53 replies to this topic

[gbpuckfan]

While all have possibilities, Quebec has:

- tradition
- potential owner already lined up in the RIM guy

Those two factors alone may put it on the top of the list

[dirt]

gbpuckfan, on 11 February 2012 - 11:53 PM, said:

Storm Chaser, on 11 February 2012 - 10:26 PM, said:

I guess I'd like to see the USHL stay in the Midwest, from a fan perspective it's nice with teams relatively close together. If I was to expand any I'd say maybe Missouri, Kansas, Minnesota.

* St. Louis - actually St. Charles - was an unmitigated disaster in a rink better suited for junior B. That's not to say there aren't medium sized cities elsewhere that might work, but given the travel, etc., they'd better be able to make money.

The Eagles played in Chesterfield. And yes it was/is a dump of a rink.

[TheShow]

gbpuckfan, on 12 February 2012 - 08:24 PM, said:

While all have possibilities, Quebec has:

- tradition
- potential owner already lined up in the RIM guy

Those two factors alone may put it on the top of the list

Has Jim Balsillie ever mentioned Quebec/is he apart of the Quebec group? Every single other previous attempt has been Ontatio based in his bids...Waterloo, Markham, Kitchener...

[aceface905]

JacksJacksJacks, on 12 February 2012 - 07:01 PM, said:

Kansas City is on the list of cities that need an NHL franchise, but theyre closer to the bottom of the list then the top. It should go:

Seattle
Quebec City
Houston (I still think that it will make a good NHL city)
and KC.

I would swap QC and Seattle, but yes. And Hamilton is still a possibility--weren't the Bulldogs moving?--I would put them ahead of Houston and KC, but behind QC and Seattle. I completely agree on Houston... why exactly don't they have the NHL again? Just content with the AHL for now?

[FargoForceFan]

gbpuckfan, on 11 February 2012 - 11:53 PM, said:

Storm Chaser, on 11 February 2012 - 10:26 PM, said:

I guess I'd like to see the USHL stay in the Midwest, from a fan perspective it's nice with teams relatively close together. If I was to expand any I'd say maybe Missouri, Kansas, Minnesota.

Unfortunately, all three of those fall into the "bee, there, done that, failed" category.

* While Minnesota may be the state of hockey, there are no good cities that are candidates. Either they are too small and high school hockey rules, or are big enough but have a D1 team (i.e. Duluth, Mankato, St. Cloud and Bemidji might all be USHL candidates sans their WCHA teams). And given the general predisposition to dislike the USHL, it's not an option.

* There was a team in Topeka. Didn't draw and now that's a NAHL team (or was the last time I checked). Olathe was rumored but never developed. I'm familiar enough with other options.

* St. Louis - actually St. Charles - was an unmitigated disaster in a rink better suited for junior B. That's not to say there aren't medium sized cities elsewhere that might work, but given the travel, etc., they'd better be able to make money.

I agree with your general sentiment that staying in the midwestern footprint is desireable, however. Unfortunately, the best options might end up being minor pro cities that switch, a la Muskegon. And it's always tough for this league to follow in the steps of pro teams. (And I don't think anyone wants to see hockey fail at any level, even if that opens a door for the USHL.)

I've always thought that Rochester, MN would be a great place for the USHL to expand. I know the Mustags were there before inthe 60-70's. Population is over 100,000 and large enough to support a team, with 3 high school hockey teams, yet far enough from any D1 program that would compete for the same audiance. Lots of $$ down there with the Mayo Clinic.

[TheShow]

aceface905, on 13 February 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

JacksJacksJacks, on 12 February 2012 - 07:01 PM, said:

Kansas City is on the list of cities that need an NHL franchise, but theyre closer to the bottom of the list then the top. It should go:

Seattle
Quebec City
Houston (I still think that it will make a good NHL city)
and KC.

I would swap QC and Seattle, but yes. And Hamilton is still a possibility--weren't the Bulldogs moving?--I would put them ahead of Houston and KC, but behind QC and Seattle. I completely agree on Houston... why exactly don't they have the NHL again? Just content with the AHL for now?

Bulldogs moving to Laval, yea.

The thing about Hamilton is...that place needs a new arena. Copps Coliseum is the definition of dump. NHL isn't touching it with a 40 foot pole.

Back to KC/USHL...I don't see it. The league seems to have this airtight "footprint" that is seriously limiting the league's growth as essentially, all the targets within it are milked dry.

[gbpuckfan]

Part of the issue with Rochester was - at the first transition to Tier 1 - it didn't have enough seating capacity. Same with Dubuque, etc. Now, an owner can post a surety bond, IIRC, instead of meeting attendance minimums.

