|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Alias
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:59 pm Post subject: Hamilton to get an NHL team? |
 |
|
| What do you guys think of Balsillie wanting to move the Preds to Hamilton? Of course it would be a huge success but the NHL brass in New York are probably going to try and stop the move because they don't want another team in Canada. They would rather keep them in non-hockey markets where they are nothing more than fringe sports. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Smee
Joined: 24 Dec 2004
Location: Jeollanam-do
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I know nothing about the market of Hamilton, having never been there. But I'd honestly prefer the NHL just get rid of a team or two (Nashville, Florida, LA). That isn't likely as the NHLPA wouldn't agree to that. But the market can't support a league this bloated. At least in the US hockey hasn't recovered from the strike . . . hell, we can't even get games on TV. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wylies99
Joined: 13 May 2006
Location: I'm one cool cat!
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What about Quebec city and Winnipeg? 
They could be called the "Nordiques" and the "Jets." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SarcasmKills
Joined: 07 Apr 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wylies99 wrote: |
What about Quebec city and Winnipeg?
They could be called the "Nordiques" and the "Jets." |
Quebec City and Winnipeg wouldn't be able to support teams in the long run...
Hamilton could.
Here's hoping it happens. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endo
Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul...my home
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NHL is a second or even third league sports league in North America.
The head office should just accept that.
And how in the hell are there NHL teams in Dallas, Nashville, Colombus, Tampa Bay, ect.......?
Nothing against those cities, but it just bothers me the the pursuit of the mighty dollar has teams in those cities where fan support is questionable at best.
If I was the commisioner I would blow up the NHL and have teams in the following cities:
Vancouver, Coloroda, Los Angeles, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Minnesota, Chicago, Detriot, St. Louis, Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City, New York, Boston, Philedelphia
That's it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VanIslander
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Location: Geoje, Hadong, Tongyeong,... now in a small coastal island town outside Gyeongsangnamdo!
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| endo wrote: |
If I was the commisioner I would blow up the NHL and have teams in the following cities:
Vancouver, Coloroda, Los Angeles, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Minnesota, Chicago, Detriot, St. Louis, Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City, New York, Boston, Philedelphia
That's it! |
Buffalo and San Jose are two of the most loyal, rabid fan bases in the NHL and have been for a long time. I've been to each, and hockey is indeed in the air, more so than St. Louis, and these days, more than in Chicago and Boston. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
animalbirdfish
Joined: 04 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| VanIslander wrote: |
| endo wrote: |
If I was the commisioner I would blow up the NHL and have teams in the following cities:
Vancouver, Coloroda, Los Angeles, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Minnesota, Chicago, Detriot, St. Louis, Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City, New York, Boston, Philedelphia
That's it! |
Buffalo and San Jose are two of the most loyal, rabid fan bases in the NHL and have been for a long time. I've been to each, and hockey is indeed in the air, more so than St. Louis, and these days, more than in Chicago and Boston. |
Buffalo I understand, but what is it about San Jose that makes hockey so viable there?
I know next to nothing about hockey but even I'm amazed to see teams in places like Florida and Tennessee. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
newteacher
Joined: 31 May 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| endo wrote: |
NHL is a second or even third league sports league in North America.
The head office should just accept that.
And how in the hell are there NHL teams in Dallas, Nashville, Colombus, Tampa Bay, ect.......?
Nothing against those cities, but it just bothers me the the pursuit of the mighty dollar has teams in those cities where fan support is questionable at best.
If I was the commisioner I would blow up the NHL and have teams in the following cities:
Vancouver, Coloroda, Los Angeles, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Minnesota, Chicago, Detriot, St. Louis, Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City, New York, Boston, Philedelphia
That's it! |
You would put teams back in two cities that already proved they couldn't support a team and one in a city that nobody in the US, where most of the games are played, has even heard of?
I'm not a purist, and I'm not afraid of southern expansion in the NHL if they can make it work. The problem with hockey is that there aren't enough general managers that are able to put together competitive teams under the salary cap, yet. Hopefully this will change, but there's a shortage of talented scouts and recruiters out there. So that ties the hands of GM's who have to put a lot of trust in the people under them to make wise choices with the prospect reports. There's always going to be free agents out there, but these teams have to start building from the drafts like Pittsburgh did.
I think the game will slowly get back some of it's fans, now that they've finally gotten rid of the red line and brought back delayed offsides, but it'll take some time. The NHL lost a lot of casual fans with the lock-out, which I blame on the players more than anyone. Like you said, the NHL has to deal with the harsh reality of not generating the revenues of football, and the players are the ones who thought they deserved the same kind of money as the major sports regardless of what the bottom line of the teams were.
The best thing the NHL can do now is just not expand anymore for a while and instead focus on improving the quality of play with the teams they already have. They should keep most of the new rules, except maybe the delay of game crap, and some of the goalie interference calls. They should go a little further in decreasing the size of the goalies pads. As much as I don't like the shootouts, they should give a statistical goal for the player who gets the game winner. Phil Kessel had four or five for the Bruins this year, and some of those game winners are the only things that Bruins fans had to cheer for this year. Most importantly though, they have to get rid of the b--s-- slashing and hooking calls, do something about the divers, and stop trying to get rid of fighting. I agree with Don Cherry, there'd be less cheap shots and concussions if some of these guys had to worry about dealing with players like Chris Nilan or Marty McSorley. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endo
Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul...my home
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I completely forgot about Buffalo. Repace them with St. Louis.
And Winnipeg and Q City couldn't support teams (a) when the Canadian dollar was much lower, and (b) there was no salery cap.
Winnipeg has a brand no spanking new arena and a very loyal fan base. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
newteacher
Joined: 31 May 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ehh, Buffalo you can get rid of. I actually like San Jose though, and Anaheim. Nashvilles not bad either, surprisingly. I just don't think northern expansion and southern contraction is necessarily the answer. Keep things the way they are and let the teams build for a few years under the new system and see where it leads, while tweeking the rule changes a little bit to make it work better. The NHL just needs to focus on becoming a faster game, maybe even expanding the ice to international size. It's not soccer, and the trap years set back hockey about a decade, they need speed and goals to survive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VanIslander
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Location: Geoje, Hadong, Tongyeong,... now in a small coastal island town outside Gyeongsangnamdo!
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| animalbirdfish wrote: |
Buffalo I understand, but what is it about San Jose that makes hockey so viable there?
I know next to nothing about hockey... |
The fact that hockey is so strong in San Jose has been attributed to the fact of the Silicon Valley which provides (a) tons of Canadian skilled labour and biz types for luxury boxes and expensive seats, and (b) plenty of local blue collar workers. Believe me, you have not experienced a hockey game until you've been to the Shark Tank. And I've been to the Joe in Detroit (gawd, rich bored factory workers sit on their hands, bor-ing), T.O. (quietest of all), Montreal (fun chants but very moody, ridicules own team, finicky fans), Vancouver (loyalists and urban types side by side), Calgary (a good feel, occasionally loud).... San Jose blows them away (roars, passion, emotion, they are into it). Yet, oddly enough, the team has got to have the worst televised package: camera angles from the rafters, few interviews, listless play by play. MSG for the NY Rangers has easily the slickest, coolest, most well-packaged media coverage. Almost makes one a NYR fan. Almost. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endo
Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul...my home
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 10:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| newteacher wrote: |
| Ehh, Buffalo you can get rid of. I actually like San Jose though, and Anaheim. Nashvilles not bad either, surprisingly. I just don't think northern expansion and southern contraction is necessarily the answer. Keep things the way they are and let the teams build for a few years under the new system and see where it leads, while tweeking the rule changes a little bit to make it work better. The NHL just needs to focus on becoming a faster game, maybe even expanding the ice to international size. It's not soccer, and the trap years set back hockey about a decade, they need speed and goals to survive. |
How the hell is there a hockey, I repeat a hockey team in a city like Nashville or Colombus, but not Winnipeg?
I'm from the Peg so I'm moody and biased on the subject by the way.
It doesn't make any sense to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ajgeddes
Joined: 28 Apr 2004
Location: Yongsan
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 12:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| newteacher wrote: |
| You would put teams back in two cities that already proved they couldn't support a team and one in a city that nobody in the US, where most of the games are played, has even heard of? |
We did it in Denver and Minnesota and those have both worked out great. Winnipeg and Quebec City could both probably do very well now that the dollar is back to an almost equal value. (Of course this is only good if they stay this way) I really think southern Ontario could support another team easily. Where they should put it?? I don't know, but Hamilton seems like a logical choice. there are about 8,000,000 people in the region, so they can support more than one team.
You can't get rid of Buffalo though. They love their team and a lot of Canadians in the area also love the team, just like a lot of Canadians from the Windsor area love the Red Wings. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SarcasmKills
Joined: 07 Apr 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| endo wrote: |
I'm from the Peg so I'm moody and biased on the subject by the way.
It doesn't make any sense to me. |
Unfortunately, there's not enough money in Winnipeg to support a team in the long run...
And that new arena is even too small for an NHL team...
A Jets reincarnation wouldn't last a decade...
I do think Columbus does have the potential to be a GREAT hockey market.. once (if? they ever put a decent team together, it'll easily become yet another part of the Michigan-Ohio rivalry... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pauly
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Location: Incheon
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 2:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| newteacher wrote: |
| You would put teams back in two cities that already proved they couldn't support a team and one in a city that nobody in the US, where most of the games are played, has even heard of? |
Hmmmmm...places that have lost NHL teams that now have another NHL team. There's Ottawa, Minnesota, Colorado, Atlanta...Kansas City was on the verge of getting another team, and still may if Nashville moves there. Seattle pops up as a potential city for a new NHL franchise every once in a while. Funny thing is, when Denver lost their team, the Rockies moved to Kansas City, where it failed miserably before moving to New Jersey. Talk about a team having a tough road to the Cup.
Anyhow, Bettman said that Winnipeg may get another team.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=209177&hubname= |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
