Toggle sidebar

OT: Around Hockey and the NHL

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
LightningStrikes said:
What I don’t get is that it looked like the league manually interfered here yet now “they” say it was a settings error?
Click to expand...
YouTube shenanigans happen all the time, so I'm not even phased to hear about this.

I'm surprised it was the actual NHL claiming their own videos. That's not always been a guarantee. YouTube creators have a very perilous existence. A single rule change can demonetize them, or bury their discoverability. I don't blame them for being skittish.

I don't think footage from a Canes-Rangers game played in 2022 really has much value at this point (or even the next day), so I'd say let them cook.
 
I'm going to say it. Keeping Chel off of PCs hurts HRR.

Madden and EAFC (FIFA) both get PC releases. NBA 2k gets a PC release, although that's from a different publisher.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoek
A podcast on African soccer academies. If the NHL were to abolish its draft, we could get some interesting solutions to finding players.
 
McDavid gooning it up in Edmonton: First an elbow to the face now a cross-check to the face (got a major for it).

Goonerov better step up!
 
Major4Boarding said:


Cool!
Click to expand...

Do we really know why league revenues are so high? EA hasn't even announced Chel for Switch 2 and PC. I don't think Nintendo has gotten an NHL game since maybe 2011. PC was the PS2 port of NHL 2009.


Allan Walsh is saying that the new national Canadian TV deal would be like 2x or 3x the current amount.

So the number of Canadians playing hockey drops (or doesn't really grow), the conventional TV ratings drop, and they get 2x the money?
 
Last edited:
Felonious Python said:
Do we really know why league revenues are so high? EA hasn't even announced Chel for Switch 2 and PC. I don't think Nintendo has gotten an NHL game since maybe 2011. PC was the PS2 port of NHL 2009.


Allan Walsh is saying that the new national Canadian TV deal would be like 2x or 3x the current amount.

So the number of Canadians playing hockey drops (or doesn't really grow), the conventional TV ratings drop, and they get 2x the money?
Click to expand...

Viewership, Club evaluations, sponsorships (Team and in-Arena), and attendance are all up. The League set a record at $6.2B in revenue and 27 franchises had 94% or higher average attendance. Fun fact, and a bit of homerism, if the Lightning finish this season with sellouts, they will be at ~400 which is the longest in the League.

So it’s a bit front-loading, I imagine, along with the anticipation of the Canadian Broadcast contract as you mentioned.

Before anyone says moving the Yotes to Utah has anything to do with it, that’s not necessarily true. Moving to Utah will increase League revenue in the long run (duh), but the upcoming cap and revenue projects are done on previous season revenues. So always look at these numbers and determine they’re from the previous season, not the current.

There has even been chatter that the projected 2026-2027 cap may come in at $99M - $104M.
 

The 16-team USHL and USA Hockey have been alarmed over the number of players leaving the USHL for CHL teams, ever since the NCAA said that CHL players moving forward will retain their eligible to play U.S. college hockey.The USHL recently began charging CHL teams a $50K transfer fee to acquire a player who want to leave the USHL, the source said.
Click to expand...
I don't really see why USA Hockey is entitled to anything. If they want to keep their players, they need to beat the CHL in the marketplace of ideas.

The source also said USA Hockey officials do not want the Phantoms and Lumberjacks to leave the USHL because of the impact it would have on the U.S. National Team Development Program, which plays in the USHL and is based in Plymouth, Mich.
Click to expand...
🤷‍♂️

What's going to end up happening is that they're going to have to work together, and make it end up so that US and Canadian players have to stay in their country (or US based CHL team) until they're 18.
 
Last edited:
Keeping a player in their own country until 18 is pretty much a FIFA rule. There are exceptions, like how European teams can recruit under-18s, or for individual circumstances, but 18 is pretty much the dividing line.

What's the intent of the CHL (OHL specifically)? If they want to compete with the USHL, and go for the money, then they make the league less Canadian. If they want to be about player development, then they can pretty much stay as they are. Do they keep the WHL kids in the west, and the Q kids in the east because that would work best for the owners, or is it for the players' benefit?

Both the USHL and CHL benefit from being largely domestic leagues.