I always liked games at the Rec Center - and the very good pizza place across the street - but without a new rink, a la Dubuque, I can't see them drawing enough in that 1,900 seat building to make it financially.

[FargoForceFan]

gbpuckfan, on 13 February 2012 - 09:27 AM, said:

Part of the issue with Rochester was - at the first transition to Tier 1 - it didn't have enough seating capacity. Same with Dubuque, etc. Now, an owner can post a surety bond, IIRC, instead of meeting attendance minimums.

I always liked games at the Rec Center - and the very good pizza place across the street - but without a new rink, a la Dubuque, I can't see them drawing enough in that 1,900 seat building to make it financially.

Yea, I thinking new rink also. I look at how/what Fargo and Dubuque has done and could see this being duplicated in Rochester. 3rd largest city in MN with lots of $$$$. Yet anything even close to the USHL level would be D1 in Mankato or the U of M and both are over 90 minutes away from Rochester. A team there would also fit in the West or East geographicly.

[hockeypalooza]

gbpuckfan, on 11 February 2012 - 11:53 PM, said:

* St. Louis - actually St. Charles - was an unmitigated disaster in a rink better suited for junior B.

Are you referring to The Family Arena? It is a real nice venue, actually. Word is that they want hockey back pretty badly, too. They seat 9,600 for hockey.

http://www.familyarena.com/
http://en.wikipedia....ki/Family_Arena

[hockeypalooza]

minor life, on 09 February 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

USHL budgets are close to those of AA pro.

I'd really like to know how "close" they are. Are there just more owners willing to lose money on USHL than AA? Because teams like QC are drawing 3,200/game and losing a lot of money in AA. There are only 4 teams drawing more than 3,200/game in the USHL. So what am I missing here? Are there like 10-11 teams losing a pile of money every year in the USHL, too? I don't know, but teams like Des Moines and Cedar Rapids seem very solid and stable from the outside, and they are not drawing anywhere even close to what they would need to support a AA pro team.

I know USHL pays full billet for the players. Isn't that like $500/month/player? Most AA pro teams pay rent for their players' housing, which is also probably $500/month. So that's a wash to me. The salaries for AA are around $12,000/week/team. Doing the math there that is around $300K+ in expenses that USHL teams don't have, plus there may be other benefits on top of that AA pro teams have to pay that the USHL does not (insuraunce, travel allowances, etc).

From the USHL games I have been to, I bet they spend more on marketing and game production than a lot of AA teams (which sadly might say more about the AA teams, but it’s true). So I admit that USHL teams may have some expenses that are not obvious at first glance.

But my gut feel is that the USHL still is definitely quite a bit cheaper than AA pro, but it is kind of like comparing apples and oranges. They are very different models.

Edited by hockeypalooza, 13 February 2012 - 01:06 PM.

[kwey24]

NHL Expansion/Relocation Options

1. Toronto/Markham - Grame Roustan is looking to construct an arena in Markham. TSN went over, quite well, why a second team in Toronto was actually the most sustainable. It'd require the okay of Toronto and probably Buffalo, but they could be paid off.

2. Quebec City - Still needs the arena, but with the American dollar and Canadian dollar being much closer than in the mid-90's, when the Nordiques moved, this city is again an option.

3. Seattle - Needs a new arena, but with no NBA team there now, Seattle might support an NHL team instead. Seattle would be very useful for the NHL geographically

4. Houston - The owner of the Rockets apparently has the first right of refusal for an NHL team in the Toyota Center. Houston has the arena, it has the population base, and it has the corporate base. The only concern would be whether Houston would eventually duplicate the dwindling attendance in Dallas over the years. (Dallas has a sweetheart lease agreement, too, and it apparently still loses money.)

5. Kansas City - Has the Sprint Center, but it's just not a hockey town. The Sprint Center has made money even without a tenant. I'd say leave KC be with the successful Missouri Mavericks.

So, in terms of USHL expansion, there really aren't a lot of options in the geographic footprint. If Dayton gets the new arena, then I could see someone potentially giving the USHL a try there if pro hockey there folds. Bloomington, Illinois, is insufficient to support a USHL team (their attendance with a Double-A team is insufficient to support a USHL team). If the Quad Cities ever lost pro hockey, then the USHL in the QC would make some sense geographically. It'd be a tough sell to QC fans at first, but they might eventually come around because of the natural rivalries with Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, Waterloo, and Dubuque.

I'm also someone who thinks the days of Muskegon and Youngstown are numbered. It may not be in the immediate future, but in the coming years, unless attendance numbers go up in those two markets, or the owners don't mind running a charity, they won't make it.

USHL return to Rochester? While Rochester is growing, I'd say it's unrealistic to think Rochester would consistently pack 3,000 for USHL games (which, obviously, would have to be in a new arena). Methinks we'll just continue to see the Rochester Ice Hawks continued to be one of the very best organizations in Tier III junior hockey. (No reason to move up to the NAHL--the attendance uptick would never compensate for the increase in costs.) Here's hoping Owatonna can average a few hundred per game with their new MnJHL team. Probably only a matter of time before the Austin Bruins fold (or relocate down South, too, thus becoming an option for the MnJHL.)

USHL in the Twin Cities: Would have to be in a new building in the northwest side of the cities. Even the, it'd still be very uncertain whether it'd go over. It's a hike from, say, Monticello down to Mariucci or the Xcel Center, but fans might still be indifferent to it. Of note, Minnesota high school hockey doesn't play a lot of games on Friday nights, so that's not necessarily a major issue. This is why you can have high school players from Minnesota tell you they went to a lot of Gophers games and whatnot. It's more Tuesday nights, Thursday nights, and Saturday and Sunday afternoons.

[kwey24]

hockeypalooza, on 13 February 2012 - 01:05 PM, said:

I know USHL pays full billet for the players. Isn't that like $500/month/player? Most AA pro teams pay rent for their players' housing, which is also probably $500/month. So that's a wash to me. The salaries for AA are around $12,000/week/team. Doing the math there that is around $300K+ in expenses that USHL teams don't have, plus there may be other benefits on top of that AA pro teams have to pay that the USHL does not (insuraunce, travel allowances, etc).

USHL teams don't pay $500 per month to the billet families per player. It's more typically $250, or thereabouts, from what I've been told by housing families from different USHL markets.

USHL budgets are now, typically, a bit over $1 million, which is about the same as an SPHL team. Double-A budgets are much closer to $2 million (don't bring up anyway Welfare Hockey League teams that Fort Wayne used to support that had budgets of $1.4 million--those were jokes).

Most USHL teams are losing money, including Cedar Rapids. (If your gameday impression of the USHL is molded primarily by Cedar Rapids, it's not quite THAT good everywhere--that's the best I've seen, but USHL teams do, by and large, have good game presentations.) It doesn't hurt that more and more of the arenas in the USHL are relatively new. Can't wait for the Lancers' new arena. No way the Lancers won't rival the RoughRiders. The Lancers do everything top notch, at least with the resources they have.

[hockeypalooza]

kwey24, on 13 February 2012 - 03:12 PM, said:

hockeypalooza, on 13 February 2012 - 01:05 PM, said:

I know USHL pays full billet for the players. Isn't that like $500/month/player? Most AA pro teams pay rent for their players' housing, which is also probably $500/month. So that's a wash to me. The salaries for AA are around $12,000/week/team. Doing the math there that is around $300K+ in expenses that USHL teams don't have, plus there may be other benefits on top of that AA pro teams have to pay that the USHL does not (insuraunce, travel allowances, etc).

USHL teams don't pay $500 per month to the billet families per player. It's more typically $250, or thereabouts, from what I've been told by housing families from different USHL markets.

USHL budgets are now, typically, a bit over $1 million, which is about the same as an SPHL team. Double-A budgets are much closer to $2 million (don't bring up anyway Welfare Hockey League teams that Fort Wayne used to support that had budgets of $1.4 million--those were jokes).

Most USHL teams are losing money, including Cedar Rapids. (If your gameday impression of the USHL is molded primarily by Cedar Rapids, it's not quite THAT good everywhere--that's the best I've seen, but USHL teams do, by and large, have good game presentations.) It doesn't hurt that more and more of the arenas in the USHL are relatively new. Can't wait for the Lancers' new arena. No way the Lancers won't rival the RoughRiders. The Lancers do everything top notch, at least with the resources they have.

Thanks for the info! That was my impression. I know the magical "break even" point varies greatly from team to team, depending on their arena situation and other factors. I'm sure there are USHL teams losing money, but just in general there is a lot less risk with them than AA pro. If Cedar Rapids is losing money, I bet it is not a huge figure. It's probably a number the owner can live with for a while (unlike a lot of AA teams).

I really hope QC keeps their AA team. If not, I think they could support a USHL team. I think it would be harsh at first, but we have to face reality here: they don't have a ton of diehards left, and the ones they do have left are hockey fans that will probably still come out for some USHL games. The real challenge in QC is getting sponsors back on board. They are real reluctant to support ANY team with all the drama every year. If they can ever weather a couple seasons with the same owners & front office, I think sponsors will slowly come back. The USHL team would have the same challenge at first if they came in, say, next year. To the community, they will just be the latest group to give it a shot. They are going to have to prove they are "for real", weather they are USHL, CHL, whatever HL.

Edited by hockeypalooza, 13 February 2012 - 04:53 PM.

[Yeti]

I don't understand why the NHL to Seattle rumors are so prevalent. I lived out there for about seven years, and I never got the vibe that NHL hockey could survive. They couldn't support a NBA team, so I don't see how they'd support NHL. You've got a pocket of hockey fans in the north (Everett Silvertips - WHL) puget sound area and in the south (Seattle Thunderbirds - WHL), but that's it. In my experiences, Seattle sports fans are the worst bandwagon fans in the country. The colors come out when their teams are winning, but when they stink....attendance takes a hit. I just don't see how they'd survive after the first few years when the newness wears off.

If the NHL wants to get into the pacific northwest, I think Portland would be a much better option. Their sports fans are pretty rabid.

[arlingtonway]

Hate to bring this back up since its been so long but according to Jim Cain of the Colisee in Lewiston


"Our joint pursuit of the USHL is really working well," Jim Cain said. "We're clearly in the lead, and I believe it'll happen."


(LINK)


For this guy to keep saying stuff like this he's got to know something, unless he's just really good at blowing smoke

[TheShow]

arlingtonway, on 04 March 2012 - 12:35 AM, said:

Hate to bring this back up since its been so long but according to Jim Cain of the Colisee in Lewiston


"Our joint pursuit of the USHL is really working well," Jim Cain said. "We're clearly in the lead, and I believe it'll happen."


(LINK)


For this guy to keep saying stuff like this he's got to know something, unless he's just really good at blowing smoke

Well, as most people here know, it's probably best to either not believe what the USHL says or know there is something going on behind the scenes the USHL doesn't want its fans to know about, so I'm thinking there may be smoke to it actually. Even if it is a really terrible idea...again which would lead to believe its a probability with the USHL.

[minor life]

If the USHL were to go east, Lewiston would be in the lead. With no other teams out east, and no bridge travel partners moving toward the east, it is a long shot. Unless,
Lewiston would be paying for travel for the other teams it is unlikely. I look for an FHL team in Lewiston next year, along with several Portland Pirates AHL games while their arena gets a facelift. I also look for an FHL junior league to start up under AAU to become a development league for the pro league. Lots of people out east talking about this happening.

[Mr Ricochet]

I received an email from a reliable source, but usually wait until I get independent confirmation on things before I post, which I haven't. With this new info in the article and Minor Life's addition to it I'll paste part of the email........ This has the USHL taking on multiple EJHL teams!!!

Quote

The USHL eastward expansion will inlcude the Portland Pirates, Bay State Breakers, South Shore, Huskies/Islanders, Boston Jr Bruins and likely New Jersy Hitmen. as this effectively kills the EJHL,

This is one helluva rumor, but in theory this would plop the USHL into the east big time.............

[minor life]

Very interesting indeed. Portland Pirates AJHL and Met junior teams are moving to the EJHL and EmJHL next season. That is a done deal. AHL Portland is playing at least a half dozen games in Lewiston, it is already going to AHL scheduling committee. The only problem I see with this is the lack of arenas that meet Tier I standards for USAH. South Shore and Boston could pull it off with their talent and recruiting no problem. Portland with Brad Church probably could as well. I just dont see it happening this season though. But if it did.......WOW!!!! This would be a game changer for sure. Access to the Eastern D-1 scouting machine that is limited in the Mid West would be amazing, NHL scouting would get that much better, and any player that is boarder line D-1 would get the D-3 exposure of eastern schools. This would just be incredible.

Edited by minor life, 04 March 2012 - 01:06 PM.

[Ryan]

Mr Ricochet, on 04 March 2012 - 12:52 PM, said:

I received an email from a reliable source, but usually wait until I get independent confirmation on things before I post, which I haven't. With this new info in the article and Minor Life's addition to it I'll paste part of the email........ This has the USHL taking on multiple EJHL teams!!!

Quote

The USHL eastward expansion will inlcude the Portland Pirates, Bay State Breakers, South Shore, Huskies/Islanders, Boston Jr Bruins and likely New Jersy Hitmen. as this effectively kills the EJHL,

This is one helluva rumor, but in theory this would plop the USHL into the east big time.............

I suppose that would help, kind of, getting some more highly touted kids into the league. It seems like a lot of kids opt to stay out east close to home and where they are going to college. Doesn't make sense to play in the USHL and travel to Omaha to live if BU or BC, etc. are happy with the situation in the EJHL. I don't think attendance is great for the EJ teams and if they add 7 more teams, that will drastically drop the talent pool, which isn't the best idea.