Sports in Canadian culture

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

Australia with its lower population and still a large land mass has a few sustainable leagues.

When a country fully buys into its own leagues (in terms of corporate, media, and citizen support), any country can have a successful league(s). Canada is basically the only developed country of our size that struggles with this...

[HTania]

Originally Posted by Nathan

When a country fully buys into its own leagues (in terms of corporate, media, and citizen support), any country can have a successful league(s). Canada is basically the only developed country of our size that struggles with this...

I think its because we are too close to the US.

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by HTania

I think its because we are too close to the US.

Many smaller European countries exist in close quarters to the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, etc and they make a go of it.

My comment was mainly directed at the Canada doesn't have enough people/isn't rich enough crowd. Yes, in our case it's because of our close proximity to the states, but it's still a poor excuse in the end. If our media and corporations actually fully supported/sponsored Canadian leagues (historically and presently), we really wouldn't be having this conversation, bordering the US or not.

Edit: And I'll add that the irony in the situation is that our media and some corporations (namely financial) only exist because regulations protected/protects them from foreign competition/takeovers.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Ramako

I meant that joining MLC would be easier than starting a Canadian cricket league from scratch. By virtue of population numbers, the American-based MLC would have a better chance of succeeding.

You and Acajack are mocking Toronto by suggesting that we would try to get a team in an American based sports league, MLC. The only alternative would be trying to create a Canadian cricket league from scratch, which would be a much larger endeavor and unlikely to succeed.

Well, one has to admit it's pretty low-hanging fruit!

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Mister F

I love how on this thread multiple posters take on the default "the American league is better" position when the American league has been dead for six years. Says a lot about how Canadians think.

The Major League Cricket Facebook page has 45 likes

Got'em!

[Ramako]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Got'em!

No, he didn't, but keep hunting that whale.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Ramako

No, he didn't, but keep hunting that whale.

Well, no one's really come up with a better reason for piggybacking on American leagues other than "that's what we have always done".

And BTW Mister F is actually from the GTA but he still seems to see the absurdity of all of this like we do.

[Ramako]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Well, no one's really come up with a better reason for piggybacking on American leagues other than "that's what we have always done".

And BTW Mister F is actually from the GTA but he still seems to see the absurdity of all of this like we do.

I don't care where Mister F is from (no offence to him), and I didn't see anybody come up with that reason.

The fact is there are no professional baseball or basketball leagues in Canada (other than the National Basketball League of Canada, which started only a couple years ago). If Torontonians who enjoy baseball or basketball want to watch those sports at their highest competitive level (or at merely a professional level) there is no alternative other than to join MLB or the NBA.

I wonder why nobody has made the same criticism of Montreal because of the Expos or of Vancouver because of the Grizzlies. The only absurd thing is implicitly denying that any other major Canadian city (including those in Quebec) would be thrilled to have a MLB or NBA team if it were possible.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Ramako

I don't care where Mister F is from (no offence to him), and I didn't see anybody come up with that reason.

The fact is there are no professional baseball or basketball leagues in Canada (other than the National Basketball League of Canada, which started only a couple years ago). If Torontonians who enjoy baseball or basketball want to watch those sports at their highest competitive level (or at merely a professional level) there is no alternative other than to join MLB or the NBA.

I wonder why nobody has made the same criticism of Montreal because of the Expos or of Vancouver because of the Grizzlies. The only absurd thing is implicitly denying that any other major Canadian city (including those in Quebec) would be thrilled to have a MLB or NBA team if it were possible.

It's a good point about the absence of leagues but there is a bit of a chicken and egg thing at play here. (And if the biggest city in the country is automatically counted out, it makes things way more difficult.)

As for certain cities being finger-pointed more, well I guess Toronto stands out because many people there can be more brash and adamant about all of this, but I have often pointed out on here that the wannabe Americanism is a trait you find all across Canada, not just in southern Ontario.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by Migs

Wrong. The insecure Canadians prefer to belong in American leagues.

Everyone says this. But if the NFL said, Hi Vancouver, come join the NFL, or if the NBA said that, or if MLB said welcome back to Montreal, or if MLS added teams in Ottawa and Edmonton, I'm sure the majority of people in those markets would be happy.

Which sucks. I think, at least in soccer, Canada should have its own league. I understand it's just not feasible when it comes to basketball and baseball, but yeah.

[Ramako]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It's a good point about the absence of leagues but there is a bit of a chicken and egg thing at play here. (And if the biggest city in the country is automatically counted out, it makes things way more difficult.)

If that's the case, then Montreal is to blame for there being no Canadian baseball league as they had a MLB team first, and were the largest Canadian city at the time.

