Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Dude, I can't back you on this. I worked with the guy lining up interviews with troops during one of the Tickets for Troops games the Oilers did a couple years back. He was definitely a breeze to work with and really down to earth. Told me a story about how his son is an aspiring magician who does animal tricks, but keeps his animals at his parents' place. Having talked with him off-camera like that, I know his persona on-air is a put-on.
Like I said in my post, just that he comes across that way, I don't know him. Glad to hear he's alright.
Scott Oake is about as much of an ass as anyone. I should say, he comes across as such on-air (I don't know the guy or anything)
Remember when Bettman was on Charlie Rose, probably about 94, when the league had its biggest success in the States? He was basically given about a four-minute segment and asked two or three questions. The league, and probably Bettman's ego, got a bit of a shot in the groin there.
dangler wrote:One thing that surprised me in that interview was his desire to put teams back in Winnipeg and Quebec City before considering another southern Ontario franchise.
Perhaps he's realised it's not so bad having a team in a location where the population actually cares about the sport.
Then again.maybe he's just blowin smoke because he was on CBC
I think it was because he wanted to piss off Jim Balsillie. Basically saying that I would even put franchises in Winnipeg and Quebec City before I put one near where you want it to be.
Probably a bit of both. Only way he ever gets onboard another Canadian franchise is if every single plausible American location has been exhausted. I mean seriously, who ever thought Nashville, Florida, Tampa Bay, San Jose, Columbus etc would all get expansion franchises w/ teams being quickly ushered out of Canadian hockey markets. Phoenix? ...really???
ClamRussel wrote:
Probably a bit of both. Only way he ever gets onboard another Canadian franchise is if every single plausible American location has been exhausted. I mean seriously, who ever thought Nashville, Florida, Tampa Bay, San Jose, Columbus etc would all get expansion franchises w/ teams being quickly ushered out of Canadian hockey markets. Phoenix? ...really???
I am not sure why San Jose got lump into the others. The Sharks franchise is probably the best performing one out of all expansion ones since the early 90s. And it started in 91, 4-5 years before the Nordiques and the Jets left Canada. It's located in the part of San Francisco Bay Area that has no other major league teams and where high tech giants such as Google, HP, Apple, Intel are headquartered.
ClamRussel wrote:
Probably a bit of both. Only way he ever gets onboard another Canadian franchise is if every single plausible American location has been exhausted. I mean seriously, who ever thought Nashville, Florida, Tampa Bay, San Jose, Columbus etc would all get expansion franchises w/ teams being quickly ushered out of Canadian hockey markets. Phoenix? ...really???
I am not sure why San Jose got lump into the others. The Sharks franchise is probably the best performing one out of all expansion ones since the early 90s. And it started in 91, 4-5 years before the Nordiques and the Jets left Canada. It's located in the part of San Francisco Bay Area that has no other major league teams and where high tech giants such as Google, HP, Apple, Intel are headquartered.
I never said San Jose hasn't done well, only it was an unconventional hockey market. Were you not a tad surprised when they were awarded a franchise? I think its great things have worked out well for the Sharks, they are a bit of an exception when it comes to that flood of US expansion the NHL went on. Perhaps Anaheim would have been a better example.
ClamRussel wrote:
I never said San Jose hasn't done well, only it was an unconventional hockey market. Were you not a tad surprised when they were awarded a franchise? I think its great things have worked out well for the Sharks, they are a bit of an exception when it comes to that flood of US expansion the NHL went on. Perhaps Anaheim would have been a better example.
I wasn't following hockey when they were awarded a franchise, but as I said, they were awarded a franchise way before any team left Canada. I agree that the Sharks is, unfortunately for Bettman, an exception rather than the rule. Anaheim would be a better example, but I think all the California expansions came at a time when Gretzky popularized the league in that area, so it was at least partly justifiable. The same cannot be said for places like Nashville, Atlanta, Miami, etc.
Look how hard Bettman has fought to keep US teams where they are....Pittsburgh (justified), Nashville, Phoenix etc...the same couldn't be said for Winnipeg or Quebec...but those were political imo; notice how Hartford also moved and Edmonton was long on the chopping block (all WHA franchises). I think the WHA-negativity still is present in the old boy's club. Bettman barely put up a sneeze to try & save the Jets or Nordiques....yet here he was PURCHASING the Coyote to keep them in the desert (wtf?) and, more importantly to him, out of Basilie's hands. I don't recall him worrying too much about the North Stars leaving either so perhaps its a changing in philosophy....or more likely he's protective of the teams HE had a part in relocating/starting. If the Coyotes were to move back to Canada it would prove his original plan was a failure, right now it just looks that way (nothing he can't spin into a success story).
Look how hard Bettman has fought to keep US teams where they are....Pittsburgh (justified), Nashville, Phoenix etc...the same couldn't be said for Winnipeg or Quebec...but those were political imo; notice how Hartford also moved and Edmonton was long on the chopping block (all WHA franchises).
But remember, if I'm not wrong, those clubs in Winnipeg and Quebec were bleeding money, as were a lot of the other Canadian teams, and it wasn't at that time seen as the cash cow it is now.
Look how hard Bettman has fought to keep US teams where they are....Pittsburgh (justified), Nashville, Phoenix etc...the same couldn't be said for Winnipeg or Quebec...but those were political imo; notice how Hartford also moved and Edmonton was long on the chopping block (all WHA franchises).
But remember, if I'm not wrong, those clubs in Winnipeg and Quebec were bleeding money, as were a lot of the other Canadian teams, and it wasn't at that time seen as the cash cow it is now.
How is that different from the bleeding some of these American teams have been suffering? ...and there's Bettman jumping in front of moving trains to save them.
How is that different from the bleeding some of these American teams have been suffering? ...and there's Bettman jumping in front of moving trains to save them.
Don't get me wrong I'm with you. I'm just saying he was brought in to expand the American market, and there were several Canadian teams smooching with derelict status. One would hope there would be an equal acknowledgment in the opposite direction all these years later, but it goes against Bettman's corporate mandate, and frankly, the market structure of North America. Yes, Canada is the hockey money-man today, but it runs against most economical wisdom, and I think the owners of the franchises (who, I'm told, do run the show) will always want the effort to expand toward the bigger market.
You'd think they'd follow the money though. Considering 60% of the league's revenue comes from 20% of the teams logic would dictate they should strengthen that area. In every CDN city hockey is no.1 w/ no competition; in some of the larger US markets they have to compete directly w/ all the other bigger sports leagues. By adding a few more CDN teams plus US teams along the northern states the NHL would only solidify their league and have 30 strong teams. Build on that and the TV deals will come south of the border. Having a bunch of fledgling franchises exist that no one cares about in markets that consider hockey on par w/ arena football and darts is not doing anyone any good.
I think the NHL would be very exciting w/ teams back in Winnipeg & Quebec plus the possibility of Seattle and perhaps Portland and Hamilton. That would also allow Detroit to move back to the east where they belong and make the travel in the west alot more fair. The natural regional rivalries would be intense (Van-Seat-Ptl; Mtl-Que; Tor-Det-Ham-Buf; Wpg-Minn).
I'm an idealist I know.
Hartford still makes more sense than a half dozen of these expansion teams.
Considering 60% of the league's revenue comes from 20% of the teams logic would dictate they should strengthen that area.
But it's 60% of the small pie. The owners are business types who will always seek measures to expand their revenue and that involves flailing at the American market. Canada is lucrative, but capped at a fraction of what MIGHT one day be available in the US.
The problem like it or not is American fans do not attend games featuring Cdn teams. More Cdn team from parts of the world many americans have no idea where it is does not sit well. American fans who attend game against the NY Rangers do not attend games featuring Edmonton, Calgary and maybe Vcr. With a gate driven sport it's a big item, they want more Rnagers, Chicago LA not Winnipeg
The problem like it or not is American fans do not attend games featuring Cdn teams. More Cdn team from parts of the world many americans have no idea where it is does not sit well. American fans who attend game against the NY Rangers do not attend games featuring Edmonton, Calgary and maybe Vcr. With a gate driven sport it's a big item, they want more Rnagers, Chicago LA not Winnipeg
That may be true of Edmonton, Calgary, and Ottawa, who probably draw like any other bland, non-rival team would in most markets, but I think, usually, the leaves, Canadians, and Vancouver amongst its many rivals, do well as draws.
Fred wrote:The problem like it or not is American fans do not attend games featuring Cdn teams. More Cdn team from parts of the world many americans have no idea where it is does not sit well. American fans who attend game against the NY Rangers do not attend games featuring Edmonton, Calgary and maybe Vcr. With a gate driven sport it's a big item, they want more Rnagers, Chicago LA not Winnipeg
You sure about that? ....or is it the networks don't want to broadcast Cdn teams, hmmm? My guess is attendance in certain US markets is abysmal whether its Calgary or LA visiting. Be careful not to generalize because in good US hockey markets I bet the fans love to see Cdn teams come down as they know the roots of the game and the players are all international anyways.
