Time for a new pro league?

Is it time for an all Canadian Pro league?

 
Total votes: 0

User avatar
Luddo_Nadd
Freshman
Posts: 57
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 04, 2007

Time for a new pro league? 

Post#1 » by Luddo_Nadd » Sat Jun 23, 2007 8:54 pm

With the growing disenchantment Canadians are feeling towards the American Owners, an American majority BOG and their incompetent American Commissioner who seem to consistently stymie and thwart any expansion/relocation into Canada, I ask this simple question:

Is it time for a separate all Canadian pro hockey League?

When you look at the fact that the NHL over the last decade in an attempt to win over non-hockey markets in the USA, have tweaked; changed and generally Americanized our beautiful game.

Is is time for a CNHL? Is it time for the 6 Canadian teams to tell the NHL that they'll take there 33% of total league revenue and keep it in Canada, in our own pro league?

I certainly think so, I also think their is the potential for a 12 to 16 team league in the land that whorships the game.

All these cities have a large enough population to support a pro team:

All figures based on Urban population density compiled by Statistics Canada's 2006 Census.

Quebec City(659,545)
Hamilton(647,634)
Winnipeg(641,483)
Kitchener(422,514)
London(353,069)
St.Catharines(308,596)
Victoria(304,683)
Halifax(282,924)
Windsor(278,765)
Oshawa( 269,734)
Saskatoon(202,425)


So 11 cities with a population density greater than 200,000 that I think given the right circumstances could house CNHL teams, + you have the 7 established and all ready existing NHL teams.

You could add 2 expansion teams right off the bat to bring the new league up to 8 teams and add 1/2 teams ever 3 to 6 years to allow for expansion depletion of the talent pool until you have your established 12 or 16 teams.


Just my 2 cents.
Image


ImageImage
User avatar
MAS
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 14,271
And1: 53
Joined: Aug 12, 2004
Location: Thornhill
     

 

Post#2 » by MAS » Sat Jun 23, 2007 9:04 pm

No league will survive without Toronto, that's where are the corporate sponsors are.

The Leafs will not allow another team in Toronto, meaning no league
User avatar
Luddo_Nadd
Freshman
Posts: 57
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 04, 2007

 

Post#3 » by Luddo_Nadd » Sat Jun 23, 2007 9:17 pm

MAS wrote:No league will survive without Toronto, that's where are the corporate sponsors are.

The Leafs will not allow another team in Toronto, meaning no league



Well Toronto only has blocking rights to another NHL team setting up shop in Toronto so your argument is flawed. The Leafs would have no say in a non NHL pro team setting up in Toronto, since that would violate fair business laws.




At any rate, you seem to have misunderstand what I meant MAS, I was thinking that the existing 6 Canadian NHL teams: Toronto, Ottawa, Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary and Montreal would leave the NHL to create a CNHL.
Image





ImageImage
User avatar
timd1218
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 2,380
And1: 0
Joined: Mar 24, 2005
Location: I will eat your soul.
Contact:

 

Post#4 » by timd1218 » Sat Jun 23, 2007 10:23 pm

Bettman was hired as the first NHL Commissioner (the position was formerly styled as president) to try to give the NHL some of the same success that the NBA was enjoying in the United States. His mandate was to make hockey appeal further to many American audiences unfamiliar with the game, and who are traditionally more interested in professional baseball, football and basketball.


This is what you got when Gary Bettman was elected as the NHL Commisioner. If you don't like him, start a petition, write some letters, BE PROACTIVE!

Despite popular opinion, Bettman was not responsible for the majority of the league's southern movement. The decision to expand to Miami, Tampa, San Jose, and Anaheim were all made before he took over as Commissioner of the NHL. In fact, the only cities that the league expanded to under his watch were St. Paul, Atlanta, Nashville, and Columbus

Could have been a Canadian who wanted this to happen.

