and anyone else.. to improve the overall popolarity of the NHL, we all know the first step.. lets pretend that has been done and you are the commish and this your baby.. how do you help it grow and prosper in a luke warm at best U.S. market?
2007-10-07 15:50:32 · 13 answers · asked by Copas -- Tit,Toots & Leggy line 5 in Sports ➔ Hockey
I've said this a thousand times, but oh well.
Get rid of two teams, either Carolina, Florida (I'm sorry Kimmy, lol), Nashville or Atlanta.
Say we got rid of Carolina and Atlanta. Then I'd take the remaining two teams, Florida and Nashville, and relocate them to Quebec, Seattle, Portland, or Winnipeg, whichever city would better support them. Then I'd absolutely make a deal with ESPN to broadcast at least one game per week. I'd change the schedule so teams in the same division won't play each other 8 times a season and so every team would have the chance to play every other team in the NHL. And I absolutely, positively, WOULD NOT expand the league. Also there's no way KC or Las Vegas (whatever B. Loblaw, we've been through this) should have a team.
That should help the NHL move forward, and I think it's the best way to go. We don't need anything drastic (like contracting 8 teams, or expanding 4 teams). Just have 28 teams, an ESPN TV deal, a better schedule, and things would be on the uprise. Frankly, if all that happens, I wouldn't even care who the commissioner is.
~
Lity (that's what we're calling "Like I'm telling you..." now, if you aren't in the know), I thought you were all for contraction? You're the one who should have an answer to your question.
~~
OMG, DC FURY, making preseason tickets free is an EXCELLENT idea! I think that would work great! But I don't agree with getting rid of the shootout, I like it in the regular season, never in the playoffs though.
2007-10-07 16:05:26 · answer #1 · answered by N/A 6 · 6⤊ 0⤋
After wasting over a billion dollars, the NHL will be faced with the reality that many of us already know. That is the sport of ice hockey is unique and one that has a regional popularity. To change the game as they are now is an insult to traditional fans and requires a huge investment with a poor R.O.I. to attract new fans in new markets.
The first thing I would do is make it attractive to relocate teams that aren't doing well, once I've declared what "not doing well" means. I would be emphatic toward more representation in Canada by four more cities and possibly second franchises in Toronto and Montreal. I'd make several northern American cities new members too.
I would chuck parity out the window and also be open to a first and second division format used in European soccer today.
The trapezoid and the center ice red line would disappear, I would declare myself Emperor of Uniform and Logo Design and right a few wrongs there.
And the coup de grace would be the rink size being increased to European standards.
Oh, I'd fire Ed Snider too.
2007-10-08 01:42:01 · answer #2 · answered by Awesome Bill 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I love how people think that you can just do all of these things like it's nothing.
"I'd sign a contract with ESPN!"
No, you would pitch the idea to the owners and they would shoot you down. In fear for your job, you would do what the owners tell you. In the event that you would sign with ESPN, they would probably fire you and hire someone would would sign a contract with the Food Network.
"I would just move some teams to Canada!"
Yup. Sure. We saw how easy that was last offseason with the Hamilton Preds.
"Contract!"
Gee, I wonder how many owners would be cool with that idea?
Bettman is just another greedy owner and all, but it's not like having a true hockey guy in the office could just change everything. He'd still have to deal with 30 greedy bosses, who collectively have more power than the commish will ever have.
2007-10-08 02:55:19 · answer #3 · answered by JK Nation 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't contract! Just move some more teams to Canada where we actually care about hockey. There are some great American hockey fans and hockey cities but in the end its not about trying to twist arms to fall in love with the game.
'Popolarity' is not really the issue, its about letting the real fans enjoy the game.
2007-10-07 19:26:27 · answer #4 · answered by megalomaniac 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You want improvement? Here's how: Get rid of Gary Bettman. Reduce the number teams so teams can have more depth. Get rid of the salary cap. Let teams spend as much as they can afford. Move some teams back to Canada. Canadian fans are more passionate about their hockey. No offense to some of the American markets. Places like Detroit and NJ have great fans, but I just don't think there's enough interest in some of the southern teams. I mean, Nashville and Carolina just aren't hockey cities. Give back teams to Winnipeg and Quebec. Not going to have as much revenue, but if you want good hockey that's where it is.
2007-10-07 16:49:29 · answer #5 · answered by hockey craze99 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Contraction. It was best when their were fewer teams. Also they need to be in a region that WANTS them and SUPPORTS them. Face it Hockey is and will probably always be a Niche Sport. The ratings are better when you have great teams. The ratings are better when you don't have crappy teams that can't get anyone to watch their games dragging down the rest of the league. Honestly if team A gets a viewership rating of 20 and team B only gets a rating of 2 then the ratings fall to 11. So imagine taking out the teams that no one wants to watch. Suddenly the ratings go up from that alone.
2007-10-07 16:01:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
The CEO of RIM tried to purchase two teams for more than they were worth and got shot down by the NHL. They should have let him purchase one of them. He offered more for Nashville than the second group of investors did. The NHL should make wise business decisions.
He had season's tickets sold in Hamilton in order to move the Predators there. The team would have done a lot better there than it could ever do in Nashville.
2007-10-07 17:58:05 · answer #7 · answered by DANIEL G 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Geez people, don't you think it would be a little expensive for the NHL to contract teams. Lets just say a team is worth 180 million. Take away two teams, thats 360 million the NHL has to pay those owners.
2007-10-07 16:56:49 · answer #8 · answered by Wings Fan! 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the ratings were still bad when the league was with ESPN, but they were better than they are now so I'd go back to them. i would eliminate the shoot-out. the intensity of overtime helped bring a lot of my friends over to the game during the playoffs and the shoot out is just plain stupid. I would make preseason tickets free. that way someone could decide to just go for a free night and fall in love with hockey. in short i would make it as easy as possible for anyone to get a dose of hockey.
2007-10-07 16:54:44 · answer #9 · answered by DC FURY 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Preseason games are a fairly critical revenue source, particularly for the 14 teams that don't make the playoffs.
2007-10-08 00:21:22 · answer #10 · answered by zapcity29 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