You make an interesting point about the chicken and egg. One could argue that the presence of the Raptors (and Grizzlies to a lesser extent) has helped raise the profile of basketball in Canada, especially during the Vince Carter years. As a result, you're starting to see a lot of Canadian kids getting picked in the NBA draft. (This year's number one overall pick was Canadian, and next year's will likely be as well). Ironically, we probably have more home grown talent and interest in basketball across Canada than if the Raptors never existed. It's kind of a Catch-22.

[EpicPonyTime]

I think the whole issue of domestic leagues in Canada is off-topic in this thread, n'est pas?

[Welkin]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

No one in the UK complains that Swansea and Hull have teams. In fact, the opposite is true. The entire basis the league is built upon is the fact that ANY football club can reach the premiership. Rivalries are based upon the club, not the city. It's a far better system than the North American system where teams like the Maple Leafs can suck year after year and maintain their big league status. If the NHL employed the same system, any city could have an NHL team if the right team was built. It's far more exciting to see teams move up and down than see the same teams year after year.

As much as we would all love to have a domestic Canadian Hockey League, in reality it would just never work all that well. Unless you had multiple teams in Toronto and Montreal and a hard salary cap, the CHL would be dominated by a few big money/big market teams who could afford the top-tier players while teams in Regina, Halifax and such would be playing with basically AHL level players. Unfortunately the strong salary cap which would make the CHL viable (like the CFL) it would allow the American NHL teams to out bid Canadian teams for the top players and turn the CHL into a lower level league.

Without a strong salary cap, the CHL would turn into the EPL. I hate to burst everyones's bubble, but the EPL sucks as a league because it is a league of two classes. Just like a CHL where a couple of teams with all the money would dominate year-in-and-year out the EPL is dominated by a only a handfull of teams. The rest of the league knows they have no chance in hell of winning the league and they play simply to avoid relegation. 3/4 of the EPL are in the "We-are-just-happy-to-be-here" group and serve as nothing more than practice fodder for the rich, powerful teams.

In the last 20 years Manchester United has won the EPL 12 times, Man City once, Chelsa three times and Arsenal 3 times. The only time a non Top Four team has won the EPL in 20 years was Blackburn in 1995. The only fans that like the way the EPL is set up are the fans in lower-tier cities that are so happy to see their team play the Man U's of the world, that they really don't care that their team is going to loose. However, there is a growing movement in Europe for the establishment of a Super League where the top teams play for all the glory and riches and leave their domestic leagues to their second-tier cities and teams. Fans of Man U are getting tired of spending their money watching their home team playing the likes of Norwich, Swansea and Hull, when what they really want is Man U. playing comparable teams such as Barcelona, Bayern Munich and Juventus on a regular basis.

A CHL would be the same. The big money markets of Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver would dominate with Calgary, Winnipeg, Edmonton and Ottawa winning the occasional title, and Saskatoon, Regina, Halifax, Saint John, London, Victoria......etc just trying to stay out of the bottom. With the CHL competing against the NHL for top-tier players (don't assume top Canadian players are going to stay in Canada), the CHL would quickly become a league where a few top teams would be playing NHL caliber hockey and a lot of the teams playing AHL/KHL level hockey.

In essence we have already achieved the North American version of a Super League. Only the top-tier cities and teams in Canada and the US and get to play in the NHL and both countries have minor league teams for the second-tier cities.

[GreatTallNorth2]

Originally Posted by Welkin

I hate to burst everyones's bubble, but the EPL sucks as a league because it is a league of two classes. Just like a CHL where a couple of teams with all the money would dominate year-in-and-year out the EPL is dominated by a only a handfull of teams. The rest of the league knows they have no chance in hell of winning the league and they play simply to avoid relegation. 3/4 of the EPL are in the "We-are-just-happy-to-be-here" group and serve as nothing more than practice fodder for the rich, powerful teams.

In the last 20 years Manchester United has won the EPL 12 times, Man City once, Chelsa three times and Arsenal 3 times. The only time a non Top Four team has won the EPL in 20 years was Blackburn in 1995. The only fans that like the way the EPL is set up are the fans in lower-tier cities that are so happy to see their team play the Man U's of the world, that they really don't care that their team is going to loose. However, there is a growing movement in Europe for the establishment of a Super League where the top teams play for all the glory and riches and leave their domestic leagues to their second-tier cities and teams. Fans of Man U are getting tired of spending their money watching their home team playing the likes of Norwich, Swansea and Hull, when what they really want is Man U. playing comparable teams such as Barcelona, Bayern Munich and Juventus on a regular basis.

I'm sorry, but what your saying is not reality at all. I am a Chelsea supporter and went and saw Chelsea play against Swansea at Stamford Bridge. No one there was thinking "Oh, we are playing against a smaller Welsh city - this sucks." No, quite the opposite. Swansea as a club has been performing really well and they have some great talent. It was great to see the teams play each other and Swansea won the game. The EPL is not just about who wins the Premiership. Football in the UK is more than who has the highest points. Its about winning the other tournaments as well. Reading your post, I am sure you don't know what it's really like here. I have lots of friends who are Man U supporters and they love to watch any match they can. Yes, playing bigger clubs is clearly the most desirable games to watch, but it's not the way you make it out to be. Whats amazing about the EPL is watching teams like Portsmouth go from a lower league to EPL and playing Europe and then back to lower divisions. There's a lot more drama and supporters are much more into their teams. You don't see a lot of "suits" at EPL matches, just real fans who will travel up and down the country to support their team. Best system in sports.

[Mister F]

Originally Posted by Welkin

AUnfortunately the strong salary cap which would make the CHL viable (like the CFL) it would allow the American NHL teams to out bid Canadian teams for the top players and turn the CHL into a lower level league.

There's no evidence to back up this view. This is just the default "American is better" attitude so many Canadians fall back on. If anything it would be the opposite. The Canadian NHL teams, on average, make more money and have stronger followings than the American ones. A hypothetical Canadian league would be second to noone.

Originally Posted by Welkin

Without a strong salary cap, the CHL would turn into the EPL. I hate to burst everyones's bubble, but the EPL sucks as a league because it is a league of two classes. Just like a CHL where a couple of teams with all the money would dominate year-in-and-year out the EPL is dominated by a only a handfull of teams. The rest of the league knows they have no chance in hell of winning the league and they play simply to avoid relegation. 3/4 of the EPL are in the "We-are-just-happy-to-be-here" group and serve as nothing more than practice fodder for the rich, powerful teams.

In the last 20 years Manchester United has won the EPL 12 times, Man City once, Chelsa three times and Arsenal 3 times. The only time a non Top Four team has won the EPL in 20 years was Blackburn in 1995. The only fans that like the way the EPL is set up are the fans in lower-tier cities that are so happy to see their team play the Man U's of the world, that they really don't care that their team is going to loose. However, there is a growing movement in Europe for the establishment of a Super League where the top teams play for all the glory and riches and leave their domestic leagues to their second-tier cities and teams. Fans of Man U are getting tired of spending their money watching their home team playing the likes of Norwich, Swansea and Hull, when what they really want is Man U. playing comparable teams such as Barcelona, Bayern Munich and Juventus on a regular basis.

A CHL would be the same. The big money markets of Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver would dominate with Calgary, Winnipeg, Edmonton and Ottawa winning the occasional title, and Saskatoon, Regina, Halifax, Saint John, London, Victoria......etc just trying to stay out of the bottom. With the CHL competing against the NHL for top-tier players (don't assume top Canadian players are going to stay in Canada), the CHL would quickly become a league where a few top teams would be playing NHL caliber hockey and a lot of the teams playing AHL/KHL level hockey.

In essence we have already achieved the North American version of a Super League. Only the top-tier cities and teams in Canada and the US and get to play in the NHL and both countries have minor league teams for the second-tier cities.

The beauty of the system the EPL plays in is that it doesn't play in isolation. There are tournaments with teams from all over Europe that are just as meaningful as league play. Teams can play with the big boys from other countries without sacrificing their domestic leagues. Put it this way: in EPL smaller teams like Swansea and Norwich don't have a very good chance of winning it all, but in MLS the chance of Edmonton and Ottawa winning is zero.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Mister F

There's no evidence to back up this view. This is just the default "American is better" attitude so many Canadians fall back on. If anything it would be the opposite. The Canadian NHL teams, on average, make more money and have stronger followings than the American ones. A hypothetical Canadian league would be second to noone.

.

Exactly. Plus, the assumption that a US NHL would be stronger than the Canadian league is based on the false premise that all of the teams in the American league would be strong.

The reality is that it would be the exact opposite: all of the current NHL clubs in Canada are strong or stable financially. Close to half of those based in the US are on shaky ground. At best the number of strong NHL franchises at the moment in both countries is equal. Plus all of the weak American teams are propped up by money from the money-making Canadian and American clubs. That Canadian money is gone if Canada forms its own league, so either the strong US clubs pony up more cash (weakening their bottom line) or they jettison some of the money-losing clubs, which leave the US NHL with far fewer clubs than the current NHL has in the US today.

Basically, the likely scenario if Canada split off from the NHL is a league in each country with about a dozen teams each, and these two leagues would be of comparable calibre.

[osmo]

Originally Posted by Acajack

This is true about Ottawa almost getting a team a few years ago but I think that ship has sailed since MLS was not as mature a league then as it is now.

They are now thinking of the next phase in the development of their league and this means they have the NHL in their sights.

Perceptions are very important in pro sports (especially in the US) and MLS, not unlike the NHL, does not want to give the impression that it has a bunch of Canadian "filler" teams because most Americans don't care about their game.

Ideally, if the NHL had well supported clubs in all of the major cities in the U.S., that league wouldn't see any need for having teams in Canadian cities beyond the big three (Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver) either. Trust me on that.

It's perception is in its product. Your wrong in it viewing Canadian teams poorly.TFC was the "model" franchise for the leagues approach to expansion. The team sucks but they make a shit ton of money for MLSE for the nickels they put in. MLS packaged this approach to sell to perspective owners and many bought in. Nobody was crying about Canada being "filler" as they were all counting their cash.

The MLS is delicate about "perception" in television only, this is why the presented product is polished and produced "in-house" jontly by the league and ESPN to give it a "look" like European soccer. This is to present a polished and professional looking product to hesitant legitimate soccer fans whom may view the league as a toy compared to the European powerhouses. Taking that into account though, any legitimate soccer fan knows that in Europe teams exist all over and the only club that matters is your own. You don't care whom your team is playing aside from a rival as long as the soccer is good and your team wins. A LA Galaxy fan could care less where Montreal is as long as his club wins. The league already has created Derbys for clubs to instill fake rivalries. The rest of the clubs don't matter to fans, soccer is always a provincial and local game.

The MLS just wants to make money and this is why in its older days is nuked charter franchises in premier markets like Miami. But only suspended San Jose... Why? Because San Jose is in probably one of the most affluent suburban areas in the USA, and the MLS whom largely has zoned in on suburban soccer demographics in the states didn't want to burn the market or that franchise so they offered it a lifeline that Miami did not get.

The MLS is open to Canada because it grows it's money pot regardless. Again, nobody is watching his stuff on TV in the states and the league does not have to justify dumping teams in crappy markets like the NHL does to justify a national TV deal. They already have one and IMO its more lucrative then what the NHL is getting if you consider the numbers they pull in are piss poor. The MLS goes where it thinks it can make money and get soccer specific faculties built.

Why did they choose Columbus over Cleveland or Cincy? Salt Lake before Atlanta? Why did Portland and Vancouver all come on-line at the same time with Seattle? They know what they are doing, it's easily been the most stable growing sports league in history this far. If anything it's their charter franchises whom are bogging them down. DC is still working out the kinks on a soccer specific Stadium, RFK is too big for them and apple venue bag they have been dealing with since it's start.

The league is making money, with a considerable presence in Canada that will only continue to grow. Blue chip suburban type cites such as Ottawa and Calgary make sense for the league and you then make a case for having a Canadian farm league as a subset to the MLS down the road.

The soccer demographic is more affluent and has a better knowledge and class when it comes to sport. You see the riff raff that creeps into football games in America ad you understand that it's a different approach. If only the NHL could understand this and focus soley on populated markets in the North East that have a history of the game. The NHL if they were smart would only have teams in Cali and Texas for warm places and only deal with "colder" cities where hockey makes sense. The fact Houston which had a good history with its old minor team, is the 4th largest city in America, and a natural rival to Dallas dosn't have a team lets you know the NHL doesn't know what the hell it's doing. The MLS went to Huston in a joint deal and its already one of the more successful franchises.

[osmo]

The only advantage the NHL has in America is the corporate angle. A Canadian only league can't compete with the amount corporate money swirling around in America. Television is important also even though Canadian rights cost more the scope and scale difference in America even if it's not tuned in is important.

Plus 8 team leagues are stupid. I hate the CFL for its toy playoff format where anybody with a heart beat gets in. I would rather have a tier league with top performing clubs, or a larger general league. Small general leagues are dumb and IMO its my biggest turn off from the CFL amongst other things.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

Everyone says this. But if the NFL said, Hi Vancouver, come join the NFL, or if the NBA said that, or if MLB said welcome back to Montreal, or if MLS added teams in Ottawa and Edmonton, I'm sure the majority of people in those markets would be happy.

Which sucks. I think, at least in soccer, Canada should have its own league. I understand it's just not feasible when it comes to basketball and baseball, but yeah.

The NBA was in Vancouver and MLB was in Montreal, both were collosal failures. One can also argue that the NBA in Toronto is a collosal failure with their miniscule tv ratings.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by Migs

The NBA was in Vancouver and MLB was in Montreal, both were collosal failures. One can also argue that the NBA in Toronto is a collosal failure with their miniscule tv ratings.

If you meant to say colossal, then your statement would still be wrong.