Speculation: Implications of Canada joining the EU

[Yukon Joe]

If a hypothetical split happens, i would assume the 1/3 league revenue generated from Canada would go to with the Canadian teams. They are the ones that draw almost all the viewers in Canada and would command a sizable broadcast fee. That would give the new Canadian league a massive financial leg up against the US league that would be splitting the remaining 2/3 amongst more teams. Also would be interesting if the Stanley Cup would go with the Canadian teams since it is not owned by the NHL.

As someone who actually liked the Covid-era "North division" I will admit that having games against the same 7 teams got old pretty fast. We're also assuming that the reason why Canadian teams would separate from American teams are because of EU regulations around things like a salary cap and a draft.

So you'd have an all-Canadian national league with no cap where presumably TML just walks all over everyone every year because there's no cap or draft. Not sure how successful that would be. That being said there might be more interest in Canadian expansion so as to avoid a 7-team league (people complain the CFL is boring, and that's 9 teams).

Woo owns the Stanley Cup would be interesting. Based on Wiki the Trustees basically handed the rights to the Cup over to the NHL for as long as the NHL exists - so it would depend if the all-US or all-Canadian league gets the rights to the "NHL" name.

 

[edog37]

Taking the ridiculous assumption though - "defying EU rules" isn't an option. If Canada joins the EU those rules would be in effect in Canada.

And would the NHL survive without Canadian teams? 3 of the top 5 teams in terms of revenue are in Canada (Toronto 1, Edmonton 2, Montreal 5).

It most certainly would. Canada is such a cash cow that the NHL never expands into it. Ever notice that? New revenue lines in further US expansion would occur. Houston, Atlanta, Phoenix, Austin, San Diego, etc., would take their place. There would be short term pain, but over time, the league would be just fine.

And who do you think Montreal & Toronto would play? They would be the only ones who could afford to keep playing in a non-capped league. Maybe Vancouver, but questionable. Edmonton drives revenue only due to McDavid. By the time we are talking about, he’ll be long retired. Calgary & Winnipeg would have no shot. I suppose Montreal/Toronto could join one of the Euro leagues, but does that make sense? Even the NFL is hesitant about overseas expansion.

Let’s talk talent too. While salaries may be hypothetically higher in Canada, it’s all relative. High end players routinely favor US teams over Canadian ones. Taxes for certain, but better opportunities in the US as well. The money is in the US.

The NHL is not getting rid of the cap. And with the league being US-based, it won’t cowtow to the EU. It’ll just give an ultimatum & move on.

Here’s something else to consider too. The NHL would retain ownership of its intellectual property. Perhaps even the names of Montreal & Toronto or enough of it to make both names/history moot. Most certainly the Stanley Cup.

So go ahead, join the EU. You’ll lose hockey over it.

 

[edog37]

If a hypothetical split happens, i would assume the 1/3 league revenue generated from Canada would go to with the Canadian teams. They are the ones that draw almost all the viewers in Canada and would command a sizable broadcast fee. That would give the new Canadian league a massive financial leg up against the US league that would be splitting the remaining 2/3 amongst more teams. Also would be interesting if the Stanley Cup would go with the Canadian teams since it is not owned by the NHL.

Might want to check the part about the Cup again. The only way the Cup goes back to the trustees is the following:

1. This agreement shall remain in force so long as the League continues to be the world's leading professional hockey league as determined by its playing caliber and in the event of dissolution or other termination of the National Hockey League, the Stanley Cup shall revert to the custody of the trustees.

This agreement, reached back in 1947, effectively grants the NHL sole proprietorship to the Cup as long as it remains in operation.

A Canadian-only league wouldn’t survive outside Montreal/Toronto. And since caps are a no-no in the EU, who are Montreal & Toronto playing?

 

[WarriorofTime]

Taking the ridiculous assumption though - "defying EU rules" isn't an option. If Canada joins the EU those rules would be in effect in Canada.

And would the NHL survive without Canadian teams? 3 of the top 5 teams in terms of revenue are in Canada (Toronto 1, Edmonton 2, Montreal 5).

