Around the NHL (Part XIII): RIP Bob Suter

[No Fun Shogun]

Not easy to say who will have the better career. Teuvo could win a Cup as Rookie... this would give him something on Ekblad

Just don't use that argument for Hall vs Seguin with Oilers fans.


... no, seriously, don't.

 

[Crazy_Ike]

What a boring August. Glad I slept through this post-FA offseason.

 

[Bubba88]

wonder what will happen with the Bs too

 

[UsernameWasTaken]

Carcillo got a tryout with Pittsburgh.

 

[Bubba88]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=729385&navid=DL|NHL|home

Right Wings

Ovi
Perry
Kane
Kessel
Hossa

 

[x Tame Impala]

Hate Perry but he's a great player sometimes

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

I am curious to see what happens with B's in coming weeks

Smith/Krug still not signed and the expected cap trade from Boston never happened (Just like here in Chicago)

 

[Illinihockey]

Loss of revenues at the gate makes that scenario's chances of happening just north of naught.

I know it won't happen, same reason the NHL will never contract even though it should.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Why should the NHL contract? Game is growing and the talent is better than ever.

 

[Illinihockey]

Why should the NHL contract? Game is growing and the talent is better than ever.

Because you have franchises that are hemmoraging money like Phoenix.

 

[Kurtosis]

Because you have franchises that are hemmoraging money like Phoenix.

The better solution is to move them to locations where they won't hemorrhage money.

 

[IU Hawks fan]

I think relocation would be a much better option than contraction in that case.

 

[Illinihockey]

The better solution is to move them to locations where they won't hemorrhage money.

To where? Another city where they will fail like Vegas? There are 2 franchises in Florida, how stupid is that? They already had to move a team out of Georgia, they are going to end up moving a team out of Arizona. This is a regional sport, why do they keep trying to shoehorn teams into markets that don't give a crap about hockey?

 

[RayP]

Hey, what are you talking about. I saw a Thrashers bumper sticker like 3 months ago man.

 

[Kurtosis]

To where? Another city where they will fail like Vegas? There are 2 franchises in Florida, how stupid is that? They already had to move a team out of Georgia, they are going to end up moving a team out of Arizona. This is a regional sport, why do they keep trying to shoehorn teams into markets that don't give a crap about hockey?

Canada, the Pacific NW, New England region, etc.

 

[Ace Rothstein]

I think Seattle, Portland, Quebec City and the Toronto area could support an NHL team. Possibly Houston as well.

 

[Illinihockey]

Canada, the Pacific NW, New England region, etc.

The Pacific NW may work, but those are not large cities and its not a hockey haven. Wouldnt shock me to see that totally fail. Canada has already lost 2 teams in my lifetime (granted they got one back). I'm not sure where in New England you would put a team. Hartford already showed they couldn't support a team.

 

[Illinihockey]

I think Seattle, Portland, Quebec City and the Toronto area could support an NHL team. Possibly Houston as well.

I'd also add that putting a team in the Toronto area isn't going to grow the sport. The people there are already fans of other teams. Its a 0 sum game. The fans that would become fans of that team would just take fans away from Toronto and Buffalo.

 

[IU Hawks fan]

The Pacific NW may work, but those are not large cities and its not a hockey haven. Wouldnt shock me to see that totally fail. Canada has already lost 2 teams in my lifetime (granted they got one back). I'm not sure where in New England you would put a team. Hartford already showed they couldn't support a team.

Different era, different rules...come on, you're smarter than this.

 

[Kurtosis]

The Pacific NW may work, but those are not large cities and its not a hockey haven. Wouldnt shock me to see that totally fail. Canada has already lost 2 teams in my lifetime (granted they got one back). I'm not sure where in New England you would put a team. Hartford already showed they couldn't support a team.

Look at the success the Sounders have had and the residual support the Sonics garner to this day. I think Seattle would welcome and embrace a hockey team. I think the same could be said for Portland, but maybe not to the same extent.

You are correct about it being a zero-sum game. However, what you don't realize is that there is an excess in the supply of fans that is ready to pay for tickets. If the curve was already at equilibrium you would have a point, but I don't believe it is.

The New England region may be able to support a team, but of course a feasibility study would have to be completed in order to see if that is true or not.

With regards to Canada losing teams...it wasn't due to lack of support.

 

[Duke33]

I think Seattle, Portland, Quebec City and the Toronto area could support an NHL team. Possibly Houston as well.

Houston wouldn't shock me if that sneaks in. 3rd/4th largest city in the country and a strong economy with people moving there left and right. I'm moving there next year and the real estate has skyrocketed. More importantly, tons and tons of northerners moving in. Lots of potential hockey fans.

But I think someone like Seattle or Quebec would get a team first.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

The failure of certain markets doesn't mean that the league itself is in trouble or that there aren't untapped markets that the NHL could succeed in. Quebec City, Seattle, and Portland all stand out as obvious choices, as would the GTA and Hamilton if the Leafs and Sabres not be opposed. Houston as well, if not for Les Alexander having to be involved for it to be possible, and he's not interested any more.

As long as there's at least one interested open market, the NHL owning contract. We'll see a team in Saskatoon if push comes to shove before contraction, so just erase the notion from your head.

Also, moving this conversation to the NHL topic for topicality reasons.

 

[Illinihockey]

The failure of certain markets doesn't mean that the league itself is in trouble .

We just had the 2 lockouts in less than 10 years right?

 

[No Fun Shogun]

We just had the 2 lockouts in less than 10 years right?

Two lockouts initiated by owners that wanted a bigger piece of the pie after bragging during every non-lockout year about ever growing revenues.

Greediness isn't a sign of actual trouble, either. The NHL's in better shape now than at any point since at least 1967. There've always been troubled franchises and issue that impact the league, but at no point in hone past have revenues and public interest been higher north or south of the border.

 

[Kurtosis]

HRR was the main reason for each lockout, not the health of the actual franchises.