Home HockeyBuzz Register Login
"Talking New York Rangers Hockey, since 2007"
New York, NY • United States • 23 Years Old • Male
I do not take responsiblity for this suggestion, it was my father who proposed this to me. However, he believes that the NHL would be best with the 16 teams that are making the most money and are the most economically sound. There should be no salary cap, and no need because only financially solid teams would be in the league, and in this way the talent pool is not diluted at all. This would make for more exiting hockey and a greater appeal to the game. He is not concerned with losing 14 cities and believes that they will remain big hockey fans, buy merchandise and adjust to the lack of team their city. He also believes that the teams would be able to keep up with the pay and there would be just as much parity as there is now. There would be no need for revenue sharing and the entire NHL would be bringing in more money.

I disagree on a few counts. First, I dont think there would be as much parity because there will still be higher and lower tier teams and the level of parity existant now is remarkable. I dont think that the NHL will make more money as a whole because the merchandise and ticket sales will drop durastically in the exiled cities and salsries would go up with the lack of salary cap. Most importantly, I dont think that the loyal fans of Pittsburgh, Islanders, Atlanta, Tampa, Florida, Washington, Carolina, Columbus, Nashville, San Jose, Anaheim, LA and St. Louis (as he listed to me) would be too happy with losing a team. I dont care how much you improve the game, I would not cut off half of the NHL cities from having an NHL team. Ironically, he is an Islanders fan but said he would give up his team for a better NHL and root for the Canadians.

So I ask you for your opnion. Yay or nay for a 16 team NHL. Why or why not?
Filed Under:   16 ream nhl   rags2riches   rags2riches  
December 15, 2007 9:22 PM ET | Delete
Nay. I like the idea of ahving less teams, but losing 14 is a bit rought. Yay for 24
December 15, 2007 9:50 PM ET | Delete
I agree avsnumber1fan, that 24 would be better, I say nay to a 16 team league
December 15, 2007 10:24 PM ET | Delete
Sorry, I dont buy the fact that your Dad is an Islander fan or a fan of any other team you listed to disbanded. No fan could possibly consider disbanding their own team and be satisfied to root for another team. Just come out and say it. He's a Canadian Fan. PS the answer to your question is. There are too many teams in the NHL. BTW the NHL is looking to EXPAND!!! Hot Stove in Canada tonight reported on expanding to RUSSIA and EUROPE
December 16, 2007 12:08 AM ET | Delete
Financially this system wouldn't work. Professional Sports Teams earns 80 to 90% of it revenues from Ticket Sales, Licensing, Advertising and Broadcasting. Actual sales on merchandise doesn't account for that much when you compare to the other 4 big streams, so that fact that people might by different teams merchandise won't cover those losses. By dropping so many teams the league would be losing almost half their revenue streams, in addition you would see less national coverage of Hockey in the states, making it even more of a niche sport. Adding to the fact that the NHL would some how have to settle with all the owners of those teams, and re purchase them. The cost of this would be insane. Overall the competition of the games would be better, but slashing so many teams just doesn't work. NAY!!!
December 16, 2007 9:23 AM ET | Delete
The NHL will NEVER expand to Europe or Russia. Write that down no matter who says what. Even these games in Europe to start the season will be tiring and they'll give that up too!
December 16, 2007 11:36 AM ET | Delete
I think we should cut out a few of the dead weight teams that are never going to have a solid enough fan base, if we can't find markets for the team, then we should just remove them. 24 teams sounds reasonable.
December 16, 2007 3:09 PM ET | Delete
Of all the major sports leagues (NHL, NFL, MLB and NBA), the NHL derives the largest per capita revenue from the ticket buyers. Given this fact, reducing down to 16 teams would cause a huge out cry from the typical fan and would result in a major drop in league revenues, have spiraling salaries for larger markets, etc.There is no doubt that a number of the US franchises have economic challenges similarly to the teams left Winnipeg and Quecec City. Both cities had die hard hockey fans and had solid teams (look at how strong Colorado became). However, the salaries and lack of corporate dollars of support in advertising, etc. combined with the Canadian dollar the franchises could not compete.If you look at the Edmonton model, one of the strongest economically, they would be going down a slipperly slope financially if they had to compete with Toronto and New York - big markets with big TV dollars. The only way would be an owner with deep pockets who financied the team from his other business interests.
December 16, 2007 3:27 PM ET | Delete
24- 26 sounds more Realistic and it might have to happen if they make a Euro Super League. Which would be good for them but possibly bad for us. cutting 14 is way too many.
December 16, 2007 8:52 PM ET | Delete
cut 6 teamsAtlantaPhoenixNashvilleFloridaColumbusCarolina
December 17, 2007 8:23 AM ET | Delete
Every time I see a contraction proposal that includes Tampa Bay I just have to laugh. Last I checked their attendance records are some of the best in the league, behind only Detroit and Montreal.
December 17, 2007 4:32 PM ET | Delete
Viqsi, alot of those tickets are give aways and alot are sold for like 7$ per ticket or things like buy 1 get 2 free.
Notice to Internet Explorer Users
There is an issue with the form blow that will make it appear that nothing happens when you click the post message button below. To see your message, after you click the post message button, refresh this page. Sorry for the troubles, we hope to have it fixed soon.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to leave a comment.

Blog Archive

20 Again