NHL Lockout 2004

[LucVanLierde]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

Good for Canada, I think its ironic that on the day we officially take back the supremecy of hockey we decide that we will not be playing hockey for sometime. This proving that hockey is a close second to our # 1 dominant skill. We are clowns on skates with the souls of jesters. Canadians are funny. They also play hockey at international competitions and win, sadly they have no league to play in. Maybe a new Mike Weir will be born out of an NHL alum.

Baseball never fully recovered from a STRIKE(lets not forget that these bitches are on strike) and neither will hockey. Baseball aka. Americas passtime struggled, hockey is # 7 on the list of popular sports in the USA. I think they have killed themselves, not to mention the pubs and sports bars in Canada. I wonder how big the financial blow will be to sportsnet and other such hockey orientated sorts channels.

What will this do to the whl,ohl ect.......Are the giant going to sellout every game?, will they become household names?, live televised games?

 

[Dude]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

The game will never die in this country. There is simply way too much demand for Professional Hockey here. Major Junior will continue to crank out players. The best of the best will either take a year off, of go to a lower level league to keep playing. One thing for sure is that ultimately, the top league in the world will always reside in North America, and the best players will always play here.

I see this either going till January, or it will be lost. If the season is lost, I believe it will break the union, and the owners will get their way. Along with that, we may see a contraction.

In the very worst case scenario, the league disbands, and we have a new 20 team or so league, with teams only in hockey markets. In this scenario, you'd have lower salaries, a hard cap, and teams back in markets like Winnipeg, Quebec, and even Hamilton. The strong, traditional US markets would retain teams, i.e.: New York (one team only), Detroit, Buffalo, Boston, Chicago, Minnesota, Colorado, maybe Dallas...who else am I missing???

One thing for sure is that it is Hockey Armageddon. I think the players will have to bite the bullet, and accept a hard cap.

 

[BlazeArmy]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

The real shame is that the bargaining that has been done so far has been at the level of 6 year olds. I want a salary cap. No. Yes. No. Yes. No etc.

I'm wondering what sportsnet will do to fill all the time they have showed Nuck games in the past. That is alot of progamming time to fill and wonder like Luc if they are gonna deal with the Giants to show games live on TV. The real problem for the sports networks comes after Superbowl when no football ( college or pro) makes it tough to fill a schedule with old hockey highlights and basketball. Is sportsnet going to be showing a lot of soccer? Will Poker be on TV nightly or will we being watchingf every single curling event in Canada. Lots of questions but no real answers.

I think the break will have to come from the players side as the owners don't care what happens it seems. Dour Smurf has the owners all on the same page so far and if he can keep there soldarity togethor the players will eventually cave. Contraxction isn't going to happen if this goes on for too long as the owners would then have to fork out the dough to buy an owner out. BAnkruptcy is a possibility for contraction but that is about it.

I was just talking to my bro-in-law in TO and they have gotten season tickets to the Baby Leafs instead of the big boys. They were having a hard time justifying the cost of 500.00 in tickets per game(x48 or so) to the business.

 

[Keeper]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

Aren't the Baby-Leafs in St. John's?

 

[sensei_hanson]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

The strong, traditional US markets would retain teams, i.e.: New York (one team only), Detroit, Buffalo, Boston, Chicago, Minnesota, Colorado, maybe Dallas...who else am I missing???

I'd say both the Isles and Rangers could survive, given the fact Long Island seems to be something of a seperate entity from the blueshirts in Manhattan. The Islander fans are still pretty loyal (I suppose lots of diehards were made during the early 80s) and fierce when the team actually performs well.

Hard to imagine a NHL without the New Jersey Devils, especially considering the success they've had in the 90s. Mind you, their fanbase is nothing to write home about. They struggle for numbers.

I also can't see the NHL folding up St. Louis. The Blues have been a model of consistency in terms of being competitive and being a playoff regular.

While is still may seem like a non-traditional hockey market, you cannot ignore L.A/California as a destination. There is no way they need three teams in the State, but the NHL would be a disaster if the only true West Coast team is Vancouver. Travel would be an even bigger nightmare.

It would have been interesting to see how pro hockey went over (the second time around, no less) in Colorado if they weren't on the receiving end of an instant contender. I highly doubt the Avs would have achieved such status - they're second only to the Broncos in terms of Colorado fan support, still ahead of the Nuggets and Rockies - if they had to suffer through the tough first few losing years of an expansion team.

Other than these, all the remaining US hockey teams are on fragile ground. And that includes Pittsburgh, which is a sad state of affairs when you consider they've had Mario there since 1984.

