Preach on.

Posted by Nathan from Jonny Ericsson's ice cream truck on 09/08/09 at 09:15 AM ET

Gary Bettman would like to continue his practice of selecting U.S. cities with no interest whatever in hockey, like maybe Biloxi, Miss., or Lubbock Texas (where it could potentially partner with the Buddy Holly Memorial Centre for a sure-fire double bill).

As a hockey fan, I understand the whole moving the franchise to Canada where it would be welcomed more than it has in Arizona, but why the poking fun at America?  I don’t get it.

Posted by Gretzky_to_Lemieux on 09/08/09 at 09:21 AM ET

He’s playing to his audience...mostly middle-aged white guys with money, who still cling to the belief that Canada is hockey.  The funny thing is, McParland is a neo-con, and usually they fall all over themselves embracing all that is America, good or bad.

Don’t worry about it.  We don’t all think that way about the States.

Posted by Mick Kern from Toronto on 09/08/09 at 09:41 AM ET

As a hockey fan, I understand the whole moving the franchise to Canada where it would be welcomed more than it has in Arizona, but why the poking fun at America?  I don’t get it.
Posted by Gretzky_to_Lemieux on 09/08/09 at 10:21 AM ET

How can you possibly think that is poking fun at the US, unless you truly believe NHL hockey would be successful in Lubbock and Biloxi.  It is simply aimed at Bettman’s ridiculous decisions regarding expansion.

Posted by HockeyTownTodd from upset when blogs don’t live up to my expectations on 09/08/09 at 09:49 AM ET

It is anti-Americanism whether or not some folks want to believe it. There are some up north who oppose the expansion and growth of hockey in the US. As this is a threat to their perceived control and supposed national identity. The fact that some Americans in “traditional” markets buy this bogus garbage is the sad part. This isn’t about Bettman, this is about someone who is attempting to destroy the NHL because he can’t have his way and put a team where ever he wants. If you think it is anything other than that you are being played by this charade for a so called 7th team. Hamilton is no more suited to being an NHL market than Biloxi, but these clowns try and pass it off as if it is a national birth right to put NHL teams in any town with a Tim Horton’s!

Posted by Tero from Tacoma on 09/08/09 at 10:09 AM ET

but why the poking fun at America?  I don’t get it.

I wouldn’t take it too seriously… it’s the same way I like to make fun of Canadian’s infatuation with denim jackets with denim pants and denim shirts, and silly winter hats.

It’s just a little ribbing… Canada is a great country with great people. Sometimes we tease each other. Like brothers growing up together. Let’s not take it too seriously.

Hamilton is no more suited to being an NHL market than Biloxi

Did you type that with a straight face?

Posted by Nathan from Jonny Ericsson's ice cream truck on 09/08/09 at 10:27 AM ET

No Tero, that is not the case.  You have grossly oversimplified the issue.

I am in agreement with you that Hamilton is not suited to being an NHL market.  I’d go further and argue I can’t think of any Canadian city, at the moment, that would be suitable for an NHL team.

Supporters in Winnipeg, for instance, would wholeheartedly disagree, but I still feel that all the large Canadian cities already have an NHL team, and national pride aside, economics are still the determining factor in whether-or-not to parachute another team in.

In the case of Basillie, he’s a very rich man, loves the game of hockey, and is accustomed to going after what he wants.  If he were to remain the principle owner of a Hamilton-based NHL franchise, then I have little doubt it would fly.

The question is, what happens if he loses interest in the team, or runs into some economic “hardship” down the line?

Of course, the bigger issue here, the one you skated around, is who is in control?
The NHL understandably wants to be able to decide where a franchise is placed.  Balsilie, in his third attempt at NHL ownership, is trying to circumvent that process.

If Balsille does not end up with ownership of the Coyotes, his real legacy may be the eventual birth of a third Ontario-based NHL franchise.  This goes right back to the issue of who’s in control?

If I’m the NHL, I’d much rather extract a signficant expansion fee from an owner or group of owners I’d prefer to have in the league, than surrender autonomy to Balsillie.  At the very least, if the league loses this court battle, they will squeeze out of Balsillie every last buck they can, and who can blame them?

Where the NHL has fallen down in this sordid affair, is in its continual insistance that Phoenix will work, even prosper, as an NHL market.  Court documents have since revealed that even the league has prepared, or the very least, seriously considered an exit strategy for this franchise.

Further to that, the league sadly does have a history of handing franchises to questionable individuals.  On the surface, it’s hard to side with the league in rejecting a billionaire who wants to own a hockey team because he actually loves hockey.

Both sides, the NHL and the Balsillie camp, have attempted to frame this debate/court battle with broad strokes that are easily digested by the average fan.  Regardless of the respective propaganda campaings, this has never been about Canada vs. the U.S., or Canadian hockey vs. American hockey.

