# ECHL San Francisco -- ceasing operations 1/27/14



## LadyStanley

ECHL San Francisco -- new ownership or fold by next week

http://blog.sfgate.com/sgreen/2014/01/20/sf-bulls-to-fold-or-move-as-soon-as-next-week/

Might move to Oakland (if the NBA Warriors are willing to share facility) or Fresno (Selland?) under new ownership.

Team lost $2m last year and state made ~$500k from Cow Palace lease, but not willing to renegotiate deal.

Attendance down 52%.


Stay tuned for Wednesday's BOG meeting in Philadelphia.


----------



## No Fun Shogun

Yikes... that's a sharp drop. Hard to believe that they were initially being lofted alongside Orlando as one of the successes taking advantage of last year's lockout.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

$2 million per year in losses. Wow.

Too bad that they're all but gone. Seems like it was a pretty poor proposition to begin with. Bad rental terms plus the costs of ice plant and scoreboard, high housing rental prices, impossibility of getting any decent media coverage, major league teams in all 4 major sports to compete with......

The failure of the Chicago Express (2011-12 ECHL) evidently didn't register with the ownership of the Bulls. The ECHL doesn't work in mega metropolitan areas.


----------



## LadyStanley

The team seemed to concentrate their marketing on SF and north.

Never really encouraged Peninsula/South Bay (more likely NHL Sharks fans) to come to games. I would have preferred to travel there by train, and they never had any shuttles for pickups. (So never went to games.)


----------



## No Fun Shogun

There probably is a lot to that Express analogy. There were games where I was the only person in my section, which really wasn't all too surprising given the fact that the Hawks and AHL Wolves probably more than satiated both the live and televised hockey demand in the market. There is something to be potentially said about low level minor league teams just being drowned in major markets, especially ones that already have an NHL team in them.

But even if all went well, just sounds like their startup and rental costs were too much of a barrier to overcome.


----------



## LadyStanley

http://www.mercurynews.com/sharks/c...sco-bulls-minor-league-hockey-team?source=rss

Little impact on NHL Sharks.



> The Sharks only have three players on the Bulls who are on two-way contracts â€” wingers Riley Brace and Sebastian Stalberg and goaltender J.P. Anderson. A Sharks spokesman said if the Bulls fold, those players would be reassigned to another minor league team. The Sharks would also likely seek to gain affiliation with another ECHL team in California.
> 
> Sharks general manager Doug Wilson was not available for comment.


----------



## Francis10

Fresno and the Selland arena seems like a good place to move.


----------



## Rude

...

What a bummer. I wonder how they'll handle season ticket packages if they fold or move to Oakland. More info to come, I'm sure.

Also curious if any Niners fans would have eventually made their way to the Cow Palace once the team moves to Santa Clara.

-Rude


----------



## Cyclones Rock

No Fun Shogun said:


> There probably is a lot to that Express analogy. There were games where I was the only person in my section, which really wasn't all too surprising given the fact that the Hawks and AHL Wolves probably more than satiated both the live and televised hockey demand in the market. There is something to be potentially said about low level minor league teams just being drowned in major markets, especially ones that already have an NHL team in them.
> 
> But even if all went well, just sounds like their startup and rental costs were too much of a barrier to overcome.




I remember seeing Express staff in Cincinnati at a game in the year prior to the team taking the ice. Cincinnati was but one of their visits to other ECHL teams in their "start up" phase. The Express were definitely not a hastily thrown together team. They used their ample lead time to not only study other ECHL teams' strategies, but had the experience of the UHL Chicago Hounds (2006-07,same owner as Express, same venue) upon which to draw. Unfortunately, their thorough preparation and prior experience wasn't near enough to make the franchise work.

I attended one game at the Sears Center and had a very positive experience. 

As you said, the Wolves and the Hawks (plus the USHL Steel) have saturated the market. When I passed the Rosemont Horizon (now Allstate Arena...home of the Wolves) and saw that it was only four highway exits away from the Sears Center, all I could do was: 

Cincinnati, Las Vegas and Orlando are all larger markets, but LV has no major league sports competition and Orlando only has the Magic.
Cincinnati has both the Reds and the Bengals, but the city has a professional ice hockey history dating back to 1949 and gets decent TV and radio coverage.

The ECHL has a lot of trouble spots. While it is disappointing that the team in San Franciso is on the verge of failing, it probably shouldn't be all that surprising.


----------



## LadyStanley

Curcio & the Bulls had an entire year to get prepped as well.


----------



## No Fun Shogun

I'm not doubting the due diligence of either the Express or the Bulls. For a variety of reasons, sometimes it just seems fated for a team to fold.

For the Express, it was the nearby Wolves already offering cheap hockey, being located in a venue that I'm only half-joking when I say is cursed, and a local fanbase that didn't want to go to games when the Hawks were on TV. For the Bulls, sounds like it was prohibitive start up costs and probably local hockey fans not wanting to miss televised Sharks games.

ECHL can work in bigger markets, a la the Cyclones and hopefully the Fuel, but there seems to be a barrier that's very tough to overcome when a higher level team's already there. Seems logical that most fans of a sport in a market would prefer to watch their NHL team on TV than go see an ECHL team live. Just because more people may go to NHL games if their venues were bigger doesn't mean that the folks unable to go to games would go to a lower level live experience over watching the NHL on TV.


----------



## mfrerkes

Cyclones Rock said:


> The ECHL has a lot of trouble spots. While it is disappointing that the team in San Franciso is on the verge of failing, it probably shouldn't be all that surprising.




If your plans include operating some AA hockey club in a market where the NHL already exists, you should probably reconsider. The recent track record of such teams doesn't inspire confidence.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

No Fun Shogun said:


> ECHL can work in bigger markets, a la the Cyclones and hopefully the Fuel, but there seems to be a barrier that's very tough to overcome when a higher level team's already there. Seems logical that most fans of a sport in a market would prefer to watch their NHL team on TV than go see an ECHL team live. Just because more people may go to NHL games if their venues were bigger doesn't mean that the folks unable to go to games would go to a lower level live experience over watching the NHL on TV.




I'm optimistic about the Fuel having success in Indy. However, the Ice (USHL) is owned by a very deep-pocketed crew and a two team hockey market is a recipe for disaster. I'm banking on the Ice ownership quitting the market.

I've seen a couple of situations which are interesting to me regarding minor league teams in major league markets. The Columbus Stars of the UHL were in existence during the NHL lockout of 2004-05. The team drew about 400 per game and were (obviously) not viewed as a replacement team by Columbus Blue Jacket fans whose team didn't play that year. At the time, the Blue Jackets were still averaging big crowds yet nobody (literally) gave a damn about the Stars who led the UHL standings at the time of their January folding.

Last season, the Cincinnati Cyclones early season attendance was very poor. The management of the Cyclones attributed this to the NHL lockout. Without the coverage of the NHL in the media, hockey wasn't in the minds of many people. As such, their interest in minor league hockey lagged. A confirmation of this was in 2004-05 when the AHL Cincinnati Mighty Ducks had the Cincinnati hockey market to themselves (The ECHL Cyclones suspended operations that year and the next). Though the Ducks had a quasi-NHL roster and didn't have the local competition, their attendance fell from the previous year.

So, it seems as if AA minor league hockey is not a replacement for NHL hockey nor a substitute. Additionally, minor league hockey needs the NHL operating to maximize its level of popularity.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

mfrerkes said:


> If your plans include operating some AA hockey club in a market where the NHL already exists, you should probably reconsider. The recent track record of such teams doesn't inspire confidence.




It's been almost a universal disaster, hasn't it? Here's the list of low minor league teams in NHL markets during the past decade. Add if I've missed anyone.

1) Chicago Hounds (UHL 2007) folded after one year
2) Chicago Express (ECHL 2012) folded after one year
3) Columbus Stars (UHL 2005) folded during first year
4) St. Charles Chill (CHL 2013-4) St. Louis Blues....drawing flies in first year......... The clock is ticking
5) Denver Cutthroats (CHL 2012-14)....sub 2000 attendance average overall........... On death watch.
6) San Francisco Bulls (ECHL 2012-14).......the plug could be pulled any day.


The Gwinnett Gladiators (ECHL 2003-present) appear to be the lone exception to these short-lived AA franchises in NHL markets. Gwinnett is in the Atlanta metropolitan area and shared the market with the NHL Thrashers until that franchise relocated to Winnipeg a few years ago.


----------



## jabberoski

Cyclones Rock said:


> I've seen a couple of situations which are interesting to me regarding minor league teams in major league markets. The Columbus Stars of the UHL were in existence during the NHL lockout of 2004-05. The team drew about 400 per game and were (obviously) not viewed as a replacement team by Columbus Blue Jacket fans whose team didn't play that year. At the time, the Blue Jackets were still averaging big crowds yet nobody (literally) gave a damn about the Stars who led the UHL standings at the time of their January folding.




For the record, the Stars played during the 2003-04 season, not 2004-05.

http://www.hockeydb.com/stte/columbus-stars-5325.html


----------



## CrazyEddie20

Cyclones Rock said:


> IThe Columbus Stars of the UHL were in existence during the NHL lockout of 2004-05. The team drew about 400 per game and were (obviously) not viewed as a replacement team by Columbus Blue Jacket fans whose team didn't play that year. At the time, the Blue Jackets were still averaging big crowds yet nobody (literally) gave a damn about the Stars who led the UHL standings at the time of their January folding.




Come on, an average of 973 literally gave a damn every night about Malcolm Cameron's club that played at the Fairgrounds!


----------



## sharksohnoes!

Cyclones Rock said:


> So, it seems as if AA minor league hockey is not a replacement for NHL hockey nor a substitute. Additionally, minor league hockey needs the NHL operating to maximize its level of popularity.




Not true, and the Bulls are the perfect example. The Cow Palace was packed between October and February last year during the lockout. It was perfect timing for the Bulls, but unfortunately they weren't able to hold interest.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

jabberoski said:


> For the record, the Stars played during the 2003-04 season, not 2004-05.
> 
> http://www.hockeydb.com/stte/columbus-stars-5325.html




oops 



CrazyEddie20 said:


> Come on, an *average of 973 *literally gave a damn every night about Malcolm Cameron's club that played at the Fairgrounds!




No way I went to most of the games and counted the "crowd" a lot of the time. There were a couple below 200.

It was so obvious that the Stars were in trouble by December that I started calling their office to see if they were playing on game nights. Ultimately, calling saved me a trip to Columbus as the team folded on a day when there was a scheduled home game.


----------



## MSteudle

I was surprised any league would give sf another shot at hockey after the ihll spiders saga, this will probably be the cities death nail for at least another 25 yrs


----------



## Rocko604

I guess you could add the Rocky Mountain Rage (06-09) to that list as well, 16 miles outside Denver. 

In addition to the NHL teams in the area, Denver, and the Rage and Columbus before them, have/had NCAA programs to compete with as well.


----------



## lennysundahl

Cyclones Rock said:


> It's been almost a universal disaster, hasn't it? Here's the list of low minor league teams in NHL markets during the past decade. Add if I've missed anyone.
> 
> 1) Chicago Hounds (UHL 2007) folded after one year
> 2) Chicago Express (ECHL 2012) folded after one year
> 3) Columbus Stars (UHL 2005) folded during first year
> 4) St. Charles Chill (CHL 2013-4) St. Louis Blues....drawing flies in first year......... The clock is ticking
> 5) Denver Cutthroats (CHL 2012-14)....sub 2000 attendance average overall........... On death watch.
> 6) San Francisco Bulls (ECHL 2012-14).......the plug could be pulled any day.
> 
> 
> The Gwinnett Gladiators (ECHL 2003-present) appear to be the lone exception to these short-lived AA franchises in NHL markets. Gwinnett is in the Atlanta metropolitan area and shared the market with the NHL Thrashers until that franchise relocated to Winnipeg a few years ago.



The Gladiators have done well because they're right in the middle of the affluent suburbs of Atlanta. The Braves have taken notes, apparently, because they're moving to Cobb County when their lease at Turner Field runs out.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

Rocko604 said:


> I guess you could add the Rocky Mountain Rage (06-09) to that list as well, 16 miles outside Denver.
> 
> In addition to the NHL teams in the area, Denver, and the Rage and Columbus before them, have/had NCAA programs to compete with as well.




Thanks. I forgot about them. Love the name.


----------



## Francis10

The original Colorado Eagles in the CHL had some success and good fan support. But I think that isn't the norm in these cases.


----------



## CNS

Bay Area hockey really died over the last decade. SF used to have a youth team but I'm not sure they're around anymore. I'm 21 now and played hockey in the Bay Area from 5 to 18. In that time, the Bay went from 12+ teams to ~6. I have to think that might have had something to do with the failure of a team in SF.


----------



## LadyStanley

cnshockey said:


> Bay Area hockey really died over the last decade. SF used to have a youth team but I'm not sure they're around anymore. I'm 21 now and played hockey in the Bay Area from 5 to 18. In that time, the Bay went from 12+ teams to ~6. I have to think that might have had something to do with the failure of a team in SF.




SF hockey may have reduced (what's the state of local ice rinks), but San Jose has been increasing greatly.

SJ is among the country's leaders in # of adults participating in ice hockey (there are two MORE rinks on the board for Sharks Ice SJ, including ~5k arena) and also growing #s of kids participating.

And given the Sharks also operate rinks in Fremont and Oakland, the reports are that hockey is doing quite well there. (They are also trying to build rink in Pleasanton.)


----------



## easternrefugee

Cyclones Rock said:


> It's been almost a universal disaster, hasn't it? Here's the list of low minor league teams in NHL markets during the past decade. Add if I've missed anyone.
> 
> 1) Chicago Hounds (UHL 2007) folded after one year
> 2) Chicago Express (ECHL 2012) folded after one year
> 3) Columbus Stars (UHL 2005) folded during first year
> 4) St. Charles Chill (CHL 2013-4) St. Louis Blues....drawing flies in first year......... The clock is ticking
> 5) Denver Cutthroats (CHL 2012-14)....sub 2000 attendance average overall........... On death watch.
> 6) San Francisco Bulls (ECHL 2012-14).......the plug could be pulled any day.
> 
> 
> The Gwinnett Gladiators (ECHL 2003-present) appear to be the lone exception to these short-lived AA franchises in NHL markets. Gwinnett is in the Atlanta metropolitan area and shared the market with the NHL Thrashers until that franchise relocated to Winnipeg a few years ago.




Here are three other disasters in large markets without major league teams:

Long Beach ice dogs
San Diego Gulls
Fresno Falcons

Simply put ECHL is best suited for 5-8,000 seat arena in a medium size town.


As for the SJ Sharks comments I am confused. We just got Bowman who is on an AHL contract with SJ. How come his name is not mentioned as one of their contracted players???? I seriously doubt anyone is going to take over a franchise mid-season move it to a new market location and continue playing. It makes no business sense. The ECHL office has stated int he past that they want new locations to have one year of marketing before the doors open up for business. Oakland makes no sense because the costs I would think would be similar to the dump they are in now and Fresno is hundreds of miles away and how do they sell tickets NOW or do they just throw many several million dollars for the chane or hope of recuperating it next year??? I would be shocked if any ECHL tema makes that much of a profit under normal circumstances. Mid-season change would be a horrendous loss.


----------



## mfrerkes

Cyclones Rock said:


> It's been almost a universal disaster, hasn't it? Here's the list of low minor league teams in NHL markets during the past decade. Add if I've missed anyone.




Allen is in the Dallas market, where the Stars play. That is the exception, and not the rule, however.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

mfrerkes said:


> Allen is in the Dallas market, where the Stars play. That is the exception, and not the rule, however.




That's interesting.

Allen and Gwinnett are suburbs of huge cities and compete(d) with NHL teams and have been able to make a go of it for a significant time. So, it's not so cut and dried as I had originally thought.

It would be interesting to see how these two teams survive without much, if any, media coverage. I'm making an assumption that they don't get any coverage of note from the major media outlets in the area. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

The Cyclones, despite being in roughly the 30th biggest media market in the country and having two major league franchises to compete with for media time, manage a good deal of coverage in the electronic media. The amount of coverage has increased since their attendance began to climb and they won their first Kelly Cup. They are virtually shut out in the daily paper (Cincinnati Enquirer). 

The Cyclones advertise very heavily on electronic billboards on the most heavily traveled areas of the interstate highways in the area. The cost of doing so is within their budget. I can't imagine a Dallas or Atlanta area team being able to use this form of advertising as heavily as the Cyclones do as a viable option. It would be interesting to hear from anyone who knows something about either Gwinett or Allen's marketing strategies.


----------



## SeattleSharksFan

The Cow Palace is old and dingy in an industrial area with very little to do around the arena. There's a decent sports bar down the street (7 Mile House) but other than that, nada. This doesn't help to attract the more affluent dollar from the Peninsula suburbs and The City. It seems like the Bulls were marketing the team as well as they could with creative advertising, social media usage, and unique promotional nights. Until SF gets a more modern arena (be it the Warriors' arena or a smaller facility) more centrally located, hockey doesn't seem like it can succeed there.


----------



## mfrerkes

Cyclones Rock said:


> The Cyclones, despite being in roughly the 30th biggest media market in the country and having two major league franchises to compete with for media time, manage a good deal of coverage in the electronic media. The amount of coverage has increased since their attendance began to climb and they won their first Kelly Cup.




Cincinnati is likely helped by the fact their two "major league" sports are baseball and football. MLB doesn't run concurrent with the hockey season, while the NFL does but only has eight regular season home dates. Cities with an NHL team (Saint Louis, for example) have little room left for minor league hockey, while likewise the Oklahoma City Barons are having difficulties competing with the NBA's Thunder.

If the Cyclones were sharing the spotlight with an NHL and/or NBA team, the road would probably be much more difficult.


----------



## LadyStanley

easternrefugee said:


> As for the SJ Sharks comments I am confused. We just got Bowman who is on an AHL contract with SJ. How come his name is not mentioned as one of their contracted players????




Because Bowman's rights were traded to Bakersfield last week.


----------



## tvboy11

Loveland is only about an hour north of Denver and the Eagles do just fine. If you're gonna survive in a "big league" market, you can't try to do things the same way the big boys do. In the case of the Eagles, own towns like Loveland, Greeley and Fort Collins and cultivate your fan base there. That's a target audience of over 300K in the northern Colorado area.


----------



## easternrefugee

LadyStanley said:


> Because Bowman's rights were traded to Bakersfield last week.




Thank you.....

Interesting that he walked off the team. I wonder if he saw the handwriting on the wall and that is why he left. I have never heard of a contracted player walking off of the ECHL.


----------



## returnoftheyeti

Created an account to say this:

If the Bulls can't fill the Cow Palace, what ever makes anyone think that Oracle is an option? Or even a good idea? The prices will even go higher. I cant imagine how much parking ($20+) or concessions ($10 draft beer) would be. The Cow Palace is a dump, but its our dump. But the ECHL in one of the most expensive metros in the country is a bad idea from the start. $10 parking is the cost of the tickets in most ECHL markets. Drop the prices, fill the barn, advertise like crazy, and try like hell not to schedule home games on the same day as 49ers and Giants home games.

And Drop the prices. Make every seat $10. Paying $45 for an "elevated" seat is dumb, when you can buy a $15 ticket and move down as there is no one there. 

http://oraclearena.com/info/parking.php


----------



## Cyclones Rock

mfrerkes said:


> Cincinnati is likely helped by the fact their two "major league" sports are baseball and football. MLB doesn't run concurrent with the hockey season, while the NFL does but only has eight regular season home dates. Cities with an NHL team (Saint Louis, for example) have little room left for minor league hockey, while likewise the Oklahoma City Barons are having difficulties competing with the NBA's Thunder.
> 
> If the Cyclones were sharing the spotlight with an NHL and/or NBA team, the road would probably be much more difficult.




There is no doubt that not having an "in season" major league competitor is of great benefit to the Cyclones.

The Cyclones suffer at the gate once the baseball season begins. This season, Fan Appreciation Night is slated to take place at the same time the Reds are playing next door. What normally is a 10,000 turnout will probably be much lower.

While the Cyclones don't have to compete with an NBA team, there are two major college basketball programs locally- Cincinnati and Xavier. Cincinnati isn't economically healthy enough anymore to support 3 major league teams so the Cyclones won't have to jump off that bridge.

At one point, Cincinnati almost had 3 major league teams. In 1978, the NHL Board of Governors vote to merge with the WHA fell one vote shy of including the Cincinnati Stingers , New England (Hartford), Quebec, Winnipeg, Edmonton and either (I forget which one) Indianapolis or Birmingham in a WHA/NHL "merger". The following season, 4 WHA teams were absorbed by the NHL and the Cincinnati Stingers and Birmingham Bulls each accepted a buyout of $3.15 million to cease operations.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

easternrefugee said:


> Thank you.....
> 
> Interesting that he walked off the team. I wonder if he saw the handwriting on the wall and that is why he left. *I have never heard of a contracted player walking off of the ECHL.*




Happens with a fairly often. Players quit....a Cyclones player, Theo Ruth, retired at 24 years old a few weeks ago. I've seen players quit who had NHL deals which were paying them well over $100,000 per season. ECHL players often leave to play in Europe as well.

Todd Robinson, one of the all time leading minor league scorers, quit Evansville of the ECHL last season to join the CHL Allen Americans where he won a CHL Championship.

Many ECHL players make roughly $500 per week plus housing. A lot of guys quit for better paying jobs every year.


----------



## LadyStanley

BOG meeting was Wednesday. I've seen no news/tweets about "what happened" WRT Bulls or Wranglers, etc.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/local/x429886968/ECHL-board-approves-Condors-sale

ECHL BOG approved sale of Condors to Edmonton Oilers.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/ka...lers-weighing-three-options-new-home-2014-15/

It appears that the Wranglers have secured their existence for next season. The article says that the team will likely receive a two week extension from the original deadline (this week) from the league to sign lease(s).

I saw nothing about the Bulls.

The ECHL BOG in the past has not officially "closed" its meetings after they have concluded. This technicality has given leeway to deadlines involving decisions which were supposed to be taken care of at the meetings.


----------



## LadyStanley

Bulls press release, via email:



> January 23, 2014
> 
> Statement from SF Bulls CEO Angela Batinovich
> 
> Thank you for your support during this time, we appreciate all of the encouragement from our fans.
> 
> During the ECHL Mid-Season Meeting, the Commissioner and Board of Governors granted our request for additional time to complete negotiations that would allow for the transfer of the San Francisco Bulls to a new ownership group.
> 
> We are hopeful that these negotiations will be completed within the allotted time, and we currently have no intention to cancel any games.


----------



## No Fun Shogun

Hopefully something good comes of the extension. Hard to imagine that there's a future there with that much red ink, though.


----------



## PCSPounder

Cyclones Rock said:


> That's interesting.
> 
> Allen and Gwinnett are suburbs of huge cities and compete(d) with NHL teams and have been able to make a go of it for a significant time. So, it's not so cut and dried as I had originally thought.
> 
> It would be interesting to see how these two teams survive without much, if any, media coverage. I'm making an assumption that they don't get any coverage of note from the major media outlets in the area. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
> 
> The Cyclones, despite being in roughly the 30th biggest media market in the country and having two major league franchises to compete with for media time, manage a good deal of coverage in the electronic media. The amount of coverage has increased since their attendance began to climb and they won their first Kelly Cup. They are virtually shut out in the daily paper (Cincinnati Enquirer).
> 
> The Cyclones advertise very heavily on electronic billboards on the most heavily traveled areas of the interstate highways in the area. The cost of doing so is within their budget. I can't imagine a Dallas or Atlanta area team being able to use this form of advertising as heavily as the Cyclones do as a viable option. It would be interesting to hear from anyone who knows something about either Gwinett or Allen's marketing strategies.




Dallas is a growing market because it's not particularly expensive. Chicago isn't cheap. San Francisco is ridiculously expensive and has been for a long time. Fort Collins/Greeley/Loveland should never have been brought into this discussion (and Denver's not that expensive anyway, though it's also small enough of a market and so ridiculously jammed with sports that a suburban arena was never a good idea).


----------



## returnoftheyeti

An update, nothing really new. Good Summary:
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2014/01/san_francisco_bulls_remain_on.php


----------



## tvboy11

PCSPounder said:


> Dallas is a growing market because it's not particularly expensive. Chicago isn't cheap. San Francisco is ridiculously expensive and has been for a long time. Fort Collins/Greeley/Loveland should never have been brought into this discussion (and Denver's not that expensive anyway, though it's also small enough of a market and so ridiculously jammed with sports that a suburban arena was never a good idea).




Keep in mind the context that Loveland was brought into the conversation with.

It's about 50 miles straight down the interstate from Loveland to downtown Denver.

It's about 35(ish) miles from the Gwinnett Center to downtown Atlanta - and it's not necessarily straight interstate.

The context is putting these teams in "major" markets, but in an area of those major markets where they have a chance to succeed. Part of the reason Gwinnett works is because they can draw off a fan base that can't (or won't) travel into downtown Atlanta regularly for events.

Same thing for the Eagles in Colorado. They've made their hay off people who will drive ten miles, but not fifty. Ontario does the same - they latch on to the Inland Empire fans, 40 miles outside of downtown LA even though it's all still the LA market.

Doesn't appear the Bulls have had success in that regard. Fans aren't gonna ride 45 minutes on the BART to watch ECHL hockey, but they might drive five miles over the hill from some of the residential areas around the college campus there.

If you put a minor-league hockey team in downtown Seattle, odds are high it won't work. But you can put a WHL team called the Seattle Thunderbirds in Kent - 25 miles south of downtown - and draw off THAT audience to draw 4K per game and be perfectly viable.


----------



## Artie Fufkin

tvboy11 said:


> Same thing for the Eagles in Colorado. They've made their hay off people who will drive ten miles, but not fifty.




That's not really true, since a third of their season ticket base comes from Cheyenne, Wyoming, 50 miles to the north. Most people going to Eagles games have to drive 20 miles one way.


----------



## JB51Hockey

tvboy11 said:


> Keep in mind the context that Loveland was brought into the conversation with.
> 
> It's about 50 miles straight down the interstate from Loveland to downtown Denver.
> 
> It's about 35(ish) miles from the Gwinnett Center to downtown Atlanta - and it's not necessarily straight interstate.
> 
> The context is putting these teams in "major" markets, but in an area of those major markets where they have a chance to succeed. Part of the reason Gwinnett works is because they can draw off a fan base that can't (or won't) travel into downtown Atlanta regularly for events.
> 
> Same thing for the Eagles in Colorado. They've made their hay off people who will drive ten miles, but not fifty. Ontario does the same - they latch on to the Inland Empire fans, 40 miles outside of downtown LA even though it's all still the LA market.
> 
> Doesn't appear the Bulls have had success in that regard. Fans aren't gonna ride 45 minutes on the BART to watch ECHL hockey, but they might drive five miles over the hill from some of the residential areas around the college campus there.
> 
> If you put a minor-league hockey team in downtown Seattle, odds are high it won't work. But you can put a WHL team called the Seattle Thunderbirds in Kent - 25 miles south of downtown - and draw off THAT audience to draw 4K per game and be perfectly viable.




This is so brilliant. It really makes so much sense why teams fail in big markets but others succeed.


----------



## PCSPounder

tvboy11 said:


> If you put a minor-league hockey team in downtown Seattle, odds are high it won't work. But you can put a WHL team called the Seattle Thunderbirds in Kent - 25 miles south of downtown - and draw off THAT audience to draw 4K per game and be perfectly viable.




Provided that the numbers are accurate and the management isn't too old-school. 

Thing is, when I went to Everett a couple weeks ago, they announced 3,200, but there wasn't a thousand in the building. Moreover, Comcast is a decent arena, but the team's operations were rather low-rent IMO.

(If you want proof, photos in, shall we say, a blog designed for the 7 regular readers who exist and nae more. http://blogbythepound.wordpress.com...wishing-i-had-brian-libby-strapped-to-my-bag/ )

But I digress to a degree. The Thunderbirds aren't really competing with an NHL team, unless the US Border Patrol suddenly lightens up and/or bullet trains finally arrive in the region.


----------



## Maddog

tvboy11 said:


> .
> 
> If you put a minor-league hockey team in downtown Seattle, odds are high it won't work. But you can put a WHL team called the Seattle Thunderbirds in Kent - 25 miles south of downtown - and draw off THAT audience to draw 4K per game and be perfectly viable.




I agree that a minor league team would not work in Seattle. However, regarding the Seattle Thunderbirds. The team was averaging over 4K per game prior to moving from Key Arena to Kent's Showare arena. The Thunderbird attendance average has remained steady after the move.


----------



## HansH

easternrefugee said:


> Here are three other disasters in large markets without major league teams:
> 
> Long Beach ice dogs
> San Diego Gulls
> Fresno Falcons



Just stop. Stop right now. Yes, all three teams eventually failed. After YEARS of success. To call them "disasters" and dismiss them out of hand is to show woeful understanding of the history... and to call Fresno a "large market"?? *snicker*


----------



## Steelhead16

HansH said:


> Just stop. Stop right now. Yes, all three teams eventually failed. After YEARS of success. To call them "disasters" and dismiss them out of hand is to show woeful understanding of the history... and to call Fresno a "large market"?? *snicker*




Totally correct. San Diego had minor league hockey for 21 years and 16 years straight at one stretch. Fresno was in different leagues but hockey was played at Selland from 1971-2008 consecutively and minor league hockey dates back to the early 40's. And Long Beach went 14 straight years.
Just straight attendance numbers didn't do any of the 3 of them in. There were extenuating circumstances for all 3.


----------



## LadyStanley

http://www.fresnobee.com/2014/01/23/3729600/city-hall-ponders-deal-to-bring.html

Thursday article on Fresno city council looking at lease for Bulls of Selland Arena.


----------



## adsfan

Cyclones Rock said:


> Happens with a fairly often. Players quit....a Cyclones player, *Theo Ruth, retired at 24 years old a few weeks ago*. I've seen players quit who had NHL deals which were paying them well over $100,000 per season. ECHL players often leave to play in Europe as well.
> 
> Todd Robinson, one of the all time leading minor league scorers, quit Evansville of the ECHL last season to join the CHL Allen Americans where he won a CHL Championship.
> 
> Many ECHL players make roughly $500 per week plus housing. A lot of guys quit for better paying jobs every year.




Ruth couldn't stick in Milwaukee. He had no chance at the NHL. I wish him well in whatever profession he tries next. It is better than being a 28 year old NHL rookie.


----------



## returnoftheyeti

They keep talking about Oakland. Is there anywhere else besides Oracle that would work? What about in Berkley, on the Cal Campus? Anything that has seating in the 7k seating range, and close to BART?


----------



## Kmshrkx

As far as another building with ice making abilities and large enough for a minor league team, there isn't any other venue in the Bay Area, aside from CP, Oracle and SAP.


----------



## Steelhead16

returnoftheyeti said:


> They keep talking about Oakland. Is there anywhere else besides Oracle that would work? What about in Berkley, on the Cal Campus? Anything that has seating in the 7k seating range, and close to BART?




Unfortunately no.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

adsfan said:


> Ruth couldn't stick in Milwaukee. He had no chance at the NHL. I wish him well in whatever profession he tries next. It is better than being a 28 year old NHL rookie.




I'd rather have been a 28 year old NHL rookie at $550,000 minimum

Ruth's NHL deal had expired (roughly $130,00 per year) and he was on an AHL deal this season.

Agreed. He wasn't going to go to the NHL.

How are Bitetto and Liambas looking?


----------



## sharksohnoes!

adsfan said:


> Ruth couldn't stick in Milwaukee. He had no chance at the NHL. I wish him well in whatever profession he tries next. *It is better than being a 28 year old NHL rookie.*




Tell that to 32-year-old Bracken Kearns!


----------



## LadyStanley

returnoftheyeti said:


> They keep talking about Oakland. Is there anywhere else besides Oracle that would work? What about in Berkley, on the Cal Campus? Anything that has seating in the 7k seating range, and close to BART?






Steelhead16 said:


> Unfortunately no.




I believe UC Berkley's club team plays at Oakland Ice (run by Sharks Ice).


----------



## Steelhead16

LadyStanley said:


> I believe UC Berkley's club team plays at Oakland Ice (run by Sharks Ice).




They do, but it only seats about 100.


----------



## PCSPounder

returnoftheyeti said:


> What about in Berkley, on the Cal Campus?




I see this kind of question a lot.

Since my expertise is out west, allow me to answer to arenas in the Pac-12, Mountain West, WCC, WAC, Big West, and Big Sky.

Fresno State, Save Mart Center, which I think is technically off campus.

Since Cal State Bakersfield moved into the arena where the Condors play, they don't really count. 

Nobody else has a basketball arena that could accommodate hockey. I know a couple places that hosted Ice Capades or Disney On Ice, but you can't get 180 feet of ice out of any of these places except Fresno. 

Anyone who wants to mention North Dakota? Their basketball teams play in a smaller arena.


----------



## JungleJON

PCSPounder said:


> I see this kind of question a lot.
> 
> Since my expertise is out west, allow me to answer to arenas in the Pac-12, Mountain West, WCC, WAC, Big West, and Big Sky.
> 
> Fresno State, Save Mart Center, which I think is technically off campus.
> 
> Since Cal State Bakersfield moved into the arena where the Condors play, they don't really count.
> 
> Nobody else has a basketball arena that could accommodate hockey. I know a couple places that hosted Ice Capades or Disney On Ice, but you can't get 180 feet of ice out of any of these places except Fresno.
> 
> *Anyone who wants to mention North Dakota?* Their basketball teams play in a smaller arena.




The Fargo Force play in the USHL and there are some smaller arenas that have teams in the NAHL.


----------



## returnoftheyeti

You could put ice in the Bill Graham Auditorium, but my guess is that the concerts are more lucrative. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Graham_Civic_Auditorium

Isn't there a small, unused Auditorium in Oakland, by Lake Merritt? 

*edit*
Here it is: http://urbanhabitat.org/19-1/allen-taylor
The Oakland Civic Auditorium. Perfect for an ECHL team. For this purpose, I am guessing that the new owners are going to want a "ready made" solution, not a build it yourself, but its too bad the Bulls owners did not build that out instead of the Cow Palace.


----------



## LadyStanley

rossmckeon 12:50pm via Twitter for iPhone
Latest pro hockey failure in S.F.: ECHL Bulls vacate Cow Palace today, source tells me


SF Chronicle (Sharks beat writer)


----------



## CNS

LadyStanley said:


> SF hockey may have reduced (what's the state of local ice rinks), but San Jose has been increasing greatly.
> 
> SJ is among the country's leaders in # of adults participating in ice hockey (there are two MORE rinks on the board for Sharks Ice SJ, including ~5k arena) and also growing #s of kids participating.
> 
> And given the Sharks also operate rinks in Fremont and Oakland, the reports are that hockey is doing quite well there. (They are also trying to build rink in Pleasanton.)




Sorry but there's a lot to disagree with in this post. 

Growing number of kids? Give me a break. When I started as a mite in 1998, there were at least 12 different teams in NorCal at every youth level. By the time I left in 2010, there were 5 or 6. And half were owned by the Jr. Sharks, which is NOT a good thing for hockey in the area. That organization is just scum and I won't get into why but I have very strong reasons for saying that.

And the Pleasanton rink is about as accurate a rumor as bigfoot sightings. They've been talking about that since I lived there as a kid back in the 90's. That will simply never happen it feels.

I really think part of the reason the Bulls failed is because of this. Yes, the Sharks are popular. That's because they win. The people in the are aren't hockey fans. And I can safely say this because up until this year, I spent my entire life there.

It sucks that the Bulls failed. Really does. Wish it worked out but that's the way she goes.


----------



## sharksohnoes!

It's official. The SF Bulls have folded. I just received an email from the front office. Official statement should come out shortly.


----------



## LadyStanley

http://www.csnbayarea.com/sharks/echls-san-francisco-bulls-cease-operations?p=ya5nbcs&ocid=yahoo

With letter to STH announcing closure.


----------



## LadyStanley

PollakOnSharks  2:47pm via Web  SFBulls of ECHL fold. #SJSharks say five prospects there now will be reassigned in near future.


----------



## Thepainter

cnshockey said:


> Sorry but there's a lot to disagree with in this post.
> 
> Growing number of kids? Give me a break. When I started as a mite in 1998, there were at least 12 different teams in NorCal at every youth level. By the time I left in 2010, there were 5 or 6. And half were owned by the Jr. Sharks, which is NOT a good thing for hockey in the area. That organization is just scum and I won't get into why but I have very strong reasons for saying that.
> 
> And the Pleasanton rink is about as accurate a rumor as bigfoot sightings. They've been talking about that since I lived there as a kid back in the 90's. That will simply never happen it feels.
> 
> I really think part of the reason the Bulls failed is because of this. Yes, the Sharks are popular. That's because they win. The people in the are aren't hockey fans. And I can safely say this because up until this year, I spent my entire life there.
> 
> It sucks that the Bulls failed. Really does. Wish it worked out but that's the way she goes.




Everything posted by LadyStanley are actual numbers. Not sure how you can "disagree" with it, but hey, this is the internet.


----------



## Shrimper

Shame to hear, what were the biggest reasons for it folding?


----------



## LadyStanley

Shrimper said:


> Shame to hear, what were the biggest reasons for it folding?




$2m in losses over 1.5 seasons.


----------



## LadyStanley

Sharks have five prospects will Bulls.


SanJoseSharks  3:15pm via HootSuite  Statement from #SJSharks GM Doug Wilson on @SFBulls. go.sjsharks.com/t0FfH


----------



## returnoftheyeti

While I agree that 2 mil in loss over 1.5 years is a good reason, I'd love more details. 

The Bulls installed new ice making equipment, new scoreboards, hell, they even brought in real Internet Access to the Cow Palace. 

I can buy that expenses were greater than revenue, my question is WHY? Rent too high? Not enough seats sold? 
What could have helped this?


----------



## LadyStanley

Attendance dropped by half from last season (which coincided with NHL lockout).

That's a big part. 

They were trying to renegotiate new deal with Cow Palace on lease, and didn't get anywhere.


----------



## LadyStanley

http://www.echl.com/san-francisco-ceases-operations-p190053

New schedule coming.



http://www.echl.com/echl-transactions-jan-27-p190055
Rights to two players traded (I'm thinking those might be "future considerations" redemption). 

Five players are Sharks (NHL and AHL) prospects.

All the rest of the team is declared UFAs.


----------



## returnoftheyeti

LadyStanley said:


> They were trying to renegotiate new deal with Cow Palace on lease, and didn't get anywhere.




I'd love more details on this. I cant imagine the Cow Palace makes more sitting empty. There is probably a reason I am not a CEO, but if it was up to me, $15 admission, all seats, no parking charges, and advertise $5 PBR nights. People would go just for the cheap beer.


----------



## CrazyEddie20

returnoftheyeti said:


> While I agree that 2 mil in loss over 1.5 years is a good reason, I'd love more details.
> 
> The Bulls installed new ice making equipment, new scoreboards, hell, they even brought in real Internet Access to the Cow Palace.
> 
> I can buy that expenses were greater than revenue, my question is WHY? Rent too high? Not enough seats sold?
> What could have helped this?




You answer your own question - they probably sunk well over $1M into the ice plant, scoreboards, and all. When you start $1M in the hole in the minor leagues, you're starting out pretty deep in the hole.

Had Curcio picked a city and a venue that was ready for hockey, he'd have been able to plow that $1M into marketing and probably done a little better.

---

I did a little digging, and according to Curcio they spent $2M in preparing the Cow Palace for hockey. How they ever thought they could be profitable, I'll never know...


----------



## Johnny8242

I'll miss you SF Bulls. You were beautiful and wonderful. 

Lots of good ECHL players going to be Free Agents now. Should be interesting for the other teams.


----------



## JeffNYI

returnoftheyeti said:


> I'd love more details on this. I cant imagine the Cow Palace makes more sitting empty. There is probably a reason I am not a CEO, but if it was up to me, $15 admission, all seats, no parking charges, and advertise $5 PBR nights. People would go just for the cheap beer.




I'm NOT ... again, NOT ... saying this is what actually happened.. but I am saying it's possible..

While the team may have had problems meeting other obligations, there's a very real scenario in which a struggling team could not pay its arena..

--------------------------------

Normally, the day after a game there's a settlement for the event.. if the arena's box office took in more money on game day on behalf of the team (combined with team's concessions share if any, etc) than the rent and all other costs - the venue cuts a check to the team for the difference... if the venue doesn't take in enough money to cover the game's costs, the team needs to pay the venue.

When you look at the Bulls attendance, the first thing one wonders is how many of those tickets were already pre-paid TO THE TEAM in the form of season tickets, or tickets distributed as part of corporate packages.. comp tickets, etc.. and thus with little walk-up crowd, very little money would have never entered the VENUE'S accounts..

It's quite possible that the revenue from game-day ticket purchases at the box office were actually really low.. and given the attendance at the games, concessions revenue were potentially far below expectations as well.. so it's not like the venue would say "okay well, so what if the team isn't paying us because the fans are scarfing down our hotdogs and beer and we're profiting $25k/game due to our concession stands"

In cases like this, it's possible the team could be unable to pay the game day liabilities from game to game.. the venue makes a decision to let the games continue for awhile in the hope of eventually being paid.. (plus a team could be snowing the venue saying they have X or Y revenue coming in - or new owners who will settle any balance).

At some point the venue realizes they'll never be paid the money they're owed.. and they act by refusing any more events to occur unless all outstanding balances are paid either in full or at least a meaningful percentage to re-establish good faith.. 

The team may not even be able to pay travel and payroll expenses, let alone paying the venue..

So in a scenario like this, the venue does indeed lose less money sitting empty.. and the venue does what it has to do..

------------------------------------

NOT SAYING THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED IN SF WITH THE BULLS AND COW PALACE.


----------



## LadyStanley

http://www.echl.com/echl-transactions-jan-27-p190055

Two Bulls players "traded" to other teams.

(I'd have to think that those might be the "completion" of "Future Consideration" trades?)

There are another 16 ECHL players now UFAs, who may or may not be signed by other teams. (Not to mention the Sharks five prospects looking for new homes.)


----------



## CrazyEddie20

LadyStanley said:


> http://www.echl.com/echl-transactions-jan-27-p190055
> 
> Two Bulls players "traded" to other teams.
> 
> (I'd have to think that those might be the "completion" of "Future Consideration" trades?)
> 
> There are another 16 ECHL players now UFAs, who may or may not be signed by other teams. (Not to mention the Sharks five prospects looking for new homes.)




Correct, future considerations trades have to be resolved before the remaining players can be declared free agents.


----------



## Off da post and in

Johnny8242 said:


> I'll miss you SF Bulls. You were beautiful and wonderful.
> 
> Lots of good ECHL players going to be Free Agents now. Should be interesting for the other teams.




I'll speculate that the 5 San Jose prospects will end up on a non-affiliated ECHL team, located out West. 

The 16 remaining players will end up in either the ECHL, CHL, SPHL, European Leagues, or be out in the cold for a period of time. The mid-season folds have a tendency not to work well for the players in most cases.


----------



## LadyStanley

Per AHL transactions, the five Sharks (NHL/AHL) players have been assigned to ECHL Ontario.



http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs....gn=Feed:+ThunderHeadlines+(Thunder+Headlines)

Stockton might be interested in signing one or more of the 16 UFAs.



Sharks have not made any announcement regarding official affiliation with any ECHL team.


----------



## paul-laus

People on these boards bash the CHL and its instability to no end (more often than not warranted). But I find it almost laughable that these same posters give the ECHL a free pass as if it's some beacon of stability in North American Minor Pro Hockey. 

No one ever mentions the fact that this is now the third ECHL team (Augusta, Fresno) to fold mid season in less than five years. I can't think of anything that tarnishes a league worse than a team closing shop and not making it to the finish line and the schedule changes and roster moves that result. Even the CHL hasn't had this occur since the Chill. 

Everybody has been gaga about the new Indianapolis team for next season and hyping it including McKenna but if the ECHL brings them in and loses San Fran and Las Vegas its a net loss of one for the league count. How's this progress for a league that's supposed to be the premier double A league? It's comical....


----------



## PCSPounder

paul-laus said:


> People on these boards bash the CHL and its instability to no end (more often than not warranted). But I find it almost laughable that these same posters give the ECHL a free pass as if it's some beacon of stability in North American Minor Pro Hockey.
> 
> No one ever mentions the fact that this is now the third ECHL team (Augusta, Fresno) to fold mid season in less than five years. I can't think of anything that tarnishes a league worse than a team closing shop and not making it to the finish line and the schedule changes and roster moves that result. Even the CHL hasn't had this occur since the Chill.
> 
> Everybody has been gaga about the new Indianapolis team for next season and hyping it including McKenna but if the ECHL brings them in and loses San Fran and Las Vegas its a net loss of one for the league count. How's this progress for a league that's supposed to be the premier double A league? It's comical....




In relative terms, the CHL still stinks. 

The thing is, the scam with the ECHL is the affiliations when, in reality, the 5 Sharks in SF is more than the usual.

The reality: I think the operative quote is "how does an owner become a millionaire in hockey? He starts out as a billionaire." The ECHL at least tries to grab a territory with multiple teams with some geographic connection. Don't even get me started on Brampton.

However, after I researched this stuff again last year, a pertinent question. Are we better off with smaller regional leagues with 6-8 teams? Is the ideal to have familiarity breed contempt? But will that help the NHL players?


----------



## IrascibleOne

FWIW, Las Vegas hasn't folded. The most recent word is that they're secured a location, and will be around next season. An announcement is expected from the team soon.


----------



## Jackets Woodchuck

PCSPounder said:


> In relative terms, the CHL still stinks.
> 
> The thing is, the scam with the ECHL is the affiliations when, in reality, the 5 Sharks in SF is more than the usual.
> 
> The reality: I think the operative quote is "how does an owner become a millionaire in hockey? He starts out as a billionaire." The ECHL at least tries to grab a territory with multiple teams with some geographic connection. Don't even get me started on Brampton.
> 
> However, after I researched this stuff again last year, a pertinent question. Are we better off with smaller regional leagues with 6-8 teams? Is the ideal to have familiarity breed contempt? But will that help the NHL players?




The real question is does the NHL need a development level below the AHL? Couldn't the AHL affiliate just take on a few extra players (given that AHL rosters are unlimited) and just have all the prospects in one place?

Not saying that I necessarily believe in such a scenario being optimal, but it's worth thinking about.

Also, why not a national league with regional divisions and no interdivision play until the playoffs? Amateur/summer college soccer leagues (such as the PDL and NPSL) have done well with this concept.


----------



## LadyStanley

http://echl.com/echl-releases-updates-to-2013-14-schedule-p190084

Revised schedule


----------



## PCSPounder

JeffNYI said:


> I'm NOT ... again, NOT ... saying this is what actually happened.. but I am saying it's possible..
> 
> While the team may have had problems meeting other obligations, there's a very real scenario in which a struggling team could not pay its arena..
> 
> --------------------------------
> 
> Normally, the day after a game there's a settlement for the event.. if the arena's box office took in more money on game day on behalf of the team (combined with team's concessions share if any, etc) than the rent and all other costs - the venue cuts a check to the team for the difference... if the venue doesn't take in enough money to cover the game's costs, the team needs to pay the venue.
> 
> When you look at the Bulls attendance, the first thing one wonders is how many of those tickets were already pre-paid TO THE TEAM in the form of season tickets, or tickets distributed as part of corporate packages.. comp tickets, etc.. and thus with little walk-up crowd, very little money would have never entered the VENUE'S accounts..
> 
> It's quite possible that the revenue from game-day ticket purchases at the box office were actually really low.. and given the attendance at the games, concessions revenue were potentially far below expectations as well.. so it's not like the venue would say "okay well, so what if the team isn't paying us because the fans are scarfing down our hotdogs and beer and we're profiting $25k/game due to our concession stands"
> 
> In cases like this, it's possible the team could be unable to pay the game day liabilities from game to game.. the venue makes a decision to let the games continue for awhile in the hope of eventually being paid.. (plus a team could be snowing the venue saying they have X or Y revenue coming in - or new owners who will settle any balance).
> 
> At some point the venue realizes they'll never be paid the money they're owed.. and they act by refusing any more events to occur unless all outstanding balances are paid either in full or at least a meaningful percentage to re-establish good faith..
> 
> The team may not even be able to pay travel and payroll expenses, let alone paying the venue..
> 
> So in a scenario like this, the venue does indeed lose less money sitting empty.. and the venue does what it has to do..
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> NOT SAYING THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED IN SF WITH THE BULLS AND COW PALACE.




Concerts clear more money for arena and bands.

You mentioned comp tickets. I see a LOT of that. In an expensive-to-operate place like San Francisco, I can but imagine that the only way you get the word out effectively is at fairs and gatherings, and only then by handing out free tickets. I can scarcely imagine what PAID attendance was. Of course, when you start giving out tickets, people anymore expect more free tickets.

One thing I'd never do, even with the Sharks down the road, is try to place a minor league team in the Cow Palace... or the supposedly incoming SF arena... or Oracle. I was at Oracle Sunday, they could sneak in a rink, but post-renovation it is a basketball arena with basketball angles and sightlines, and hockey would be crap there. However, it's the same problem regardless... you can't afford TV advertising to the target audience, there's too many major league teams, and the Sharks are down the road.


----------



## LippinOff

paul-laus said:


> People on these boards bash the CHL and its instability to no end (more often than not warranted). But I find it almost laughable that these same posters give the ECHL a free pass as if it's some beacon of stability in North American Minor Pro Hockey.
> 
> No one ever mentions the fact that this is now the third ECHL team (Augusta, Fresno) to fold mid season in less than five years. I can't think of anything that tarnishes a league worse than a team closing shop and not making it to the finish line and the schedule changes and roster moves that result. Even the CHL hasn't had this occur since the Chill.
> 
> Everybody has been gaga about the new Indianapolis team for next season and hyping it including McKenna but if the ECHL brings them in and loses San Fran and Las Vegas its a net loss of one for the league count. How's this progress for a league that's supposed to be the premier double A league? It's comical....




No offense, but you're letting your emotions cloud your common sense. Putting the ECHL in the same sinking boat as the CHL is kind of silly given the make up of their respective members.


----------



## easternrefugee

I was told that the SJ contracted players will be going to Ontario. Gee... I guess the Kings and the Sharks swim in the same waters.


----------



## Yog S'loth

Ontario STH holder here.

No official word yet on getting any of the Bulls players, but the revised schedule is out.

Ontario makes no home schedule changes, but loses one road game, to play a 71-game schedule.

[EDIT] Contacted the team PR, was told this:



> We will be receiving one player under contract with San Jose (NHL) and three under contract with Worcester (AHL) as they have been assigned to us by their organizations.


----------



## LadyStanley

http://sharks.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=702941
Sharks official announcement of 4 players (1 NHL + 3 AHL contracts) to ECHL Ontario.

(The goalie JP Anderson is recovering from injury, so for now he's been "assigned" to Worcester.)


----------



## PCSPounder

cnshockey said:


> And half were owned by the Jr. Sharks, which is NOT a good thing for hockey in the area. That organization is just scum and I won't get into why but I have very strong reasons for saying that.




I'd be curious if you'd expand on this.

I could easily say it's the same territorial squabbles I always see with soccer. I could say such an organization looks for all the money. There's just nothing pretty about the politics at the youth level in any sport. Please do tell.


----------



## paul-laus

LippinOff said:


> No offense, but you're letting your emotions cloud your common sense. Putting the ECHL in the same sinking boat as the CHL is kind of silly given the make up of their respective members.




Perhaps you misinterpreted my post. At no point did I lump the ECHL in with the CHL. Trust me, I'm familiar with the CHL and the misguided desire of a few owners to keep the league alive with desperate measures being the norm. The CHL has lost team after team and the ECHL has a number of markets that have worked. But I was pointing out that for all the CHL bashing that occurs in this forum, nobody ever mentions how laughable the ECHL is in its own right. 

Folding teams mid season and having to reorganize is as bush league as it gets and the fact that the ECHL has done it three times in under five years speaks volumes. People give the league too much credit. To put things in perspective, the ECHL still has Reno and Columbia listed on its website for future markets. What a joke. Wheeling is a joke, Elmira's a joke and the entrance into Victoria was a move that most would expect from the CHL, and many of the ECHL's more solid markets like Reading and Florida Everblades are showing signs of wilting....They may bring in Indy next year but could lose as many as four teams and that is just ridiculous for a league that prides itself on being the premier double a league.....


----------



## PCSPounder

paul-laus said:


> Perhaps you misinterpreted my post. At no point did I lump the ECHL in with the CHL. Trust me, I'm familiar with the CHL and the misguided desire of a few owners to keep the league alive with desperate measures being the norm. The CHL has lost team after team and the ECHL has a number of markets that have worked. But I was pointing out that for all the CHL bashing that occurs in this forum, nobody ever mentions how laughable the ECHL is in its own right.
> 
> Folding teams mid season and having to reorganize is as bush league as it gets and the fact that the ECHL has done it three times in under five years speaks volumes. People give the league too much credit. To put things in perspective, the ECHL still has Reno and Columbia listed on its website for future markets. What a joke. Wheeling is a joke, Elmira's a joke and the entrance into Victoria was a move that most would expect from the CHL, and many of the ECHL's more solid markets like Reading and Florida Everblades are showing signs of wilting....They may bring in Indy next year but could lose as many as four teams and that is just ridiculous for a league that prides itself on being the premier double a league.....




I have a more major objection to your post: you're talking about all that's left of supposed "AA hockey." It's possible the problem is more systemic. At times, you can trash leagues... but at some point, Brampton happens because the Central is simply trying to maintain numbers. The ECHL merges and tries to shop around for close to the same reasons.

I believe we consider the AHL to be managing fairly well. Do we believe the SPHL is alright? Possibly? The middle of this supposed pyramid is eroding, however. Is this level of minor pro going away? 

Let me throw a wrinkle in here: how many Central league teams ended up converting to NAHL? Is Junior the future? Given there's already a rebellion against USA Hockey, I could see someone promising a non-college path as a pro feeder. Of course, I'm in a relatively large market with Major Junior, many people elsewhere seem to react less than well to what they see as "high school hockey," I'm not putting all my eggs in that basket. However, when the problem becomes the survival of lower levels of the sport altogether, the solutions kind of get creative now, no?


----------



## LadyStanley

*brodiebrazilCSN*  8:43am via TweetDeck  Two great reads on the @SFBulls foldingâ€¦ from an employee: http://t.co/VkYOPVTcE5 and from a news critic: http://t.co/4jrZqPLPmY


----------



## mfrerkes

paul-laus said:


> People on these boards bash the CHL and its instability to no end (more often than not warranted). But I find it almost laughable that these same posters give the ECHL a free pass as if it's some beacon of stability in North American Minor Pro Hockey.




If the ECHL were a ten-team league, with four teams being owned by just two ownership groups and another being run covertly by the league, then more people would likely express cynicism about the ECHL's future as well. Yes, the E has some weak franchises that have been/will be going by the wayside. However, when you look at the big picture, the CHL is currently in a much more precarious position.

Furthermore, if you look at the teams who have recently jumped from the CHL to ECHL (Colorado, Evansville, Fort Wayne) it paints a vivid picture of reality. Rapid City and Allen are no dummies. They wanted to free themselves of the CHL this past summer, but were bound by legal restrictions. If those contracts didn't exist, you can bet the Rush and the Americans would already be in the ECHL this season.

The ECHL is far from perfect. It is also far from being extinct. The same cannot be said of the CHL.


----------



## desert dawg

*Oracle*

One thing I'd never do, even with the Sharks down the road, is try to place a minor league team in the Cow Palace... or the supposedly incoming SF arena... or Oracle. I was at Oracle Sunday, they could sneak in a rink, but post-renovation it is a basketball arena with basketball angles and sightlines, and hockey would be crap there. However, it's the same problem regardless... you can't afford TV advertising to the target audience, there's too many major league teams, and the Sharks are down the road.[/QUOTE]

Regarding the Oracle, can I reveal my age and admit to having watched the Golden Seals take on the Broadstreet Bullies from Philly??? I remember it being a decent place to watch a hockey game.

Managed to make it to the Cow Palace for a game last year to take in Bulls-- sorry to seem them go, but I went ASAP from out of town for a reason. They made a fortune I bet from chuck a puck-

Also don't forget to add Phx Roadrunners to teams that did not make it in major league cities. To bad they tried to make it work at US Airways- would have been better at Vets, but ice was removed preventing that from happening.


----------



## PCSPounder

desert dawg said:


> Regarding the Oracle, can I reveal my age and admit to having watched the Golden Seals take on the Broadstreet Bullies from Philly??? I remember it being a decent place to watch a hockey game.




This was my first time in Oracle since they completely gutted and rebuilt the interior. It probably was a nice place for hockey before the renovation. I think it's nice seating for basketball, but I would not want to be there during an earthquake.


----------



## GareFan18

Jackets Woodchuck said:


> The real question is does the NHL need a development level below the AHL? Couldn't the AHL affiliate just take on a few extra players (given that AHL rosters are unlimited) and just have all the prospects in one place?




I think for goaltender development, you do need a development level below the AHL. Goalies need games and 60 starting goaltender jobs (NHL + AHL) simply isn't enough.

Perhaps AA hockey should be more like AA baseball. AA baseball has three leagues of 12, 10 and 8. Seems like something like this could work for AA hockey -- 8 teams in the Mountain/West time zone, 8 teams in the Central time zone, 14 teams in the East.


----------



## Off da post and in

GareFan18 said:


> I think for goaltender development, you do need a development level below the AHL. Goalies need games and 60 starting goaltender jobs (NHL + AHL) simply isn't enough.
> 
> Perhaps AA hockey should be more like AA baseball. AA baseball has three leagues of 12, 10 and 8. Seems like something like this could work for AA hockey -- 8 teams in the Mountain/West time zone, 8 teams in the Central time zone, 14 teams in the East.




AA hockey is very close to what you think it should be right now.

The ECHL has 14 teams in the East, and 8 teams in the Mountain/West. The CHL has 10 teams located in between.

The ECHL is going to add one more team, Indianapolis, in the East. Meanwhile, the CHL is looking to add Louisville in the East and Casper,WY in the Mountain/West... there could be as many as 35 teams next season. However, both the ECHL & CHL may have some teams folding.

Question is: IF or When is the merger happening?


----------



## Cyclones Rock

Off da post and in said:


> AA hockey is very close to what you think it should be right now.
> 
> The ECHL has 14 teams in the East, and 8 teams in the Mountain/West. The CHL has 10 teams located in between.
> 
> The ECHL is going to add one more team, Indianapolis, in the East. Meanwhile, the CHL is looking to add Louisville in the East and Casper,WY in the Mountain/West... there could be as many as 35 teams next season. However, both the ECHL & CHL may have some teams folding.
> 
> *Question is: IF or When is the merger happening?*




The merger already has started. Colorado jumped from the CHL to the ECHL in 2011. Evansville and Fort Wayne jumped in 2012. Allen and Rapid City tried to jump in 2013, but legal maneuvers by the CHL prevented them from doing so.

I would think that the time frame the ECHL will end up absorbing the remaining viable CHL teams would be from next season (2014-15) to, at the latest, the 2015-16 season.


----------



## GareFan18

Cyclones Rock said:


> The merger already has started. Colorado jumped from the CHL to the ECHL in 2011. Evansville and Fort Wayne jumped in 2012. Allen and Rapid City tried to jump in 2013, but legal maneuvers by the CHL prevented them from doing so.
> 
> I would think that the time frame the ECHL will end up absorbing the remaining viable CHL teams would be from next season (2014-15) to, at the latest, the 2015-16 season.




Right, but they aren't quite there, yet. 30 teams -- 14/8/8, all teams with affiliations and, the key to the whole thing, the same salary cap across all three leagues so that the three leagues are all playing from the same sheet of music. 

Missouri is definitely one of those CHL teams. They outdraw both Allen and RC


----------



## ripham23232

GareFan18 said:


> Right, but they aren't quite there, yet. 30 teams -- 14/8/8, all teams with affiliations and, the key to the whole thing, the same salary cap across all three leagues so that the three leagues are all playing from the same sheet of music.
> 
> Missouri is definitely one of those CHL teams. They outdraw both Allen and RC




Honestly, what I think needs to happen if minor league hockey is to be taken seriously is the same thing that happened with minor league baseball starting in the late 80's. Major League Baseball committed fully to building the minors as a ladder to the majors, invested in the lower levels of the sport and have helped groom minor league baseball into what it is now. It may be on the NHL at this point to give the sport some stability in that regard. We can all agree the AHL is doing ok, and undoubtedly serves as the AAA league. If AA is what they want, then put 30 teams across the country in smaller, regional based leagues as someone mentioned. (California league, Midwest, east, etc.) with set affiliation agreements in place and go from there. If the NHL deems it not important, then minor league hockey is going to continue to toil away in obscurity, with new teams and leagues coming and going every couple of years as it has for all of time. Teams folding and leagues being in hot water or popping up is nothing new. I think in some regards, the NHL has begun doing this, but it either needs to be full on or not done at all, it can't be a toes in the water thing.

To address another voiced idea, there's no way there can just be the one minor league, as someone suggested. The whole purpose to minor league hockey is to get these guys playing and developing talent, so if you expand AHL rosters and have 12 guys scratched each night, its doing to be a development nightmare.


----------



## Mayor Bee

[deleted]


----------



## PCSPounder

Mayor Bee said:


> Stabilizing minor league hockey will require a similar effort. It may take a herculean effort for cities to build up the necessary infrastructure, and it may require a joint venture with other sports (basketball or indoor football), but it can be done.




American cities still understood that baseball kind of = national pastime, if no longer national passion. I think now that most of these cities are finding that ballpark to be more of a burden than they expected (minor league baseball is slipping again; the falling number of new ballparks AND creative accounting prop up the attendance numbers).

