maxpower Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 It's not Lou propping the Devils up, it's Dolan. They get huge chunk of their revenue from MSG. Teams like Atlanta don't have this kind of luxury. So imagine the Devils with a generic TV deal and no money from the arena, and well, we're back in 2006. And that wasn't sustainable either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam85491 Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 (edited) Canadian teams do not generate TV ratings for the league (see: the reason no canadian teams host the winter classic). Winnipeg is a small city. It has a small arena. It is not in the United States. And it's the same exact team that was iced in Atanta. If they continue to suck, the honeymoon will be over after two years and then we're back to having another team with a big question mark. Atlanta cannot succeed with the current management and ownership. It just isn't working. This doesn't mean hockey in Atlanta cannot work. There are better places to move a team than Winnipeg. Period. Edited May 31, 2011 by adam85491 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxpower Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 (edited) Canadian teams do not generate TV ratings for the league (see: the reason no canadian teams host the winter classic). Winnipeg is a small city. It has a small arena. It is not in the United States. And it's the same exact team that was iced in Atanta. If they continue to suck, the honeymoon will be over after two years and then we're back to having another team with a big question mark. Atlanta cannot succeed with the current management and ownership. It just isn't working. This doesn't mean hockey in Atlanta cannot work. There are better places to move a team than Winnipeg. Period. The owners who are selling, and don't want the team, and have openly said they'd rather have the 41+ dates for something else... are keeping the building. Where do you propose they play? Once they decided to sell the Thrashers alone instead of selling everything in one shot, the Thrashers are done. As for US TV ratings, it's irrelevant because the Thrashers are irrelevant, they don't get national games (hell, they get blackout booked INTO national games more often than not)... no one watches national games to see the Thrashers. If someone in Atlanta is watching a VS or NBC national, the Thrashers leaving has no effect on that. Yeah, in theory they can be used to grow the game there, but when you have one building and the owner of the building is on the record saying they don't want them there, that's it. And in case you forgot, there's a Canadian TV deal too. Edited May 31, 2011 by maxpower Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZeroGravityFat Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 TSNBobMcKenzie Bob McKenzie True North (WPG)-Atlanta Spirit Groug (ATL) have concluded their deal. Official news advisory coming soon. News conference to follow. 11MT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Dan 56 Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Canadian teams do not generate TV ratings for the league (see: the reason no canadian teams host the winter classic). Winnipeg is a small city. It has a small arena. It is not in the United States. And it's the same exact team that was iced in Atanta. If they continue to suck, the honeymoon will be over after two years and then we're back to having another team with a big question mark. Atlanta cannot succeed with the current management and ownership. It just isn't working. This doesn't mean hockey in Atlanta cannot work. There are better places to move a team than Winnipeg. Period. 1) No, the reason no Canadian teams host the Winter Classic is because it was made to push the game to the American audience. People in Canada watch games, therefore they do get ratings. Just because it isn't American ratings doesn't mean it isn't ratings. 2) Calgary and Edmonton are also small and not in the United States. 3) There will be different management. They may not continue to suck. And they can continue to suck in any other city you move them too as well. That has nothing to do with Winnipeg. 4) No, Atlanta can't succeed with current management and ownership. That's why it's getting sold. No one else in Atlanta wants to keep the team there. Hockey in Atlanta cannot work unless they are consistently winning. 5) What better places? Why haven't any of those cities gotten groups together to make an offer for the Coyotes or Thrashers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eldon Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Not sure why anyone is against Atl. moving to Wpg. The 'good for the league' stuff is just ridiculous. You could have all the tv markets you want & the networks are still going to show Wings/Pens or flyers/rangers; and most importantly the ratings are still going to be 0.7 to 1.6, which is the same as they've been since 1995 Fox. When it comes to tv viewership, we like, enjoy and watch a 'cult' sport. Almost everyone realizes it except the nhl itself. Not that they shouldn't keep trying to make money to do better, but trying to cling to markets like Atlanta & Phoenix seem quite desperate. I'd rather see a full building in Winnipeg. And one in Quebec too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteyNice Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Atlanta