Survive.. yes. Be heavily impacted in a negative financial way? Yes most certainly.

 

[Yukon Joe]

The NHL is not getting rid of the cap. And with the league being US-based, it won’t cowtow to the EU. It’ll just give an ultimatum & move on.

But that's the assumption here. Canada joins the EU. EU says "you can't have a draft / salary cap". NHL says "nu-uh" - which causes the Canadian teams to have to leave the NHL.

It most certainly would. Canada is such a cash cow that the NHL never expands into it. Ever notice that? New revenue lines in further US expansion would occur. Houston, Atlanta, Phoenix, Austin, San Diego, etc., would take their place. There would be short term pain, but over time, the league would be just fine.

And who do you think Montreal & Toronto would play? They would be the only ones who could afford to keep playing in a non-capped league. Maybe Vancouver, but questionable. Edmonton drives revenue only due to McDavid. By the time we are talking about, he’ll be long retired. Calgary & Winnipeg would have no shot. I suppose Montreal/Toronto could join one of the Euro leagues, but does that make sense? Even the NFL is hesitant about overseas expansion.

Edmonton drives revenue from a lengthy playoff run, but mostly due to having a nearly brand-new arena that they're experts at squeezing every drop out of. Edmonton is not a richer city than Vancouver of Calgary - Calgary in particular if they get a new arena will shoot up in revenues.

Canada absolutely is a cash cow for the NHL - but it already has all the best markets sewn up. Winnipeg and Ottawa are already second tier teams (financially). While I'm sure you could put a team in QC, or Hamilton, or Saskatoon or wherever and they'd do ok they wouldn't be driving league revenues like Toronto, Edmonton or Montreal do.

Let’s talk talent too. While salaries may be hypothetically higher in Canada, it’s all relative. High end players routinely favor US teams over Canadian ones. Taxes for certain, but better opportunities in the US as well. The money is in the US.

Not always true, but to the extent players prefer US markets it's due to A: taxes B: weather (Buffalo doesn't get any love) and C: less media attention.

Here’s something else to consider too. The NHL would retain ownership of its intellectual property. Perhaps even the names of Montreal & Toronto or enough of it to make both names/history moot. Most certainly the Stanley Cup.

That's the easiest one to answer. Go search the US Patent and Trademark office online search.

Trademark Search

tmsearch.uspto.gov

You'l find the TM for the Toronto Maple Leafs is owned by: MLSE. Interesting I can't find a registration for "Montreal Canadiens", but just "Canadiens" is owned by CLUB DE HOCKEY CANADIEN, INC. - the Canadiens holding company. And so on and so forth.

So go ahead, join the EU. You’ll lose hockey over it.

Maybe not lose it - but it seems like you'd get two separate leagues, with very different business models - and both much poorer than they were compared to the old NHL. The CNHL would be dominated by a few big clubs, with the second tier celebrating when they have a "good enough" season, never expecting to win the championship.

The USNHL on the other hand would continue with the same business model - but without some of its biggest most noticeable clubs risks becoming irrelevant in the US sporting marketplace.


But again - this is just a fun "what if" - because it'll never happen.

 

[aqib]

As someone who actually liked the Covid-era "North division" I will admit that having games against the same 7 teams got old pretty fast. We're also assuming that the reason why Canadian teams would separate from American teams are because of EU regulations around things like a salary cap and a draft.

So you'd have an all-Canadian national league with no cap where presumably TML just walks all over everyone every year because there's no cap or draft. Not sure how successful that would be. That being said there might be more interest in Canadian expansion so as to avoid a 7-team league (people complain the CFL is boring, and that's 9 teams).

Woo owns the Stanley Cup would be interesting. Based on Wiki the Trustees basically handed the rights to the Cup over to the NHL for as long as the NHL exists - so it would depend if the all-US or all-Canadian league gets the rights to the "NHL" name.

I am sure that the EU if the really wanted Canada to join could easily put a one-paragraph exception for this. Same if the NFL ever wanted to add teams in Germany since they wouldn't just do 2 teams in London.

 

[Yukon Joe]

I am sure that the EU if the really wanted Canada to join could easily put a one-paragraph exception for this. Same if the NFL ever wanted to add teams in Germany since they wouldn't just do 2 teams in London.

