Mando27 Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 With the NHL wanting to expand more and more I wonder if a second league would be good for everyone. Teams that tank would be punished with the threat of being relegated and teams in the lower league would be pushing to try to get promoted to the first league. Thoughts on the idea? Just something I was thinking about if the NHL continues to expand like mad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballisticsports Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 Would the league be paying owners for the loss of fans like they have supported Arizona? Bettman sells parity with point system, game management calls, secret draft etc No way owners or players agree to that or the fans imo 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwarrior Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 So a relegation/promotion system with the AHL? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mando27 Posted February 6 Author Share Posted February 6 (edited) 16 minutes ago, gwarrior said: So a relegation/promotion system with the AHL? Sure why not? Teams like the Sharks should be playing in the AHL, feels like the league already has way too many teams. Could potentially relight rivalries a bit as well, teams would be playing each other more often. Edited February 6 by Mando27 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 1 minute ago, Mando27 said: Sure why not? Teams like the Sharks should be playing in the AHL, feels like the league already has way too many teams. NHL answer. LET'S ADD MORE TEAMS! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mando27 Posted February 6 Author Share Posted February 6 3 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said: NHL answer. LET'S ADD MORE TEAMS! https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/bettman-list-six-nhl-expansion-cities Houston, Atlanta, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Omaha, Nebraska. How many teams is too much? There's gotta be a limit right? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 6 minutes ago, Mando27 said: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/bettman-list-six-nhl-expansion-cities Houston, Atlanta, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Omaha, Nebraska. How many teams is too much? There's gotta be a limit right? I could see up to 36 being feasible but staggered, so 2 more teams by 2026 and 2 more after that by 2028-2030 but not further expansion for at least a decade or more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijjibo Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 No 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureQuickness Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 42 minutes ago, Mando27 said: Sure why not? Teams like the Sharks should be playing in the AHL, feels like the league already has way too many teams. Could potentially relight rivalries a bit as well, teams would be playing each other more often. But the Sharks don't play like an AHL team. Their rebuild was pretty much on par with what they expected. When key players get old and they aren't drafting as well as they should, that's how and why you see a decline. Good teams are able to bounce back either via trade or SMART free agent signings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 36 minutes ago, Mando27 said: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/bettman-list-six-nhl-expansion-cities Houston, Atlanta, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Omaha, Nebraska. How many teams is too much? There's gotta be a limit right? 28 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeanSeanBean Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 No. What your suggesting is punishing tanking and then having players like Bedard playing in the AHL instead of NHL. That's a terrible idea from a business and marketing standpoint by the NHL and owners would never agree. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 lol so how does the nhl draft work?? relegated team are guaranteed the top picks/best chance at 1st overall? or they are not ever allowed to be in the nhl draft because they are playing in another league?? so they are forever out of the NHL and fold the team coz they won't make enough money to cover players salary? what they need is to fix the players salary/bonus structures so if a player signs for 80mil x 8 years.. they are paid 10mil in salary every year instead of just being paid like couple mil at the end and then sent off to bottom feeding teams to reach cap floor without having to actually pay much salary. then you prolly have more parity in the league. instead of bottom feeding team full of aging players not worth their cap 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 No matter if AHL, KHL or (for whatever reason it happens) European champions come over and possibly replace the worst NHL teams, I think the skill gap between top farm teams or Euro league teams and the NHL is still too broad (since all the top Europeans/ minor leaguers/ college kids get funneled to the NHL in the draft, while the over the top vets or "just not good enough" AHL stars won't be able to keep up with the best of the NHL). This isn't really like European football, since there's so many nations with development programs and prodigies signing as kids so they can help those upstarts win one level down and make their way up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 To build on what had been said here, the NHL (and other leagues across NA) work in cyclical format designed to keep parity in the league. A team does well and wins a lot. Then they fall down to