Toggle sidebar

OT: NHL Taking Over NJ Devils Franchise

  • 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
I wonder if Lou and Marty will stick around beyond this season. You have to figure both are considering hanging them up, and I'd assume if the NHL takes over the Devils they'll be close to a cap floor payroll like they were in Phoenix (not right at the floor, but only slightly above it).
 
Well, something is wrong with this league when there's another team that the NHL takes over right after they had just sold a team. So after the Devils, who's next? Sharks?
 
Rafa Nadal said:
Well, something is wrong with this league when there's another team that the NHL takes over right after they had just sold a team. So after the Devils, who's next? Sharks?
Click to expand...

The Sharks? No way. The Sharks have been one of the highest drawing teams in the league for a LONG time.
 
Rafa Nadal said:
Well, something is wrong with this league when there's another team that the NHL takes over right after they had just sold a team. So after the Devils, who's next? Sharks?
Click to expand...

The only thing wrong was how they handled the Phoenix affair. How many years did that go on? They should have cut bait on that years ago. Even with a new owner in place, there's zero guarantees that in the future Phoenix won't be in some sort of trouble again. Bettman was hellbent on seeing his southern expansion work in all locations. Likely hurt like a hemmeroid to have to see Atlanta move to Winnipeg.

Situations like NJ pop up in sports from time to time where a team financially can't keep up. I'm not as familiar with the NJ situation as others, so I don't know the real issues, but it's not the first time a team has had to face financial issues off the playing field. It won't be the last, in the NHL or in another league.
 
The Dingo said:
The Sharks? No way. The Sharks have been one of the highest drawing teams in the league for a LONG time.
Click to expand...

Yeah but I read an article a year or so ago that the owner(s) are losing money every year. I'm not saying they are gonna go under but if something changed with the ownership group, they would have to cut back salary more than likely. That could have a ripple effect.

Here is what I think I read:

http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/blog/e...ost-15-million-last-season-and-are-ok-with-it

e Sharks' parent company said this summer that it lost $15 million last season despite selling out every game. But the disclosure -- coming shortly before the start of NHL collective bargaining talks -- wasn't as surprising as the group's response.

"We're OK with that because that's a decision we've made to stay competitive," said Kevin Compton, referring to the fact his team's player payroll bumped up against the NHL salary cap.
Click to expand...
 
Makes it better that they don't have their first this year.

NHL will have a lower tolerance level for New Jersey than Phoenix. Relocating New Jersey would also put a team in Quebec without major realignment issues.
 
ControlPuck said:
Makes it better that they don't have their first this year.

NHL will have a lower tolerance level for New Jersey than Phoenix. Relocating New Jersey would also put a team in Quebec without major realignment issues.
Click to expand...

I agree that the NHL will have a lower tolerance level with New Jersey. But, they would move the team to Seattle way before they moved the team to Quebec. There is far too many teams in the east in the NHL. It's the biggest geographical issue with the league right now. So, they won't waste anytime moving a team from the east to the west. I think that's why the Thrashers moved Winnipeg so quickly. Because they were moving west. Same thing in Phoenix. The NHL wouldn't even consider budging them until a western city (Seattle) presented it's self as a realistic option.
 
Buddy The Elf said:
Yeah but I read an article a year or so ago that the owner(s) are losing money every year. I'm not saying they are gonna go under but if something changed with the ownership group, they would have to cut back salary more than likely. That could have a ripple effect.

Here is what I think I read:

http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/blog/e...ost-15-million-last-season-and-are-ok-with-it
Click to expand...

every team can be 'losing money'. Don't have to share your revenue as much if you claim losses. Sharks are in fine shape
 
CTKingsFan said:
I agree that the NHL will have a lower tolerance level with New Jersey. But, they would move the team to Seattle way before they moved the team to Quebec. There is far too many teams in the east in the NHL. It's the biggest geographical issue with the league right now. So, they won't waste anytime moving a team from the east to the west. I think that's why the Thrashers moved Winnipeg so quickly. Because they were moving west. Same thing in Phoenix. The NHL wouldn't even consider budging them until a western city (Seattle) presented it's self as a realistic option.
Click to expand...

well i see a expansion to portland and seattle for next year The nhl want the money this will bring and it will balance out the league. nj moving to quebec doesnt add any team to the east it just moves them to a more likely profitable situation.
 
KingCanadain1976 said:
well i see a expansion to portland and seattle for next year The nhl want the money this will bring and it will balance out the league. nj moving to quebec doesnt add any team to the east it just moves them to a more likely profitable situation.
Click to expand...

They won't have both a Seattle and Portland team, at least not at first. The cities are just too close to each other.
 
Vic Vinegar said:
They won't have both a Seattle and Portland team, at least not at first. The cities are just too close to each other.
Click to expand...

while Portland is pretty big on the Winterhawks, I just don't know if this city would do so well with a NHL team, but maybe. Seattle on the other hand, definitely needs on, and I would be in full support of them moving to Seattle.
 
New Jersey is not going anywhere and there's two potential buyers bidding for the rights to own the team. They have an excellent arena and facilities. There's no reason to move them or for the NHL to take over at this point.
 
Vic Vinegar said:
They won't have both a Seattle and Portland team, at least not at first. The cities are just too close to each other.
Click to expand...

ok maybe not portland maybe vegas my point is expansion is coming and they will add 2 teams in the west before moving a team there. Quebec is going to get a team but it will be one from the east with cash probelms (nj floridia are my guesses)
 
CTKingsFan said:
There is far too many teams in the east in the NHL. It's the biggest geographical issue with the league right now. So, they won't waste anytime moving a team from the east to the west. I think that's why the Thrashers moved Winnipeg so quickly. Because they were moving west. Same thing in Phoenix. The NHL wouldn't even consider budging them until a western city (Seattle) presented it's self as a realistic option.
Click to expand...

The biggest thing in Atlanta is that the owner of the building, who owned the Thrashers, didn't want the Thrashers in the building anymore. I'd say that's why the Thrashers moved so quickly. At least in Phoenix, the team wasn't being kicked out. They had a place to play while the situation went on forever.

Going from east to west probably didn't hurt though. I'm sure it caused a few headaches trying to think up a new alignment too. Once that Atlanta thread was pulled, every problem in the West over the last 15+ years became an issue that needed some sort of fix.
 
Seattle/Portland, Las Vegas, Quebec City seem the most logical relocation/expansion markets, for various reasons. Toronto and Hamilton also seem like a good idea, but the Leafs will put up a fight over it, making it more difficult. The area could easily support three teams in my opinion, two in Toronto and one in Hamilton.
 
kingsfan said:
Seattle/Portland, Las Vegas, Quebec City seem the most logical relocation/expansion markets, for various reasons. Toronto and Hamilton also seem like a good idea, but the Leafs will put up a fight over it, making it more difficult. The area could easily support three teams in my opinion, two in Toronto and one in Hamilton.
Click to expand...

i agree hamilton is also a good spot but i dont see it happening until Quebec has a franchise first and this wont happen till the league is balanced Meaning two more team out west. I read on twitter that the owener of the portland basketball team stated he wanted to get a nhl team there to help costs of his area. Not sure how accrute but its some hope for there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom