Another "Southern Belt Is A Failure" Article

[PredsV82]

Is there any proof to back that up? Or just an opinion?

I dont have a link but each of the last three years the owners have stated this, publicly. All Nashville fans follow this avidly every year because when we first secured our local ownership one of the conditions that could trigger a lease break(and subsequent move) was $20 million in cumulative losses. Given that we played three extra playoff games I expect this year they will turn a modest profit.

edit: see above post from WFMOE

 

[PredsV82]

All you guys talking about how the NHL needs to stick it out, etc--have you forgotten that the Thrashers are gonzo because nobody wants to own them in Atlanta anymore? All this talk about growing hockey in the southern US is great, but Joe Millionaire isn't going to endure $20 million in annual losses just so Johnny Numnuts and ten of his pals in Dallas decided to play rec hockey because of the Stars.

I don't know why anyone expects the NHL to be the guardians of hockey and to grow the game. I can understand exhibitions in non-traditional locales, and working with rec hockey programs to seed the ground and build hockey markets. That's what you do to pave the way for a possible NHL team in 10 or 20 years. Spending $100 or more million first to try and do this seems ass-backward, at best. It's like building a huge new factory for a product without even doing any market testing to see if anyone wants to buy the damn thing.

The whole southern expansion strategy makes no sense at all from a business standpoint. Atlanta is just the first domino to fall. There will be more.

not sure thats accurate.

its pretty clear that ASG is determined to get hockey out of ATL in order to benefit the Hawks.

by cutting the arena out of any deal for the thrash they have made it almost impossible for anyone to buy the team and keep them local.

 

[RandR]

not sure thats accurate.

its pretty clear that ASG is determined to get hockey out of ATL in order to benefit the Hawks.

by cutting the arena out of any deal for the thrash they have made it almost impossible for anyone to buy the team and keep them local.

But if hockey wasn't down the list in sports in that part of the country to fans, advertisers and viewers, it would have been in the owners' best business interests to try and find a way to make both the Hawks and the Thrashers work.

If this had a story about a Canadian city, it would have been the basketball team that would have been pushed aside to make room for the hockey team.

 

[edog37]

not sure thats accurate.

its pretty clear that ASG is determined to get hockey out of ATL in order to benefit the Hawks.

by cutting the arena out of any deal for the thrash they have made it almost impossible for anyone to buy the team and keep them local.

I wonder how many other owners will try a similar approach towards dumping their teams....

 

[Roadrage]

I wonder how many other owners will try a similar approach towards dumping their teams....

Depends on how many NHL franchise owners own franchises in other sports and controls the lease on the arena.

 

[Buck Aki Berg]

Depends on how many NHL franchise owners own franchises in other sports and controls the lease on the arena.

...and if they don't control the lease, they could just throw really loud parties late at night and trash the place so they get evicted

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

I admit it was something of a pot-shot on my part, but your numbers felt like they were just "dangling" there, with no or minimal context. I can take your exact same numbers and state that, after 20 years and multiple NHL franchises, a population base that is triple Canada's has increased its minor hockey registration numbers at such a glacial pace that they've only reached a little over 2% of Atlantic Canada's on a per-capita basis.

I would certainly never expect them to match ours, but 2% in 20 years? That is a generous definition of "southern expansion success".

My argument is that there are several points about Southern Expansion the writer left out. Whether it was by chance or by nefarious intent, it makes the article biased.

One of those points is that NHL franchises stimulate growth of hockey players in the Sunbelt of the Untied States.

I really don't see what connection you are making, and honestly, don't know why you are comparing places non-traditional markets to Canada. All it indicates is that you (like many others) have unrealistic expectations about Southern Expansion.

 

[Confucius]

I never played ice hockey until college (D-league inter-mural) - but I was a fan long before then.

How the heck did you manage that? I couldn't imagine a guy playing for the 1st time at the age of what 18? Crap you must have been a sight.

 

[Confucius]

One of those points is that NHL franchises stimulate growth of hockey players in the Sunbelt of the Untied States.

Apparently having played the game doesn't matter. People become fans without ever having played, so who cares whether kids in the south play?

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Apparently having played the game doesn't matter. People become fans without ever having played, so who cares whether kids in the south play?

Because it's an example of the growth of the sport in the South? Kids that normally would have grown up playing football or baseball are instead opting to playing hockey instead

 

[Confucius]

Because it's an example of the growth of the sport in the South? Kids that normally would have grown up playing football or baseball are instead opting to playing hockey instead

Again, playing the game doesn't matter. The sport can grow just by fans being spectators.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Again, playing the game doesn't matter. The sport can grow just by fans being spectators.

So you are saying that the 500% growth of registered hockey players in North Carolina from 1990 to today has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the Hartford Whalers relocated there in 1997 and became the Carolina Hurricanes?

 

[optimus2861]

All it indicates is that you (like many others) have unrealistic expectations about Southern Expansion.

You presume I have expectations about it in the first place. I never did. If that makes me just another ******* Canadian hockey fan who can't be bothered to give a damn about the southern markets, so be it. (I'll admit to a soft spot for Nashville since I've gone to games there and quite enjoyed them, but that's about it)

 

[Confucius]

So you are saying that the 500% growth of registered hockey players in North Carolina from 1990 to today has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the Hartford Whalers relocated there in 1997 and became the Carolina Hurricanes?

No, I'm saying you don't have to play to be a fan. You can grow the game by being a spectator.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

No, I'm saying you don't have to play to be a fan. You can grow the game by being a spectator.

I am completely lost.

EDIT: I agree with your premise. The problem is that it has little to do with what I am arguing.

If you see such a connection, then forgive me but I don't.

 

[kdb209]

So you are saying that the 500% growth of registered hockey players in North Carolina from 1990 to today has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the Hartford Whalers relocated there in 1997 and became the Carolina Hurricanes?

The existance of a successful NHL Franchise leads to the growth of youth hockey.

The growth of youth hockey does not necessarily lead to the a successful NHL franchise. Those new youth players contribute only a very small percentage to the fanbase, and those players were (in my experience) very likely already NHL fans before they started playing.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

The existance of a successful NHL Franchise leads to the growth of youth hockey.

And that is all I am saying.

 

[Killion]

The existance of a successful NHL Franchise leads to the growth of youth hockey..

Yes, of course it does, and thats a good thing. I just wish that part of the franchise agreements with the expansion or relocated clubs included a co-operative and mandatory amateur developmental program between the NHL, PA & member clubs to help speed things along, while increasing their profile in the community & getting kids interested. With the exceptions of Dallas, San Jose & Anaheim who have done things on their own & to a lesser extent Raleigh, more should be done at league level IMO, rather than awaiting the organic development thats always sure to follow. One certainly not need to have played the game to be a "fan", though having done so gives one a different perspective to be sure.

 

[jacketracket*]

Yay!!

More claptrap about how Canadians will trudge through the snow barefoot, uphill both ways, to get to an NHL game ...

 

[RandR]

The existance of a successful NHL Franchise leads to the growth of youth hockey.

The growth of youth hockey does not necessarily lead to the a successful NHL franchise. Those new youth players contribute only a very small percentage to the fanbase, and those players were (in my experience) very likely already NHL fans before they started playing.

I think we would all agree that a successful franchise (especially when it includes a star player like Orr or Gretzky) will help grow the sport locally.

I also believe that this works both ways. My son plays soccer, and my newly gained interest in soccer at all levels over the past few years is precisely because of spending so much time at my son's games and socializing with the parents of other kids who come from more traditional soccer backgrounds. Part of actively encouraging my son to continue with soccer has been to take him to soccer games that I probably wouldn't have gone to myself (sometimes along with the rest of the family). We have also gone to games as part of group ticket purchases due to his membership in a youth league. Sports is a terrific opportunity for a common interest between parents and their children as they get older; better than, say, music.

So it is not just the kids themselves who become future ticket buyers, it is also the adults who buy the tickets and merchandise, and potentially the friends and neighbours of both.

 

[Adz]

How the heck did you manage that? I couldn't imagine a guy playing for the 1st time at the age of what 18? Crap you must have been a sight.

I didn't play until I was 45. I was terrible. Still am. I had no illusions of NHL greatness, I just wanted to stay upright til the shift was over. Put a goal in the net? That was not happening. The guys were sweet to me since I was an old lady trying to play, but I determined I was much more helpful to my team by staying on the sidelines as cheerleader and beer maid.

Know thy limitations.

That said, a 35 year old friend of mine took to the game like he'd been playing all his life and he'd never even stood up on skates before.

 

[Retail1LO*]

Yes, of course it does, and thats a good thing. I just wish that part of the franchise agreements with the expansion or relocated clubs included a co-operative and mandatory amateur developmental program between the NHL, PA & member clubs to help speed things along, while increasing their profile in the community & getting kids interested. With the exceptions of Dallas, San Jose & Anaheim who have done things on their own & to a lesser extent Raleigh, more should be done at league level IMO, rather than awaiting the organic development thats always sure to follow. One certainly not need to have played the game to be a "fan", though having done so gives one a different perspective to be sure.

I agree. If you're going to try and make inroads in areas where the game doesn't already have a strong footprint, I think it should be absolutely mandatory that a teams application for an NHL franchise include a comprehensive plan for building the game at all levels in that area. You can't just throw an NHL team in a city and expect people to fall in love with the game AND build all of the infrastructure to foster the game from the youth levels on their own. It's just not going to happen.
The NHL has to be a steward of the game in every facet. They have to take ownership of the game in these communities at all level. Think of it like a feeder system to even the AHL. This league needs to create it's future players by being involved with the game from the time some little kid gets his/her first pair of skates. They need to be there to make sure they GET a pair of skates, and have a place to use them. The challenges are so great to improve the fan base north AND south...they need the highest level of involvement that anyone can care to fathom. They have to be fanatical in their approach. That's what "fans" are. The league needs to be its own biggest fan.

 

[Confucius]

I didn't play until I was 45. I was terrible. Still am. I had no illusions of NHL greatness, I just wanted to stay upright til the shift was over. Put a goal in the net? That was not happening. The guys were sweet to me since I was an old lady trying to play, but I determined I was much more helpful to my team by staying on the sidelines as cheerleader and beer maid.

Know thy limitations.

That said, a 35 year old friend of mine took to the game like he'd been playing all his life and he'd never even stood up on skates before.

All that is great and it's nice to have that ambition. However lets look at the reality of the situation. If you've never played before and can barely stand up and keep your balance on skates. A team of 7 year olds will kick your butt. However since you're playing with other adults, unless you are all non skaters, first timers. Anytime you're on the ice the other team is on a power play. Your team is a man short, sorry for being callous, no other way to put it.

Had he started as a kid, your friend would have been in the NHL then.

It would be very similar to being part of a relay swim team, and the most water you've ever been in was in the bathtub. Think of all the problems you face soon as you jump in.

 

[KevFu]

"Sun Belt" is the phrase people use BECAUSE teams like San Jose aren't really "South." It IS Sunny in California. The problem is that this is looked on as a negative thing. It shouldn't be. It's merely a descriptive term.

The problem with failing hockey teams is that they often have owners who want to make a buck instead of already having billions and not caring about turning a profit. If the NHL were smart, they would only award teams with owners who are billionaires who want to win.

This is why Jim Ballsillie (sp?) would be a perfect owner. He has money, he doesn't mind spending it, and he wants to win. This is the formula for long term sustainability. Of course, I haven't done any research, so please feel free to show me where I err.

While on the surface JB would look like an ideal owner, if he was truly "that guy," he'd have walked into Gary Bettman's office and set up a meeting with GB and the owners of Buffalo and Toronto, and said "What do I have to do? And how much is it going to cost me?"

He'd come prepared with projections of what Hamilton will do for the league (either via relocation a struggling franchise, or via expansion), and how it would affect Buffalo and Toronto. He'd have candidates for an expansion partner for 32 teams and proposals for a re-alignment.

He'd walk into the meeting basically saying "I want to make this happen. I understand the opposition comes from the interests of Buffalo and Toronto; how do we make this work?"

He didn't do that (that I know of). Instead, he tried to hijack a team and sneak them off to Hamilton by using a bankruptcy judge to circumvent the BoG.

If you're going to try and make inroads in areas where the game doesn't already have a strong footprint, I think it should be absolutely mandatory that a teams application for an NHL franchise include a comprehensive plan for building the game at all levels in that area. You can't just throw an NHL team in a city and expect people to fall in love with the game AND build all of the infrastructure to foster the game from the youth levels on their own. It's just not going to happen.

The NHL has to be a steward of the game in every facet. They have to take ownership of the game in these communities at all level. Think of it like a feeder system to even the AHL. This league needs to create it's future players by being involved with the game from the time some little kid gets his/her first pair of skates. They need to be there to make sure they GET a pair of skates, and have a place to use them. The challenges are so great to improve the fan base north AND south...they need the highest level of involvement that anyone can care to fathom. They have to be fanatical in their approach. That's what "fans" are. The league needs to be its own biggest fan.