Potentially interesting reading:

Monthly Report 20

Monthly Report 20
football-observatory.com
This Monthly Report shows that more and more footballers are confronted with early migration. As we have illustrated in the “Slow Foot” book (only available in french), this situation is not without its hazards. Indeed, all things being equal, players having left their country under the age of 18 have, on average, less rewarding careers than footballers who left later with more experience under their belt.

This result indicates that the premature international migration of inexperienced players poses serious risks for both the footballers concerned and the teams recruiting them. Unfortunately, in spite of all sporting logic, in an overly speculative context where numerous actors make their living out of player transfers, the international flow of minors increases with each year.
Click to expand...
 
Not really breaking news that a 72-year-old man may not still be in the job 10 years from now.


The next guy is going to have to deal with the affordability problem of just playing the game. It's not hit crisis territory, but that's good. There's time. You pretty much have to already have multi-millions to even build a rink, and there's basically no chance local governments would initiate doing that stuff on their own. Ironically, partly due to the common politics of those multimillionaires.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Renopucker
It’s been commonly expected that he would oversee the execution of the next CBA, the next round of expansion, and then retire. Not necessarily immediately after expansion is announced, but either just before or right as the new expansion franchisees go online.

Bill Daly is on deck, unless some incredibly unforeseen event
 
Major4Boarding said:
It’s been commonly expected that he would oversee the execution of the next CBA, the next round of expansion, and then retire. Not necessarily immediately after expansion is announced, but either just before or right as the new expansion franchisees go online.

Bill Daly is on deck, unless some incredibly unforeseen event
Click to expand...
The NHL decided to expand to 28 teams in 1990, before Gary Bettman was involved. SJ, OTT, and TB were already in the league. FLA, ANA started, and the Stars moved to Dallas shortly after Bettman took over (Feb 1993). Those wheels were pretty much already in motion.

Getting saddled, and blamed/credited for it all, may affect what he wants to leave to his own successor.
 
Wheels are already in motion now. Atlanta and Houston are all but “formally“ announced. Unless there’s some underlying semantical case in Atlanta where shovels aren’t in the ground yet. Which I get. The last hurdle in Atlanta’s case was just cleared, but I would like to see a bunch of silver-coated shovels at the groundbreaking ceremony before I get 100% comfortable. But I’m 99.1% comfortable now.

I highly doubt Gary Bettman is concerned what Bill Daly would be inheriting. But, at the same time I maintain that Gary will stick around long enough to see this through under his watch. Both the CBA and Expansion

Bill Daly is more than capable of running this league and has pretty much done so in that being the out-front executive of the owners and Board of Governors - with the exception of All-Star and Stanley Cup playoff appearances by Bettman.

The league has definitely changed in the last 33 years, but I highly doubt that John Ziegler or Gil Stein really gave a shit what Gary Bettman, or anyone else, was inheriting.

If anyone hasn’t done so, I highly recommend reading Power Plays: An Inside Look at the Big Business of the National Hockey League written by Stein
 
Major4Boarding said:
Wheels are already in motion now. Atlanta and Houston are all but “formally“ announced. Unless there’s some underlying semantical case in Atlanta where shovels aren’t in the ground yet. Which I get. The last hurdle in Atlanta’s case was just cleared, but I would like to see a bunch of silver-coated shovels at the groundbreaking ceremony before I get 100% comfortable. But I’m 99.1% comfortable now.

I highly doubt Gary Bettman is concerned what Bill Daly would be inheriting. But, at the same time I maintain that Gary will stick around long enough to see this through under his watch. Both the CBA and Expansion

Bill Daly is more than capable of running this league and has pretty much done so in that being the out-front executive of the owners and Board of Governors - with the exception of All-Star and Stanley Cup playoff appearances by Bettman.

The league has definitely changed in the last 33 years, but I highly doubt that John Ziegler or Gil Stein really gave a shit what Gary Bettman, or anyone else, was inheriting.

If anyone hasn’t done so, I highly recommend reading Power Plays: An Inside Look at the Big Business of the National Hockey League written by Stein
Click to expand...
Anaheim and Florida were awarded Dec 1992. Bettman started Feb 1993. Maybe he could have done something to keep the North Stars in Minnesota, but it also doesn't happen overnight. He thought the New York Icelanders were a team.