Earth and rebuild and that process happens over and over again. Chicago is the prime example here. European football does not follow the draft model and instead relies on youth academies and scouting. This way the best teams with the most prestige get to stay at the top (until some oil sheikh comes in and turns a random club into giants). As an example, how can possibly justify awarding Connor Bedard to Chicago, and then bury him and the team in the AHL? How would that work? On top of that, you're overlooking another thing. The NHL is a closed system where owners buy franchises. If a new team comes in, the owner is buying a stake in the NHL business. These teams are not independent from the league - they ARE the league. As an example, the Sharks play in the SAP Center (Shark Tank), a giant, modern arena that seats 18,000. As a business model, they've made that investment. The NHL honours that investment by having the best players in the world play in that arena and fill seats. You are breaking that investment plan if you suddenly bring in teams like the Charlotte Checkers or the Abbotsford Canucks. I mean, is that stadium in Abby built for NHL capacity? Come on. So no. Relegation/promotion is fundamentally impossible in the NHL. The business model doesn't allow it. The player development structure doesn't allow it. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 3 hours ago, Mando27 said: Sure why not? Teams like the Sharks should be playing in the AHL, feels like the league already has way too many teams. Could potentially relight rivalries a bit as well, teams would be playing each other more often. If you are looking at the European soccer model, then if a team gets demoted to the AHL, then salaries would also need to change. You wouldn't be able to pay a player $8 million per year if they are in the AHL. Most of the teams that get demoted in the Premier League are shit teams that never get the top players. Also, they don't have a salary cap. Messi, Ronaldo used to get paid $50 million per year. Players get sold and go to the highest bidder. So, this wouldn't work in the NHL or any other pro North American league, especially the ones with a salary cap... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 29 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: If you are looking at the European soccer model, then if a team gets demoted to the AHL, then salaries would also need to change. You wouldn't be able to pay a player $8 million per year if they are in the AHL. Most of the teams that get demoted in the Premier League are shit teams that never get the top players. Also, they don't have a salary cap. Messi, Ronaldo used to get paid $50 million per year. Players get sold and go to the highest bidder. So, this wouldn't work in the NHL or any other pro North American league, especially the ones with a salary cap... they technically do have a cap just not a salary cap. they have financial fair play where you can only spend x amount based on your total profit.. not the greatest system and you see teams like manchester city making a joke of the system and cheated the hell out of it ever since they were bought by the oil country 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 3 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said: they technically do have a cap just not a salary cap. they have financial fair play where you can only spend x amount based on your total profit.. not the greatest system and you see teams like manchester city making a joke of the system and cheated the hell out of it ever since they were bought by the oil country True, but ManCity makes a hell of a lot more profit than the bottom feeders. So, they can still get away with paying millions to players while still being compliant with FFP. The NHL needs a salary cap, or we would go back to the Rangers buying all the top players. So not sure how you can have a relegation system in place when every team would have the same cap constraint and every team would have $8 million dollar players. Only way it would work is if contracts were not guaranteed, or players were allowed to be sold. But selling players means you can't have a cap. So, if San Jose gets relegated, then they could sell Thomas Hertl to New York for $20 million as an example. This is what happens in the Premier League so the team getting relegated avoids having to pay the big salaries... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 18 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: If you are looking at the European soccer model, then if a team gets demoted to the AHL, then salaries would also need to change. You wouldn't be able to pay a player $8 million per year if they are in the AHL. Most of the teams that get demoted in the Premier League are shit teams that never get the top players. Also, they don't have a salary cap. Messi, Ronaldo used to get paid $50 million per year. Players get sold and go to the highest bidder. So, this wouldn't work in the NHL or any other pro North American league, especially the ones with a salary cap... There are parts here that are incorrect. Leicester City has had a significant fall from grace since 2016 and were relegated last season (but will most certainly come back up after this year). They are still paying star players like Jamie Vardy the same amount of cash regardless of where they play. On the flip side of things, there are obscure teams that have been catapulted into success with new investors. Manchester City, Newcastle and Wolverhampton are prime examples of average clubs getting juiced up with money from new owners and spending their way to the very top. On a less cynical version of that, you have a