More growth = more people playing = more hockey, whether at the NHL level or wherever.

The crux of my argument is that an NHL with more Canadian teams is a weaker, poorer NHL, and it would be more likely that more Canadian players would have to look elsewhere to make a living playing hockey. Fin.

Good to know nothing's changed in 50+ years.

In other news.....

----------

OneSoccer to air exclusive coverage in Canada of 2021 and 2023 Concacaf Gold Cups

MEDIAPRO Canada has secured exclusive broadcast rights in Canada to all national team tournaments organized by Concacaf, the continental confederation encompassing the 41 soccer associations in North and Central America and the Caribbean, from 2020 to 2023.

The Concacaf package of national team tournaments includes the prestigious Concacaf Gold Cup, the men’s national team competition, in 2021 and 2023, and the women’s equivalent, the 2022 Concacaf Women’s Championship.

https://us6.campaign-archive.com/?u=...&id=977c00884d

Too bad no one will see it. Maybe they'll get flicked to CBC streaming as some CPL games have.

New 3 on 3 summer hockey league?

And if crowds are a big part of the atmosphere then Syracuse isn't a bad option at all. They average around 40,000 for football, sometimes drawing over 50,000 though they may also get 33,000 for some games.

They average around 20,000 for basketball.

I see the benefits of both models. Expanding into the unconventional markets or expanding into traditional hockey markets. From my perspective I could have done without the Sunbelt teams. There's just this element of sentiment I like in my sports. I don't lose sleep over these things but I know I'd enjoy the sport more if it were not in far flung exotic locations. But I know the reasons why they do it.

The Spanish Cup (Copa del Rey) was just held in its new format. Instead of league champ vs cup champ to kickoff the season, they just took the top 4 finishers from last year and had them do a mini tournament in Saudi Arabia. Only 300 Barca fans bought their team's allotment to travel and go watch. If I were to watch, I don't think I'd like the experience live or on TV. Sometimes you can just tell the game is not being held in a soccer hotbed, even if it were in a full stadium as weird as that sounds.

For instance, the best WCs I can remember are Italy '90 and and France '98. Germany and then Brazil I'd rank after that ahead of Japan/Korea, Russia, South Africa and USA, which felt very similar to me.

CFB and F1 along with soccer are the three sports I've been the most passionate about. CFB and F1 went way downhill for me. A big part of both declines for me is the geography.

The conferences re-aligned for the sake of the almighty dollar. The Big Ten is supposed to be traditional midwestern football. Now Rutgers and Maryland have been in the for the past few years. Two places close to the ocean. Sure, they are just another team like the other members, but you just know when you're watching or following the games and the season that they just don't feel right. Especially Maryland which was in the aptly named Atlantic Coast Conference and played against schools that just felt more appropriate like the four NC schools including Duke and UNC.

When Nebraska moved from the Big 12 North to the Big Ten West it did not feel off at all because Nebraska fits both geographic profiles. They can be viewed as Heartland or Midwest.

Texas A&M left the Big 12 South for the SEC. That didn't feel as bad because College Station actual has that Gulf coast vibe like in Houston and SEC has tonnes of teams in states bordering the Gulf. Mizzou, in a midwestern state, also made the same conf. move but that it doesn't fit as perfectly. It's not too bad since Missouri does border the South and the SEC is the Southeastern Conference.

Many, many more examples in college. One that almost happened that seemed illogical was Boise State going to the Big East, which started out as NE schools.

For F1, Europe is their base. Then you have some traditional hotspots in various locales around the world we were used to and had some kind of motorsport culture like Brazil, Japan, Australia, USA and Canada for example. Then Bernie started to take some of these races away, especially in Europe because they couldn't pay what non-traditional Motorsport countries would pay for hosting fees.

Azerbaijian, Qatar, Bahrain, Korea, Russia, India, China, Malaysia, Singapore is what I can name off the top of my head. This isn't as bad now that there are 22 races instead of the 16 like when I grew up, but too many of these races has just brought the good feels I had about the sport way down.

I had a more sentimental connection to the NHL before the Sunbelt teams came in. It's not just because I grew up watching that NHL and now I'm an adult. I feel the exact same way about the NBA now as when I grew up watching it. If these leagues start putting teams in London or even crazier, Tokyo, I am pretty sure I'd start to feel differently about them. Doesn't have to be logical, but that's just how it is for me and that's part of the human condition.

Since Liberty came on as owners they cut Malaysia and brought back France...Vietnam is on the calendar this year which should be interesting and also Holland is back for the first time since 1985, so there's definitely some Euro-centrism coming back. Thing is most agreements are signed long-term so a lot of these races in places like Azerbaijan and Bahrain still have agreements in place and can't really be removed until they expire. Qatar has never hosted F1 but they do have a great track which hosts MotoGP and a few others.

Thing is, Bernie kept chasing TV money and hosting fees. He kept accepting millions from increasingly sketchy countries and hoped for increased international TV broadcasting fees as a result. India was a really good attempt but ultimately flopped, but a success in that country would have of course provided more eyeballs.

Conversely, Liberty came in, opened F1 to social media and the 21st century, introduced F1TV, increased streaming and video playback and connectivity, and as a result F1 has generally just became a better product since their ownership began. Near the end of the Bernie days stands were worringly empty at a lot of major circuits but now they're jam-packed just about everywhere they go.

And the Spaniards were right pissed about it and bitched during the entire tournament.

The turmoil in the (general) vicinity of the tournament, though unrelated and largely inconsequential, conveniently added even more fuel to the fire.

The Dakar rally (originally known as the Paris-Dakar and still referred to as such by many) was held entirely in Saudia Arabia this year.

Though they've been moving it around quite a bit (including South America), and I think it's been decades since they actually ran it on the Sahara Desert route from Paris to Dakar, Sénégal.