 

[Dude]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

I guess on the West Coast, you could keep San Jose, and possibly LA. I'd ditch NJ though. Dispite their success, the fans don't support them. Immagine how it would be w/ a dog.

I agree with your other points. That gives us what, 21 teams?

 

[Dial 9-1-1]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

What about Gretzky taking centre stage for the photo-op? Then Draper telling him to move his mug so he could be in the picture too?

Regarding the lockout...according to the World Cup format, there are only enough world class players to field 7 teams (the two guys on Germany don't count). You can probably add one more solid team of Canadians. So that's 8 teams worth of players and now you're going to spread them out over 30 teams and expect people to pay exhorbitant (or something like that) amounts of $$ to watch this? That's why I've never paid for a ticket in ten years.

Bottom line: Offer players 100,000-$500,000 per season. If they don't like it, they can all try their luck in the Swedish Elite league or they can check the classified ads. I hear there is quite a demand for unskilled labourers who have a Grade 11 high school education.

 

[Buckfast]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

Watching ESPN's Sportscenter, where they had a "how do you feel about the NHL lockout?" poll. Our American brethern responded with 51% saying "don't care". Jackasses.

Buckfast

 

[BlazeArmy]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

Check that. IceDogs of Mississauga tickets. OHL team. My bad. I should apparently pay attention when talking to someone on the phone instead of playing yahoo pool.

 

[sensei_hanson]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

That gives us what, 21 teams?

If (and it's a big if) things get to the point where re-structuring and contracting the number of teams is the solution, yeah, I'm guessing there would be 20-24 teams. As far as the state of California goes, you have to put a team in L.A. simply because it is L.A. No major league, regardless of the "regional" or "national" classification, ignores the biggest market west of New York.

I find it amusing that the PA finds Bettman to be some kind of boardroom Darth Vader with regards to this whole mess. It was Bettman, in all his infinite wisdom, who created about 180 new jobs for the NHLPA with his rampant expansion moves over the past 10 years. There are a lot of fringe NHLers who have been paid quite handsomely - and will eventually qualify for a NHL pension - thanks in large part to these expansion teams fielding scrub lineups.

Did anybody see Burke's "15-Point Plan" during the 1st intermission last night? In terms of hockey as a business, Burke is one sharp cookie. It's pretty evident this TV gig won't last for long - he's far too sharp to deal with the crotch-watcher and the blue doo-rag on a regular basis. My guess is he ends up as some type of independent arbitrator if this strike/lockout goes on past January.

 

[termatofylakas]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

Hey Blaze and Keeper the Leafs I heard last week were moving the baby leafs to Toronto. Even though they'll probably lose fans in St. John's this will only help them because their call ups can join them right away when playing at home.

 

[Jinky]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

As far as the state of California goes, you have to put a team in L.A. simply because it is L.A. No major league, regardless of the "regional" or "national" classification, ignores the biggest market west of New York.

Does the NFL ring a bell?

 

[BlazeArmy]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

They are moving but not sure if it is this year or next. I went to an ice dogs game last year. Don Cherry is/was invlolved with getting them a franchise.

 

[Dial 9-1-1]

Re: World Cup of Hockey 2004

Don Cherry...you won't be seeing him much anymore. The "King of the Lowest Common Denominators" is quietly being brushed aside. His absence didn't hurt TV ratings. Hopefully the CBC was taking note. Jinky...I was going to mention the NFL not having a team in LA, but no one likes a know-it-all--not even Alex Trebek!

 

[sensei_hanson]

from the washington post:

NFL Keeping an Eye On Return to Los Angeles

By Mark Maske and Leonard Shapiro
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, May 26, 2004; Page D02

The NFL hopes to pick a stadium site in the Los Angeles area within a year to house a new team and is aiming to have that club playing in the 2008 season, Commissioner Paul Tagliabue said as the league's team owners began a two-day meeting near Jacksonville, Fla., yesterday.

Los Angeles has been without an NFL franchise since the Raiders and Rams left in 1995, and league leaders seem increasingly intent upon placing a team there. Picking a stadium site by May 2005, as Tagliabue said is the goal, would send a clear signal to the television networks that the NFL is serious about returning to the nation's second-largest market by the time the next set of TV contracts takes effect. Such a move would be expected to increase the league's leverage in the upcoming negotiations. The NFL's current TV deals expire following the 2005 season.

The league has been weighing whether to put a team in a renovated existing stadium, either the Rose Bowl or the Los Angeles Coliseum, or build a new facility in Carson, Calif. The NFL plans to resolve the stadium issue before working out the particulars of a team or an ownership group.