Anymore, it's not about the better of the league, it's more of I'm Canadian so I want another Canadian team. I agree that there should be more Canadian teams, but the reason Quebec and Winnipeg left was because they couldn't afford to stay in the league. No Corporate sponsors. And in all sports, you gotta have corporate sponsors now.
Image
I know what you're thinking. We're in the middle of a city, what's a hawk doing there?
User avatar
timd1218
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 2,380
And1: 0
Joined: Mar 24, 2005
Location: I will eat your soul.
Contact:

 

Post#5 » by timd1218 » Sat Jun 23, 2007 10:27 pm

[quote="Luddo_Nadd"][/quote]

If Toronto wouldn't allow another NHL team in Toronto, why would they allow another team in the CNHL???
Image
I know what you're thinking. We're in the middle of a city, what's a hawk doing there?
User avatar
The_Child_Prodigy
Analyst
Posts: 3,396
And1: 0
Joined: May 03, 2005

 

Post#6 » by The_Child_Prodigy » Sat Jun 23, 2007 10:55 pm

timd1218 wrote:Bettman was hired as the first NHL Commissioner (the position was formerly styled as president) to try to give the NHL some of the same success that the NBA was enjoying in the United States. His mandate was to make hockey appeal further to many American audiences unfamiliar with the game, and who are traditionally more interested in professional baseball, football and basketball.


This is what you got when Gary Bettman was elected as the NHL Commisioner. If you don't like him, start a petition, write some letters, BE PROACTIVE!

Despite popular opinion, Bettman was not responsible for the majority of the league's southern movement. The decision to expand to Miami, Tampa, San Jose, and Anaheim were all made before he took over as Commissioner of the NHL. In fact, the only cities that the league expanded to under his watch were St. Paul, Atlanta, Nashville, and Columbus

Could have been a Canadian who wanted this to happen.

Anymore, it's not about the better of the league, it's more of I'm Canadian so I want another Canadian team. I agree that there should be more Canadian teams, but the reason Quebec and Winnipeg left was because they couldn't afford to stay in the league. No Corporate sponsors. And in all sports, you gotta have corporate sponsors now.


Winnipeg and Quebec could get a corporate immediatley. And they will sell out every single game.... Its impossible to get Flames tickets but you can walk in to an american team and hand pick your seats.
User avatar
timd1218
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 2,380
And1: 0
Joined: Mar 24, 2005
Location: I will eat your soul.
Contact:

 

Post#7 » by timd1218 » Sat Jun 23, 2007 11:24 pm

The_Child_Prodigy wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Winnipeg and Quebec could get a corporate immediatley. And they will sell out every single game.... Its impossible to get Flames tickets but you can walk in to an american team and hand pick your seats.


I'm not denying Quebec and Winnipeg can't sell out. I know they can. They moved because they couldn't get a corporate sponsor. They moved because they were losing money. They couldn't afford player salaries.

And you can't blame Bettman for the move of the Jets and Nordiques to an American city because he wasn't the one who picked the city. It was the buyer. And if those owners wanted the teams to stay in Canada, they would have sold the team to Canadian owners or people who would have kept the team in Canada.

You can't blame Americans for all of this. Winnipeg and Quebec each had the chance to keep the teams in Canada, but they choose to sell the teams to American owners.

Again, I've said Florida and Nashville should be moved to 2 Canadian cities before anything else. The Canadian dollar just about equal to the American dollar now so those small market cities will now be able to pay the high rising salaries. But to come on here and say it was just Americans fault for the lack of Canadian teams is a joke.

About the bold, I'm about 99% sure I heard somewhere a few years back that Calgary couldn't even sell out their home games.

Here's proof:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002-03_Ca ... mes_season
Image
I know what you're thinking. We're in the middle of a city, what's a hawk doing there?
User avatar
Luddo_Nadd
Freshman
Posts: 57
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 04, 2007

 

Post#8 » by Luddo_Nadd » Sun Jun 24, 2007 12:39 am

timd1218 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



If Toronto wouldn't allow another NHL team in Toronto, why would they allow another team in the CNHL???


