Reply With QuoteIn the short term yes, long term, no. But that's not what any of this is about anyway...Originally Posted by DuklaNation
LA basically has a 2nd team, Anaheim. And if anyone thinks the surrounding Toronto area couldnt easily support another and be more profitable than any other location, you really dont know anything about hockey or business for that matter.
In the short term yes, long term, no. But that's not what any of this is about anyway...
12 team Full Dynasty w cap. 13F, 7D, 2G, 5B.
G 4.25, A 2.75, PPP 1.5, SHP 3, Hits 0.4, Blocks 0.5, PIM 0.25, DFP 1
W 5 OTL 1 SO 6 SV 0.25 L-1 GS 1
F:Stamkos, C Stew, R Johansen, B Dubinsky, Max Pac, Umberger, B Ryan, D Backes, T Ruutu, Lucic, Ott, MSL, Heatley, C Kunitz, J Benn, L Adam
D: C Fowler, Kronwall, A Goligoski, JM Liles, M Giordano, K Letang, N Nikitin, R Josi
G: J Quick, A Niemi, C Anderson, Rinne
Nope, according to wikipedia the top NA cities by population are (btw I use metropolitan area because I feel it better portrays the actual size of a city):
Mexico City 22.5M
New York City 19.75M
Los Angeles 12.875M
Chicago 9.7M
Dallas - Fort Worth 6.145M
Toronto 6.145M
Philadelphia 5.826M
Miami 5.413
Washington DC 5.306M
I think you misunderstood what I was staying. I was counting Anaheim as LA's second team and I never said that Toronto couldn't support another team. I just said that LA has 2 teams because its twice as big as Toronto. NY is 3x as big as Toronto (plus change) and they have 3 teams.
Last edited by letangerang58; August 11, 2012 at 2:35 AM.
Fantrax - Salary cap dynasty - cap hit - H2H each category
Start: 2C, 2LW, 2RW, 4D, 2UTIL, 2G, 6 Bench, 4IR
Cats: G, A, +/-, PIM, STG, STA, SOG, FOW, GWG, Hits, BLK, W, GAA, Saves, SV%, SO
C: Getzlaf, Turris, Eakin, ____
LW: Kunitz, MacArthur, Pacioretty, ____
RW: Little (C), Tarasenko, Eriksson (LW)
D: Pietrangelo, JJ, Streit, Brodie, Benn, ____
G: Lundqvist, Bishop, Holtby
Farm: Grigorenko, H Lindholm, Faksa, Collberg, Grimaldi, Lee, K Hayes, G Carey, Schmaltz
G: Grubauer, Gudlevskis
Not a Bettman fanboi but i do understand some of the things he has done.
Like putting teams in markets where they can not 'currently' be self supporting (like markets that have had hockey for 100+ years).
I recall a stat after TB was given a franchise (after several years). This was about the numbers of 5 years enrolled in ice hockey. The number kept climbing each year after the team was established.
So these kids that are new to hockey, grow up being hockey fans. Add 20+ years and they have families. Now they are watching hockey and passing the appreciation of the game on to their kids.
Rinse / Repeat.
In 50+ years these markets should be self supporting.
Hockey is a business and some of the decisions are made for long term reasons.
just my 2c
I understand where you're going with this; but its not all telling or entirely accurate in the context of the Leaf's market reach. The Leafs ticket market expands exponentially outside of the GTA(metropolitan area) reaching throughout Southern Ontario, Central Ontario and I'm sure in a lot cases, Northern Ontario as well. We're talking hours away on all ends of the spectrum. Also keep in mind when looking at Toronto vs. the other cities that the Leafs are the ONLY ticket in town. Raptor's, Blue Jays, Argo's(cfl), TFC--none of them are even in the same world, but probably more comparable to the Marlies. Sure, the Jays and Raptors have their supporters, but it's not hard to get a ticket and the city and surrounding area are in no way invested in the teams the way they are in the Leafs. There's no competition.
Another team in the GTA would do wonders for everyone involved. The waiting list for leafs tickets are literally, upwards of 30, 40, 50 years...the Leafs won't have a problem continuing to sell out games regardless of how many other teams you put in the GTA. The heritage, the profile, the business community support--it goes on and on. And if they do take a hit on anything like merchandise sales because of another team, there isn't anyone that can tell me that MLSE can't afford a couple million dollar hit and continue to gross multi-millions annually.
I've yet to hear a solid argument saying the GTA can't host another NHL team. Of course it can!
F: P. Kane, Oshie, N. Foligno, Thorton, Coyle, Marleau, Pavelski, Dubinsky
Steen
D: seabrooke, Subban,wizniewski,garrison, Carle
G: Niemi, Fleury,
G/A-1 pt PIM- .25pts
Win-2pts Shutouts- 5pts(2+3)
Keep 10. Top 13 count (4 d, 1 g, 6 Frwd and next highest-any position)
I also think that we should take into account how much the Leafs make each season, and how much they are worth as a franchise. It would be interesting to read how much money is spent per person in the GTA, as well as for all other NHL franchise cities for their respected franchise. Some of the numbers would be tricky though (Rangers/Islanders/Devils and Ducks/Kings).
" You said you don't give a f*ck about hockey. I've never heard anyone say that before."
I don't think the NHL needs to be concerned with how much the Leafs' profit is threatened by another team. The reason is because let's say a 2nd team does come. This will increase the league's overall profit because that 2nd team would be profitable and the Leafs would still be profitable so that combined is better than the Leafs being profitable and another team losing $.
Besides, I doubt that Leafs ticket sales are affected by a 2nd team unless under extreme circumstance (the 2nd team is a cup contender and becomes an even hotter ticket). Even in this extreme example, the Leafs would still be charging a tonne for their tickets and sell out. They'd still sell merchandise. So it's not them you need to be worried about. You need to worry about the 2nd team and if it'll be able to win over new fans. My guess is yes as long as the tickets are cheaper and the team doesn't screw up in terms of location or bad press (eg: The Mississauga Majors now called the Steelheads team decided to open up their arena in a horrible location in Mississauga where there are no regular bus routes or even a restaurant within walking distance and it's not in the central part of the city plus they didn't spend much on promo).
This has nothing to do with just one or two bad franchises, this is a larger battle of rich versus poor owners. It's a battle for how much protection the owners will forcibly be given against their own stupidity. Right now, it's threatening to kill the league. A lock out of more than a month would be a catastrophe of epic proportions.
12 team Full Dynasty w cap. 13F, 7D, 2G, 5B.
G 4.25, A 2.75, PPP 1.5, SHP 3, Hits 0.4, Blocks 0.5, PIM 0.25, DFP 1
W 5 OTL 1 SO 6 SV 0.25 L-1 GS 1
F:Stamkos, C Stew, R Johansen, B Dubinsky, Max Pac, Umberger, B Ryan, D Backes, T Ruutu, Lucic, Ott, MSL, Heatley, C Kunitz, J Benn, L Adam
D: C Fowler, Kronwall, A Goligoski, JM Liles, M Giordano, K Letang, N Nikitin, R Josi
G: J Quick, A Niemi, C Anderson, Rinne
All these direct comparisons of populations of NA cities and potential NHL markets does not work with Canadian cities VS US cities. The GTA CAN support another NHL club easily. Quebec and/or Hamilton look to be able to do the same.
Massive population centers in the USA like Houston, Seattle,and Kansas city may be more attractive on paper but are they really comparable to Canadian cities where the built in hockey fanbase is naturally so much higher?
Atlanta has now had 2 failed NHL franchises and they have a metro population over 5M. Both those franchises moved to Calgary and Winnipeg with metro populations of barely 1M+ each. Calgary does well, and Winnipeg should be in good financial health going forward.
The NHL is so gate driven for revenues that moving into smaller Canadian cities that can guarantee high attendence numbers should be the NHLs focus. The attempts to force NHL hockey in huge US TV/advertising markets is barely working but Bettman is damned determined to breakout in those markets instead of building on where the NHL gets its hard revenue- at the gate. Smaller Canadian cities can continue to be counted on to buy season tickets and have a good walkup crowd for each and every game.
Not having a another GTA NHL team seems almost nuts considering the pent up demand of hockey fans not being able to attend Leaf games. I can understand MLS wants to protect their 'turf' and potential revenue streams but honestly do they want to continue to send cash away to prop up failing franchises or would they rather like to save some of that cash because another franchise 20-50km away can add so much more league wide wealth?
After saying all that, I think the biggest factor for Canadian clubs is the continued strong CDN$ against the greenback. This is one major reason for keeping a 30 team NHL league from crashing in on itself.
Posting Permissions
