All Canadian Hockey League?

[dennis1]

Could it work? What would it take, how many teams?

[patm]

It would turn into CFL hockey version. Which, for the majority of the population, has little REAL significance.

Victories tend to be forgotten a few days after the fact, celebrations are hardly anything like say the Red Mile or anything like that and it just... Doesn't really matter.

[BretttheRiderFan]

Originally Posted by patm

It would turn into CFL hockey version. Which, for the majority of the population, has little REAL significance.

Victories tend to be forgotten a few days after the fact, celebrations are hardly anything like say the Red Mile or anything like that and it just... Doesn't really matter.

The CFL is pretty big, just so you know

To the original poster, expect this thread to be locked soon because apparently anything not 100% directly related to skyscrapers apparently should be locked


In the case of an all-Canadan league, I don't think it's impossible, but extremely unlikely.

I think the league would be better quality than the "American only" NHL could be, because imagine the NHL today without the revenue that the Canadian markets bring in....it would be severely shattered.

I think a Canadian league (retaining the Stanley Cup, as it was meant for Canada ) would be about the size of the CFL...the existing 6 teams plus Quebec City and Winnipeg would be awesome. I think the disparity of pay wouldn't be entirely different between the two leagues when it's all said and done either. Call me crazy but it would be cool, but 99.99% unlikely to happen ever

[kool maudit]

why would i give up, say, the montreal-boston rivalry, with all the history and regional significance than attends it, so that i could watch the habs play some team from victoria or whatever?

[Bdog]

I don't think it would happen, for a variety of reasons. First of all, it would be in competition with the NHL (assuming you're talking about a rival league, and not somehow magically absorbing the 6 existing canadian teams). Top players would likely stay with the NHL, due to contracts/more money/endorsement deals/etc. Understandably then, the league would be on par with the AHL in terms of talent, which would make it unlikely that fans (in NHL cities) would switch allegiances. Second, existing markets (if they somehow saw this new league as a threat) would likely try to defend their markets from competition (i.e. See how Toronto teams fared in the 1970s WHA, in regards to TV, arena leases, etc.). Third, the league would likely struggle in terms of revenue, for the fact that it would be forced into very small markets (assuming the league was to be larger than 9 teams) - thus, smaller arenas, less ticket revenue, less TV revenue, less merchandise opportunity, etc....

[Calgarian]

We have the CHL where 95% of teams are Canadian based and that's good enough.

[thurmas]

the only way it could work is if the 6 nhl teams deffected or if you somehow had similar to soccer national leagues set up like an english premier league and then the champion of canada would play the russian or u.s. national champion like the uefa champions league.

[PoscStudent]

St. John's can support a hockey team as long as it's pro enough. AHL was good QMJHL was not.

[Antigonish]

Originally Posted by thurmas

the only way it could work is if the 6 nhl teams deffected or if you somehow had similar to soccer national leagues set up like an english premier league and then the champion of canada would play the russian or u.s. national champion like the uefa champions league.

The most interesting concept would be introducing promotion/relegation from this league into the NHL (include smaller market Canadian and USA teams in one league) instead of creating corperate fake "franchaises" to market players and the league.

I'd prefer to see the small market Halifax Mooseheads get promoted to to NHL to battle against the hockey giants for survival or a surprise playoff spot in the 10,500 seat Metro Centre than see the Atlanta Thrashers finish last every season with no real fans or local developement teams producing any players.

Don't forget the big TV deal that keeps the NHL going is the CBC, and to a lesser extent TSN. Without those two the NHL would have very little money.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by Bdog

I don't think it would happen, for a variety of reasons. First of all, it would be in competition with the NHL (assuming you're talking about a rival league, and not somehow magically absorbing the 6 existing canadian teams). Top players would likely stay with the NHL, due to contracts/more money/endorsement deals/etc. Understandably then, the league would be on par with the AHL in terms of talent, which would make it unlikely that fans (in NHL cities) would switch allegiances. Second, existing markets (if they somehow saw this new league as a threat) would likely try to defend their markets from competition (i.e. See how Toronto teams fared in the 1970s WHA, in regards to TV, arena leases, etc.). Third, the league would likely struggle in terms of revenue, for the fact that it would be forced into very small markets (assuming the league was to be larger than 9 teams) - thus, smaller arenas, less ticket revenue, less TV revenue, less merchandise opportunity, etc....

Where does this idea come from? Is it some kind innate inferiority complex? It sure has nothing to do with facts or logic. I have no problem with a North American league like the NHL. It works fine and I see no reason to introduce separate national leagues for the US and Canada. That said a Canadian professional league would be nothing like the CFL or AHL. The CFL was actually relatively comparable to the NFL in player quality and compensation until the latter started getting insane television contracts. Hockey is very different in that it has its big television market in Canada. Right now the soon to be replaced Canadian contracts (CBC, TSN, and RDS, so ignoring local television rights) are essentially the same as the big American contract just signed with NBC. That means six teams and thirty million people raise the same revenue as twenty four teams and three hundred million people. A large Canadian league would likely have lower team payrolls than the NHL. The American league would be even weaker, like much weaker. Without the American television revenue, Canadian teams would each lose about 6.7 million dollars a year; with the Canadian contract all to themselves they would gain 25 million dollars a year. That would be offset by additional teams, beyond the current six, in Canada but it would take a lot of teams to disperse Canadian hockey money to the point where they would, individually, be weaker than the NHL average. The American league would automatically be screwed without revenue sharing from Canadian teams and the television contract. There just aren't enough powerhouse franchises or television viewers in the US to subsidize all of the weak ones.

That all said, I can't see any circumstances under which the NHL would dissolve and individual national leagues would replace it. Nor is there a valid reason for it to happen. It would have to involve blind nationalism or some bizarre desire to replicate the European sports situation. Neither of those reasons make sense to me. I could see another WHA style competitor spring up. I cannot see it being very successful though. It would probably do exactly the same thing as the original WHA: hurt the NHL until the few franchises that actually make sense are asked to merge so that the competition can stop hurting everyone. There just aren't enough locations left where hockey can succeed that the NHL isn't already covering.

[dennis1]

Originally Posted by BretttheRiderFan

The CFL is pretty big, just so you know

To the original poster, expect this thread to be locked soon because apparently anything not 100% directly related to skyscrapers apparently should be locked


In the case of an all-Canadan league, I don't think it's impossible, but extremely unlikely.

I think the league would be better quality than the "American only" NHL could be, because imagine the NHL today without the revenue that the Canadian markets bring in....it would be severely shattered.

I think a Canadian league (retaining the Stanley Cup, as it was meant for Canada ) would be about the size of the CFL...the existing 6 teams plus Quebec City and Winnipeg would be awesome. I think the disparity of pay wouldn't be entirely different between the two leagues when it's all said and done either. Call me crazy but it would be cool, but 99.99% unlikely to happen ever

1) The CFL is big now. It has gone up in the last 10 years. In 1999 here in Southern Ontario no one was checking and the Argos were still good.
2)It is much bigger in the west then the east.

[Ayreonaut]

Originally Posted by PoscStudent

St. John's can support a hockey team as long as it's pro enough. AHL was good QMJHL was not.

Which is kinda lame considering the size of the city. How the hell can it not support a major-junior team?

[dennis1]

Originally Posted by Ayreonaut

Which is kinda lame considering the size of the city. How the hell can it not support a major-junior team?

weird to me.

[Nicko999]

It will NEVER happen but even if it somehow does, I would lose interest because of the smaller league.
I also want to see Montreal-Boston matchups as often as possible and creating an all Canadian Hockey League would kill the best rivalry not only in hockey but in sports.

Like Calgarian said, if you want to watch a Canadian hockey league, the CHL is your best bet.

[PoscStudent]

Originally Posted by Ayreonaut

Which is kinda lame considering the size of the city. How the hell can it not support a major-junior team?

Because after years of watching AHL people don't wanna watch QMJL. We were spoiled.

[Some guy]

All I can say is imagine all the rivalries that would come about. If it were to be the size of the CFL. . . . . then I would suspect everyone would be a rival with everyone.

The only reason the CFL doesn't have that level of rivalry is because football is not as popular as. . . . . . well you know.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

Where does this idea come from? Is it some kind innate inferiority complex? It sure has nothing to do with facts or logic. I have no problem with a North American league like the NHL. It works fine and I see no reason to introduce separate national leagues for the US and Canada. That said a Canadian professional league would be nothing like the CFL or AHL. The CFL was actually relatively comparable to the NFL in player quality and compensation until the latter started getting insane television contracts. Hockey is very different in that it has its big television market in Canada. Right now the soon to be replaced Canadian contracts (CBC, TSN, and RDS, so ignoring local television rights) are essentially the same as the big American contract just signed with NBC. That means six teams and thirty million people raise the same revenue as twenty four teams and three hundred million people. A large Canadian league would likely have lower team payrolls than the NHL. The American league would be even weaker, like much weaker. Without the American television revenue, Canadian teams would each lose about 6.7 million dollars a year; with the Canadian contract all to themselves they would gain 25 million dollars a year. That would be offset by additional teams, beyond the current six, in Canada but it would take a lot of teams to disperse Canadian hockey money to the point where they would, individually, be weaker than the NHL average. The American league would automatically be screwed without revenue sharing from Canadian teams and the television contract. There just aren't enough powerhouse franchises or television viewers in the US to subsidize all of the weak ones.

That all said, I can't see any circumstances under which the NHL would dissolve and individual national leagues would replace it. Nor is there a valid reason for it to happen. It would have to involve blind nationalism or some bizarre desire to replicate the European sports situation. Neither of those reasons make sense to me. I could see another WHA style competitor spring up. I cannot see it being very successful though. It would probably do exactly the same thing as the original WHA: hurt the NHL until the few franchises that actually make sense are asked to merge so that the competition can stop hurting everyone. There just aren't enough locations left where hockey can succeed that the NHL isn't already covering.

Not even sure what you're arguing with me about. It seems to me like you agree with my points, unless I'm reading it wrong...

In regards to some of your points though:

First of all, your TV numbers are off. Not sure where you're calculations are coming from...

American league screwed without revenue sharing? Canadian team success is relatively recent, with almost half on life support just a short decade ago. You seem to think that every US team is a Coyotes or a Thrashers. They'll do just fine with Boston, NY, CHI, LA, Philly, Pittsburgh, Detroit, etc. etc. etc.

Anyway, it looks like we agree that some sort of Canadian League is not likely...

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by Bdog

Not even sure what you're arguing with me about. It seems to me like you agree with my points, unless I'm reading it wrong...

In regards to some of your points though:

First of all, your TV numbers are off. Not sure where you're calculations are coming from...

American league screwed without revenue sharing? Canadian team success is relatively recent, with almost half on life support just a short decade ago. You seem to think that every US team is a Coyotes or a Thrashers. They'll do just fine with Boston, NY, CHI, LA, Philly, Pittsburgh, Detroit, etc. etc. etc.

Anyway, it looks like we agree that some sort of Canadian League is not likely...

I was disagreeing with the assertion that players would play in the American league because there would be more money there. My TV numbers are not off. The national contracts are all that I'm talking about, the local contracts go to individual teams so they don't matter. The new NBC contract is for 200 million a year. The combination of the CBC, TSN, and the national portion of the RDS contract is essentially the same.

It isn't the lack of revenue sharing alone that would screw them. It is the combination of that and the loss of the Canadian television contracts that would. There are plenty of healthy US franchises but there is healthy and there is replace the Canadian money healthy. There are very few of the latter. Without the six or so million that every team in the NHL receives from the Canadian television contracts, a lot more teams drop into the red or cut player salaries substantially. Revenue sharing from Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa might not make a whole lot of difference but cutting Toronto and Montreal out does. The NHL just isn't in a position where it can lose any contributor franchises, it would shift to much of the burden to the other contributors. That is without touching on merchandise. Centrally generated revenue matters a great deal to most franchises.

Basically my point is this talk about a Canadian league being comparable to the CFL, AHL, or KHL is flawed. If the NHL were to ever break a part into two national leagues the Canadian one would be the premier hockey league in the world. The difference between it and number two, presumably the American league, wouldn't be as great as that between the NHL and the current number two but it would be significant.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

I was disagreeing with the assertion that players would play in the American league because there would be more money there. My TV numbers are not off. The national contracts are all that I'm talking about, the local contracts go to individual teams so they don't matter. The new NBC contract is for 200 million a year. The combination of the CBC, TSN, and the national portion of the RDS contract is essentially the same.

It isn't the lack of revenue sharing alone that would screw them. It is the combination of that and the loss of the Canadian television contracts that would. There are plenty of healthy US franchises but there is healthy and there is replace the Canadian money healthy. There are very few of the latter. Without the six or so million that every team in the NHL receives from the Canadian television contracts, a lot more teams drop into the red or cut player salaries substantially. Revenue sharing from Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa might not make a whole lot of difference but cutting Toronto and Montreal out does. The NHL just isn't in a position where it can lose any contributor franchises, it would shift to much of the burden to the other contributors. That is without touching on merchandise. Centrally generated revenue matters a great deal to most franchises.

Basically my point is this talk about a Canadian league being comparable to the CFL, AHL, or KHL is flawed. If the NHL were to ever break a part into two national leagues the Canadian one would be the premier hockey league in the world. The difference between it and number two, presumably the American league, wouldn't be as great as that between the NHL and the current number two but it would be significant.

The TV numbers are wrong in that they can't simply be transferred to a new league as you have done. Assuming all the Canadian deals equal $200 Million as you claim doesn't automatically give each team 25$ a year (I guess you're assuming an 8 team Canadian league?). No, the contract would obviously be renegotiated for much less, considering the majority of NHL superstars are no longer in the league (Crosby, Ovechkin, Toews, Stamkos, and the list goes on...). Moreover, the NHL is a gate-driven league, so TV contracts are not a major factor at the moment anyway.

Players would definitely play in the US league, for reasons I mentioned. First they're tied to their contracts. Second, the attraction of being in the NHL over some rival startup would surely keep most where they were (unless the owners want to pool their money to lure a star or 2, a la Bobby Hull). The only reason the WHA was somewhat successful was that it beat the NHL into certain markets - this spurred NHL expansion, and now those markets are tapped out. A rival Canadian league, in my opinion, would either A) be on par with the AHL, or B) if they really made a push to compete with the NHL, would fold in a year or 2 (because there would be no way for a start-up league to pay high-calibre players with reduced revenues - a start-up isn't going to be charging $70 for tickets out the gate, and TV contracts aren't going to be $200 M for a startup league with a dozen teams).

I assume the OP didn't mean that the Canadian league would be just the 6 in the NHL now (if so, why even leave the NHL). If a 12 team league (for example), is what he has in mind, then the revenue split of the reduced TV contract would be even less. Moreover, doubling the amount of teams isn't going to even come close to doubling the TV market, but is more likely going to just redistribute (which would create resistance from teams who are getting their markets cut into). Montreal and Toronto would be too big for this new league, and would never join (as the revenues from being in the NHL would keep them there).

We're in Canada, people love hockey. If a league like this was feasible, it would have been tried many times. The fact that something like this wasn't even attempted during the lockout should put this idea to rest...

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by Bdog

The TV numbers are wrong in that they can't simply be transferred to a new league as you have done. Assuming all the Canadian deals equal $200 Million as you claim doesn't automatically give each team 25$ a year (I guess you're assuming an 8 team Canadian league?). No, the contract would obviously be renegotiated for much less, considering the majority of NHL superstars are no longer in the league (Crosby, Ovechkin, Toews, Stamkos, and the list goes on...). Moreover, the NHL is a gate-driven league, so TV contracts are not a major factor at the moment anyway.

Players would definitely play in the US league, for reasons I mentioned. First they're tied to their contracts. Second, the attraction of being in the NHL over some rival startup would surely keep most where they were (unless the owners want to pool their money to lure a star or 2, a la Bobby Hull). The only reason the WHA was somewhat successful was that it beat the NHL into certain markets - this spurred NHL expansion, and now those markets are tapped out. A rival Canadian league, in my opinion, would either A) be on par with the AHL, or B) if they really made a push to compete with the NHL, would fold in a year or 2 (because there would be no way for a start-up league to pay high-calibre players with reduced revenues - a start-up isn't going to be charging $70 for tickets out the gate, and TV contracts aren't going to be $200 M for a startup league with a dozen teams).

I assume the OP didn't mean that the Canadian league would be just the 6 in the NHL now (if so, why even leave the NHL). If a 12 team league (for example), is what he has in mind, then the revenue split of the reduced TV contract would be even less. Moreover, doubling the amount of teams isn't going to even come close to doubling the TV market, but is more likely going to just redistribute (which would create resistance from teams who are getting their markets cut into). Montreal and Toronto would be too big for this new league, and would never join (as the revenues from being in the NHL would keep them there).

We're in Canada, people love hockey. If a league like this was feasible, it would have been tried many times. The fact that something like this wasn't even attempted during the lockout should put this idea to rest...

Ah, okay. We were just talking about two different things. I was talking about the entirely hypothetical situation were the NHL to either cease to exist, or never have existed in the first place, and be replaced by two European style national leagues. I have heard a lot of people argue that in such an, unlikely, eventually the Canadian league would be some kind of pathetic second tier to the American league. That was the idea that I found problematic. I agree with you completely that a new, all Canadian or otherwise, start up league would have a hell of a time competing with the NHL whether the six Canadian teams defected or not.