Quote:
Originally Posted by EastVanMark
First off, its not 1/3 of total revenues since there is no possible way to accurately measure those since teams are owned by private entities that don't release figures. The 1/3 figure comes from ticket sales. Secondly, when you take away the troubled sunbelt franchises, that ratio falls right about where it should be. As for TV contracts; FALSE. The US TV deal is currently worth slightly more (although the Canadian side is yet to be re-negotiated). Also, if the 2 countries were to form their own leagues the US league would keep 12 or so of their largest, most successful markets capable of driving salaries into the stratosphere while the Canadian one would only have a couple, maybe 3 that could keep pace. The rest would not be able to. And that is for our national pastime. For Soccer, the situation would be even worse!
|
There aren't 12 American powerhouse clubs in the NHL. More like 7 or 8. In order to get to 12 you'd have to fill their league with other clubs, some of which aren't even as rich as the Flames and Oilers.
Maybe an all-Canadian pro hockey league wouldn't beat the pants off the U.S. counterpart, but it certainly wouldn't be a poor second sister either. There would likely be two highly competitive pro hockey leagues in North America. That's it.
Of course, all of this is assuming the popularity of hockey remains a different ball game on either side of the border. An NHL club in a city of 2 million in Canada will almost always be more successful (not necessarily on the ice) than an NHL club in a city of 2 million in the U.S., just because hockey is number one in Canada, and rarely number one in the States. Not even in the northern cities.
Because of hockey's unique position in Canada, a pro hockey club in Halifax, Nova Scotia in a top-level Canadian league would probably be as viable as the Buffalo Sabres or Carolina Hurricanes.