Pete Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 9 hours ago, Long live the King said: TV market is overrated. SJS and ANH are in big markets. 1 national game between them. National game focus on star power, rivalries, and good teams from the previous year. Correct. It's about season ticket packages and corporate sponsors, arena naming rights, etc. It's also not about how many fans you draw, it's about % capacity. Two teams can draw 17,000 fans, but one of them is at 102% withstanding room only and the other is at 90%, that 90% team still has work to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted Thursday at 02:32 PM Share Posted Thursday at 02:32 PM Sounds like we might be headed to 34 teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted Thursday at 03:11 PM Share Posted Thursday at 03:11 PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted Thursday at 03:16 PM Share Posted Thursday at 03:16 PM Up to 36 teams at some point? Jesus. Atlanta and Houston was likely. Maybe an expansion team back in Arizona at some point? If not that, I'll be interested to see where they add the two other teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted Thursday at 03:22 PM Share Posted Thursday at 03:22 PM Increasing the teams is such a bad idea. It's talent dilution. Think for a second about the NBA and how many players are on each team and on the floor for a majority of the game. The number of players who make it to the show are not nearly as many, and that elevates the talent and product. Expanding the NHL is like signing on to the idea that the Nick Boninos of the world need to be on a roster. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted Thursday at 03:28 PM Share Posted Thursday at 03:28 PM There are too many teams as it is. They won't do it because of the money involved but the NHL should probably be contracting to 28 teams not expanding from 32. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted Thursday at 03:56 PM Share Posted Thursday at 03:56 PM Or relocate a team or two. Get the Jets out of Winnipeg again. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted Thursday at 04:37 PM Share Posted Thursday at 04:37 PM Everyone wants more teams except the fans. NHL, NHLPA, owners, mayors, governors, construction companies, etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichieNextel305 Posted Thursday at 05:16 PM Author Share Posted Thursday at 05:16 PM (edited) Yeah I think adding teams is really not a good play here. 34 teams are just way too much and spreading the talent way too thin. Edited Thursday at 05:16 PM by RichieNextel305 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted Thursday at 05:20 PM Share Posted Thursday at 05:20 PM I want to understand why folks have their undies in a twist over talent dilution when we've added two teams in the past 6 years and have only seen an increase in available talent, scoring, and the general excitement of the game. The argument feels deeply flawed and rooted in thinking the systems that develop skilled players are stuck in the 90s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted Thursday at 05:23 PM Share Posted Thursday at 05:23 PM 1 minute ago, LindG1000 said: I want to understand why folks have their undies in a twist over talent dilution when we've added two teams in the past 6 years and have only seen an increase in available talent, scoring, and the general excitement of the game. The argument feels deeply flawed and rooted in thinking the systems that develop skilled players are stuck in the 90s. Bro there are teams winning less than 20 games a season. There's absolutely a talent dilution. Yea, 4th liners are more skilled than in 1990, but that's not the issue. Pulling a Michigan doesn't make you a hockey player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted Thursday at 05:37 PM Share Posted Thursday at 05:37 PM 2 minutes ago, Pete said: Bro there are teams winning less than 20 games a season. There's absolutely a talent dilution. Yea, 4th liners are more skilled than in 1990, but that's not the issue. Pulling a Michigan doesn't make you a hockey player. You and I both know that's a hyperbolic overreaction to one very specific, actively tanking team and a piss-poor way to measure a global talent level. I do not doubt that when the time comes to fill these rosters, there will be 46 players who are either underutilized on their current rosters, should be in the NHL, or could be in the NHL to fill these two rosters and/or backfill roster spots vacated by current NHLers heading to these two teams, and that at the end of the day, the product will be better and more exciting for it. What, is the NHL bad because Detroit can't cherry-pick Europe in the 9th round to build superteams? Is that the problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted Thursday at 05:40 PM Share Posted Thursday at 05:40 PM Yeah, I don't think talent is too thin necessarily, it's just too many damn teams. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted Thursday at 05:41 PM Share Posted Thursday at 05:41 PM 4 minutes ago, LindG1000 said: You and I both know that's a hyperbolic overreaction to one very specific, actively tanking team and a piss-poor way to measure a global talent level. I do not doubt that when the time comes to fill these rosters, there will be 46 players who are either underutilized on their current rosters, should be in the NHL, or could be in the NHL to fill these two rosters and/or backfill roster spots vacated by current NHLers heading to these two teams, and that at the end of the day, the product will be better and more exciting for it. What, is the NHL bad because Detroit can't cherry-pick Europe in the 9th round to build superteams? Is that the problem? The problem is the league is too big and watered down, they already play too many games and they already have too little rivalry. It's generic as fuck and you don't fix that by adding more teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted Thursday at 05:49 PM Share Posted Thursday at 05:49 PM 3 minutes ago, Pete said: The problem is the league is too big and watered down, they already play too many games and they already have too little rivalry. It's generic as fuck and you don't fix that by adding more teams. Too big by what definition? Watered down how? What is the thing you're looking at to say "oh, it's watered down." Don't eye test this - we want scoring, we want excitement, we want to see...what? You're absolutely right to call some of this out, but to me....these aren't player issues. They're marketing problems - and problems that have very little to do with expansion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted Thursday at 06:07 PM Share Posted Thursday at 06:07 PM 11 minutes ago, LindG1000 said: Too big by what definition? Watered down how? What is the thing you're looking at to say "oh, it's watered down." Don't eye test this - we want scoring, we want excitement, we want to see...what? You're absolutely right to call some of this out, but to me....these aren't player issues. They're marketing problems - and problems that have very little to do with expansion. Too big because they can't even sustain the teams they have and now they're going back to locations that have already failed like Winnipeg (on its way to failing again) and Atlanta (failed twice). There is no way that NHL should have more teams than the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsm7302 Posted Thursday at 06:07 PM Share Posted Thursday at 06:07 PM I want Texas to have another team. Houston should be the priority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsm7302 Posted Thursday at 06:08 PM Share Posted Thursday at 06:08 PM Just now, Pete said: Too big because they can't even sustain the teams they have and now they're going back to locations that have already failed like Winnipeg (on its way to failing again) and Atlanta (failed twice). There is no way that NHL should have more teams than the NFL. I'm good with moving Winnipeg to Houston and ending it there. No need for expansion, just find the best market for the current teams and REBRAND. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Heaven Posted Thursday at 06:12 PM Share Posted Thursday at 06:12 PM Pretty soon, the Rangers will be playing just 3 games vs. the Metropolitan Division, and 2 games vs. the rest of the teams. Gotta switch up the schedule like the NFL, play out of conference divisions alternating home and away each year. But the NHL makes you think that we want to see McDavid at MSG every year, or the Wild fans want to see the NYI every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted Thursday at 06:29 PM Share Posted Thursday at 06:29 PM 16 minutes ago, Blue Heaven said: Pretty soon, the Rangers will be playing just 3 games vs. the Metropolitan Division, and 2 games vs. the rest of the teams. Gotta switch up the schedule like the NFL, play out of conference divisions alternating home and away each year. But the NHL makes you think that we want to see McDavid at MSG every year, or the Wild fans want to see the NYI every year. That's where I'm going with this.... "Hey! Let's play every team twice a year!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaveByRichter35 Posted yesterday at 01:37 AM Share Posted yesterday at 01:37 AM 7 hours ago, Pete said: Too big because they can't even sustain the teams they have and now they're going back to locations that have already failed like Winnipeg (on its way to failing again) and Atlanta (failed twice). There is no way that NHL should have more teams than the NFL. Bingo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted yesterday at 01:42 AM Share Posted yesterday at 01:42 AM 7 hours ago, Pete said: Too big because they can't even sustain the teams they have and now they're going back to locations that have already failed like Winnipeg (on its way to failing again) and Atlanta (failed twice). There is no way that NHL should have more teams than the NFL. Even that's not a talent issue or a dilution of the product. It's bad asset placement. The NFL thing is completely irrelevant. The costs, the competition, the laws around that even (the NFL's expansion limitations include broadcast and gametime limitations that no other league has) - it's way off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted yesterday at 01:45 AM Share Posted yesterday at 01:45 AM Just now, LindG1000 said: Even that's not a talent issue or a dilution of the product. It's bad asset placement. Yes it is, because a lot of these teams fail because they aren't good, and never have been, and that leaves right back to dilution of talent along with mismanagement. They're literally only sustained by the worst players in the league going there. Quote The NFL thing is completely irrelevant. The costs, the competition, the laws around that even (the NFL's expansion limitations include broadcast and gametime limitations that no other league has) - it's way off. Your point is what's completely irrelevant. When the most popular sport on NA has x amount of teams, The 6th most popular shouldn't have more. It makes less than zero sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted yesterday at 02:03 AM Share Posted yesterday at 02:03 AM 16 minutes ago, Pete said: Yes it is, because a lot of these teams fail because they aren't good, and never have been, and that leaves right back to dilution of talent along with mismanagement. They're literally only sustained by the worst players in the league going there. Your point is what's completely irrelevant. When the most popular sport on NA has x amount of teams, The 6th most popular shouldn't have more. It makes less than zero sense. NHL draws talent all over the world tho. NFL only drafts US college students. There’s a much much bigger pool of talent in hockey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siddious Posted yesterday at 02:07 AM Share Posted yesterday at 02:07 AM 8 hours ago, LindG1000 said: Too big by what definition? Watered down how? What is the thing you're looking at to say "oh, it's watered down." Don't eye test this - we want scoring, we want excitement, we want to see...what? You're absolutely right to call some of this out, but to me....these aren't player issues. They're marketing problems - and problems that have very little to do with expansion. 8 hours ago, Pete said: The problem is the league is too big and watered down, they already play too many games and they already have too little rivalry. It's generic as fuck and you don't fix that by adding more teams. im fine with expansion. Talent being watered down is innacurate. Teams were tanking when there were 30 teams too. If hockey was a wildly unpopular sport that was shrinking in viewership and participation then I would say expansion is a bad idea but there are more hockey players than ever right now. Talent finds a way when there is opportunity. Just fix the schedule. Starts in early September. You don’t have to play each team every year - give me more divisional games. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now