I think in this scenario it's much more Canada wanting to join the EU, not the EU wanting Canada to join.

Not to mention that amongst the millions of other little details a Canada-EU accession would involve I doubt that the NHL would even register.

 

[aqib]

I think in this scenario it's much more Canada wanting to join the EU, not the EU wanting Canada to join.

Not to mention that amongst the millions of other little details a Canada-EU accession would involve I doubt that the NHL would even register.

Well there is also the NBA and MLB. I think that it would go both ways as the goal would be to make a block that would make everyone less reliant on the US.

I am sure that if a bunch of people on a message board are already thinking about this, someone with direct contact to the Canadian Government would make a phone call. There are fewer than 60 billionaires in Canada. 7 of them own NHL teams. Pretty sure all 7 could make a phone call to whoever the Prime Minister is and make sure this clause gets added in.

 

[Yukon Joe]

I am sure that if a bunch of people on a message board are already thinking about this, someone with direct contact to the Canadian Government would make a phone call. There are fewer than 60 billionaires in Canada. 7 of them own NHL teams. Pretty sure all 7 could make a phone call to whoever the Prime Minister is and make sure this clause gets added in.

You don't have to go through all 7 - just look at Ed Rogers, chairman of Rogers Communication, which owns/controls the Leafs, Raptors, Blue Jays, Argos, Toronto FC...

But even there - Rogers Communications would be massively impacted by Canada joining the EU. I am far from an expert but the EU has a ton of rules regarding the working of cellular networks across its members. So even Ed Rogers might have bigger worries in the Canada-EU scenario than hockey.

 

[digmor crusher]

I would be ok with the 7 Canadian teams forming their own league, throw in a team in Quebec City, Saskatoon and Hamilton and go with a 10 team league to stay away from the US. I bet their salary cap would still be quite high as the Canadian tv deal is more then the US one, Canadian teams sell out for the most part and they could pay in the Canadian dollar. And take the cup, its ours.

 

[aqib]

You don't have to go through all 7 - just look at Ed Rogers, chairman of Rogers Communication, which owns/controls the Leafs, Raptors, Blue Jays, Argos, Toronto FC...

But even there - Rogers Communications would be massively impacted by Canada joining the EU. I am far from an expert but the EU has a ton of rules regarding the working of cellular networks across its members. So even Ed Rogers might have bigger worries in the Canada-EU scenario than hockey.

My point is that any agreement would be negotiated and I don't think the EU if they wanted Canada to join wouldn't have a problem putting a paragraph in the agreement allowing an exception for North American sports leagues.

 

[Albatros]

My point is that any agreement would be negotiated and I don't think the EU if they wanted Canada to join wouldn't have a problem putting a paragraph in the agreement allowing an exception for North American sports leagues.

Freedom of movement is core to the European single market, it's not negotiable just because of the interests of a sports league.

 

[rojac]

So do people see some benefit of Canada actually joining the EU that can't be obtained by simply negotiated an expansion of our existing economic deals with the EU?

 

[aqib]

So do people see some benefit of Canada actually joining the EU that can't be obtained by simply negotiated an expansion of our existing economic deals with the EU?

Media outlets need clickbait. When Scotland was looking at independence there was an article asking "Should Scotland Join Canada" No one in any official position anywhere that took any action to even explore the possibility.

 

[Yukon Joe]

So do people see some benefit of Canada actually joining the EU that can't be obtained by simply negotiated an expansion of our existing economic deals with the EU?

So first of all there's no "simple" in negotiating a deal with the EU. The existing deal, CETA, started negotiations in 2009, concluded in 2014, signed in 2016, and provisionally came into force in 2017. Worth noting in 2025 it is still not fully in force, only provisionally.

The benefit of Canada joining the EU would be A: in case of widespread US tariffs, to more fully integrate our economy with Europe as an alternative and B: in the face of US threats to annex Canada, to signal that the US would be taking on all of Europe, not just Canada.

That's the theory anyways. Problem is any deal with the EU would take longer than Trump will be in office. So we need to decide to what extent all of this chaos is just the "new normal" in Canada-US relations, or whether it only exists with Trump.

 

[MeHateHe]

So do people see some benefit of Canada actually joining the EU that can't be obtained by simply negotiated an expansion of our existing economic deals with the EU?

There is an appetite for stability, and when one cannot find stable markets in traditional locations - say, abutting nations - one looks elsewhere.

Joining the EU is a fanciful suggestion made by a few folks - as I mentioned, the former finance minister to Germany suggested it. One wag online pointed out that since Denmark and Canada have agreed to co-manage Hans Island, that technically Canada is part of Europe. Canada, at its shortest point, is only, what, a dozen miles from France (Ste. Pierre et Miquelon)?

So yeah, what's more likely to happen is broadening trade with Europe and Asia, and maybe less reliance on, uh, others.

 

[tyhee]

Not happening.

As an EU member, Canada would be required to adopt the EU’s common external trade policy. This means Canada’s existing trade obligations under USMCA could conflict with EU rules. EU membership involves joining its customs union, which imposes a common external tariff on goods entering the EU. This would override Canada’s ability to set its own tariffs under USMCA. Canada would no longer negotiate directly with the U.S. and Mexico but instead rely on the EU to represent its trade interests. This could complicate the administration of USMCA and disrupt the seamless trade Canada currently enjoys with its North American partners.

I doubt anyone making this "suggestion" has seriously thought through these ramifications, and why it makes it completely impracticable.

I don't see it happening, but with the North American Free Trade deal soon up for re-negotiation and all parties about to ignore it anyway, I don't think an of this has anything to do with whether or not Canada could join the EU.

 

[Yukon Joe]

I don't see it happening, but with the North American Free Trade deal soon up for re-negotiation and all parties about to ignore it anyway, I don't think an of this has anything to do with whether or not Canada could join the EU.

Yeah the whole "Canada should join the EU" thing (which, again, is not happening) is predicated on the idea that CUSMA is basically gone anyways (since the US seems to feel free to just declare National Emergencies on anything to justify tariffs that would otherwise be forbidden under CUSMA) and therefore should Canada join a different trade block.

But I agree that under a more-or-less functioning CUSMA/NAFTA agreement it would be unnecessary and impossible to join the EU.

 

[edog37]

But that's the assumption here. Canada joins the EU. EU says "you can't have a draft / salary cap". NHL says "nu-uh" - which causes the Canadian teams to have to leave the NHL.



Edmonton drives revenue from a lengthy playoff run, but mostly due to having a nearly brand-new arena that they're experts at squeezing every drop out of. Edmonton is not a richer city than Vancouver of Calgary - Calgary in particular if they get a new arena will shoot up in revenues.

Canada absolutely is a cash cow for the NHL - but it already has all the best markets sewn up. Winnipeg and Ottawa are already second tier teams (financially). While I'm sure you could put a team in QC, or Hamilton, or Saskatoon or wherever and they'd do ok they wouldn't be driving league revenues like Toronto, Edmonton or Montreal do.



Not always true, but to the extent players prefer US markets it's due to A: taxes B: weather (Buffalo doesn't get any love) and C: less media attention.



That's the easiest one to answer. Go search the US Patent and Trademark office online search.

Trademark Search

tmsearch.uspto.gov

You'l find the TM for the Toronto Maple Leafs is owned by: MLSE. Interesting I can't find a registration for "Montreal Canadiens", but just "Canadiens" is owned by CLUB DE HOCKEY CANADIEN, INC. - the Canadiens holding company. And so on and so forth.



Maybe not lose it - but it seems like you'd get two separate leagues, with very different business models - and both much poorer than they were compared to the old NHL. The CNHL would be dominated by a few big clubs, with the second tier celebrating when they have a "good enough" season, never expecting to win the championship.

The USNHL on the other hand would continue with the same business model - but without some of its biggest most noticeable clubs risks becoming irrelevant in the US sporting marketplace.


But again - this is just a fun "what if" - because it'll never happen.

It won’t happen I agree. Though if you think the Canadian teams can survive on their own…they can’t.