jetsniper Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=249235&...s=secStory_main Not sure about you guys but thats a terrible idea IMO. I like that Rutherford mentions getting back into Canada before considering this but you know the top execs. in the league probably don't think the same way. Travel alone would be an absolute nightmare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Hmm, one of the reasons they tried the unbalanced schedule was to cut travel costs. Going into Europe doesn't make traveling more expensive or anything. Idiotic idea. Keep to a single stinking continent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markierung Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Wow, the NHL really drives me nuts. I can't understand their obsession with trying to build NHL markets. The keep trying to plant seeds everywhere so that MAYBE in 10 years they'll have a fan base somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted September 13, 2008 Share Posted September 13, 2008 (edited) There's little distance flying to London, England and Vancouver for many in Eastern Canada. For instance: commercially from YOW (Ottawa) to Vancouver is direct: 852 1 stop: 758 from YOW to Heathrow England is direct: 913 1 stop: 811 That's coach. Lowest possible denominator and ONLY on Expedia. I'm betting there are better deals out there and certainly group deals and better charter costs. Ottawa to Vanvouver is 4611 km. To London, England it's 5378 km. (Incidentally, it's closer to get to London from New York than Vancouver.) I'm not sure time and distance are really in the cards. It's more the ability of those cities to support the teams and, probably more importantly, ensuring that ALL current NHL teams are on solid footing before moving off-continent. Edited September 13, 2008 by Colin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted September 13, 2008 Author Share Posted September 13, 2008 Not every team plays on the east coast, Colin. The Western Conference already complains about travel, making them go to Europe will be even worse. I'm hoping the NHLPA makes a stand against this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Posted September 13, 2008 Share Posted September 13, 2008 Are they that afraid of the KHL? Never minding travel, it would be a nightmare to make TV friendly schedule for both continents as well. I dont think games starting at 6PM Europpean time / noon EST / 9AM Pacific time during weekdays would get very good ratings :S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted September 13, 2008 Share Posted September 13, 2008 Not every team plays on the east coast, Colin. The Western Conference already complains about travel, making them go to Europe will be even worse. I'm hoping the NHLPA makes a stand against this. According to something I read a while back, the casual idea postulated is that each Western team would have one trip of about two weeks to Europe - 6 games. And let's be honest here, I realize that not every team plays on the east coast, but the 'centre' of the league is the Eastern Time Zone. Broadcasts are optimized for us, all the league offices are here, and both Centres of the Universe call the EST home - Toronto and New York. I think Europe will be a reality; it'll just take some time to get there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 There's little distance flying to London, England and Vancouver for many in Eastern Canada. For instance: commercially from YOW (Ottawa) to Vancouver is direct: 852 1 stop: 758 from YOW to Heathrow England is direct: 913 1 stop: 811 That's coach. Lowest possible denominator and ONLY on Expedia. I'm betting there are better deals out there and certainly group deals and better charter costs. Ottawa to Vanvouver is 4611 km. To London, England it's 5378 km. (Incidentally, it's closer to get to London from New York than Vancouver.) I'm not sure time and distance are really in the cards. It's more the ability of those cities to support the teams and, probably more importantly, ensuring that ALL current NHL teams are on solid footing before moving off-continent. But would there even be any teams in England? They've never shown any interest in hockey? Finland, Sweden, Russia, the Czech Republic, Switzerland, Germany, Belarus, Latvia, Norway, Denmark, France, Slovenia and Slovakia are all more competitive, I think. Most of these places are harder to get to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 (edited) But would there even be any teams in England? They've never shown any interest in hockey? Finland, Sweden, Russia, the Czech Republic, Switzerland, Germany, Belarus, Latvia, Norway, Denmark, France, Slovenia and Slovakia are all more competitive, I think. Most of these places are harder to get to. An extra couple hundred km to the mainland. Yes, more to the Eastern Euro countries and perhaps a couple of Southern Euro countries (if teams could survive there), but the increase in distance isn't worth worrying about when you're crossing the ocean. Plus, getting around in Europe is INFINITELY easier than getting around in North America. (And cheaper.) EDIT: And I'm doubting, at this point, that Russia would be interested since they have their "Super league." Edited September 14, 2008 by Colin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted September 14, 2008 Author Share Posted September 14, 2008 Well to be fair, London was really enthusiastic about the NHL last year which is part of the reason NHL decided to go back to Europe this year. Whether they could consistently support an NHL team though, I don't know. Only one NHL city has a higher population then London though and thats New York. Out of the 7 million people living in the Greater London area, I don't think they'd have too much trouble attracting 20,000. Thats only 3% of the population. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLP Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 Ottawa to Vancouver is 4611 3538 km. To London, England it's 5378 km. 7 million people living in the Greater London area, I don't think they'd have too much trouble attracting 20,000. Thats only 3% 0,3% of the population. all in a day's work for the HWL fact checker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 all in a day's work for the HWL fact checker Heh, interesting, at this site: http://www.trailcanada.com/travel/in_canad...avel_distances/ it has what I listed. Either way, point stands. No further to go West than it is to go East when you're in the middle of the hockey world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted September 14, 2008 Author Share Posted September 14, 2008 all in a day's work for the HWL fact checker Whoops, I put 200 000 into the calculator by accident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bombTHEice Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 *lol* NHL to Europe ... I don't hope so, it's total nonsense! Even if I could catch some games then but heck, it will never happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch_nl Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 I think you get it wrong. The NHL has no intention to create a European conference in that sense it would make NHL team travel around the globe on a regular basis. But it would be possible to create two European coferences and then let them compete for a European champ to face the winner of the NHL. The NHL would still have their Stanley Cup. Western Conference Eastern Conference European Conference Russian Conference Not a bad idea after all... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch_Habs_Fan Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 You might have something there!! Sounds pretty amazing.... Keep the NHL as it is, but just let the Stanley cup champ play the winner of the Euro/Rus champ... Great idea, just like Championsleague winner plays the winner of America(is it still called Concacaf?).. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 It would become just like the All-Star game if they do it like that in the offseason. No one would give a shit and they'd only be trying not to get hurt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CerebusClone Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 You might have something there!! Sounds pretty amazing.... Keep the NHL as it is, but just let the Stanley cup champ play the winner of the Euro/Rus champ... Great idea, just like Championsleague winner plays the winner of America(is it still called Concacaf?).. I like the idea, but I'm not sure that would work in hockey. Football players are basically owned by their respective teams, and are expected to particpate in pretty much every league and championships the team is involved in (like the Impact players who have to play a lot more games now that they are in the Champions league). However in hockey players get paid to play in pre-season, regular season, and playoff games (actually a new trend seems to have older players only play half a season plus playoffs), nothing more. Anything else is optional and unpaid by the team; if this were to change, we'll be in for a strike from the NHLPA before a new CBA is signed. Also, the North American professional hockey culture is all about the league games, and we care very little about championships. That includes owners, and I doubt they would want to see their entire roster play additional intense games against the best European clubs, especially not after 82 regular season games, plus the playoffs, plus the preseason. Finally, I really doubt the NHL would want to oppose their best teams to the best European teams; the league is considered the world's elite, and won't want to jeopardize that. For the same reason, the CHL is not interested in opposing some of its teams against NCAA teams (even though the NCAA had made offers) because they don't want to lose more of its top players to college hockey... especially not after the mini-tournament last year where 2 USHL teams actually came out on top against 2 QMJHL teams (even though the Q teams didn't have their full roster). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch_Habs_Fan Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 It would become just like the All-Star game if they do it like that in the offseason. No one would give a shit and they'd only be trying not to get hurt. Yeah for you north americans it doesnt matter. Nothing changes, just an "unmeaning" game, but we europeans would get a huge league with great hockey. Good structure, and thats something i would like very much. 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.