Balisille isn’t attempting to destroy the NHL, but he is attempting to gain entry into its private club.  If successful, in doing so he may very well change its power structure, for he has not become a very successful businessman by sitting on the sidelines.

(Paul, do I get paid for this???)

Posted by Mick Kern from Toronto on 09/08/09 at 10:29 AM ET

So what if Basille has money? Is that wrong? He wants a team, has the money to fund it and probably cares enough to make it a competitive team.

It’d be great to have a Toronto/Hamilton rivalry. Would get good hype and exposure. Yeah, it’s not like the old original 6 rivalries or others where there’s a long history, but you gotta start somewhere. Columbus did, and media tries to make them a rivalry to Detroit, but still will never compete with Detroit/Chicago, but still, the hype is good for Columbus.

If Canada is a better NHL market, so be it, it’s good for the sport.

Destory the NHL? Heck, Gary Bettman and the NHLPA is doing a good job of that already, they’ll probably find a way to pin this all on Basille even if he doesn’t get the team. It’s old school politics where in the end it’s the fans and the sport get screwed.

Posted by Simian on 09/08/09 at 10:30 AM ET

I don’t care if that’s the correct spelling of “dufus,” it seems more appropriate to have it spelled “doofus.”

Posted by HockeyJoe from Upstate New York on 09/08/09 at 10:33 AM ET

That’s quite the played out shtick, Tero.  Seriously, time for some new material.

Posted by dash_pinched from Rumour Mill Bay on 09/08/09 at 10:49 AM ET

I can’t disagree with Mick.  I have obviously over simplified my comments as they are intended in response to the absurd National Post article and many of its type coming out of Ontario. I agree that getting expansion fees for a second team in Toronto or affluent suburb is the right approach for the NHL. Letting Balsillie ram home this team to Hamilton, damaging Buffalo and the league on the cheap needs to be opposed. My beef with this article and many like it, is the continual denigration of hockey in the US and the hostility to its growth in non traditional areas. Dallas, Washington, Los Angeles and San Jose are proof that hockey sells and Phoenix has never really been given a chance to support a legitimate NHL team, as this franchise has been so poorly run. I am all for those that want to expand hockey be it in Canada or Seattle? But if you do it at the expense of those who are trying to grow the game, love it and want to see it nationwide, I will resort to oversimplification (or cheap shot) to make a point.

Posted by Tero from Tacoma on 09/08/09 at 10:52 AM ET

Dallas, Washington, Los Angeles and San Jose are proof that hockey sells and Phoenix has never really been given a chance to support a legitimate NHL team, as this franchise has been so poorly run.

Dallas had (at the time) a financially strong owner and moved an already pretty good hockey team to Texas. Remember how well the Stars had been doing in the playoffs prior to that season. They took a team ready to make a jump into the league’s elite and moved it at the right time, which made it easy to get fans on board. The other thing that people don’t realize is that minor league pro hockey and amateur hockey was pretty strong in Texas before the Stars moved there, so there was an audience. The other thing the Stars had is that they moved to an area that is near to three of the ten most populated cities in the country. That’s hugely important. If only 1% of the people in Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston are die-hard Stars fans that will go to hockey games, that’s still roughly 50,000 people. That doesn’t include the suburban communities that those cities encircle.

Los Angeles has a similar fortune that the Dallas area has—it’s the second-largest city in the country. When you have four million people in the area, and a lot of those people have money, finding 15 - 20,000 people to watch a hockey game 41 times a year isn’t so hard. The other thing Los Angeles has is that as the movie and TV capital of the world, it has a lot of entertainment corporations that can offer support to the team. And they are able to share an arena with the most popular basketball team on the planet. That’s very helpful when you’re trying to cross-promote, save money on arena costs, and grab sports fans that haven’t yet come to hockey.

The point isn’t that hockey can’t work in Phoenix, it’s that the conditions required to make it work there are really difficult to procure… look no further than the history of the Coyotes to see that.

If hockey in Phoenix was a good business opportunity, someone other than Balsillie would’ve stepped up to the plate with a proper offer to buy the team long before this thing had to go to court, and committed to keep the team in Arizona.

Guys like Reinsdorf and Balsillie are rich because yeah, they’re smart, but also because they know a good (and bad) business opportunity when they see one.The fact that the best offer to keep the team in Phoenix was Reinsdorf’s offer, held together with duct tape, taxpayer dollars, chewing gum, and escape clauses, should tell you everything you need to know.

Posted by Nathan from Jonny Ericsson's ice cream truck on 09/08/09 at 12:39 PM ET

So let Balsillie build his team in Hamilton and keep the ‘Yotes in Phoenix.  Expand to 32 teams for a season or two, then pluck out the two weakest franchises in each respective conference.  If that’s Phoenix in the West, so be it.  If Hamilton works, then take out one of the Florida teams or Atlanta...whoever is doing worse.

Posted by Animal Drew from A Nightmare on Helm Street on 09/08/09 at 01:50 PM ET