% of Quebec natives that speak English as their primary language.

The only downside of Quebec if they handle it right is the risk that comes with a city of only 500K in population, while Denver is around 5,500,000, so you can see why they moved there. However, it wouldn't be the lowest population Canadian NHL city, (metro area is now over 750K), as it is bigger than Winnipeg (metro area is bigger than the Peg's metro area anyway). Regina, Saskatchewan, is able to supply the Saskatchewan Roughriders of the CFL pretty exception crowds with a population of only 194K.

We know from the past that there is definitely interest in hockey there, and that may be all it takes. Just remember it was the Canadian Dollar and the Denver market size that cost them their team last time, not a lack of support.

I gotta put you on ignore. ugh.. terrible.

Capt. Serious · Oct 18, 2012

DewsSox79 said:
I gotta put you on ignore. ugh.. terrible.

:andruw: took you that long? :troll:

Jntg4 · Oct 18, 2012

DewsSox79 said:
I gotta put you on ignore. ugh.. terrible.

Capt. Serious said:
:andruw: took you that long?

HawkWriter · Oct 18, 2012

Really hoping the public talk is just that...talk. Hopefully just part of the negotiation. Really hoping we are down to the last week here as getting back some of that lost revenue is important to both sides here.

Diehardfan · Oct 19, 2012

Jntg4 said:
Well, the bigger problem was letting those teams (besides Quebec) leave to shitty markets in the first place.

However, as I'm sure you know, the Canadian teams were being forced to leave not by lack of support, but by a very weak Canadian dollar at the time that they couldn't compete with the American teams financially anymore. Honestly, the league should have found a way to keep them, seeing that all of these are last 90's relocations, except for Minnesota to Dallas which I believe was after the 92-93 season. Not sure what the story was with Minnesota again, but whatever.

Fact of the matter is that leaving those markets is worse than coming back to them, coming back to them is fine. Of course, the Peg still needs a bigger stadium, but times are different now to where piece of shit markets like Phoenix don't appeal the them.

Now, the one I can't believe you didn't mention was expanding back to Atlanta after the Flames left. We knew all along that Atlanta was not a hockey market but we made that mistake twice.

As for Quebec, Winnipeg, and Minnesota, it wasn't a lack of support that kept them from staying. In Quebec, in addition to the Canadian dollar, there was a pretty interesting background story to that. The PA and news coverage of the team was done only in French, so it was hard to gain any form of support from the extra 10% of Quebec natives that speak English as their primary language.

The only downside of Quebec if they handle it right is the risk that comes with a city of only 500K in population, while Denver is around 5,500,000, so you can see why they moved there. However, it wouldn't be the lowest population Canadian NHL city, (metro area is now over 750K), as it is bigger than Winnipeg (metro area is bigger than the Peg's metro area anyway). Regina, Saskatchewan, is able to supply the Saskatchewan Roughriders of the CFL pretty exception crowds with a population of only 194K.

We know from the past that there is definitely interest in hockey there, and that may be all it takes. Just remember it was the Canadian Dollar and the Denver market size that cost them their team last time, not a lack of support.

Who is "we"?

You sound like Hawk Harrelson.

If you are actually involved, please let me know. I'd really like for you to tell Bettman to kiss my ass.

HawkWriter · Oct 19, 2012

Jntg4 said:
As for Quebec, Winnipeg, and Minnesota, it wasn't a lack of support that kept them from staying. In Quebec, in addition to the Canadian dollar, there was a pretty interesting background story to that. The PA and news coverage of the team was done only in French, so it was hard to gain any form of support from the extra 10% of Quebec natives that speak English as their primary language.

A big part of It was a lack of support. Mostly a lack of corporate support but definitely a lack of support. Pretty sure that the Phoenix Coyotes have had a better average attendance every single year compared to the Winnipeg Jets last year.

Winnipeg was able to come back to the NHL and be successful because of more corporate sponsorship and because of the unique season ticket holder commitment the fans had to make. Moving forward, Winnipeg needs a new stadium though...a max of 15,000 is just not going to cut it long term.

DewsSox79 · Oct 19, 2012

Diehardfan said:
Who is "we"?

You sound like Hawk Harrelson.

If you are actually involved, please let me know. I'd really like for you to tell Bettman to kiss my ass.

:rofl: he has known "all along" before he even followed hockey (which was a year ago) he knew. haha! unreal the shit he spews out of his mouth. He is CO v2.0

Capt. Serious · Oct 19, 2012

Although the Winter Classic isn't scheduled to be played until Jan. 1, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman warned that the cancellation date for it is "rapidly approaching."

Seen this coming.

DewsSox79 · Oct 19, 2012

Capt. Serious said:
Seen this coming.

yikes. not good.

Locked Out

Will the NHL have a season in 2012-2013?

Yes, they will play a full season.

No, they will not play any games at all.

Yes, they will play, but it will be a shortened season.

Fire Forum Moderator

My favorite teams

Well-known member

My favorite teams

Fire Forum Moderator

My favorite teams

Fire Forum Moderator

My favorite teams

CCS Donator

Fire Forum Moderator

My favorite teams

CCS Donator

Fire Forum Moderator

My favorite teams

Fire Forum Moderator

My favorite teams

New member

CCS Donator

CCS Donator

CCS Donator

Fire Forum Moderator

My favorite teams

New member

Well-known member

My favorite teams

New member

CCS Donator

CCS Donator

CCS Donator