Things were booming less than two decades ago for minor pro hockey. Many of the teams creating the boom were in new buildings. Teams collapsed almost as quickly as they sprung up. In short, we'd already done this and it didn't work.

Ballparks can have cute little features (some of which are handy) because baseball's pace lends itself to constant diversion. I'm not the only soccer fan who gets into hockey because our attention spans are built a little better. 

There's more. Not yet.


----------



## ripham23232

PCSPounder said:


> American cities still understood that baseball kind of = national pastime, if no longer national passion. I think now that most of these cities are finding that ballpark to be more of a burden than they expected (minor league baseball is slipping again; the falling number of new ballparks AND creative accounting prop up the attendance numbers).




There's no doubt that there is some creative accounting in terms of producing attendance numbers, I can't debate that. I also don't think that's anything new though. I don't have set numbers at the moment, but MiLB has been fairly steady over the past ten years with some ups and downs from year to year. Basically been between 41 and 43 million total. Went up actually from 2012 to 2013 by a quarter million. I don't think counting the falling number of new ballparks is an accurate way to measure interest. The more that built new parks in previous years means there is less to build now, if that makes sense. Also, a number of parks undergo renovations on a yearly basis that keeps them up to date and extends usage/life of the park.

An interesting report that discusses many of the topics we have discussed in this thread is published by NumberTamer and discussed in pages 73-91 in the 2013 Minor League Attendance Analysis. I'll link to it, and if not allowed, mods please remove.

http://numbertamer.com/files/2013_Minor_League_Analysis.pdf


----------



## PCSPounder

ripham23232 said:


> There's no doubt that there is some creative accounting in terms of producing attendance numbers, I can't debate that. I also don't think that's anything new though. I don't have set numbers at the moment, but MiLB has been fairly steady over the past ten years with some ups and downs from year to year. Basically been between 41 and 43 million total. Went up actually from 2012 to 2013 by a quarter million. I don't think counting the falling number of new ballparks is an accurate way to measure interest. The more that built new parks in previous years means there is less to build now, if that makes sense. Also, a number of parks undergo renovations on a yearly basis that keeps them up to date and extends usage/life of the park.
> 
> An interesting report that discusses many of the topics we have discussed in this thread is published by NumberTamer and discussed in pages 73-91 in the 2013 Minor League Attendance Analysis. I'll link to it, and if not allowed, mods please remove.
> 
> http://numbertamer.com/files/2013_Minor_League_Analysis.pdf




Put it this way... how you know the numbers are good or not is, say...

...baseball returns to Portland in 2001. By the end of the season, the owners are trying to offload the team. They stick around a couple more years, the Pacific Coast League has to take the team over for a year and change, they groom an owner to take over, he tries to sell by the end of the year, and the eventual buyer tries to split the Beavers and Portland Timbers into separate stadiums, with the obvious outcome being the Timbers make the renovation and...

...after an aborted effort at the Memorial Coliseum site (right next to Rose Garden / Moda Center)...

...after a Portland neighborhood rejects using urban renewal money for the ballpark after having talks with the owner for two years...

...and after a Portland suburb tries and fails to overcome a private landowner's objections to a ballpark at a former cinema site...

...the Beavers leave town for Tucson, which had lost a team only 3 years prior.

In that process, a San Diego suburb was engaged (the Beavers were the Padres' affiliate), but that failed...

...Boise dipped their toes into the debate, but that failed...

...who knows how many other western cities were offered...

...and six years after the whole process began, a downtown El Paso stadium will begin hosting the Chihuahuas this year.

If attendance were truly maintaining, that process would have a few suitors. Of course, the real sales time took place when the economy nosedived. I know. Of course, sports are supposed to be downturn-resistant.

Meanwhile, Fresno built a ballpark and is basically continuing to bail out the losses.

Meanwhile, Memphis received a privately built ballpark, it was the envy of the league, but 10 years on the stadium went into forebearance as attendance dropped, and the city has bailed out the team by buying the ballpark.

Meanwhile, Tacoma got $30 million in public funds to renovate the stadium... or more specifically, install luxury suites, NOT change the old seating bowl, and REDUCE the capacity of the ballpark.

Cooper Stadium, the cited example in Columbus, has been replaced by a stadium with a smaller capacity.

There's more, but I don't want to rub this in.

***********************

You know, I can point to the ECHL Boise team. In the first few years, the owners (and their bought-and-paid-for radio talk show host) apparently lamented that they only built a 5,000-seat arena when they could probably have sold more tickets in a larger venue as part of a proposed convention center expansion. BTW, that's never happened, and the land is currently ticketed for the replacement ballpark that I've partially mentioned above (though the question of whether it should be more suitable to the current Short A team or a possible AAA team is still wide open). Over time, however, I have to believe they made the right call, and for other cities to really have a chance, they should build smaller than they plan to build. Boise's attendance has slowly leaked down (or, to a degree, they may have stopped puffing attendance so much... my last visit was a Saturday night in a pretty full arena), but I believe it would have happened faster if they'd built larger. Boise is also kind of unique from what I know: the only real concourse and all the concessions are inside the arena bowl (though you can buy tickets for tables in the upstairs sports bar area, and that's close to a top-down view), so you can kind of watch the game (or maybe get hit with a puck) while ordering your food. I can think of some offshoots of that format that I'd like to think could be done with private money.

Mostly, I shrug to read this. It's kind of painful. I'm not sure there's that many cities where hockey can really be staged. How do we think outside the box on this?


----------



## ripham23232

PCSPounder said:


> Put it this way... how you know the numbers are good or not is, say...
> 
> ...baseball returns to Portland in 2001. By the end of the season, the owners are trying to offload the team. They stick around a couple more years, the Pacific Coast League has to take the team over for a year and change, they groom an owner to take over, he tries to sell by the end of the year, and the eventual buyer tries to split the Beavers and Portland Timbers into separate stadiums, with the obvious outcome being the Timbers make the renovation and...
> 
> ...after an aborted effort at the Memorial Coliseum site (right next to Rose Garden / Moda Center)...
> 
> ...after a Portland neighborhood rejects using urban renewal money for the ballpark after having talks with the owner for two years...
> 
> ...and after a Portland suburb tries and fails to overcome a private landowner's objections to a ballpark at a former cinema site...
> 
> ...the Beavers leave town for Tucson, which had lost a team only 3 years prior.
> 
> In that process, a San Diego suburb was engaged (the Beavers were the Padres' affiliate), but that failed...
> 
> ...Boise dipped their toes into the debate, but that failed...
> 
> ...who knows how many other western cities were offered...
> 
> ...and six years after the whole process began, a downtown El Paso stadium will begin hosting the Chihuahuas this year.
> 
> If attendance were truly maintaining, that process would have a few suitors. Of course, the real sales time took place when the economy nosedived. I know. Of course, sports are supposed to be downturn-resistant.
> 
> Meanwhile, Fresno built a ballpark and is basically continuing to bail out the losses.
> 
> Meanwhile, Memphis received a privately built ballpark, it was the envy of the league, but 10 years on the stadium went into forebearance as attendance dropped, and the city has bailed out the team by buying the ballpark.
> 
> Meanwhile, Tacoma got $30 million in public funds to renovate the stadium... or more specifically, install luxury suites, NOT change the old seating bowl, and REDUCE the capacity of the ballpark.
> 
> Cooper Stadium, the cited example in Columbus, has been replaced by a stadium with a smaller capacity.
> 
> There's more, but I don't want to rub this in.
> 
> ***********************




Picking 3 situations where a team has moved or changed something regarding to capacity is not an indicator that a minor league sport is failing. You point out Portland, I'll point out Dayton. You point out Fresno, I'll point out Frisco. Tacoma, meet Indianapolis. We can go back and forth here. Minor League sports is the same as any other business, some will succeed handsomely, some will fail. When the failures happen, somebody thinks they have a solution and gives it another shot. When a guy wants to sell, it isn't always a bailing water scenario. But as a whole, minor league baseball has grown significantly in the past 30 years, and has maintained that level attendance wise over the past decade. Fan interest in the past 5-6 years is at an all-time high, thanks to things such as Moneyball, Baseball America, Baseball Prospectus and the like that have people more glued in than ever to the farm system and prospects. It sounds like to me, since a group in Portland tried, a group outside Portland tried, a group in San Diego tried, a group in Tucson tried, and now a group in El Paso is trying, that the process did have a few suitors. Five in fact. There's a lot more to this Portland pie than the fact the owners wanted out and had a hard time finding suitors as well. In my brief research, it appears the city wasn't overly serious about finding a venue for the baseball team after making their stadium soccer specific. That said, because a city government not wanting to proceed with a ballpark, doesn't mean minor league baseball is a failure.

With all that said, I think we're disagreeing to agree if that makes sense. The underlying issue here is that the continual upheaval of minor league teams and leagues does not lend itself to a strong business model. To me, it goes back to my point of the NHL needing to lead the charge. MLB is so heavily involved with MiLB at this point, its nearly impossible to separate the two. Until the NHL becomes truly invested in a "real" minor league system, its going to continue to be throwing things at the wall to see if they stick. My thoughts are the NHL is doing just fine with the current development system in place, so it will remain status quo.

As an aside, since you brought up Fresno and bailing losses on the ballpark: Stadiums aren't moneymakers. That's why owners try to minimize their own investment and let taxpayers foot the bill. No one should build a stadium and expect cash to pour in on that investment alone.


----------



## PCSPounder

ripham23232 said:


> Picking 3 situations where a team has moved or changed something regarding to capacity is not an indicator that a minor league sport is failing.




I said slipping, not failing. The problem to me is less the sport and more the likelihood of the next town building an arena for hockey. Truth is, the minor model as we know it is slipping in ALL sports save American soccer (and that's tenuous IMO).



ripham23232 said:


> To me, it goes back to my point of the NHL needing to lead the charge. MLB is so heavily involved with MiLB at this point, its nearly impossible to separate the two. Until the NHL becomes truly invested in a "real" minor league system, its going to continue to be throwing things at the wall to see if they stick. My thoughts are the NHL is doing just fine with the current development system in place, so it will remain status quo.




You get the owners you get instead of the owners you want. I frankly don't think the NHL could sustain a AA level on their income and their model, even after the new Rogers $$ slides in. They might be able to afford the AHL now... without asking for kickbacks from cities.



ripham23232 said:


> As an aside, since you brought up Fresno and bailing losses on the ballpark: Stadiums aren't moneymakers. That's why owners try to minimize their own investment and let taxpayers foot the bill. No one should build a stadium and expect cash to pour in on that investment alone.