There does not seem to be sufficient support among the owners at this point for adding an expansion franchise in Los Angeles; the introduction of a 33rd NFL team would make scheduling and the divisional alignment problematic. Many executives around the league think it's more likely that the San Diego Chargers, Indianapolis Colts or New Orleans Saints eventually will move to Los Angeles. Saints officials currently are haggling with state leaders over a $7.1 million shortfall that Louisiana is facing in a $15 million payment that it must make to the team by July 5 under a 2001 agreement. If the state defaults, it would have 75 days to address the matter or the Saints could begin looking for a new home.

The major reason for the Rams and Oakland leaving L.A. was the inability for city officials to kiss up to Al Davis and Georgia Frontierie (sp?) by fixing up the L.A. Memorial Coliseum. It had no luxury boxes and that just killed NFL owners in terms of extra revenue.

 

[girth]

The answer to the hockey lockout is to all subscribe if you haven't already to Fox Sports World.Non stop Soccer hilights and games from around the world,you won't miss a thing. Just stay away from that reallity TV it will kill you. My passion for hockey left right around the time Gretzky left?Not sure why? Maybe it's why I like watching soccer hilights and the amazing goals scored. Mario had the magic as well and still shows flashes now and then. Hockey needs a magical dominant player again to win me back.

 

[Bronco]

I think that the thing the players are failing to realize here is that they have little or no sympathy from the fans on this issue. They didn't have it 10 years ago, and they don't have it now. Owners have cokced this up beyond belief, but that still doesn't mean that people are going to be able to relate to some punk that earns more for 1 shift than HOS does in a pay period.

Further, the players need to realize that the majority of the owners if not all of them own hockey teams because they can. ie, it's a hobby, not their bread and butter. Is John Mccaw going to be ruined if hockey never comes back? Ilich? Karmanos? NO!! It's a hobby for these guys. On the other hand, what would Matt Cooke do if he was in his second year and wasn't playing hockey? Probably asking you if you wanted fries with your Big Mac. The players are fcuking with their bread and butter, and it probably won't matter to idiots like Roenick, Hull, and these left wing faggots who have plundered what they could for 15 years. Ask the rookies coming into the league if they're on board??

Sincerely,


Your Union Breaking Bronco

 

[Dial 9-1-1]

Further, the players need to realize that the majority of the owners if not all of them own hockey teams because they can. ie, it's a hobby, not their bread and butter. Is John Mccaw going to be ruined if hockey never comes back? Ilich? Karmanos? NO!! It's a hobby for these guys. On the other hand, what would Matt Cooke do if he was in his second year and wasn't playing hockey? Probably asking you if you wanted fries with your Big Mac.

The sooner owners in ALL sports figure this out, the better.

You're telling me that all the 3rd and 4th line players, all the 4, 5, 6, and 7th defencemen couldn't be replaced by kids coming out of Jr or playing in the minors, or overseas? Would I cry if we lost Brad May or Trevor Linden? Or our second line Sedin twins?

Piss on the $38 million salary cap and offer a $5-10 million cap. See who blinks first.

 

[BJB]

Sounds good to me. One of the fcukers i heard used an analogy comparing an nhler to a 9 to 5 worker.It's like a 9 to 5 worker getting a pay cut from 60000 to 40000. Not even close fcukers... One difference is the normal 9 to 5 er has a fcuken mortgage coming out of his ass, while the nhler is wiping his ass with his $$$. I'd like to see how those fcukers would feel like paying $300 for a pair of tickets to go watch them lose in the playoffs.... I hope they get Capped!!!

 

[robj]

The thing that kills me is the owners are their own worst enimies. They created this monster now they want a cap. Screw them. Detroit, Colorado New York Rangers,....they are teams (owners that try and buy a Stanley Cup).

Wasn't it Philadelphia who started this whole thing with paying some arrogant baby 1 Million their rookie year. They are their own worst enemy.

I am a negotiator in my CUPE Local and can't help but think why aren't these guys locked up in a hotel until they come up with a deal. 2 years ago we bargained 27 hours straight and reached a deal both sides were happy with. You have to blame both sides. Why have they stopped negotiating? They won't even meet for another month what a joke. As far as I'm concerned If both Owners and Players care about Hockey or their fans they would keep bargaining till they reached a deal.

Gary Bettmen is probably the most arrogant idiot to ever be Commisionair in the NHL. This is a guy who has little man syndrome and doesn't have a clue about hockey. I can't stand him as much as I can't stand the leafs.