Originally posted by Sam Pulsize:these two young homos were actually in philadelphia, hence the mocking of the flyers' logo …
I think this picture proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are at least two gay hockey fans in Tampa. Not that there's anything wrong with it.
And it's over...
Originally posted by HoyaSaxa03:Tough guys - be a little more PC please?
Originally posted by Sam Pulsize:these two young homos were actually in philadelphia, hence the mocking of the flyers' logo …
I think this picture proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are at least two gay hockey fans in Tampa. Not that there's anything wrong with it.
<img src="http://www.everyschool.org/u/hillbrook/kyled/slapshot226x326%5b1%5d.jpg" alt=" - " />
Originally posted by Sam Pulsize:Haha, well done!
Two separate studies found that most NHL teams were in the red. Probably because of overpaid players, but perhaps also from snot nosed law students sneaking into games without paying. ;)
They should have worked out better concession deals, because I never stole a beer or a hot dog. Oh wait, I definitely had a lot of free beers from the suites. Somebody pays for those, right? And, how much did they make on my jerseys?
Originally posted by sonickteam2:My six teams to contract would be Florida, Carolina, Phoenix, Tampa, Washington, and Anaheim. I wouldn't take out Dallas because their fan base is reasonably large enough and I wouldn't take out Phoenix because I couldn't see Gretkzy letting it happen.
I will take out 6 teams, no problem, but can i pick those 6? probably not. nashville, florida, carolina, phoenix, dallas and tampa bay will do.
but will that really solve the problem?
Contraction will HELP but not solve the league's problems, especially if they implement revenue sharing. Reasons being:
1. fewer teams on welfare (revenue sharing)
2. fewer players in the league so the lower tier players won't have jobs. The good part about this is that those are the guys that are doing alot of the obstruction that's slowing down the game. So the overall talent level goes up and so does the quality of the on ice product.
3. fewer games played in cities with low attendance (which translates to more tickets sold overall). This means higher revenue on average per team left in the league.
4. lower travel expenses
5. Detroit FINALLY gets to play in the eastern conference. More Leafs vs Wings games!!
6. Gary Bettman will get fired as a result of contraction
All these are pluses in my books :=)
I still believe that the best way to solve the league's financial woes is to allow fights– and lots of them. that would be a far bigger draw for the sport. i might even go.
Originally posted by xcanuck:nice. can you send that proposal to Daly?
My six teams to contract would be Florida, Carolina, Phoenix, Tampa, Washington, and Anaheim. I wouldn't take out Dallas because their fan base is reasonably large enough and I wouldn't take out Phoenix because I couldn't see Gretkzy letting it happen.
Contraction will HELP but not solve the league's problems, especially if they implement revenue sharing. Reasons being:
1. fewer teams on welfare (revenue sharing)
2. fewer players in the league so the lower tier players won't have jobs. The good part about this is that those are the guys that are doing alot of the obstruction that's slowing down the game. So the overall talent level goes up and so does the quality of the on ice product.
3. fewer games played in cities with low attendance (which translates to more tickets sold overall). This means higher revenue on average per team left in the league.
4. lower travel expenses
5. Detroit FINALLY gets to play in the eastern conference. More Leafs vs Wings games!!
6. Gary Bettman will get fired as a result of contraction
All these are pluses in my books :=)
number 6 is the best!!! and dont take the Capitals away til i move out of the DC area. while i dont think DC should have a team….how else would i get to see 40 games a year!!!!
Originally posted by xcanuck:Just to play the part of Devil's Advocate here, but you've listed three teams that have made the Finals in the last three years despite hockey's problems.
My six teams to contract would be Florida, Carolina, Phoenix, Tampa, Washington, and Anaheim.
Why not contract Pittsburgh? How many times are the people of Pittsburgh going to vote down a new arena? They were so broke they had to give part of the team to their best player because they coudln't pay him. And things aren't getting better.
And what of Ottowa and Buffalo? They're both already bankrupt, why save them?
Nashville and Columbus?
Originally posted by vansmack:you shut the hell up about Ottawa.
And what of Ottowa and Buffalo?
i think part of Ottawa and Buffalo's problem is that increasing salaries by the league drive ticket prices up and make it hard for lower income cities to get fans in.
Also, lets not look at contraction on team record, lets look at attendance and really lets look at genuine fan support. when Tampa and Carolina were doing bad they had NO attendance, and only got good attendance when they were having thier good years. Calgary, for example, has sold out every game for like 3 years and STILL lose money. and they were only good last year. Ottawa would have support regardless of record….Nashville wouldnt. and theres not even any ice in Nashville. screw em.
Columbus should have a team though.
and besides, Ottawa shouldnt be contracted just cause Americans can't spell it!
Using your logic Sonick, I think every team in that list would survive if they implemented a Salary Cap and Revenue Sharing - the only thing that would save teams like Ottowa and Buffalo.
I guess my overall point is that hockey can't survive as a dual-nation sport without a strong TV deal in the US. And contracting 6 US teams in new markets (some of the largest TV markets in America) does not help your US TV deal.