has been bleeding money since day 1 and are not a TV ratings draw in any which way shape or form. I believe they have the lowest local market TV viewership of any NHL team. Even worse than Florida. The NHL has a chance to actually put fans in seats and turn a profit in Winnipeg. It's a step forward for the league...and frankly you don't really have to do all that much to surpass sh!tlanta as an hockey market. It is not a step forward for the league at all. The NHL needs to grow. There is no growth in Winnipeg. There is a huge growth opportunity in Atlanta if ownership actually cared and did not simply run the team on the cheap. Atlanta is a fine hockey market. The ECHL team is regularly at the high end of attendance in that league. Why? They win occasionally. The Thrashers made the playoffs one time in their time in Atlanta and showed no signs of turning that around any time soon. You can't blame fans for not wanting to pay to see that. If you limited the league to markets that would still turn out under those circumstances the NHL would be very very small. Anyway, I am done with the NHL. After watching them go all out to save Nashville, Phoenix and to a lesser extent Pittsburgh and then not lift a finger for Atlanta? That does not work for me. If that is how the NHL treats its fans I see no reason to continue to spend time and money on it. I will find a nice Major Junior team and root for them. There is other hockey. As for the "well they couldn't find a local buyer" tripe. I have a hard time with that. They couldn't legally start trying to sell the team until December when their lawsuit ended. Five months is not a long time. These a$$holes never wanted the Thrashers. They wanted the Hawks and the arena and had to take the Thrashers to get that. They were never committed to hockey here. They failed, not Atlanta as a market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdevil26 Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Didn't see anyone post this... announcement slated for 1pm WPG time today (2pm here) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagknife Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 It is not a step forward for the league at all. The NHL needs to grow. There is no growth in Winnipeg. There is a huge growth opportunity in Atlanta if ownership actually cared and did not simply run the team on the cheap. Atlanta is a fine hockey market. The ECHL team is regularly at the high end of attendance in that league. Why? They win occasionally. The Thrashers made the playoffs one time in their time in Atlanta and showed no signs of turning that around any time soon. You can't blame fans for not wanting to pay to see that. If you limited the league to markets that would still turn out under those circumstances the NHL would be very very small. Anyway, I am done with the NHL. After watching them go all out to save Nashville, Phoenix and to a lesser extent Pittsburgh and then not lift a finger for Atlanta? That does not work for me. If that is how the NHL treats its fans I see no reason to continue to spend time and money on it. I will find a nice Major Junior team and root for them. There is other hockey. As for the "well they couldn't find a local buyer" tripe. I have a hard time with that. They couldn't legally start trying to sell the team until December when their lawsuit ended. Five months is not a long time. These a$$holes never wanted the Thrashers. They wanted the Hawks and the arena and had to take the Thrashers to get that. They were never committed to hockey here. They failed, not Atlanta as a market. First, drawing 7,000-8,000 fans in a 11,300 seat arena is drawing 75%+. When you put the same number in the 18,000 seat [17,624 to be exact] creates a huge financial burden. Also, the cost difference between ECHL tickets and NHL tickets is considerable. To say that's a proving point for keeping an NHL franchise in a city if given a different scenario is a reach. When you can take a family of four to a game for less than half the price of taking two to an NHL game, the argument is invalid. You're right, however, had the owners invested actual money beyond Andrew Ladd and Dustin Byfuglien, maybe the fans would have come out in support. Moving on to your "5 months is not sufficient to find a new owner argument," you're telling me if you did not have the funds [or a group of you and your friends] it wouldn't take you less time to hear the team was up for sale and make your pitch? All these celebrities [well like a half dozen] came out of the woodwork to "support" the Thrashers, yet none came out saying "hold on while we put a group together." Even former Brave/Met Tom Glavine's group gave up when they crunched the numbers. No other buyers came out, only a few people even scoffed at notion of possibly buying the team, you could have given them another year and it would not change that there are very few people out there willing to eat losses in the HOPES of the fans returning and getting your investment back into the black. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowdyFan42 Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Anyway, I am done with the NHL. After watching them go all out to save Nashville, Phoenix and to a lesser extent Pittsburgh and then not lift a finger for Atlanta? That does not work for me. If that is how the NHL treats its fans I see no reason to continue to spend time and money on it. I will find a nice Major Junior team and root for them. There is other hockey. Perhaps the league finally realized it can't save everyone. Though I'd argue that Nashville and Pittsburgh weren't so much about preserving hockey in those markets as it was trying to keep Jim Balsille out of the league. And you're going to let this put an end to your Devils fandom as well? Or did you cease to be a Devils fan when you moved to Atlanta? Regardless, that's weak. As for the "well they couldn't find a local buyer" tripe. I have a hard time with that. They couldn't legally start trying to sell the team until December when their lawsuit ended. Five months is not a long time. These a$$holes never wanted the Thrashers. They wanted the Hawks and the arena and had to take the Thrashers to get that. They were never committed to hockey here. They failed, not Atlanta as a market. So how long should ASG have been forced to hang on to the Thrashers in the hopes of finding a local owner? If a viable local ownership group existed, why didn't they come forward? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSC Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Didn't see anyone post this... announcement slated for 1pm WPG time today (2pm here) Are you sure? I've seen 11 AM WPG time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteyNice Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 First, drawing 7,000-8,000 fans in a 11,300 seat arena is drawing 75%+. When you put the same number in the 18,000 seat [17,624 to be exact] creates a huge financial burden. Also, the cost difference between ECHL tickets and NHL tickets is considerable. To say that's a proving point for keeping an NHL franchise in a city if given a different scenario is a reach. When you can take a family of four to a game for less than half the price of taking two to an NHL game, the argument is invalid. You're right, however, had the owners invested actual money beyond Andrew Ladd and Dustin Byfuglien, maybe the fans would have come out in support. Moving on to your "5 months is not sufficient to find a new owner argument," you're telling me if you did not have the funds [or a group of you and your friends] it wouldn't take you less time to hear the team was up for sale and make your pitch? All these celebrities [well like a half dozen] came out of the woodwork to "support" the Thrashers, yet none came out saying "hold on while we put a group together." Even former Brave/Met Tom Glavine's group gave up when they crunched the numbers. No other buyers came out, only a few people even scoffed at notion of possibly buying the team, you could have given them another year and it would not change that there are very few people out there willing to eat losses in the HOPES of the fans returning and getting your investment back into the black. The point I was making is that people turn up to see hockey here. The idea that "Atlanta doesn't support hockey" is false. Also, Glads tickets are as expensive or more expensive than some Thrashers tickets. The cheapest Glads tickets are $11 day of game. The cheapest Thrashers tickets are $10. It is a complex financial transaction. It's not like buying bread and milk at the store. There is a lot that we still don't know. There was at least part of that time that the owners had an exclusive negotiating window on the arena and the Hawks. If you were interested in the Thrashers, you couldn't make a move then since you would not know who you would be negotiating a lease with. We also don't know what kind of lease terms were being offered. That would have a huge impact on the viability of someone buying the team to keep it here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 (edited) The point I was making is that people turn up to see hockey here. The idea that "Atlanta doesn't support hockey" is false. Also, Glads tickets are as expensive or more expensive than some Thrashers tickets. The cheapest Glads tickets are $11 day of game. The cheapest Thrashers tickets are $10. It is a complex financial transaction. It's not like buying bread and milk at the store. There is a lot that we still don't know. There was at least part of that time that the owners had an exclusive negotiating window on the arena and the Hawks. If you were interested in the Thrashers, you couldn't make a move then since you would not know who you would be negotiating a lease with. We also don't know what kind of lease terms were being offered. That would have a huge impact on the viability of someone buying the team to keep it here. right, but that's max's argument for why the team had to move, because the lease terms weren't going to be favorable. the atlanta ownership group was interested in getting the most money possible, and so was the league, and so we are where we are. Edited May 31, 2011 by Triumph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteyNice Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Perhaps the league finally realized it can't save everyone. Though I'd argue that Nashville and Pittsburgh weren't so much about preserving hockey in those markets as it was trying to keep Jim Balsille out of the league. And you're going to let this put an end to your Devils fandom as well? Or did you cease to be a Devils fan when you moved to Atlanta? Regardless, that's weak. So how long should ASG have been forced to hang on to the Thrashers in the hopes of finding a local owner? If a viable local ownership group existed, why didn't they come forward? I remained a Devils fan in Atlanta. I am done with all of the NHL. It happened in Atlanta it can happen anywhere. I remember 95. Whatever the motivation, the NHL saved hockey in those cities. I am saying the ASG was never serious about finding a local owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelastonealive Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 So if they're not re-aligning for at least a season, I hope the schedule people are at least taking a close look at the travel related to keeping Winnipeg in the southeast and eliminating back-to-backs with southeast teams...nevermind Winnipeg itself, could you imagine the uproar around here if the Devils were, say, originally scheduled to open the season in Atlanta on a Friday and then play in the Lightning or Pathers' home openers that Saturday? I know there's been talk that the NHL made up two schedules as a contingency plan, I hope it's true. There's gonna be some really wonky travel issues otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 I remained a Devils fan in Atlanta. I am done with all of the NHL. It happened in Atlanta it can happen anywhere. I remember 95. Whatever the motivation, the NHL saved hockey in those cities. I am saying the ASG was never serious about finding a local owner. of course they weren't, but they were losing tons of money and constantly suing one another, so things weren't exactly working out for them. the league is in a catch-22 with these 'expansion' teams - on the one hand, it needs them to do well in order for them to grow fan bases, but on the other hand they're TV ratings poison if they ever did make it far. i wonder how winnipeg will do in the canadian ratings 4 or 5 years down the road when the novelty's worn off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devlman Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 I think it's a little shortsighted because the GTA could support another team that could be a revenue monster, and you only have so many teams to relocate, you really don't want to blow them on Winnipeg and Quebec City, which will probably revenue out like moderately successful US franchises, but it is what it is. Winnipeg wont come close to a moderately succsessful US franchise (in terms of profit). Other than the Thrashers getting the short-end of things, my stance has been that if they have to move then there are many other cities that would be much more profitable than Winnipeg. I even feel a little sorry for the Quebec City fans who have been busing to games up and down the northeast the past few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'7' Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Winnipeg wont come close to a moderately succsessful US franchise (in terms of profit). Other than the Thrashers getting the short-end of things, my stance has been that if they have to move then there are many other cities that would be much more profitable than Winnipeg. I even feel a little sorry for the Quebec City fans who have been busing to games up and down the northeast the past few years. What do you consider a moderately succesful US franchise? And don't worry about Quebec City. They're next in line...I'd say they have a good shot at landing the Coyotes after the 2012 season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devlman Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 What do you consider a moderately succesful US franchise? Dallas, Carolina, LA, NJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerzey Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 ESPN.com said... That price reportedly includes a $60 million relocation fee that would be split by the rest of the league. ...which is cool because that's 2 million for nothing towards the Kovy fine. True, everyone else gets 2 mil too, but it's still nice that it helps the budget. http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=6610414 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilsfan118 Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 (edited) So.....where's this announcement on the NHL network? Edit: Fail by the NHL on this one. If I were an atlanta fan i'd be absolutely furious Editedit: I fail by being too impatient Edited May 31, 2011 by Devilsfan118 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyrsuck26 Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 This is both really cool and really depressing at the same time. The first thing I did when I heard was go to TSN and read all the celebration. The second thing was to go the Thrashers SBNation blog. Two sides to every story, I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSC Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Announcement is underway on NHL Network for anybody who wants to watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eldon Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 NHL should be working 24/7 to re-align & schedule this season, not next. It's bogus to keep Wpg. in the Southeast, especially since this was in the works for a couple months now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 So next season they'll still be playing in Atlanta right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.