|
Post by mikecubs on Sept 13, 2011 22:37:17 GMT -6
The players union would never allow contraction. Bettman wouldn't want to do it because it would really make the NHL seem like a minor league sport and prove his sunbelt idea was a very shaky idea. Besides there is no reason you can't get a good price for a relocated team. Counting the relocation fee Winnipeg paid a good price for the return of the Jets.
|
|
|
Post by rabenga on Sept 14, 2011 8:05:41 GMT -6
The players union would never allow contraction. Bettman wouldn't want to do it because it would really make the NHL seem like a minor league sport and prove his sunbelt idea was a very shaky idea. Besides there is no reason you can't get a good price for a relocated team. Counting the relocation fee Winnipeg paid a good price for the return of the Jets. Players union doesn't care about number of teams only the number of players that are playing. If the NHL contracted 4 teams (as an example), roughly 80 players would be out of work. The NHL and NHLPA could make an agreement where the rest of the NHL teams could increase their rosters by 3 players. The reason for contraction for Betteman is that he can get more money through an expansion issue. Lets take the Atlanta example, the NHL only got $60M for their portion of the deal. If Winnipeg had been granted an expansion franchise the NHL owners would have recieved a lot more money, at the very minimum another $140M. The NHL already seems like a minor league sport to most Americans, for Canadians on the other hand if a few teams contracted I think they would be mostly for it because of the infusion of talent. Remember the 21 team NHL, WOW! The reason why most NHL owners like Betteman is because he makes them money. If he went to the owners and said we are going to contract 4 teams but we are bringing in two expansion franchises he would explain that they would buy out the contracting owners for a discount and sell the two expansion franchises at a premium. Finally, whether a sunbelt team moves or contracts, it still means that his sunbelt idea was shaky, so your logic on that doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
Post by comique on Sept 14, 2011 11:30:35 GMT -6
The players union would never allow contraction. Bettman wouldn't want to do it because it would really make the NHL seem like a minor league sport and prove his sunbelt idea was a very shaky idea. Besides there is no reason you can't get a good price for a relocated team. Counting the relocation fee Winnipeg paid a good price for the return of the Jets. Players union doesn't care about number of teams only the number of players that are playing. If the NHL contracted 4 teams (as an example), roughly 80 players would be out of work. The NHL and NHLPA could make an agreement where the rest of the NHL teams could increase their rosters by 3 players. So tell me any team owner as the whole of owners that wants to buy out 4 teams at lets say $150M a piece. So now 24 owners have to split the $600M and then take on 3 (actually 4) more players in their salary--> (avg team Salary is $53M, at 25 players which averages $2.2M x 4 = $8.8M ) So each team also takes on $8.8M more salary. That does not include the players in the minors? Another $1.5M--> $2M per year Don't see contraction happening and don't think teams like Jets, Oilers, Sens or to be honest, the Leafs agreeing to that.
|
|
|
Post by rabenga on Sept 14, 2011 14:05:38 GMT -6
Players union doesn't care about number of teams only the number of players that are playing. If the NHL contracted 4 teams (as an example), roughly 80 players would be out of work. The NHL and NHLPA could make an agreement where the rest of the NHL teams could increase their rosters by 3 players. So tell me any team owner as the whole of owners that wants to buy out 4 teams at lets say $150M a piece. So now 24 owners have to split the $600M and then take on 3 (actually 4) more players in their salary--> (avg team Salary is $53M, at 25 players which averages $2.2M x 4 = $8.8M ) So each team also takes on $8.8M more salary. That does not include the players in the minors? Another $1.5M--> $2M per year Don't see contraction happening and don't think teams like Jets, Oilers, Sens or to be honest, the Leafs agreeing to that. It does make sense if using your example of $600M (which I think is a little too high), they sell off 2 expansion franchises for $350M each and then they also get back a wack of money that is not going to be paid out in revenue sharing. Teams may have to pay extra in salary but they will also lose deadweight franchises that siphon the revenue sharing program. The only team that the NHL is not going to contract in my belief is Phoenix because they are in too deep but other than that, I wouldn't be surprised if they went in this direction. Plus the guys in the minors are SOL, they will go to other leagues and put downward pressure on AHL/ECHL salaries.
|
|
|
Post by Hannu Smail on Sept 14, 2011 18:54:17 GMT -6
slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/2011/09/14/18686221.htmlThis kind of thing makes me not want to root for QC's return. "If we had (built) earlier, we would have had a team today, not Winnipeg," he said of the Atlanta Thrashers' move to Manitoba in May.