I guess my overall point is that hockey can't survive as a dual-nation sport without a strong TV deal in the US. And contracting 6 US teams in new markets (some of the largest TV markets in America) does not help your US TV deal.
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
Originally posted by vansmack:Thank you. I was going to keep doing it until you corrected me. Just looking to get a rise….
[qb] and besides, Ottawa shouldnt be contracted just cause Americans can't spell it!
Originally posted by vansmack:so you wanna contract all of the Canadian teams? yeah, that will work
I guess my overall point is that hockey can't survive as a dual-nation sport without a strong TV deal in the US. And contracting 6 US teams in new markets (some of the largest TV markets in America) does not help your US TV deal.
honestly, if its all just about cities with money and TV deals…just give the cup to Canada and let them have thier own hockey league.
Originally posted by sonickteam2:I didn't say that and I think it's the worst possible idea. I'm not even sure how you came to that conclusion.
so you wanna contract all of the Canadian teams? yeah, that will work
But for the tradition rich folks in Canada who want to go back to the old way hockey used to be done, they're not thinking clearly. There's more to revenue then ticket sales - a lot more. And you can't just contract teams because of poor ticket sales. Contraction is a quick fix - and if you want a quick fix, why not dump the teams that are already BQ? That was my point.
The truth is, Hockey needs to have teams in largly populated areas in the US for a larger TV deal - how do you think the original ABC/ESPN kept this lockout from happening years ago? Expansion. But it was inevitable. Until a deal is in place where salaries are capped and revenue is shared, this will happen to hockey everytime the CBA is up.
Hockey has all the love in Canada, but all the money in the US. That's why there are no NFL teams in Canada. And only one baseball team left in Canada. And because I don't watch the NBA until May, I'm not sure how many NBA teams are left in Canada, but at last count it was one. When all the love and all the money is in the US, Canadian franchises can't compete. It's your love that keeps hockey competitive in a dual country league. It may also be your downfall.
Originally posted by sonickteam2:How many players would play in Canada if they could be paid twice as much to play in the US?
honestly, if its all just about cities with money and TV deals…just give the cup to Canada and let them have thier own hockey league.
The NHL needs a salary cap and revenue sharing. It's the only fix to save the league on a permanent basis.
Originally posted by vansmack:where, in the AHL. do they even have a TV deal with ANYONE?
How many players would play in Canada if they could be paid twice as much to play in the US?
Originally posted by vansmack:and i really think Ottawa's being bankrupt had more to do with shitty ownership than anything else. i dont know about Buffalo.
How many players would play in Canada if they could be paid twice as much to play in the US?
Originally posted by sonickteam2:Do you think that if the NHL were to split and the cup be given to Canada as you suggested, that the US franchises would disband? They would create their own Professional Hockey League. And with more revenue, be able to pay their players a lot more than Canada.
where, in the AHL. do they even have a TV deal with ANYONE?
Originally posted by vansmack:I didnt say they would, i said they should. and a "new" hockey league with only american teams wouldnt work. not paying millions of dollars anyway. without tradition, hockey is nothing in American……seriously.
Originally posted by sonickteam2:Do you think that if the NHL were to split and the cup be given to Canada as you suggested, that the US franchises would disband? They would create their own Professional Hockey League. And with more revenue, be able to pay their players a lot more than Canada.
where, in the AHL. do they even have a TV deal with ANYONE?
Originally posted by xcanuck:<img src="http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2004/09/01/bhagwan_shree_rajnesh_narrowweb__200x230.jpg" alt=" - " />
For both the hockey fans out there…it's all over for this year.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news;_ylc=X3oDMTBpNWZic251BF9TAzI1NjY0ODI1BHNlYwN0aA--?slug=ap-nhllockout&prov=ap&type=lgns
I place the blame for this whole debacle squarely on Bettman's shoulders. His lack of leadership lead to a situation where rampant expansion and player salaries ran amok and resulted in the season cancellation. I only hope that this all results in league contraction (even if it means losing the Caps) so that we can have a viable product in a couple of years.
The man wouldn't know a hockey puck if it hit him. Too bad that 12 yr old girl in Columbus got hit….it should have been Bettman. He should just go back to the NBA where he belongs.
I guess I'll just up to play on a THIRD team for the summer. I've got to get my fix somehow…..
And who is giving a rat's posterior, I am wondering?
Originally posted by sonickteam2:I think you mean without Canadian Players, an American Pro Hockey League would be nothing, because America doesn't need your tradition. How long are you going to hold on to this "tradition"?
without tradition, hockey is nothing in American……seriously.
The first Pro Hockey League was in the US, not Canada.
Only two Canadian teams have won a Stanley Cup in the last 15 years.
Only four teams have played for one.
There are only, what 6 Canadian Teams left, out of 30 teams total? And yet the NHL continued until this year.
Yes, the majority of the hockey players in the NHL are Canadian, but your 6 pro teams can't keep them all and when the US teams pay the players more, which they inevitably will, it will take an act of the Canadian Government to keep the Canadian hockey players from making more money in the US.
I can't even believe your suggesting this.