It boils down to the fact that hockey is awesome, so to say that hockey can fail in a market is stupid.
I've never met anyone who didn't love sports, give hockey a legitimate chance and fall in love with it. No matter where their location. Think about the deep south for a second. The reputation is what? "uneducated racists with missing teeth and a deep intense love of SEC sports." What about that does NOT make for a good hockey fan? (I'm being tongue in cheek on the racist part). But hockey is the MANLIEST of sports. People get punched in the face. Enforcers exude traits that any Good Ol' Boy from the South would relate to (this was basically SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN, I read it in a book by a political commentator: generally speaking, if a northerner is bumped into, they call the person a name and walk away; a southern male looks to fight). And it fills the void between the end of college football and the start of college football from JAN-JUNE)

The marketing has failed. The sport hasn't. There's tons of ways to tap into that "southern" mentality:
Take UFL footage of hard football hits. Alternate between those and NHL hard hits. Show a football cheap shot and nothing happening. So a hockey cheap shot and the guy getting jumped with a sound bite of "And _____'s going to protect his teammate" and show the fight.
Run the clips in December/January during the football bowl season and playoffs with a tagline "The hard hits don't stop after the Bowl. [southern market team] Hockey (Next TV Game/Time/Network)"


I don't think ANY market is a failed MARKET. I think the people in that market failed to build their fan bases.
I don't think expanding into the south was a bad idea. The issue of fans isn't one of geography; and the "Sun Belt strategy" didn't fail; the "sudden strategy" failed.

It's all about finding a balance, because we NEED big market teams that have growing fan bases in new markets.... AND we need small-market teams with awesome rabid fan bases who show them what their arena should look like. And of course, you have the combination of both: TOR, NYR, etc.

We went into 11 new markets in 10 years. Too sudden. You bring along two at a time: One in each conference. Then after 5-7 years, add another. Sure, places like Colorado and re-adding Minnesota (again) were no brainers. But we should be hitting 30 teams just recently, not 10 years ago.

We needed to slowly expand through the south; bring a new market into the NHL club, let them build a team, let them taste the playoffs... to me the most successful means of building a fan base in a new market is "watching your team in the playoffs on the road."

San Jose made the playoffs, their new fans watched the Sharks at Detroit. They saw what their crowds SHOULD be like. The next year, they play Calgary, again seeing what a rabid fan base does in the playoffs. So they get into it, go to games, and act like that. Adding TB, FLA, CAR, ATL and lumping them into a division together... doesn't do that.

They should have done things like: put a team in Tampa, and their AHL affiliate in Miami.
When Tampa has success, their fan base is cemented, they have a good atmosphere in their arena... THEN you give Miami and expansion team.
Same thing would have worked with: Dallas/Houston, Columbus/Nashville, Charlotte/Atlanta.


When you bring in a new member or two, you add to the club. When you bring 11 new guys into the club, you CHANGE the club. That's the strategy that failed. Not who the members were.

 

[Mayor Bee]

They should have done things like: put a team in Tampa, and their AHL affiliate in Miami.
When Tampa has success, their fan base is cemented, they have a good atmosphere in their arena... THEN you give Miami and expansion team.
Same thing would have worked with: Dallas/Houston, Columbus/Nashville, Charlotte/Atlanta.

Funny thing is that this is exactly what happened. Tampa Bay set up shop in 1992, and their IHL affiliate was the Atlanta Knights. The Knights were enormously popular and had a huge following, then went away to clear the way for the Thrashers.

In fact, let's see here...

Houston had the Aeros, who were hugely popular. Houston nearly got the Oilers. Columbus had the Chill (ECHL), who were affiliated with Chicago (NHL) and Indianapolis (IHL). The Chill only had about 200 sellouts in eight seasons, including 91 straight. Nashville had the ECHL Knights, who were popular. And so on.

This may be a shock, but not everyone in an NHL market that's added a team in the last 20 years is a complete rube that doesn't know what they're watching. The sport isn't the problem and the market isn't the problem.

There are two variables that are overlooked far too often.
1) Options. Given the choice between watching a successful team or an unsuccessful one, people prefer the successful one. If someone is a fan of football and hockey and they can watch a successful football team or a feeble hockey team, what's that going to do to attendance?
2) Mediocrity. Plenty of people will see a good team or an average team, but no one will spend huge amounts of money to watch a team that they know is not only rebuilding or on the way down, but has no hope for a few years. Toronto is the exception that proves the rule on that; frankly, the idea that "Toronto does it, so the fact that (American city) doesn't is proof that it's not a hockey market" is a little bit like saying "I don't care that this player had 700 goals and 1500 points in his career; he didn't hit 895 and 2858, so he's not a Hall of Famer!"

The proof is in the pudding. The Minnesota North Stars had a year averaging less than 8,000 attendance; Chicago post-lockout had games of around 8,000; Pittsburgh in 2003-04 had a year of less than 12,000; and so on. That in is no way a reflection of whether or not that market can support hockey or an NHL team [mod].