"I know that (NHL commissioner Gary) Bettman would have chosen Quebec City way before Winnipeg. I remember when the Nordiques left, he said 'we just lost a big asset, with the cultural aspect that Quebec represents.' This was an American talking!" Uh, Marcel? Talk like that is exactly why that never would have happened. Maybe ask Jim Balsillie how running his mouth in the media worked out for him. Then ask Mark Chipman how keeping quiet and playing by the league's rules worked out for us.
|
|
|
Post by JordyRamone on Sept 14, 2011 18:59:40 GMT -6
slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/2011/09/14/18686221.htmlThis kind of thing makes me not want to root for QC's return. "If we had (built) earlier, we would have had a team today, not Winnipeg," he said of the Atlanta Thrashers' move to Manitoba in May.
"I know that (NHL commissioner Gary) Bettman would have chosen Quebec City way before Winnipeg. I remember when the Nordiques left, he said 'we just lost a big asset, with the cultural aspect that Quebec represents.' This was an American talking!" Uh, Marcel? Talk like that is exactly why that never would have happened. Maybe ask Jim Balsillie how running his mouth in the media worked out for him. Then ask Mark Chipman how keeping quiet and playing by the league's rules worked out for us. No wonder why Lindros didn't want to play there. Sounds like someone is jealous
|
|
|
Post by NHLWinnipeg on Sept 14, 2011 19:31:09 GMT -6
This kind of thing makes me not want to root for QC's return. I know exactly what you mean. I had some correspondence with a QC reporter weeks before it was announced the Thrashers were moving to Winnipeg, who was trying to tell me WPG was not necessarily ahead of QC, etc... Frankly, there is a certain attitude by some in QC that pisses me off. On the Winnipeg side we've been very supportive, but obviously knew our efforts were much further advanced...i.e., having an arena and ownership group in place for years...sheeesh!
|
|
|
Post by rabenga on Sept 14, 2011 21:37:31 GMT -6
Dear Mr. Aubut,
Woulda, coulda, shoulda. We got a team and you don't got one!
In the words of Stone Cold Steve Austin "you can ask, ask, ask, but your still a jackass!!!"
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Sept 14, 2011 23:45:56 GMT -6
The players union would never allow contraction. Bettman wouldn't want to do it because it would really make the NHL seem like a minor league sport and prove his sunbelt idea was a very shaky idea. Besides there is no reason you can't get a good price for a relocated team. Counting the relocation fee Winnipeg paid a good price for the return of the Jets. Players union doesn't care about number of teams only the number of players that are playing. If the NHL contracted 4 teams (as an example), roughly 80 players would be out of work. The NHL and NHLPA could make an agreement where the rest of the NHL teams could increase their rosters by 3 players. The reason for contraction for Betteman is that he can get more money through an expansion issue. Lets take the Atlanta example, the NHL only got $60M for their portion of the deal. If Winnipeg had been granted an expansion franchise the NHL owners would have recieved a lot more money, at the very minimum another $140M. The NHL already seems like a minor league sport to most Americans, for Canadians on the other hand if a few teams contracted I think they would be mostly for it because of the infusion of talent. Remember the 21 team NHL, WOW! The reason why most NHL owners like Betteman is because he makes them money. If he went to the owners and said we are going to contract 4 teams but we are bringing in two expansion franchises he would explain that they would buy out the contracting owners for a discount and sell the two expansion franchises at a premium. Finally, whether a sunbelt team moves or contracts, it still means that his sunbelt idea was shaky, so your logic on that doesn't make sense. I remember this debate in baseball. A few flaws with your logic. Yes if you expand the rosters by 3 players you will have the same number of jobs. But the problem is those would be low paying jobs because only so many guys can start or be main players. Thats why when the owners in baseball proposed a 27 man roster vs the current 25 in exchange for contraction the players union turned it down. Your right about the NHL making only 60 million with the Atlanta sale but your forgot that even if you were to fold the Thrashers then expand to Winnipeg the old Atlanta owners would have had to be paid off by the league to fold. And they would not sell out for less than full price since there was a good market to relocate to with owners willing to buy the team. So it would come out a wash or close to it. Do the math. The sales price for the new Jets was 170 million counting the 60 Million dollar relocation fee. So Atlanta Spirit got 110 million dollars for the Thrashers. If Bettman was to fold them Atlanta Spirit would have wanted the same 110 million dollars. To make your 140 million dollars more, Mark Chipman would have had to be willing to pay 310 million for an expansion team. Winnipeg is a good market but come on. Mark Chipman is a business man not an idiot. If Chipman did pay that much that would place Winnipegs franchise value 5th in the league according to forbes between the Detroit Redwings and Boston Bruins. I love Winnipeg but get real. The 170 million dollar price was about right for the jets and was about as much as could be paid given the market size of Winnipeg. Weather it be expansion or relocation 170 Million was about as much as could or would be paid by anyone. Consider that Edmonton was sold to Darryl Katz for 200M. No offense to anyone but Edmonton is a bigger market than Winnipeg with just as passionate group of fans. Here are some more good reasons why contraction won't happen by Manitoba myth busters. manitobamythbusters.com/blog//blog4.php/2009/01/06/contraction-will-never-happen-jan-5-2008Other reasons why it won't happen is that congress would get involved(they were going to if MLB folded 2 teams) Your wrong about most Americans thinking hockey is a minor league sport. Thats true in the south but we have tons a great franchise with great fans. New York Rangers,Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, Detroit, etc. Hockey may be our 4th most popular sport but we still love it other than some places. I should have made my point about contraction vs. relocation at the end clearer. If a team moved from the south yes it would still be admitting the whole sun belt thing was a failure but its still not as embarrassing as contraction. Teams move all the time in sports.Since 1990 in the 4 major pro sports there have been 14 relocations. Mostly due to bad stadiums. There haven't been any contractions in any sport for a long time. If you contracted a team in any sport it would make that sport seem like a joke and would generate hugh headlines and very negative attention. There would be all kinds of debates on ESPN about is the NHL dying, whats wrong with the NHL. No league would want that type of attention. I'm not so sure i by the argument either that the league is watered down. People make this argument in baseball but the flaw in it is that compare to X amount of years ago our population in the United States and Canada plus other countries is much higher thus that make up for the more teams since you have a bigger pool of people to pick from to play that sport.
|
|
|
Post by domi on Sept 15, 2011 11:12:58 GMT -6
This kind of thing makes me not want to root for QC's return. I know exactly what you mean. I had some correspondence with a QC reporter weeks before it was announced the Thrashers were moving to Winnipeg, who was trying to tell me WPG was not necessarily ahead of QC, etc... Frankly, there is a certain attitude by some in QC that pisses me off. On the Winnipeg side we've been very supportive, but obviously knew our efforts were much further advanced...i.e., having an arena and ownership group in place for years...sheeesh! I really hate to generalize, but it seems when dealing with Quebec, there is always this feeling of 'entitlement'. In this case, they seem to feel they are entitled to an NHL team, and the province and federal government should 'get of their ass' and build an extravagant arena for them. :no: I don't see the private sector really steping up to make it happen. They are looking around for others to get the ball rolling for them. After all, they are 'entitled' to it If Winnipeg had that attitude, then right now we would be getting ready for the AHL. But instead, the private sector stepped up and got the ball rolling. Once that happens, its a lot easier to get government funding. I'm just not sure Quebec gets it.
|
|
mrconfusion87
1st Line Centre
Resident of the Tropical Hockey Wasteland
Posts: 415
|
Post by mrconfusion87 on Sept 15, 2011 21:54:47 GMT -6
I know exactly what you mean. I had some correspondence with a QC reporter weeks before it was announced the Thrashers were moving to Winnipeg, who was trying to tell me WPG was not necessarily ahead of QC, etc... Frankly, there is a certain attitude by some in QC that pisses me off. On the Winnipeg side we've been very supportive, but obviously knew our efforts were much further advanced...i.e., having an arena and ownership group in place for years...sheeesh! I really hate to generalize, but it seems when dealing with Quebec, there is always this feeling of 'entitlement'. In this case, they seem to feel they are entitled to an NHL team, and the province and federal government should 'get of their ass' and build an extravagant arena for them. "http://forum.calgarypuck.com/images/calpuck/smilies/no.gif" border="0" alt=":no:" /> I don't see the private sector really steping up to make it happen. They are looking around for others to get the ball rolling for them. After all, they are 'entitled' to it If Winnipeg had that attitude, then right now we would be getting ready for the AHL. But instead, the private sector stepped up and got the ball rolling. Once that happens, its a lot easier to get government funding. I'm just not sure Quebec gets it. Interesting point there... Perhaps maybe there is an underlying reason why the mayor of Quebec City is actually planning to visit Winnipeg for opening night after all. To check up what the city did right to reach its goal?
|
|
|
Post by spezza1321 on Sept 21, 2011 14:05:09 GMT -6
Quebecor can talk to NHL now Quebec governement vote in favor for the bill 204 oh and did you know Aubut is the lawer of canadians clubs in the NHL, I'm sure he know what is talking about Now Go Quebecor Go!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Sept 22, 2011 10:30:32 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by jetsnordiquesfan on Sept 22, 2011 20:22:50 GMT -6
I hope Aubut doesn't become co-owner of the team, though (even at 1%). A lot of people still hasn't forgiven him for selling the original team in '95, even though it wasn't losing that much money yet.
|
|
mrconfusion87
1st Line Centre
Resident of the Tropical Hockey Wasteland
Posts: 415
|
Post by mrconfusion87 on Sept 23, 2011 8:16:56 GMT -6
Quebecor can talk to NHL now Quebec governement vote in favor for the bill 204 oh and did you know Aubut is the lawer of canadians clubs in the NHL, I'm sure he know what is talking about Now Go Quebecor Go!!!!! Hooray! ;D
|
|