They wouldn't be able to stop another league from putting a team in Toronto, The Leafs only have the right to deny another NHL team from being in Toronto. If someone else started a pro league and wanted to put a team in Toronto, they would.

When Winnipeg and Quebec moved their wasn't a cap system in place, trying to compare today's league to when both cities had teams is like comparing apples to oranges. In today's league both those teams are making money hand over fist, and the Canadian teams would probably be responsible for 50% of total league revenue.

After all if 6 teams can generate a total of 33% of total league revenue, I can't understand why there isn't 8 or 10 teams in Canada. What does is say for the state of American support for the NHL when their is 4 times the amount of teams in the states only generating 67% of total revenue.

66& of total revenue sounds like a lot, but in reality when you work out the averages it's horribly one sided.

24 American teams average out to each team being responsible for 2.75% of total league revenue.

6 Canadian teams average out to each team being responsible for 5.5% of total league revenue.

I for the life of me can't understand why the NHL refuses to put more teams in Canada, instead opting to continue to put teams in non-hockey markets and dragging the leagues revenues further into the abyss.
Image





ImageImage
User avatar
WEFFPIM
RealGM
Posts: 38,521
And1: 473
Joined: Nov 14, 2005
Location: WEFFPIM. I'm the real WEFFPIM.
   

 

Post#9 » by WEFFPIM » Sat Jun 30, 2007 4:06 pm

Let me help Luddo_Nadd clarify

The six current Canadian NHL teams (Ottawa, Toronto, Montreal, Edmonton, Vancouver, Calgary) would leave the NHL and be the building blocks for this proposed CNHL, and then build expansion teams (or relocate AHL teams in various Canada communities since six NHL teams would no longer exist to have farm teams in the AHL) in places like Hamilton, Quebec, and Winnipeg and create an entirely new league.

However, this will never, repeat, never happen. The Canadian teams are too important to the NHL for them to just bolt, it the NHL wouldn't just allow them to leave. Without those six teams, the NHL dies.

As for not putting any more teams in Canada, the NHL isn't doing that because the NHL is committed to regrowing the American fanbase that it lost in the years preceding and following the lockout. They are making gradual steps in doing so (the Pengiuns remaining in Pittsburgh, marketing Sidney Crosby), but it's not something that can happen overnight. The NHL continues to put hockey into non-hockey markets so to broaden the fanbase, and not just make the NHL a league associated with Canada and northern states. Alienating the Southern half of the US would be a public relations and financial nightmare.

I know that you are a frustrated Canadain confused on why this league is on the brink of death, but the solution doesn't lie in Canada. The solution lies with the NHL working with what they already have in place and making it succeed. There won't be 7 Canadian teams because that's not where the answer lies. The key for the NHL to live is it's success in the United States. It helps that the Stanley Cup Champions came from a large, non-hockey market this season, and the NHL should take advantage of that.

I know my post may sound oxymoronic, saying that without the Canadian teams the NHL dies, but the future lies in the US. But 24 teams vastly outweigh the 6, even if the 6 are insanely popular.

My post was a bunch of rambling, but hope it helped a bit
ReddWing wrote:Being a fan of this team is tantamount to being in hell...There is no Christ that is coming to save us. Even if there was, we'd trade him for a 28 year old wing.
User avatar
MAS
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 14,271
And1: 53
Joined: Aug 12, 2004
Location: Thornhill
     

 

Post#10 » by MAS » Sat Jun 30, 2007 4:09 pm

[quote="Luddo_Nadd"][/quote]

I see what you mean now, i didn't know they were included.