It's a pretty big deal to Europeans.

I am much the same. Legacy and prestige are pretty important to me.

I'd go see a run-of-the-mill Bears or Packers team before I'd go see the first-place Jacksonville Jaguars.

And seeing Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea play Nouméa, New Caledonia in Aussie rules football is going to turn my crank a lot less than seeing two historic Melbourne clubs battle it out.

No matter how good the Indian Wells tournament gets it won't outshine the four grand slam tennis events.

My bad, LOL, I meant Abu Dhabi instead of Qatar.

Liberty from the get go said they were trying to make F1 better, which was a thinly veiled shot at Bernie. They kept Bernie on a for a while as consultant or something but then told him to go away.

I'm not enthused about the Miami race idea but yes, Liberty has definitely pointed F1 in the right direction. Now for me to actually start watching races again and not just highlights, and to go back to Montreal for first time since 2012 (have been to 9 races), they need to bring the engine noise back. The pitch I grew up hearing and to me is the best sound in the world.

This is where the atmosphere part comes in for me. The atmosphere I discuss so often, probably ad nauseum! The ear blistering sound was orgasmic and added a visceral component that is sorely missing for me now. God I loved stepping out from Jean Drapeau station and hearing those cars during practice off in the distance.

See Canadian GP from 2006:
• Video Link

See Aussie GP pre and post engine regulation change:
• Video Link

I do think it's unreasonable because you're not supporting your point with any evidence.

Meanwhile, the big European soccer leagues all put teams where the demand is and not in non-traditional locations in the hopes of "growing the game". They're just as big as the NFL per capita, so I don't buy the argument that the NHL's model is the only or best way to grow the game. Most of the NHL's biggest money losers are sunbelt teams. And the NHL hasn't grown at all relative to its competitors.

That's bad for Winnipeg, but it's even worse for the teams that are already losing money.

Lose. Sorry, pet peeve.

Some of the sunbelt teams are approaching 30 years old. They're not new.

And yet the Rogers tv deal dwarfs the NBC one. Not just per capita, but in absolute numbers. Large cities can pull in more viewers in theory, but the size of the city doesn't matter if people don't care about the sport.

Mine too, WTH happened that 95% of people can't get that right. You never saw that when I was a kid, is it some sort of Internet thing?

You want proof of success? The expansion fee for an NHL team is currently $650 million. Precedent based on the successful entrance of the Vegas Golden Knights and now the Seattle ownership group. The least valuable Canadian teams are currently the Jets at ~$415 million and the Senators at $435 million. It's typically not good business to invest in something immediately worth 50% less than what you paid for. Quebec City and Saskatoon aren't exactly massive corporate cities with a few billionaires lining up to own a team regardless of profitability. They would likely be large diversified ownership groups or corporately run, and both would likely be asking for an expansion fee at least half of what the NHL currently commands based on their successful expansion into new markets.

Gary Bettman's job is to make the current owners richer. I fail to see how a league with a few more Canadian teams valued at less than $400 million accomplishes that. We can talk about what someone personally feels is right for the league regarding legacy or whatnot, but the simple fact is that Bettman's expansion has created the most valuable league to date.

Nordiques 2.0 would be owned by Quebecor who have about 10 billion.

The head of Quebecor PKP himself has a personal net worth around 2 billion.

They're good.

Which is what's wrong with the North American pro sports model. It's not going to change so we'll have to make do with complaining about it the next 100 years. :yes:

And in any event, the fact that Canadian clubs like the Jets (and I assume the Senators too) are losing money isn't exactly a ringing endorsement of the current NHL model.

The other teams losing money aren't being pinned down by a deflated currency, a smaller market, and a smaller arena. Winnipeg's more or less hit its ceiling under its current financials, hasn't it?

If this isn't the most "okay, boomer" post to make I don't know what is. :P

Quebec doesn't provide growth for the NHL, see: current limitations of Winnipeg and times them by two due to Francophone-only market.

The Sens don't lose money, though.

And neither do the Panthers apparently. It pays to have good accountants and PR people.

In terms of attracting free agents this would likely be true, but for the rest?

If the hypothetical Nordiques 2.0 limited themselves to simply repeating what the Nordiques 1.0 did in terms of market impact, they'll become the go-to team for between a quarter and a third of hockey fans in the province. They certainly wouldn't be limited to the Greater Quebec City metro.

That means a market of 2 to 2.5 million or maybe a bit more even, easily twice the size of the absolutely maxed out market potential for the Jets.

Another thing they'd have that the Jets don't is for all intents and purposes their "own" sports network. The Jets compete for coverage in higher order sports media with the Leafs, Oilers, Flames, Canucks and Habs.

If the Nords ever came back, one network out of RDS or TVA Sports would put the Habs front and centre, and the other would put the Nords front and centre. Having a mainline TV sports network (and associated magazines, newspapers and media platforms) talking up your team 24/7 is a huge asset. The Nordiques 1.0 succeeded in developing a fan base all across the province due to the media and marketing tools of the day - and they didn't even have the powerhouse Quebecor (likely owner) behind them back then.

They'll also do well in terms of corporate sponsorships. As it stands now there can only be one official beer associated with an NHL team in Quebec, one official bank, one official restaurant chain, one official dépanneur chain, one official snack food, one official insurer, etc.

Tons of potential sponsors shut out by exclusivity deals the Habs have with their competitors would support the Nordiques 2.0. You can be sure of it. Source: what things were like when the Nordiques 1.0 were there. These sponsors don't even have to be based in Quebec City. Nothing prevents or prevented the Nordiques from getting sponsors based in Montreal as most of them operate across the province.

Proper spelling isn't an "OK boomer" thing. Or at least, it shouldn't be.