NHL: The Darkside

[ACCBiggz]

Hypothetically, let's just run with this....

Lock-Out, to my knowledge, what it is... Owners are losing money paying these wages, but players don't want to drop salary. Correct me if I am wrong, as I don't know everything about the NHL.

This is my fix to the problem, and my opinions on the matter:

Networks are only looking for short term ratings, which they aren't getting from the NHL. Each NFL team is making as much as the entire NHL in money from networks, scary huh. One main thing I have heard, serious or not... remember hypothetical.

Contraction:

In my opinion you can not contract. You can't contract established towns, and you can not contract brand new franchises, because these towns have raised taxes in some cities to build these stadiums, and what does it say a team is there for a few years, then poof gone. My fix to this solution, is to run PR and youth events in these cities to increase intrest with the YOUTH, not the old. It's important to focus on the young kids to get them excited about hockey, why? Because a kid learns and love hockey, then they go home, ask mommy and daddy to take them, BAM Family goes. Plus now you have a generation of new hockey fans in a town, and you work from the ground up.

Players:

These players have to know that with the NHL in the state they are in, can not make these superstar salaries that the NFL/NBA/MLB make. They have to understand, that in 5-10 years, then maybe, with the advancement in each city. Casual sports fans think of hockey as a fighting sport, but you watch Playoff Hockey, and there is almost nothing like it. You start from the ground up, building cities intrests, and then the town grows and grows into a hockey town. Then the players will start to see mega-bucks.

Feel free to post your own hypothetical situation, and write up your own of how the NHL can help itself.

[sahyder1]

I agree about getting to the youth part. The middle aged American is too lazy to spend his time on something that's not American. Hockey can be marketed to the youth. As far as I remember some veteran players have come out and said that the big money guys would agree to a slight pay cut.......but will not agree to a cap.

[Ananas]

Contraction is the only way to go. Too many American cities are apathetic to hockey and probably shouldn't have a franchise. I don't know about the American situation, but in Canada hockey is largly marketed to youth already. As for players salaries, are their any professional sports that have lower average salaries than hockey? I mean, these guys play as much as basketball players, work harder, and still get payed a fraction of what bastketball players make. I think there's a way to go about this that doesn't include going into the pockets of the NHLPA.

[ACCBiggz]

Contraction is the only way to go. Too many American cities are apathetic to hockey and probably shouldn't have a franchise. I don't know about the American situation, but in Canada hockey is largly marketed to youth already. As for players salaries, are their any professional sports that have lower average salaries than hockey? I mean, these guys play as much as basketball players, work harder, and still get payed a fraction of what bastketball players make. I think there's a way to go about this that doesn't include going into the pockets of the NHLPA.

←

You can not contract, if it isn't an established franchise, it's a team with a brand new stadium.

Yeah, the NBA always makes money from attendance, TV, etc... Hockey does not. Until Networks pay up, the players need to lower their salaries. NFL teams individually make almost as much as the NHL altogether in money from networks, and apprently the NHLPA/NHL don't understand that.

No, in the US, unless it is a hockey town (Boston, Detroit, etc) hockey isn't taught. It's Football, Basketball, Baseball.. why, because they make the money. This is why in the new towns, they should teach the game to youngsters and get them to understand and love hockey, then those kids will wanna go to the games, more turn out = more demand, more demand = more money. It's the first step in a long process to get the NHL right... you CAN NOT contract with new teams, tax payers have sent through some legislation in some cities for new stadiums. Agreeing to up their tax's x amount for x years in order to get a new stadium, and if you take that team away and have an empty building, those people are gonna get ticked off.

[Mike Ockizitchy]

I do agree alot. Teams are WAY to new to contract them, just can't happen. And with the whole youth thing, I know they do it somewhat, but it can be boosted. The only thing about is if the youth does fall in love with the sport and they get into it, down the line, alot of kids might not be able to continue at one point. Hockey is by far the most expensive sport to play. Not only equipment but when you get to a certain point it costs thousands of dollars to play. That's the state I'm at now. Juniors is alot of money. And with equipment, you have to buy new sticks every time one breaks, get skates sharpened now and then, and straight up pay for all the other pads. And skates cost alot, and after 2 or 3 years you need new ones.

Plus about the contracts you talked about, I think alot of Europeans just don't care. They feel they're Gods gift to hockey, and they're not. Sure they're SPECTACULAR players, but Gods gift to hockey was Gretzky/Lemiuex. The Europeans just think, "Hell if they won't pay me I'll go home and play," because there's so many good, established leagues in Europe.

[gunnar hendershow]

Nothing will help hockey except marketing to the youth, which won't happen thanks to the NBA being on ESPN.

Making hockey American will alienate true hockey fans and that won't work.

Getting rid of dumb franchises is the easy fix, which is what the NHL needs.

[Guest NYJetFan86]

and exactly what do you mean by dumb franchises?

[gunnar hendershow]

and exactly what do you mean by dumb franchises?

←

Bad franchises, but of course I said dumb since bad didn't come to mind. I need to stop going to bed at 12 and waking up at 6.

[Guest Hit Man 3120]

Minnesota and Atlanta both had franchises that moved, and they get new ones. A team in Columbus? 4 teams in California?

Contraction is the only way to go. Bettman added 8 teams in 10 years. The other big three have added no more than 4. The fact that they're 30 teams dilutes the talent pool.

And they need to keep the red line. If they eliminate it, teams will just play more of that Jacques Lemaire trap garbage

[Typical Phenom]

No, in the US, unless it is a hockey town (Boston, Detroit, etc) hockey isn't taught. It's Football, Basketball, Baseball.. why, because they make the money.

←

I don't think it's taught because they make the money. Hockey's a more expensive sport to play. I've known a lot of people who played street hockey, which isn't too expensive, but to actually get ice time, skates, a stick and whatnot, it costs money. I don't know a place out here that has a net set up for people to just go play hockey and Denver's crazy for hockey ever since the Avs arrived.

Basketball is simple. Get a ball, go to any park, and you got a game. Football, you need a ball and a relatively open area. For urban America at least, these are the affordable sports. This is just from my view though, could be different elsewhere.

[caucasianheat]

Biggz, your situation is well thought out and could work, but it's major flaw is that it's far too idealistic. Generating interest in hockey within the dead markets is easier said the done and the only thing for it is to have the team start winning games. If it's a team that is consistently unprofitable and unable to win games in order to create interest, they need to be cut.

It doesn't have to be the new franchises either. Look at teams like Washington and Pittsburgh, both of which are unprofitable and cannot draw a crowd in their respective markets. These are the teams that need to be cut, should cuts be decided upon as necessary. Cutting a franchise out is never a good decision to be made, but sometimes, for the good of the league, it has to happen.

[Guest Hit Man 3120]

The Pens have been turned into a damn joke. Its a shame

[ACCBiggz]

I never have said it's a quick fix, this has to be done over time.

I don't think it's taught because they make the money. Hockey's a more expensive sport to play.

Yeah, that's what I am talking about, I'm including everything. At the end of the day, those three make money, and it's why Hockey isn't taught. Does that prevent them from creating some sort of program in these cities just to teach the rules of the game, to create intrest? No.

Minnesota and Atlanta both had franchises that moved, and they get new ones. A team in Columbus? 4 teams in California?

NHL has tried to expand, maybe too much, but you can't contract new franchises. Contracting somewhere where you just made them build a new stadium is going to have more negitive than positive. Contraction may sound like a short term fix, but in the long run, if Hockey picks back up some, they'll try to expand again, and run into the same exact problem. Why? Because they just left the city, then over time the city once again turns out to not care about it. Instead of just staying there, teaching the game and growing.

I never had watched a hockey game until Columbus got a team. I kinda though, "huh, well, we are getting a hockey team, fight time." So I didn't watch a game until I saw the Hurricanes in the playoffs, I found Playoff hockey very exciting. And now, this season, I've watched tons of it. I still don't understand everything, but having a franchise near me, has got me into hockey.

[Dogbert]

Phoenix Coyotes -------> Winnipeg Jets

Nashville Predators ----> Quebec Remparts (Nords is out, COL's owner owns the name)

Tampa Bay Lightning -----> Seattle Storm

Florida Panthers ------> Houston Wranglers

Mighty Ducks of Anaheim ------> Portland (Name of team)

Pittsburgh Penguins -------> K.C. Scouts

I think that the rest of the troubled teams will turn around in time.

[Jerichoholic23]

IMO the easiest way to save hockey is move all the teams that have low attendance to Canadian cities, where they would be loved. Florida, Atlanta, Tampa, New Jersey and Carolina. Another way to save it is put the games on in the evening. No one watches hockey on saturday afternoons. I would like to know where they got the idea that they would get high ratings on saturday afternoon. In Canada we have hockey every saturday night and it always has pretty good ratings.

[Mike Ockizitchy]

And they need to keep the red line.  If they eliminate it, teams will just play more of that Jacques Lemaire trap garbage

←

I don't think they should keep the redline. It opens up the game SO much more. You really have no idea. I know personally because in my league we have no redline. It turns the game into an even more exciting one. More breakaways, more chance, more saves, more dekes, more chances for players to be creative, more excitement. And that's what's being demanded from the game. People want more scoring and what not. In my league without the redline we have TONS of scoring.

The Pens have been turned into a damn joke.  Its a shame

←

This brings up another issue I have. Given, Pitts a bad team, but nothing promises a franchise wont have a cold streak. They haven't been a great team for a while now, but they just got Marc-Andre Fleury, they won't get Ovechkin but they'll get a damn good player, and hell maybe they'll finish bad again and get Crosby. But they have a good young team, waiting in the future and when they get there the Pittsburgh Penguins will be an exciting team to watch. But this brings me to a problem I have. Draftees getting such lucrative contracts. Why should Marc-Andre Fleury get such a huge salary that Pitt had to take on so they couldn't lose him. He hadn't at the time proven anything in the NHL. If he signs a 4 or 5 year deal for less money they keep him, and if they can't resign him they'll still should have by that time turned their franchise into a profit because it's exciting hockey. If they haven't at that time, the town is dead and don't deserve a team.

Phoenix Coyotes -------> Winnipeg Jets

Nashville Predators ----> Quebec Remparts (Nords is out, COL's owner owns the name)

Tampa Bay Lightning -----> Seattle Storm

Florida Panthers ------> Houston Wranglers

Mighty Ducks of Anaheim ------> Portland (Name of team)

Pittsburgh Penguins -------> K.C. Scouts

I think that the rest of the troubled teams will turn around in time.

←

I don't know exactly what you're trying to say here...maybe you're saying take these teams and send them here to be these teams? Expand on your post a little bit.

IMO the easiest way to save hockey is move all the teams that have low attendance to Canadian cities, where they would be loved.  Florida, Atlanta, Tampa, New Jersey and Carolina.  Another way to save it is put the games on in the evening.  No one watches hockey on saturday afternoons.  I would like to know where they got the idea that they would get high ratings on saturday afternoon.  In Canada we have hockey every saturday night and it always has pretty good ratings.

←

I don't think they can just move those franchises. Atlanta is clearly showing signs of things looking bright in the future the way they played at the beginning of this season. Carolina is a bit to new, compared to other teams, to just move them. New Jersey is a dominating team, whether people like to admit it or not, and if the city won't bother to go watch them all season till playoffs and they can't hold down good attendances, move them. The team deserves better, I think the NHL would profit from another Candian team. They love the game of puck up there.

[DMN in the House]

The problem with moving teams to Canada is money. The exchange rate fucks things up.

[ACCBiggz]

And the fact the TV doesn't pay well there... America TV isn't paying for us to watch their hockey teams, because we won't watch. In every sport it's like this. Bad ratings when World Series had Mets v. Yanks because it was one city, people in LA, Phoenix, Columbus, Atlanta, etc they don't want to watch NY play each other. You draw by having East v. West, which is how NBA/NHL work, but without American teams.... it sucks, and it's all Canada.

[gunnar hendershow]

I think maybe moving a few franchises (Pittsburgh, Washington, Anaheim, Phoenix, and Florida) would help them out... but the only good US markets left are Seattle, Houston, and Kansas City. Winnipeg, Quebec, and maybe another Canadian city could take teams... but Canadian teams don't make much money from TV.

[Guest Hit Man 3120]

IMO the easiest way to save hockey is move all the teams that have low attendance to Canadian cities, where they would be loved.  Florida, Atlanta, Tampa, New Jersey and Carolina.  Another way to save it is put the games on in the evening.  No one watches hockey on saturday afternoons.  I would like to know where they got the idea that they would get high ratings on saturday afternoon.  In Canada we have hockey every saturday night and it always has pretty good ratings.

←

New Jersey? What are you on. Any whooo

Moving teams to Canada would only hurt the NHL. Notice how Canada has lost two franchises in the past decade? And Edmonton is barely surviving and the Habs are now owned by an American

I don't think they should keep the redline. It opens up the game SO much more. You really have no idea. I know personally because in my league we have no redline. It turns the game into an even more exciting one. More breakaways, more chance, more saves, more dekes, more chances for players to be creative, more excitement. And that's what's being demanded from the game. People want more scoring and what not. In my league without the redline we have TONS of scoring.

I don't think, no offense, comparing whatever league you are in to the NHL is a good one. Im positive that teams would just trap more. If you think the Minnesota Wild are boring now, just wait till they trap with all 5 between the bluelines. I like the idea of having all penalties to be fully served and to regulate goalies gear more and such