Bill Daly flopping in the role would reflect somewhat poorly on Bettman. That the guy he had worked with so closely for so long was essentially the bag holder to the coming issues for the league.

The owners hire the commissioner. They don't have to pick a guy that doesn't care about the next guy.
 
Felonious Python said:
Anaheim and Florida were awarded Dec 1992. Bettman started Feb 1993. Maybe he could have done something to keep the North Stars in Minnesota, but it also doesn't happen overnight. He thought the New York Icelanders were a team.

Bill Daly flopping in the role would reflect somewhat poorly on Bettman. That the guy he had worked with so closely for so long was essentially the bag holder to the coming issues for the league.

The owners hire the commissioner. They don't have to pick a guy that doesn't care about the next guy.
Click to expand...
I’m not comprehending what you’re saying. I think - if I got this right - Bettman couldn’t stop the already-sent-in-motion expansion (and relo of the North Stars) and Bill Daly doesn’t get your vote of confidence?

That first part you would be right on… because the “Expand the TV Footprint” (and the infusion of franchise fees) modus operandi was already set into effect way before John Ziegler got booted. And one that Gary wasn’t going to change course on either.

Bettman also could not have done anything regarding Minnesota because that all started in 1990 with the “Gund Compromise” and then Norm Green’s, uh, influence shortly after. That would be like trying to bail out the Titanic with a soup ladle.

For as much shit Bettman gets, and I’ve given him my fair share, there’s a reason why he’s lasted 31+ years and how the league has slowly clawed itself out of being a second rate, niche, often-shunned sport.

It’ll never be the NFL, the NBA, or maybe at best tie MLB, but as long as it can sustain itself, then it can sit at a very comfortable spot on its own
 
Major4Boarding said:
I’m not comprehending what you’re saying. I think - if I got this right - Bettman couldn’t stop the already-sent-in-motion expansion (and relo of the North Stars) and Bill Daly doesn’t get your vote of confidence?

That first part you would be right on… because the “Expand the TV Footprint” (and the infusion of franchise fees) modus operandi was already set into effect way before John Ziegler got booted. And one that Gary wasn’t going to change course on either.

Bettman also could not have done anything regarding Minnesota because that all started in 1990 with the “Gund Compromise” and then Norm Green’s, uh, influence shortly after. That would be like trying to bail out the Titanic with a soup ladle.

For as much shit Bettman gets, and I’ve given him my fair share, there’s a reason why he’s lasted 31+ years and how the league has slowly clawed itself out of being a second rate, niche, often-shunned sport.

It’ll never be the NFL, the NBA, or maybe at best tie MLB, but as long as it can sustain itself, then it can sit at a very comfortable spot on its own
Click to expand...
I'm just saying that Bettman's personal experience becoming commissioner during an era of expansion may inform his own decision when to hand over the league to the next guy (which will probably be Daly, but that's not for sure right now).
 
Expansion then versus expansion now is like saying beef stroganoff tastes like chicken. You had a whole crop of shady SOB‘s running amuck before Gary got in. Honestly, how else do you think we got OUR franchise?

He’ll have to wear it in regards to expansion pre Columbus, that’s true. Nothing was going to upset the process of expanding the TV footprint at that time. Look how Phoenix got shoehorned in when they went online. Into an obstructed-view building. And they actually favored an arena to be built outside the core fanbase in Glendale and look where that went. The slow death that kept crawling along until last summer. I won’t get into the rest of the clubs that came online afterwards.

The New Era of Expansion- the methodology and the due diligence is way better, and the most important thing, patience is practiced. Look at Vegas. Hopefully Seattle gets their shit together, but my personal opinion that’s a GM thing there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Renopucker
I think it's a great trade for the Canes, and a risk well worth taking even if Rantanen goes to UFA. They've never had that one game breaking talent and fall short in the playoffs because of it, and Rantanen is a decent step above Aho in that regard.

Also maybe this is good news for Kucherov's Art Ross hunt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peacefool and Stammertime91
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom