Nuxfanabroad Posted May 5, 2015 Share Posted May 5, 2015 Back in the early '70s when lots of folk had imagination & balls, they started the WHA. I tip my cap to all of'em... Too many different & difficult circumstances, today, but I'd love a WHA pt2(Cdn version), in a perfect world. Even more perfect, would have been starting this in the mid-'90s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted May 5, 2015 Share Posted May 5, 2015 Very broadthat isn't specifically about Vancouver but whatever. I don't see it happening, given what everyone has already said about it. There are too many moving parts and just doesn't seem likely teams will "Downgrade" to a lesser league. Just to have the Stanely Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted May 5, 2015 Share Posted May 5, 2015 They could have a NEW trophy competition, called the Starley Cup Champiars(or whatever the Hell Marchand was playin' for!). 2 Divisions; 1 upper & 1 lower. Div A has 10 teams, as does Div B. Bottom team gets relegated each yr; half their salary(after taxes) gets stolen by banksters..half their wives run off to the upper Div. Sport needs drama. Then over in Europe, start something similar. Each team could fly over for some 4 wk, intra-conference grind. Do some 6 wk PO to determine a Cdn & Euro champ, then a beauty, truly international final. Get the damn thing done by end-May, like the good ol' days... Ice hockey HAD so much potential. I'll never forgive that incorrigibly noxious midget lawyer. The corrupt Yanks STOLE a beautiful, national passion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
butters Posted May 5, 2015 Share Posted May 5, 2015 Another thought.. Why not just get bettman to acidentally dissapear and the nhl is easily fixed... Until a day later when he is replaced by another man who will also do what the owners tell him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted May 5, 2015 Share Posted May 5, 2015 The WHL folded in 1926, leaving the NHL as the only league left competing for the Cup. Other leagues and clubs occasionally issued challenges, but from that year forward, no non-NHL team has played for it, leading it to become the de facto championship trophy of the NHL.[40] In 1947, the NHL reached an agreement with trustees P.D. Ross and Cooper Smeaton to grant control of the Cup to the NHL, allowing the league to reject challenges from other leagues that may have wished to play for the Cup.[42][43] Wikipedia Diamond, Zweig & Duplacey 2003, p. 21. Jump up ^ "Stanley Cup Winners: Victoria Cougars 1924–25". Hockey Hall of Fame. Archived from the original on September 30, 2007. Retrieved July 11, 2006. Jump up ^ Diamond, Zweig & Duplacey 2003, p. 40. ^ Jump up to: a b "Court:Non-NHL teams could vie for Cup". TSN. February 7, 2006. Archived from the original on December 16, 2007. Retrieved July 15, 2006. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryCanuck Posted May 5, 2015 Author Share Posted May 5, 2015 A Canadian team only league would be a secondary league to the NHL as I understand how you would have it set up. My understanding to what you have suggested is that all the current Canadian teams (Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Montreal, Ottawa and Toronto) move to your new proposed "CHL" along with other Canadian teams. I am assuming you then also assume that the best Canadian players in the world would want to play in this new "CHL". I do not see that happening at all as the majority would rather play where they would get paid and that would be where the tv revenue is the greatest. Another factor working against your idea is that all those other Canadian markets that currently don't have NHL trams don't have a team for a reason. Essentially they either don't have the arena and economy to support an NHL level franchise. Good luck with the new "CHL" No, any nationality would be able to play in the league. It would water down the product similar to the KHL over the last few years. However, you need to remember that Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal are three of the biggest revenue earners in the NHL so could afford to bring in world class players. What this would mean is a serious drop in revenue for the NHL. However, as one poster already summarized the Rogers TV deal has already been signed which would limit the options of a new league. This is ultimately all the current NHL is interested in - close games (game management) in large populated TV markets attracting more eyes on the TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryCanuck Posted May 5, 2015 Author Share Posted May 5, 2015 What a stupid idea. The current TV deal with Rogers is with the NHL, if the Canadian teams were to leave they would forfeit all that money. So yeah the "CHL" would basically be hockey's version of the CFL. Of course this will never happen as the owners of the Canadian NHL teams aren't complete morons. Also according to Forbes only 3 Canadian teams make the top 10 most valuable franchises so I'm not sure where the OP got his "facts" from. I obtained my facts from the Forbes website:http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2014/11/25/the-most-valuable-teams-in-the-nhl/ The top 5 teams make up the majority of the revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted May 5, 2015 Share Posted May 5, 2015 Back in the early '70s when lots of folk had imagination & balls, they started the WHA. I tip my cap to all of'em... Too many different & difficult circumstances, today, but I'd love a WHA pt2(Cdn version), in a perfect world. Even more perfect, would have been starting this in the mid-'90s. You are completely ignoring history if you think a renegade league could have been started in Canada in the 90's. The Canadian dollar was very weak and teams in Canada were struggling financially. Not the best time to start an all Canadian team league. The WHA worked because of the players. The players left the NHL because of salaries, which isnt applicable today. Players aren't going to throw away their multi-year million dollar deals to go to another league unless the new league if offering a raise. And i highly doubt the Miss'aga or London types could provide those kind of numbers. The only players this new league might get is washed up bums and career minor leaguers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted May 5, 2015 Share Posted May 5, 2015 No, any nationality would be able to play in the league. It would water down the product similar to the KHL over the last few years. However, you need to remember that Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal are three of the biggest revenue earners in the NHL so could afford to bring in world class players. What this would mean is a serious drop in revenue for the NHL. However, as one poster already summarized the Rogers TV deal has already been signed which would limit the options of a new league. This is ultimately all the current NHL is interested in - close games (game management) in large populated TV markets attracting more eyes on the TV. Realistically, why would the owners of Montreal, Toronto, or Vancouver leave the NHL? Seriously, why would be their reasons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Sikes Posted May 5, 2015 Share Posted May 5, 2015 The WHL folded in 1926, leaving the NHL as the only league left competing for the Cup. Other leagues and clubs occasionally issued challenges, but from that year forward, no non-NHL team has played for it, leading it to become the de facto championship trophy of the NHL.[40] In 1947, the NHL reached an agreement with trustees P.D. Ross and Cooper Smeaton to grant control of the Cup to the NHL, allowing the league to reject challenges from other leagues that may have wished to play for the Cup.[42][43] Which has been overturned as the trustees did not have authority to do that. I think our Governer General ought to step in and relive our current corrupt trustees (little more than NHL puppets) of their duties as they clearly haven't followed Lord Stanleys conditions. The Cup is for a national champion of Canada, sort of like the English F.A Cup, it is also not to belong to any one club or organization and is always to remain a Challange trophy. I have for some time been thinking that it would be a good thing if there were a challenge cup which should be held from year to year by the champion hockey team in the Dominion [of Canada]. There does not appear to be any such outward sign of a championship at present, and considering the general interest which matches now elicit, and the importance of having the game played fairly and under rules generally recognized, I am willing to give a cup which shall be held from year to year by the winning team. I am not quite certain that the present regulations governing the arrangement of matches give entire satisfaction, and it would be worth considering whether they could not be arranged so that each team would play once at home and once at the place where their opponents hail from.[10] Originally, Stanley intended that the Cup should be awarded to the top amateur hockey team in Canada, to be decided by the acceptance of a challenge from another team. He made five preliminary regulations:[6][11] The winners shall return the Cup in good order when required by the trustees so that it may be handed over to any other team which may win it. Each winning team, at its own expense, may have the club name and year engraved on a silver ring fitted on the Cup. The Cup shall remain a challenge cup, and should not become the property of one team, even if won more than once. The trustees shall maintain absolute authority in all situations or disputes over the winner of the Cup. If one of the existing trustees resigns or drops out, the remaining trustee shall nominate a substitute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BI3KSA- Posted May 5, 2015 Share Posted May 5, 2015 Awful idea on so many levels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryCanuck Posted May 5, 2015 Author Share Posted May 5, 2015 Realistically, why would the owners of Montreal, Toronto, or Vancouver leave the NHL? Seriously, why would be their reasons? You need to remember this is farsical, it is based in theory. It has more to do with how people would feel about this kind of concept. If contracts could be dissolved (which they cannot) and MTL, TO and Van left at once it would be a huge statement of disillusion with the NHL. To answer your question there could be a few reasons: - like most people in the sport owners might do this to improve their chances of winning the Cup. They are fans too. Leaving a league which treats them like a cash cow whilst they promote the sport elsewhere in US growth markets would most likely be the underlying rationale. - for most owners, a NHL franchize is not their primary source of revenue - fans in Canada will still show up to games, buy tickets and merchandize (win lose or draw). I remember these days in the 80's supporting the Canucks during numerous losing seasons. - remember this would seriously water down the NHL product as well, so Canada should not really be an inferior product (although quality of life and currency could be serious threats to this concept i.e. playing in LA vs Winnipeg) - they could improve their profitability when they disband contracts and bring in more youthful players - the on ice product would still be quality to watch and games would be exciting.... believe it or not Remember, this thread is more about would you support this and go to games, rather than actually making it happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted May 5, 2015 Share Posted May 5, 2015 You need to remember this is farsical, it is based in theory. It has more to do with how people would feel about this kind of concept. If contracts could be dissolved (which they cannot) and MTL, TO and Van left at once it would be a huge statement of disillusion with the NHL. To answer your question there could be a few reasons: - like most people in the sport owners might do this to improve their chances of winning the Cup. They are fans too. Leaving a league which treats them like a cash cow whilst they promote the sport elsewhere in US growth markets would most likely be the underlying rationale. - for most owners, a NHL franchize is not their primary source of revenue - fans in Canada will still show up to games, buy tickets and merchandize (win lose or draw). I remember these days in the 80's supporting the Canucks during numerous losing seasons. - remember this would seriously water down the NHL product as well, so Canada should not really be an inferior product (although quality of life and currency could be serious threats to this concept i.e. playing in LA vs Winnipeg) - they could improve their profitability when they disband contracts and bring in more youthful players - the on ice product would still be quality to watch and games would be exciting.... believe it or not Remember, this thread is more about would you support this and go to games, rather than actually making it happen. Realistically, it doesn't matter if the fans will support it or not. Without major corporate sponsorship and lucrative television deals, this new league cant build arenas or pay the players what the NHL can. Without the players and arenas, its just an inferior league. An inferior league would never work...simply compare AHL attendance to NHL attendance for all the proof you need as to whether the fans will support it or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryCanuck Posted May 10, 2015 Author Share Posted May 10, 2015 Realistically, it doesn't matter if the fans will support it or not. Without major corporate sponsorship and lucrative television deals, this new league cant build arenas or pay the players what the NHL can. Without the players and arenas, its just an inferior league. An inferior league would never work...simply compare AHL attendance to NHL attendance for all the proof you need as to whether the fans will support it or not. You are assuming it would be a inferior product. But I suppose you are right, because the money is in USA for TV deals and major sponsorship. At the end of the day the NHL is a commercial business. You are highlighting a sad outlook for Canucks fans in general, the NHL will continue to push its growth mandate in America and cash cow franchises like TO, MTL and Van will continue to fund the preferential growth ventures elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Frk Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 Awful idea on so many levels I agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireGillis Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 I wouldn't support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwags Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 Another thought.. Why not just get bettman to acidentally dissapear and the nhl is easily fixed... It's simple... we kill the Bettman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awalk Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 I would not support it because it reeks of a wackadoodle Don Cherry idea. I don't understand the Canada VS USA obsession many people in Canada have. No one in the USA gives a sh*t LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CALGARY! Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 I like the NHL, I think if one of the Canadian teams can build a cup winner then the cup will come to Canada, end of story. Eneough of all the game management BS, yeah there are bad calls everywhere, but at least the bad calls are consistent eneough in that they effect all teams around the league both positively and negativley, thus making no ultimate impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erkayloomeh Posted May 15, 2015 Share Posted May 15, 2015 If it ever happened I would support it if it had the vancouver canucks in it. It will never happen though. I think the CFL is a bit of a joke. Especially when it had two teams with the same name. Some of the coaches had coached over half of the teams. It just doesn't seem like a legit league unless there are a considerable amount of teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.