team like Wrexham AFC, a truly obscure club that has been injected with massive investments and completely outspent its opponents for multiple years, thanks to its new owners Ryan Reynolds and Rob McElhenney. It doesn't work in the MLS for example, because teams don't operate independently of the league. They are essentially part owners of the league. Devid Beckham became part owner of the league when he created Miami FC. In a similar (but not identical) vein, the Seattle/Vegas owners bought their rights to exist in the NHL when their teams were created. A couple ironic things to consider. Firstly, Messi is actually on a really bizarre deal in the MLS right now. As a designated player, he can earn money exceeding the salary cap. But the bulk of his deal works outside that structure, in ways we don't entirely understand. It's possible he's bagging a portion of the revenue from the Apple TV deal. But here's the most ironic thing about the AHL.... THERE IS NO SALARY CAP. That means Aquilini, owner of the Abbotsford Canucks, can theoretically sign Lindholm, Reinhart and Guentzel to $200M deals in the summer and just spend his way to victory. But how can you make revenue in a small city with a tiny rink? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 2 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: True, but ManCity makes a hell of a lot more profit than the bottom feeders. So, they can still get away with paying millions to players while still being compliant with FFP. The NHL needs a salary cap, or we would go back to the Rangers buying all the top players. So not sure how you can have a relegation system in place when every team would have the same cap constraint and every team would have $8 million dollar players. Only way it would work is if contracts were not guaranteed, or players were allowed to be sold. But selling players means you can't have a cap. So, if San Jose gets relegated, then they could sell Thomas Hertl to New York for $20 million as an example. This is what happens in the Premier League so the team getting relegated avoids having to pay the big salaries... lol i expect man city to be punished and banned from the EPL for years and their trophy years have asterisk on it once all 100+ charges are sorted out.. i mean their competition isn't the bottom feeders it's the big giants of all the other league. big teams in the top flight leagues don't care about the salaries.. the only reason they sell the players is the players will demand to be transferred because the top players refuses to play on teams that are not in champions league football.. and they don't generate enough revenue without european football to satisfy the financial fair play. that's literally the only reason it's not because they cant afford the salaries. nhl for sure needs a cap.. but at the same time they need a way to deal with bonus so teams can't just pay out a bonus and dump players with 1mil salary and x amount of cap hit to bottom feeders.. coz technically taht's cap circumvention. same thing with LTIR. if a player can not dress and play in game 1 of the regular season his salary shouldn't count towards the cap floor.. and there needs to be a physical amount of salary for the cap floor.. say if the floor is 60mil.. a team must be paying at least 90% of the salaries that season ie 54mil. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 8 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: True, but ManCity makes a hell of a lot more profit than the bottom feeders. So, they can still get away with paying millions to players while still being compliant with FFP. The NHL needs a salary cap, or we would go back to the Rangers buying all the top players. So not sure how you can have a relegation system in place when every team would have the same cap constraint and every team would have $8 million dollar players. Only way it would work is if contracts were not guaranteed, or players were allowed to be sold. But selling players means you can't have a cap. So, if San Jose gets relegated, then they could sell Thomas Hertl to New York for $20 million as an example. This is what happens in the Premier League so the team getting relegated avoids having to pay the big salaries... The hypothetical of San Jose getting relegated becomes even more ridiculous when you factor in the past five or so years. The New York Rangers would've been relegated. The Montreal Canadiens would've been relegated. The Chicago Blackhawks would've been relegated. It would basically guarantee every 1st overall pick an unlimited bus pass to all the great cities of the AHL. Connor Bedard, welcome to the hockey meccas of the world: Milwaukee, Utica and... Springfield! EDDIE SHORE, BABY! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 3 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said: 28 Toronto: 6 (how else are we going to be winning a Cup?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 33 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said: lol i expect man city to be punished and banned from the EPL for years and their trophy years have asterisk on it once all 100+ charges are sorted out.. i mean their competition isn't the bottom feeders it's the big giants of all the other league. big teams in the top flight leagues don't care about the salaries.. the only reason they sell the players is the players will demand to be transferred because the top players refuses to play on teams that are not in champions league football.. and they don't generate enough revenue without european football to satisfy the financial fair play. that's literally the only reason it's not because they cant afford the salaries. nhl for sure needs a cap.. but at the same time they need a way to deal with bonus so teams can't just pay out a bonus and dump players with 1mil salary and x amount of cap hit to bottom feeders.. coz technically taht's cap circumvention. same thing with LTIR. if a player can not dress and play in game 1 of the regular season his salary shouldn't count towards the cap floor.. and there needs to be a physical amount of salary for the cap floor.. say if the floor is 60mil.. a team must be paying at least 90% of the salaries that season ie 54mil. That's not true. When Juventus was relegated to Serie B in 2006 after the Calciopoli scandal, they literally needed to sell almost every player because they could not afford to pay their wages. Only a few Italian players like Buffon and Del Piero stayed and played in Serie B for a year because they were loyal to Juventus and also took a massive pay cut. Ibrahimovic was sold to Inter and even Cannavaro, the Italian who won the Silver ball after Italy won the World Cup that year and also won the Ballon d'Or, was sold to Real Madrid. Even the Juventus coach, Fabio Capello, left and also went to Real Madrid. I agree that most players want to play on teams in the Champions League, but that is a different conversation than being relegated. Not qualifying for the Champions League and still staying in the top division is quite a bit different than actually being relegated. First off, if you stay in the top division you still get to play against the top teams, so your stadiums will still be full. Liverpool didn't qualify for the Champions League this season, did any of their top players leave to go to another team? However, if you are relegated you are literally playing to the equivalent of the AHL, so you won't be generating enough revenue to pay the top salaries. Also, you have zero chance to qualify for the Champions League or even the Europa League, so you are looking at a minimum of 2 years or more before you can make any money. Which is why you have to sell off the top players... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 30 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: That's not true. When Juventus was relegated to Serie B in 2006 after the Calciopoli scandal, they literally needed to sell almost every player because they could not afford to pay their wages. Only a few Italian players like Buffon and Del Piero stayed and played in Serie B for a year because they were loyal to Juventus and also took a massive pay cut. Ibrahimovic was sold to Inter and even Cannavaro, the Italian who won the Silver ball after Italy won the World Cup that year and also won the Ballon d'Or, was sold to Real Madrid. Even the Juventus coach, Fabio Capello, left and also went to Real Madrid. I agree that most players want to play on teams in the Champions League, but that is a different conversation than being relegated. Not qualifying for the Champions League and still staying in the top division is quite a bit different than actually being relegated. First off, if you stay in the top division you still get to play against the top teams, so your stadiums will still be full. Liverpool didn't qualify for the Champions League this season, did any of their top players leave to go to another team? However, if you are relegated you are literally playing to the equivalent of the AHL, so you won't be generating enough revenue to pay the top salaries. Also, you have zero chance to qualify for the Champions League or even the Europa League, so you are looking at a minimum of 2 years or more before you can make any money. Which is why you have to sell off the top players... The big teams can survive with or without champions league well most of them that’s not being run to the ground like man united lol they have crazy profit every year but their debt is bigger and bigger each year thx to the glazers siphoning money out of the club. Champions league is vital to club wanting to be able to spend any money in the transfer market. There’s over 500m euro split between the 32 teams depending on how they do and on top of tv revenue. Liverpool didn’t really lose any players but then again they have been very successful and last year was more to do with injuries.. they also won the champions league not too long ago coupled with the World Cup etc players prolly didn’t care too much about no champions league for more rest. just the extra jersey sale alone for making the champions league is already massive.. champions league jersey have different lettering and patch and supporters will easily buy both. Chelsea on the other hand will have to sell like crazy to satisfy the ffp for not making the champions league.. their spending hinge on making the champions league.. because they didn’t there’s no way in hell they are going to meet the ffp and have to sell players not because they can’t afford their wage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 51 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: That's not true. When Juventus was relegated to Serie B in 2006 after the Calciopoli scandal, they literally needed to sell almost every player because they could not afford to pay their wages. Only a few Italian players like Buffon and Del Piero stayed and played in Serie B for a year because they were loyal to Juventus and also took a massive pay cut. Ibrahimovic was sold to Inter and even Cannavaro, the Italian who won the Silver ball after Italy won the World Cup that year and also won the Ballon d'Or, was sold to Real Madrid. Even the Juventus coach, Fabio Capello, left and also went to Real Madrid. I agree that most players want to play on teams in the Champions League, but that is a different conversation than being relegated. Not qualifying for the Champions League and still staying in the top division is quite a bit different than actually being relegated. First off, if you stay in the top division you still get to play against the top teams, so your stadiums will still be full. Liverpool didn't qualify for the Champions League this season, did any of their top players leave to go to another team? However, if you are relegated you are literally playing to the equivalent of the AHL, so you won't be generating enough revenue to pay the top salaries. Also, you have zero chance to qualify for the Champions League or even the Europa League, so you are looking at a minimum of 2 years or more before you can make any money. Which is why you have to sell off the top players... 7 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said: The big teams can survive with or without champions league well most of them that’s not being run to the ground like man united lol they have crazy profit every year but their debt is bigger and bigger each year thx to the glazers siphoning money out of the club. Champions league is vital to club wanting to be able to spend any money in the transfer market. There’s over 500m euro split between the 32 teams depending on how they do and on top of tv revenue. Liverpool didn’t really lose any players but then again they have been very successful and last year was more to do with injuries.. they also won the champions league not too long ago coupled with the World Cup etc players prolly didn’t care too much about no champions league for more rest. just the extra jersey sale alone for making the champions league is already massive.. champions league jersey have different lettering and patch and supporters will easily buy both. Chelsea on the other hand will have to sell like crazy to satisfy the ffp for not making the champions league.. their spending hinge on making the champions league.. because they didn’t there’s no way in hell they are going to meet the ffp and have to sell players not because they can’t afford their wage I have to agree with EP here. The financial consequences of relegation in North American hockey would be insane. With a club's reputation tarnished, players will leave. Television rights will go to practically zero - I can't think of a televised AHL game. Sponsorships will be fucked - big sponsors will obviously offer a lot less to have their names put on the ice/jerseys. I think the Chicago Wolves got sponsored by a local weed company in Illinois. Ticket income will also go down the drain - no more "Welcome to the Crosby show", it's now "Welcome to the Adam Gaudette show". I'm not paying more than $20 for that. The most notable fall from grace in football has to be FC Schalke 04. It's a club that's been mismanaged to debt oblivion and now they're at risk of being double relegated. But their fanbase is world class (4th biggest club member count in the world) and their stadium is world class (to be used in Euro 2024). We need @DeltaSwede in here to share his thoughts about the Swedish relegation system and if anything there could work here in the NHL/AHL. My guess is a flat no. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 22 minutes ago, Miss Korea said: I have to agree with EP here. The financial consequences of relegation in North American hockey would be insane. With a club's reputation tarnished, players will leave. Television rights will go to practically zero - I can't think of a televised AHL game. Sponsorships will be fucked - big sponsors will obviously offer a lot less to have their names put on the ice/jerseys. I think the Chicago Wolves got sponsored by a local weed company in Illinois. Ticket income will also go down the drain - no more "Welcome to the Crosby show", it's now "Welcome to the Adam Gaudette show". I'm not paying more than $20 for that. The most notable fall from grace in football has to be FC Schalke 04. It's a club that's been mismanaged to debt oblivion and now they're at risk of being double relegated. But their fanbase is world class (4th biggest club member count in the world) and their stadium is world class (to be used in Euro 2024). We need @DeltaSwede in here to share his thoughts about the Swedish relegation system and if anything there could work here in the NHL/AHL. My guess is a flat no. In Italy the biggest fall from grace was Napoli. They signed the best player in the world and arguably the greatest player ever at the time, Diego Maradona, in the summer of 1984. By 1987, they had won the Scudetto, the Italian championship. They had never in their history won the Scudetto before. They then won it again in 1990 with Maradona. Maradona went to the Word Cup that year and was asked to take a doping test after the final where Argentina lost to Germany. They found cocaine in his system and so he was suspended from playing football for 15 months. He never played for Napoli again. Napoli then started their decline. They got relegated to the second division, Serie B, then got promoted again. Then got relegated again. By summer of 2004 they had to declare bankruptcy. They then were bought by a new owner, had to change their name for a year, and then were demoted to the 3rd division, Serie C. They returned to the first division, Serie A, in 2006. They finally won the Scudetto again for the 3rd time just last year. It was quite the story in Italy. Meanwhile, Juventus were still suffering from the effects of purchasing Cristiano Ronaldo. They had another scandal and were almost relegated again last year. They were able to stay in Serie A and now are back to being a top team in Italy. 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.