From: gerry@skatter.usask.ca
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: expansion
Date: 12 Dec 1992 15:54:30 GMT
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
NNTP-Posting-Host: skatter.usask.ca

Interesting, another post from Manitoba that got through to me in something
resembling real time. Like Daryl Turner(in Manitoba) I(and presumably anyone
else at the UofS) am experiencing delay problems with the news posts. I
would like to request that if people respond to my posts that they email me
a copy since I probably won't see the post for almost a week otherwise. This
doesn't appear to apply to Manitoba users but please email me anyway just
in case. Thanks for the trouble.

Now on to the hockey stuff.

In article <Bz4IJ2.7wv@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, by tvorst@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Tommy Che Vorst) writes:
> Oh please!  Gerald, you wrote that you didn't think any other sites should
              ^^^^^^
> have been considered for NHL expansion.  Did the city of Hamilton (a town
> made for pro hockey, if you ask me) suddenly just drop off the face of the
> earth?  As to business potential in the south - Hello? Hello?  Are you too
> young to remember the California Golden Seals?

Both because I prefer it and there is another Gerald posting regularly, to
attempt to avoid confusion I would appreciate being referred to as Gerry(of
course 'asshole' may at times seem more appropriate but I generally don't
respond kindly to that). Either that or leave in some of my post for context,
given the problems we're experiencing I didn't at first realize you were
responding to me.

Now as to the point of your paragraph. Yes I'm old enough to remember the
Golden Seals, unfortunately I'm not old enough to remember who the owners
were. However, the new owner in California is Disneyland. There is no doubt
they have the money to pay the expansion fee and to build a good competitive
club in rather short term. They have a much better probability of succeeding
than either the Tampa or Ottawa franchises both of which are shady from the
outset and will have to hope for the good will of their fans to carry them
through some very tough times.

Secondly I'm from Saskatoon, a town made for pro hockey if you ask me, but
then again that's just my opinion. Still though I don't think it bad that
nobody from Saskatoon was given a chance to put in a bid. Consider that if
the NHL waits and asks for bids the chances are that they still would have
picked the Disney and BB Video bids. Since both these companies have
considerable finances at their disposable, over and above the $50M price tag,
they will be much more attractive to the current owners. The only other group
from last expansion that this might also apply to is the Compuware gang.
Further the owners want teams in Southern Florida and another in California
for the large market they will provide, add to that,that the new possibilities
at marketing are tremendous and it becomes no contest.

Irregardless of how much Hamilton fans deserve or want a team they would still
have been passed over in a bid type system. This would have created even more
harsh feelings than this scheme does. If they had toyed with their feelings,
allowed in bids, than given the franchises to these two groups anyway, the
outcry from Hamilton would be deafening.

> 
> Let's NOT forget why McNall is involved in the first place: to make money
> $$$.  I don't think I'm naive, but it seems to me that most owners combine
> this with a healthy love for the game - McNall wouldn't have recognised a
> puck 15 years ago (then again, neither would Gil Stein).

Right all the owners are in it to make money first. Face it it's a business,
they will do what they feel best to make money. However this is not necessarily
bad for hockey. For hockey to survive it has to bring in more and more
fans, it needs a larger fan base than Hamilton,Winnipeg,Edmonton etc. can
provide it. There are enough small markets in the game already, the NHL
can not afford to keep bringing in more of them. Further I have no idea
what McNall would recognise 15 years ago, he may still not like hockey as
a game for all I know. I will assume though that he likes it now and sees
it both as a great way for him to make money and as a great sport which should
be given it's best chances to succeed.

I read in the paper today that the CEO of Disney has two kids who play for the
L.A. Junior Kings, so presumably he likes hockey. Than I saw an interview with
him, I was surprised at how young he looks, presumably still young enough to
know what will attract the young fan base he'll be looking for. Of course
in the paper it said they might want to name the team the "Mighty Ducks" in
honor of the movie, I hope they were just joking.
> 
> I'm not spouting off from some I Love Canadian Hockey standpoint, either. 
> I just think that cities like Hamilton have gone long enough without a
> team, and deserve one, having proven themselves capable and worthy. 
> Surely, the NHL has not become so one-sidedly a business that there is no
> room left for ethics and a sense of loyalty?

Become? The NHL has always been a business first and foremost. The fact that
the game as played in NA was started by Canadians is the only reason there
are any Canadian teams period. Further only those Canadian cities that could
afford to pay the players and expenses of a team had NHL franchises. Why
didn't Hamilton,Saskatoon,Edmonton,Winnipeg get teams in the original
expansion from 6 teams? All these cities deserved(from the fan love of the
game point of view) one as much than as they do now. I would love a team in
Saskatoon, I think it would even succeed but only just barely and only in
a minor way. From the point of view that I think there are alot of
people out there missing a hell of a sport simply because either they don't
know any thing about it,haven't seen it or are brain washed by a stupid
media I want these people to see the game more than I need a team in my
immediate area.

I continue to get games on t.v., with more US exposure there is hope that
I'll get even more games. My biggest problem with the NHL exposure in
Canada is that I get one maybe two games(very very rarely) on TSN a week.
During baseball season I can get upwards of 4 Jays games a week on TSN and the
rest on regular channels. This is ludicrous, much more ludicrous than not
giving Hamilton or whoever a team. TSN should be carrying an NHL game every
night and what isn't on TSN should be on CBC or CTV. Than if I want to see a
game live I can hop over to Edm.,Calgary or Winnipeg.

> Just remeber that if today's rules had applied to the NHL 25 years ago the
> NHL would have teams in Cincinatti, Seattle, Milwaukee, (one more in)
> Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta, and Baltimore, and there would NOT be teams in
> Quebec, Hartford, Ottawa, Edmonton, Calgary, Vancouver, and (dare I say
> it?) Winnipeg.

Sorry but 25 years ago worse rules applied, the only way the cities of Edm.
Winnipeg, Quebec and Hartford were able to obtain franchises was through
running a rival league. Calgary got a team by buying an existing franchise
and moving it. Vancouver was the only purely expansion franchise from the
above besides Ottawa and Ottawa deserved a team, from an ability to pay stand
point, as much as Saskatoon, ie. they didn't. From the loyalty perspective
certainly Saskatoon deserved it more, we almost had one earlier, how close
we were to getting the Blues is anybodies guess but Hamilton investors weren't
trying to buy the Blues when they were close to folding.If you want to bitch
about when Hamilton deserved a team than fine, maybe they should have got the
team over the Ottawa or Tampa group. It's too late now, the only way for a
Canadian city to obtain a franchise will be to buy a preexisting one and move
it.

> 
> Just my 2c.
> 
> Jets Season's Tix for 17 years and counting.....
> 

A real sucker for punishment aren't you? :-)
--
Gerald Gryschuk            Saskatoon,Saskatchewan = a place with 9 months
gerry@sask.usask.ca           of hockey and 3 months of poor skating.
Go Habs!!!		              (The Bum rules!!!)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey