Toronto Can Support more NHL teams

[sixrings]

Higher price gives the customer the idea that they are experiencing a better product... For instance the ACURA NSX originally sold for something like 90000... COuldnt sell any... Next year added a turbo sold it for 130000 couldnt make enough.... The leafs will always want to sell their tickets higher... It gives them the premium brand...

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

If not at the beginning, then certainly eventually.

The problem on the NHL side is that it would love a second Toronto franchise to be an expansion team in order to collect a big expansion fee, but with so many U.S teams at risk (Phoenix, Atlanta, Florida, N.Y. Islanders, Dallas, etc.), there likely aren't enough places for them to go if more than two (or maybe three) have to move. In a worst-case scenario, that could mean contraction, and the league would look foolish contracting and expanding at the same time. Even if things don't get that bad, I'm not sure anyone would be willing to pay an expansion fee, pay for a new arena, pay the Leafs a territorial fee (we're well past a billion dollars so far), and then also be on the hook if another team has to be propped up, or contracted. It could turn out that ticket prices for a second Toronto team would be higher than the Leafs.

That is very true any something to think about. And don't forget Buffalo. The NHL is so screwed its not even funny.

 

[Redroom Studios]

who cares if you cant get tickets, I'd rather watch the game on tv if at all... pro sports are so over-rated.

 

[Translude15]

These calls for NHL expansion into the GTA are sensationalist at best. Any new team into the region would essentially become Toronto's version of the LA Clippers. The Leafs are already firmly embedded into the sporting scene of this city. As for non-Leafs fans, a plethora of other teams are based within a 500 km radius of Toronto. Detroit, Buffalo, Ottawa and Montreal. That's four different teams already within a fairly short distance of the GTA/Golden Horseshoe region. There are already hoards of fans within the area for those already well establish franchises. You could maybe throw in the rest of the Original 6 franchises (Boston and NYR). I've seen the argument of London's multitude of Premier League teams, and how the same ideology would work in Toronto. I think the quasi-religious sentiments Canadians have with hockey dispels that idea. London/UK doesn't exactly have an amateur/semi-pro league comparable to the OHL/CHL. Many, if not most of these players are home-grown, thus many OHL fans are perfectly capable of developing strong ties to the players, and cheering for NHL teams far beyond the region as a result. That already happens today. The Canadian-ness of hockey allows citizens to associate with ANY team in the league. Fandom isn't always associated with regionalism, especially given hockey's nationalistic mentality.

 

[jn_12]

These calls for NHL expansion into the GTA are sensationalist at best. Any new team into the region would essentially become Toronto's version of the LA Clippers. The Leafs are already firmly embedded into the sporting scene of this city. As for non-Leafs fans, a plethora of other teams are based within a 500 km radius of Toronto. Detroit, Buffalo, Ottawa and Montreal. That's four different teams already within a fairly short distance of the GTA/Golden Horseshoe region. There are already hoards of fans within the area for those already well establish franchises. You could maybe throw in the rest of the Original 6 franchises (Boston and NYR). I've seen the argument of London's multitude of Premier League teams, and how the same ideology would work in Toronto. I think the quasi-religious sentiments Canadians have with hockey dispels that idea. London/UK doesn't exactly have an amateur/semi-pro league comparable to the OHL/CHL. Many, if not most of these players are home-grown, thus many OHL fans are perfectly capable of developing strong ties to the players, and cheering for NHL teams far beyond the region as a result. That already happens today. The Canadian-ness of hockey allows citizens to associate with ANY team in the league. Fandom isn't always associated with regionalism, especially given hockey's nationalistic mentality.

First of all, you could make the same argument about Ottawa before they received a team. With Montreal, Toronto, Boston, Quebec City (which had a team at the time) and Buffalo within a similar range to what you describe and perhaps an even greater uphill battle in attracting fans considering they're in Habs and Leafs territory, you would have thought it couldn't work there. Yet it has. And by no means does Ottawa have the economy or population base that a second team in Toronto would have. If it worked there, why would Toronto II falter?

