WPG to become an NHL city again?

[SteveP]

Originally Posted by newflyer

Its really funny reading these posts from the Edmonton and Calgary camps.. who really were a hair away from losing there teams as well.

I remember in particular the Flames begging the corportae community to stand behind them, in a presentation at Bankers Hall as they were desparate for support. The team was on its way down... and the group of local owners who picked up the team said it was all on the community if it survived. Perhaps the Flames fans are more concerned about the Jets coming back then they let on.

I also remember Edmonton business community scrambling to create a large enough group of owners to prop up that team in the 90's. It was pretty well to the point of not being able resign it high price players, due to weak buget limitations. Not much has changed.. the team is still dealing with a limited budget.. and this is during a massive Alberta boom. Anyone want to guess if it will get better or worse when oil returns to the 30's??

I think you've just help support their arguments. Personally, I believe Winnipeg could support an NHL team today in the current circumstances.

In the case of Edmonton and Calgary struggling a few ago, you have to consider that if those cities with almost double the population and more potential for corporate money barley hung on, then what would happen to Winnipeg in the same situation.

Winnipeg would be greatly support a team for a while regardless of whether the team did well or not. The tough part would be down the raod a few years and the team wasn't playing well, or if the dollar dropped, or if the salary cap went up.

[berzerkled]

Originally Posted by trueviking

freeweed...cool research, thanks...verry funny edmonton, no team..

amazing 110 posts in one day!...someone should go start a 'NHL is coming to portland/houston/kansas city' thread in the appropriate regional forums and see how many tumbleweeds blow through.

if anything, there is passion about the issue on both sides.....maybe that speaks greater volumes than any statistic.

Absolutely agreed.

I recall Darren on TSN during the lockout, while they were waiting to see if there would be another season or not, saying something to the effect of, "and Canada, stop saying you don't care about this lockout and the situation of the NHL. The TSN website and other news agencies have been bombarded with hits, hitting all time traffic highs, and some have been forced to shut down. So you do care, Canadians must stop saying they don't".

[Distill3d]

Originally Posted by BlackRedGold

Here's some American markets that are clearly better then Winnipeg as well: Minneapolis-St. Paul, Detroit, New York, Philadelphia..

didn't the Minnesota North Stars, who played in the twin cities, after all lose their first NHL franchise to Dallas, and just got a new one back a few years ago?

as for Detroit and New York, both cities have original six NHL franchises, so of course there is going to be vested interest there. no one hears of the Rangers or Red Wings threatening to move anywhere, probably because the NHL would block the move, but also because they have been supportive of their teams over the last 81 years (detroit having two other names, the Cougars from 1926 - 1930, and the Falcons from 1930 -1932 prior to settling with the name Red Wings). If you want to toss in the Islanders, they've won 4 Stanley Cups and have a deep tradition in producing superstar players (IE: Mike Bossy, Bryan Trottier). Philidelphia has won 2 Stanley Cups, and had a host of super star players come out of the ranks. so, they can keep fans asses planted firmly in the seats. and The Devils have won 3 cups. so, of course these big city's (Detroit, New York, and Philadelphia) would have NO issue filling seats.

so whats the issue with giving Winnipeg a new team? i mean, do you really think for a second that a Canadian city thats been NHL starved for a decade is going to make the same mistakes again?

[Tower Crane]

Originally Posted by trueviking

.72 thank you very much....and if american style metro areas were used, closer to .85 (close to a million within an hour's drive 100kms)

point taken though...and that is why the smaller arena hurts more in percetion than anything....really, three quarters of a million people in a true market is probably better than 1.1 million in a basketball market, but the perception is bad....so, adding the smallest arena in the league only adds to that perception.

I know your trying to make a point TrueViking but a 1 Million people within an hours drive.....come on now.

[Tower Crane]

One needs to look no further than Edmonton and Calgary. Both Cities in the 1 million mark with larger areas of population to draw from outside of both cities. Both have arena's of 17,000 or over with more boxes than the MTS centre.
With that being more than the MTS centre can produce revenue wise are the Oilers and flames making money or just breaking even. If it's only breaking even and making a bit of dough than I think we all have our answer.

[Greco Roman]

Originally Posted by BlackRedGold

Why do you keep replying to my posts with idiotic comments that add no value or purpose to the discussion?

Because your posts mirror my responses in regards to your posts about Winnipeg; complete stupidity.

[SHOFEAR]

Albertaboy, your victim mentality is getting pretty old. If your only reply to anybody questioning Winnipeg is "it's cause the rest of Canada hates us" don't bother.

Otherwise this has turned into a pretty good debate.

Originally Posted by trueviking

in 1996, it would have been financial suicide to buy the jets as a private owner...remember that even vancouver, calgary and edmonton were barely scraping by at that time....edmonton in particular was able to narrowly weather the storm with their 50 man ownership throng, but winnipeg wasnt as lucky....they were very close to saving the team, but winnipeg was not in their plans as they went after the american market...they did little to help....unlike today and the penguins.


times have changed, both in the NHL and in canada....all of the canadian cities are now profitable and very viable....edmonton is way better off today than it was in 1996, just as winnipeg would be....the league has changed as well as the strong canadian economy in all the NHL cities has taken the canadian cities from the brink a few years ago to profitable and stable...this is why today that winnipeg can be viable as well....the situation of all canadian cities has improved...as has winipeg's.

how quickly we forget that only a few sort years ago edmonton and calgary and vancouver were all perrenial losers and struggling financially...it has only been recently that the tables have turned...that is why winnipeg can now be considered...if the conditions were the same as in in 1996, we would lose them again.

i am not sure i would claim that the MTS centre is better than the arenas in calgary or edmonton.

Fair points,

But at the same time as the smaller cities like Edmonton and Calgary are financially solid we are talking about the need for a new arena that is going to be significantly larger, but most importantly have a very large number of boxes to remain competitive. If we need these rinks to ensure our stability, how feasible will the MTS center be in 5 or ten years.

Further, I don't see how Chipman would allow any team to play in his building unless he was the owner. Could somebody convince me why he would purchase a team when he has a sweat set up as it is? Does he not have to pay off the +$100 million dollar arena he sunk his money into? The profitability of a AHL vs a NHL team can't compare.

[Greco Roman]

Originally Posted by SHOFEAR

Albertaboy, your victim mentality is getting pretty old. If your only reply to anybody questioning Winnipeg is "it's cause the rest of Canada hates us" don't bother.

You think I'm completely wrong on that? You have never lived where I live and experienced the type of ridicule about Edmonton on as much of a regular basis as I have for my hometown from other Canadians so you don't get it. I won't go into it further, but the bottom line is that too many people have a distorted perception about the city. And in terms of BRG, he has just taken it too far. But yes, this is a debate and my personal feelings should stay out of it, at least partially.

I digress, the debate is fairly good and upbeat for both sides. Hope it keeps up.

[feepa]

Originally Posted by Albertaboy

You think I'm completely wrong on that? You have never lived where I live and experienced the type of ridicule about Edmonton on as much of a regular basis as I have for my hometown from other Canadians so you don't get it. I won't go into it further, but the bottom line is that too many people have a distorted perception about the city. And in terms of BRG, he has just taken it too far. But yes, this is a debate and my personal feelings should stay out of it, at least partially. On that I will agree with you; point taken.

I digress, the debate is fairly good and upbeat for both sides. Hope it keeps up.

I think alot of Edmontonians can share this experience. Remember, Edmonton is just one rung up the ladder in Canadian city rankings in most peoples perceptives, so stop crying already.

[Kevin_foster]

I think all Canadians can agree: More Canadian Teams Plz.

Whatever it takes, give Winnipeg their own team dammit.

It's good for Canada, it's good for Winnipeg, it's good for hockey.

In any case, I'm sick of beating/playing Vancouver and Calgary all the time!!!!

[Greco Roman]

Originally Posted by feepa

so stop crying already.

Only if you give me a box of kleenex

[MistyMountainHop]

Originally Posted by feepa

Just for fun here's some NHL related metro populations: (2005 estimates - in millions)

... 1.9 Vancouver...

^ Vancouver actually has 2.2 million.

[m0nkyman]

Originally Posted by feepa

Remember, Edmonton is just one rung up the ladder in Canadian city rankings in most peoples perceptives, so stop crying already.

Judging by the reactions I got when I told people we were opening a store in Edmonton, and the reaction I'm getting when I tell people the next one is going in Winnipeg, I'd say Edmonton and Winnipeg are pretty much tied for stupefied looks followed by either "Why?" or "I'm sorry."

[BlackRedGold]

Originally Posted by Albertaboy

Because your posts mirror my responses in regards to your posts about Winnipeg; complete stupidity.

If they were truly stupid, which they aren't, you'd be able to explain why that's the case. Instead you act like a gradeschooler who points at something he doesn't like and says it stupid.

Do you think Winnipeg is one of the top ten hockey markets in North America? If so, why do you think it is better then the markets I listed?

[BlackRedGold]

Originally Posted by Albertaboy

You have never lived where I live and experienced the type of ridicule about Edmonton on as much of a regular basis as I have for my hometown from other Canadians so you don't get it. I won't go into it further, but the bottom line is that too many people have a distorted perception about the city. And in terms of BRG, he has just taken it too far. But yes, this is a debate and my personal feelings should stay out of it, at least partially.

Debating on the merits of Winnipeg as an NHL market is not ridiculing or insulting Winnipeg. If Regina, Halifax, Sudbury, Sherbrooke, Charlottetown or Nanaimo claimed they deserved an NHL team or are a top ten hockey market, I'd dispute their claims just as I have with Winnipeg.

I've been to Winnipeg. My wife's been to Winnipeg on multiple occasions. My mother has lived in Manitoba. I've worked with people who live in Winnipeg. I'm not bashing Winnipeg. I'm debating about Winnipeg's status as a hockey market. If you're not mature and secure enough to understand that then that's too bad.

[Archiseek]

that's all well and good to say but in all your posts to date on this issue on different threads, all you do is come across like you have a massive hardon against winnipeg - it kind of destroys your argument

[Sammy]

The population base of an area is significant for TV / advertising revenues. That is where a large portion of revenues comes from for many sports franchises. US College teams (football) generate serious $$ from TV contracts that outnumber the NHL's numbers. No suprise there . . .

The other factor that plays against Winnipeg getting a team are the large US markets that want a pro sports franchise but are too small to have a NFL team, for example. Salt Lake and the Portland area, and other cities that have approx 2 million (+ market) and are still rapidily growing make more sense for a sports league to establish a new franchise in than entering into a small market again. Though it is unfortunate, Winnipeg even though it would probaly sell out every game does not provide enough to sway a majoirty of owners. Sports franchises are prized trophys for municipalities.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by Sammy

The population base of an area is significant for TV / advertising revenues. That is where a large portion of revenues comes from for many sports franchises. US College teams (football) generate serious $$ from TV contracts that outnumber the NHL's numbers. No suprise there . . .

Which of course explains why the US has so many NHL teams, when their TV ratings for hockey rank somewhere between bowling and CPAC. No, this is not exaggeration - more people in the US watch bowling on TV than they do hockey. Hell, the NHL is on OLN - not exactly a ratings bonanza.

Population base has far less to do with it, than actual INTEREST IN THE SPORT.

[Mikemike]

The fact that US cities who really don't give a rats ass about hockey but want a pro team (ANY pro team) are seen as more viable than winnipeg or hamilton for NHL is retarded.

[BlackRedGold]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Which of course explains why the US has so many NHL teams, when their TV ratings for hockey rank somewhere between bowling and CPAC. No, this is not exaggeration - more people in the US watch bowling on TV than they do hockey. Hell, the NHL is on OLN - not exactly a ratings bonanza.

You've got a lot of things mixed up there. Maybe more people in the US watch bowling on TV then they do hockey on NATIONAL TV but overall viewship of hockey in the US, as a whole, is much higher then bowling. In the US, hockey is a regional sport and regional broadcasts in many markets have very respectable numbers. Unfortunately all you ever hear about is the national numbers which is misleading since, in many markets, Americans will watch hockey but it has to have the home team playing.