But what i meant was that the Leafs pretty much have control of all the hockey arenas in Toronto, if a new team were to come in they would have to spend their own money on a new arena from scratch, which isn't gonna happen
HDMAVS760CA
Senior
Posts: 668
And1: 31
Joined: May 13, 2006
Location: ONTARIO, CA
       

 

Post#11 » by HDMAVS760CA » Sun Jul 1, 2007 10:09 am

willeatfire4playoffsinmil wrote:Let me help Luddo_Nadd clarify

The six current Canadian NHL teams (Ottawa, Toronto, Montreal, Edmonton, Vancouver, Calgary) would leave the NHL and be the building blocks for this proposed CNHL, and then build expansion teams (or relocate AHL teams in various Canada communities since six NHL teams would no longer exist to have farm teams in the AHL) in places like Hamilton, Quebec, and Winnipeg and create an entirely new league.

However, this will never, repeat, never happen. The Canadian teams are too important to the NHL for them to just bolt, it the NHL wouldn't just allow them to leave. Without those six teams, the NHL dies.

As for not putting any more teams in Canada, the NHL isn't doing that because the NHL is committed to regrowing the American fanbase that it lost in the years preceding and following the lockout. They are making gradual steps in doing so (the Pengiuns remaining in Pittsburgh, marketing Sidney Crosby), but it's not something that can happen overnight. The NHL continues to put hockey into non-hockey markets so to broaden the fanbase, and not just make the NHL a league associated with Canada and northern states. Alienating the Southern half of the US would be a public relations and financial nightmare.

I know that you are a frustrated Canadain confused on why this league is on the brink of death, but the solution doesn't lie in Canada. The solution lies with the NHL working with what they already have in place and making it succeed. There won't be 7 Canadian teams because that's not where the answer lies. The key for the NHL to live is it's success in the United States. It helps that the Stanley Cup Champions came from a large, non-hockey market this season, and the NHL should take advantage of that.

I know my post may sound oxymoronic, saying that without the Canadian teams the NHL dies, but the future lies in the US. But 24 teams vastly outweigh the 6, even if the 6 are insanely popular.

I wonder how come in the 1st post, Thunder Bay isn't listed. Thunder Bay Lightning comes to mind :P . But i'm not dissing you on this but who cares about how the south feels. It would NOT be a nightmare. The only southern team that is cared about is T.Bay. The rest don't sell out their games. And the southern teams winning the Cup is 1 of the reasons NHL sucks now :( .
NHL is on life support cause of the lockout & they don't be needing non-hockey city teams winning it all the time. They need 2 fold some teams & possibly move 2 teams to Canada...Winnipeg & Quebec. Hockey is dead in some cities, mainly Boston & Chicago. Stop putting NHL teams in markets where other sports is the main strength + in markets where the people don't support any of the teams[Atlanta]
Right now the NHL needs 2 care about the main fanbase now or they will lose them 4ever. Besides, its kind of the in thing 4 America is 2 hate everything & everyone foreign now. People in Detroit now don't even appreciate the RedWings. I've found out that their no.1 team in that city is the Lions even though they're the L.A. Kings of the NFL. NOT A COMPLIMENT.
Bettman needs 2 get off his high horse & admit that he made a mistake expanding too much. And the NHL was recently talking about expanding again :crazy: Vegas & KC. Just move the Kings, Crapitals, or 1 or 2 of the southern teams there instead of more expansion.

Besides too much expansion ruined it for the fans, especially the West Coast. The Atlantic got the best deal, teams 4 home games when Crosby play. West Coast gets screwed with no protection there. I'm from the West Coast & there's nobody in the Pacific Division I like. I can't think of anymore right now.

Except this. The way the Canadian teams not winning the cup & teams & players leaving them for US teams, I might be in favor of it. A little bit. As long as they have a good TV deal, get on ESPN. Canadian & northern teams.
User avatar
Storm Surge
General Manager
Posts: 9,024
And1: 17
Joined: Dec 27, 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

 

Post#12 » by Storm Surge » Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:46 am

SOUNDS GOOD

Return to The General NHL Board