Also, there are 48 London-based soccer clubs in the English Football League System. They have a massive pyramid system of amateur/semi-pro football that most people here aren't aware of, and the vast majority of it is homegrown. It's not until you reach the Premier League that you start seeing clubs filled with foreigners. That means 43 of those London clubs are filled with homegrown players for people to support and follow. In fact, most people over there follow the sport in the same way we do, with a local favourite in a lower league and a favourite at the premier league level. You also can't debate that soccer in England and hockey in Canada aren't on similar levels of religiosity. I'd probably argue they're crazier than we are to be honest.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

who cares if you cant get tickets, I'd rather watch the game on tv if at all... pro sports are so over-rated.

Okay.

 

[Translude15]

First of all, you could make the same argument about Ottawa before they received a team. With Montreal, Toronto, Boston, Quebec City (which had a team at the time) and Buffalo within a similar range to what you describe and perhaps an even greater uphill battle in attracting fans considering they're in Habs and Leafs territory, you would have thought it couldn't work there. Yet it has. And by no means does Ottawa have the economy or population base that a second team in Toronto would have. If it worked there, why would Toronto II falter?

Also, there are 48 London-based soccer clubs in the English Football League System. They have a massive pyramid system of amateur/semi-pro football that most people here aren't aware of, and the vast majority of it is homegrown. It's not until you reach the Premier League that you start seeing clubs filled with foreigners. That means 43 of those London clubs are filled with homegrown players for people to support and follow. In fact, most people over there follow the sport in the same way we do, with a local favourite in a lower league and a favourite at the premier league level. You also can't debate that soccer in England and hockey in Canada aren't on similar levels of religiosity. I'd probably argue they're crazier than we are to be honest.

Last time I was in London, a buddy and I hit up a Millwall game in the Championship League. The place was barely half full. Yes, I would agree that Brits tend to be pretty crazy with regards to football/soccer, but then again, you do realize they kick the living shit out of each other, which doesn't happen over here. We were actually introduced to the "Millwall Banger" at that game (You fold up a newspaper and duke a guy over the face with it). All the London teams have been around for the best part of 100 plus years as well. Sure, these lower tier teams may have blindly loyal followers, but I'm not too sure all of them can lay claim to financial success.

That said, sure the Sens have been relatively successful record-wise, but over the past two or three seasons, they haven't been selling out. Looking back 10 years ago as well, they were also on the brink of bankruptcy. In terms of another franchise in the Toronto area, realistically speaking, once the initial hype dies down, and say the team isn't doing too well, will they REALLY be able to sustain themselves financially? Will they have enough fan support? I mean, look at all the bashing the Leafs get already. Luckily they have a solid fan base, built around decades of existence, as well as a prominent downtown location which appeals to corporate sponsors and large businesses. Could the same support be garnered for a crappy, suburban team in Toronto? I can't exactly say no, but it's not definitive that it would be a smashing success either.

I think this call for a team in the area is fuelled by rampant media reports and idiotic suggestions (Damien Cox to name a few). It's typical Toronto-esque sensationalism. Thinking another regional team will be a success just because Canada loves hockey (which in itself is a pretty mythic statement) is more of a non-sequitur to me.

 

[jn_12]

Last time I was in London, a buddy and I hit up a Millwall game in the Championship League. The place was barely half full. Yes, I would agree that Brits tend to be pretty crazy with regards to football/soccer, but then again, you do realize they kick the living shit out of each other, which doesn't happen over here. We were actually introduced to the "Millwall Banger" at that game (You fold up a newspaper and duke a guy over the face with it). All the London teams have been around for the best part of 100 plus years as well. Sure, these lower tier teams may have blindly loyal followers, but I'm not too sure all of them can lay claim to financial success.

Well Millwall is known worldwide for their history of hooliganism. If I'm not mistaken they were featured on The Real Football Factories too (it's been awhile since I watched the series). But the violence in the sport amongst fans isn't nearly as pervasive as it was even 15 years ago. The FA has cracked down on that stuff and I've been to matches there that were absent of any violence. Also, not all of the London teams are 100 years old. Only about half of them are, though I understand your point. But at the same time, those small teams have very little financial success or financial issues because when you get down that far in the pyramid it's basically amateur football. Probably no different than our OHA Sr. A circuit or even Jr. B or C. The fact is if you're Northwood FC and you play in the 8th level of English football and you've been around for over 100 years. There's a pretty good chance that finances don't play a part in their operations.

That said, sure the Sens have been relatively successful record-wise, but over the past two or three seasons, they haven't been selling out. Looking back 10 years ago as well, they were also on the brink of bankruptcy. In terms of another franchise in the Toronto area, realistically speaking, once the initial hype dies down, and say the team isn't doing too well, will they REALLY be able to sustain themselves financially? Will they have enough fan support? I mean, look at all the bashing the Leafs get already. Luckily they have a solid fan base, built around decades of existence, as well as a prominent downtown location which appeals to corporate sponsors and large businesses. Could the same support be garnered for a crappy, suburban team in Toronto? I can't exactly say no, but it's not definitive that it would be a smashing success either.

I think this call for a team in the area is fuelled by rampant media reports and idiotic suggestions (Damien Cox to name a few). It's typical Toronto-esque sensationalism. Thinking another regional team will be a success just because Canada loves hockey (which in itself is a pretty mythic statement) is more of a non-sequitur to me.

Well teams are usually only as financially secure as their owners are. The Sens have been very stable since Melnyk took over. Also, they're playing to 96% capacity. Ya, it's not the sellouts you're seeing everywhere else in the country, but they're playing in front of almost 18.5k every game (2000 people more than the Oilers who sell out every game). That's not exactly struggling in my books, especially in comparison to the rest of the NHL. The fact is that another team in Toronto would have very strong ownership. It would have to because the start up costs are going to be massive and it will only take someone with deep pockets to get it done. The reason people aren't concerned about Winnipeg's success is because Thompson is the man behind it. So if they lose a million here or there, Thompson won't even feel it.

I don't see how a second NHL team in Toronto doesn't work and doesn't become a cash cow. If a single team can survive in metropolitian areas of a million people, why can't 2 survive in an area with 5million+? Given the GTA is significantly made up of people without any sort of attachment to hockey or the Leafs in particular, that's a huge market to tap into. There's also tons of non-leafs fans (I'm one) and also disenfranchised Leafs fans who would jump ship, or even just want to see an NHL game. Furthermore, and perhaps most importantly, Toronto has a massive corporate footprint and the second Toronto team will have corporations lining up to be involved with them because they can't get in at the ACC. Then factor in the local TV rights. The Leafs make something like $41million/year off of those. You don't think Toronto II wouldn't be able to get a good chunk of that too? Not to say they'd get 40million, but half that might be realistic at first and pretty significant for any team. Between TV, corporate support, and the demographics of Toronto, it would only take a mismangement of historical proportions for this team to fail financially.

 

[howl]

What I think should happen is the Amercial Hockey League (AHL), which currently includes the Toronto Marlies and the Hamilton Bulldogs, needs to have a greater presence. They should develop a system like British football where the bottom team from the Premier League drop down to the Secondary League after every season and the top team from the Secondary League moves up to the Premier League. This would give teams an incentive to do well and could eventually lead to Toronto having two NHL teams and one in Hamilton as well - if they actually won lots of games.

 

[jn_12]

But, there are multiple problems with that. NHL owners have bought their teams with the expectation that they have a permanent spot in the best league in the world. Similarly, AHL teams are purchased for 5% of NHL teams. Why would it suddenly be fair for an NHL owner to lose their investment while an AHL outsider gets to reap the rewards of a cheaper investment? How does such a system work when the AHL is the farm system for the NHL clubs? After one season, two affiliated clubs would be in the same league. Furthermore, what happens to TV contracts if Toronto gets relegated? or Montreal? or the Rangers? How do trades get worked out? Can teams that are relegated sell their players to the NHL teams to try to minimize their losses, since the payroll of an NHL team is around 10 times more than an AHL team? And so on...

Relegation is a fantastic system if it's instituted from day one. No one thinks twice about it in soccer because it's the norm. In North American sports, where teams are franchises, and leagues have been static since the beginning, it's an absurd concept and extremely high risk for any owner.

 

[howl]

They would do it because it would make them a bucket load of money. All of a sudden all of the top teams in the AHL would be selling out and people would start caring if their team was in the basement of the NHL because they wouldn't want them to drop out of the premier league. Instead of people just being interested in the top few NHL teams fans would be interested in the standings throughout both leagues. To make it happen the two leagues would need to be brought closer together as far as talent goes so it might take a few years to implement, but it's certainly not impossible to imagine a scenario where that might happen. The TV contracts, player contracts and salaries could all be worked out.

 

[jn_12]

You seem to have missed my point or you're living in a dream world. Let's say I'm Rogers and I buy the Leafs from MLSE. I pay $1.3billion for an NHL team and a bunch of other products (let's say the Leafs are 1/3rd of that price). So $400million for an NHL team. Why would I make such an investment if I knew the Leafs could be relegated next year? The value of all NHL teams would decrease under such a system. Why would any NHL owner want that? And that's who you have to get to agree to such a system. The NHL's owners don't care about the AHL and its owners. That's not their problem. You can't suggest to them that the best way for them to go is to create a system of financial and league instability, while allowing unvetted owners from another league access to their boy club. Because let's face it, the only people who benefit from such a system are AHL owners who all of a sudden will have been able to turn their relatively small investment into a potential cash cow. On the other hand though, keep in mind that some of those AHL clubs (and most ECHL clubs) depend greatly on the money they receive from their NHL parent, so the teams who aren't able to fight for promotion will be bankrupt very quickly.

Which leads to another problem: you're essentially dismantling hockey's development model. Where do the drafted players go to play now that you've eliminated the link between the NHL and AHL clubs? Sure they can play Junior until they're 20, but then what? do you create a development league? and if that's the case, what makes you think there's enough support for hockey to go around to support the NHL, the AHL, ECHL and a 30 team development league? And since when are there enough hockey players to fill all of those leagues? Or are you suggesting that the original AHL teams would still act as feeder teams, and if, you know, the Hamilton Bulldogs wind up in the NHL with their Montreal parents that shouldn't be a concern for anyone?

The North American system has worked quite well for years. Far better than the global soccer system. From a level of pure athletic competition it's a great model, but from a business perspective, we have them beat easily.

 

[Automation Gallery]

The North American system has worked quite well for years. Far better than the global soccer system. From a level of pure athletic competition it's a great model, but from a business perspective, we have them beat easily.

Hey i love hockey but come-on, according to you..hockey is gods gift to sport..you got to be living in a dream world with those comments. The way i see it, hockey is small potatoes, financialy, and competitively compared to world soccer.

 

[jn_12]

Hey i love hockey but come-on, according to you..hockey is gods gift to sport..you got to be living in a dream world with those comments. The way i see it, hockey is small potatoes, financialy, and competitively compared to world soccer.

I love soccer. And I agree that Hockey IS small potatoes. I'm not denying that at all. But from a business perspective soccer is a horrible sport. All you have to do is look into the financial dealings of the top teams in Europe and you'll see clubs that can be easily erased by banks. Here's a nice bit of reading for you: http://espn.go.com/sports/soccer/news/_/id/5580467/european-football-eating-itself
And a snippet just to get a sense of how bad things are there:

The 10 most indebted clubs in European soccer collectively owe $5.74 billion between them.

The 20 English Premier League clubs have a combined debt that has spiraled to $4.45 billion. Fourteen of them lost money in 2008-09, the most recent season for which numbers are available. The financial picture is even uglier in La Liga, in which last year's 20 teams tallied $4.65 billion in debt.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

There are a number of teams in the southern US that are suffering financially. Even if the attendance remains the same (not likely) it's reasonable to think that prices in a GTA market will be higher relatively than prices in say Columbus or Pheonix etc.

Also if NY state (plus NJ) can support 4 teams than surely Ontario can support an additional one, maybe two.

Everything else is just details and financing.