The city of Fresno built that stadium and the taxpayers get worse news every time it comes up. That's also tied to the Selland fiasco. Again, I can make that a comment on baseball, but in terms of hockey, these kinds of events affect the whole gig. It makes taxpayers less likely to vote for what some of us are begging to see happen.


----------



## ripham23232

PCSPounder said:


> The city of Fresno built that stadium and the taxpayers get worse news every time it comes up. That's also tied to the Selland fiasco. Again, I can make that a comment on baseball, but in terms of hockey, these kinds of events affect the whole gig. It makes taxpayers less likely to vote for what some of us are begging to see happen.




That's the idea I was thinking was in play here. I think we're starting to see that shift now that more and more people are catching on to the play of sports owners shifting the costs of the ballpark to the taxpayers.

Like you said earlier, there needs to be some outside of the box ideas here on how to stabilize minor league hockey, but the greatest barrier in my mind is the fact that Joe Diehard Fan is the only one that really cares enough about minor league hockey.


----------



## tvboy11

ripham23232 said:


> That's the idea I was thinking was in play here. I think we're starting to see that shift now that more and more people are catching on to the play of sports owners shifting the costs of the ballpark to the taxpayers.




Boise's hockey venue was mentioned earlier. I recall reading that the town's minor-league baseball team got caught up in something like this a couple years ago where the team said they'd have to explore moving if they didn't get a new park. The taxpayers essentially replied with, "don't let the door hit you on the way out."


----------



## Prussian_Blue

ripham23232 said:


> Honestly, what I think needs to happen if minor league hockey is to be taken seriously is the same thing that happened with minor league baseball starting in the late 80's. Major League Baseball committed fully to building the minors as a ladder to the majors, invested in the lower levels of the sport and have helped groom minor league baseball into what it is now. It may be on the NHL at this point to give the sport some stability in that regard. We can all agree the AHL is doing ok, and undoubtedly serves as the AAA league. If AA is what they want, then put 30 teams across the country in smaller, regional based leagues as someone mentioned. (California league, Midwest, east, etc.) with set affiliation agreements in place and go from there. If the NHL deems it not important, then minor league hockey is going to continue to toil away in obscurity, with new teams and leagues coming and going every couple of years as it has for all of time. Teams folding and leagues being in hot water or popping up is nothing new. I think in some regards, the NHL has begun doing this, but it either needs to be full on or not done at all, it can't be a toes in the water thing.
> 
> To address another voiced idea, there's no way there can just be the one minor league, as someone suggested. The whole purpose to minor league hockey is to get these guys playing and developing talent, so if you expand AHL rosters and have 12 guys scratched each night, its doing to be a development nightmare.




  



Mayor Bee said:


> Minor league baseball in the 1970s was nearly dead; attendance was plummeting nationwide, instability ruled, teams were living check-to-check from affiliation money, and fan interest wasn't there.
> 
> Everything changed when Columbus got AAA baseball back after six years out. Cooper Stadium underwent a modernizing renovation that turned it into a small version of an MLB stadium, and it triggered a resurgence. It had skyboxes, new AstroTurf, and a new scoreboard. Most important, it had a view of the Columbus skyline over the fence in left-center. Other cities would follow suit, turning their local teams into a point of civic pride instead of just something to do for a night out. This brought local businesses and businessmen and philanthropists on board, bringing stability and a resurgence of baseball.
> 
> Stabilizing minor league hockey will require a similar effort. It may take a herculean effort for cities to build up the necessary infrastructure, and it may require a joint venture with other sports (basketball or indoor football), but it can be done.




  

Kudos to both of you; I think you've both hit the nail right on the head.

Three regional AA leagues -- Western League, Midwest League, and Eastern League. Ten teams each, with affiliations. 72 game balanced schedule in each (8 games vs. every other team in the league).

It's time to bring order out of this chaos...


----------



## PCSPounder

tvboy11 said:


> Boise's hockey venue was mentioned earlier. I recall reading that the town's minor-league baseball team got caught up in something like this a couple years ago where the team said they'd have to explore moving if they didn't get a new park. The taxpayers essentially replied with, "don't let the door hit you on the way out."




The time Boise should have hit on the ballpark was 20 years ago. They'd get over 100% capacity (plenty of standing room, + sometimes they'd let people stand along the outfield wall), there were sponsors oozing from every crevasse, and it was the clear thing to do in the summer if you weren't into fishing in Idaho.

In the space of 2/3 years:
- Boise State moved from I-AA (FCS) to I-A (FBS).
- The downtown hotel/hockey arena was built and a hockey team established.
- The Idaho Center was built in Nampa as an indoor home for the Snake River Stampede AND a CBA basketball team.
- Roaring Springs was built. (The one sports radio host in Boise at the time blames this more than anything else)
- The California Angels went another direction and started fielding kids out of high school instead of kids out of college. (BTW, that strategy eventually made the big team more competitive)

Poof went the crowds. By the time I started turning my attention back towards Portland, the whole bleacher section was pulled, they weren't filling the other seats, it got kind of dead.

I actually run with the theory that the current Boise State AD acts to own the town, making a new ballpark less likely to happen. Their obvious successes don't hurt in that quest. They kind of keep the Steelheads at arm's length, too.


----------



## Steelhead16

PCSPounder said:


> The time Boise should have hit on the ballpark was 20 years ago. They'd get over 100% capacity (plenty of standing room, + sometimes they'd let people stand along the outfield wall), there were sponsors oozing from every crevasse, and it was the clear thing to do in the summer if you weren't into fishing in Idaho.
> 
> In the space of 2/3 years:
> - Boise State moved from I-AA (FCS) to I-A (FBS).
> - The downtown hotel/hockey arena was built and a hockey team established.
> - The Idaho Center was built in Nampa as an indoor home for the Snake River Stampede AND a CBA basketball team.
> - Roaring Springs was built. (The one sports radio host in Boise at the time blames this more than anything else)
> - The California Angels went another direction and started fielding kids out of high school instead of kids out of college. (BTW, that strategy eventually made the big team more competitive)
> 
> Poof went the crowds. By the time I started turning my attention back towards Portland, the whole bleacher section was pulled, they weren't filling the other seats, it got kind of dead.
> 
> I actually run with the theory that the current Boise State AD acts to own the town, making a new ballpark less likely to happen. Their obvious successes don't hurt in that quest. They kind of keep the Steelheads at arm's length, too.




Boise State has never done anything as far as acknowledging anything else in town besides Boise State Football. They don't need to. Nothing else in town can even come close to knocking them off the mountain. The Steelheads do next to nothing in the way of marketing and don't seem to care if anyone shows up. The days of the standing room only crowds are long gone. The Hawks (baseball) are a short season A league team for the Cubs. The only local tie to the Cubs is Bill Buckner who has lived here for years and only a couple years ago began to work for the Hawks. It's basically glorified high school ball. They actually draw fairly well for what the stadium will hold. It's old and awful and couldn't support anything more than what it has. Both the Angels and Cubs have had murmers of AA or AAA teams coming here if a new stadium is built. 3 or 4 years ago Meridian (next door city) had come up with plans for a baseball stadium, but that went nowhere. Last couple of years a downtown stadium/arena proposal was floating around. There was talk of it needing guarantees of the Cubs promising a AAA team and the Steelheads and Stampede (NBA D-League) moving into the arena. That talk died over a year ago.
There are plenty of hockey fans in town if the Steelheads cared to invite them in but they don't. There are two adult leagues in town with a fair number of teams at 4 levels. The youth league has both house and travel teams at every level and there is also high school hockey as well. Boise State has a club team and there is a Tier III Junior A team as well.
As much as I would love to see a AAA baseball team here I am torn as to whether it would thrive or not. It's a strange sports town. There are so many transplants here (including myself) from bigger cities. It seems like most people are "brainwashed" into thinking that there are only major league sports in the world because that is what there is where they are from. When they get here Boise State football is the only thing they have heard of before they get here and attach themselves to that. It's very social and the tailgating is huge. People will try something else but the sport alone won't keep them. The product needs to have more to keep their interest, especially if it is a sport that they don't know much about. I think the only reason the Steelheads have survived this long is the design of the arena. As you mentioned, the concourse is right in the middle of the action. People mill around there and hang out and talk and drink and barely watch the game. It is a place to meet out of the cold outside. On most nights probably 20% of the crowd never sits in a seat. They just tailgate inside. 
I think minor league teams can survive in major league cities but it needs to be an event and not just a game. Minor league teams REALLY need to KNOW who their customers are and what will keep them coming back. Many of them get caught by looking at ticket buyers as fans and not as what they really are......customers.


----------



## sharksohnoes!

Wow. This thread has really derailed...

The Stockton Thunder are having a Bulls Appreciation Night in a few weeks. 

http://stocktonthunder.com/sfbulls/

Very classy move by the Thunder organization to have us out there. Especially after those *******s in Bakersfield basically rubbed it in out faces with their "RIP Bulls" night. The event in Stockton is actually being put together by the Bulls' former ticket manager. He was hired by the Thunder after being let go by the Bulls. Really happy for him because he is a great guy.


----------



## easternrefugee

sharksohnoes! said:


> Wow. This thread has really derailed...
> 
> The Stockton Thunder are having a Bulls Appreciation Night in a few weeks.
> 
> http://stocktonthunder.com/sfbulls/
> 
> Very classy move by the Thunder organization to have us out there. Especially after those *******s in Bakersfield basically rubbed it in out faces with their "RIP Bulls" night. The event in Stockton is actually being put together by the Bulls' former ticket manager. He was hired by the Thunder after being let go by the Bulls. Really happy for him because he is a great guy.




Are you serious??? Bako is VERY well known for their prmotions. EVERY year we end up on ESPN and various other news stations for the out of the box promos like:

1. toilet paper rolls with the Fresno Falcons on it
2. toilet bowl plungers with Stockton Thunder logo on them
3. Stockton Bankrupcy night

and the list goes on and on.....In short, it is a way of getting people into the seats. Maybe had SF had Bako's originality they would still be in business


----------



## adsfan

Cyclones Rock said:


> I'd rather have been a 28 year old NHL rookie at $550,000 minimum
> 
> Ruth's NHL deal had expired (roughly $130,00 per year) and he was on an AHL deal this season.
> 
> Agreed. He wasn't going to go to the NHL.
> 
> How are Bitetto and Liambas looking?




Bitetto is one of the top scorers for Milwaukee (3rd). Pretty good for a D-man.

Liambas is rounding out his game, 2g 4A in 34 games. Great forechecker!


----------



## adsfan

sharksohnoes! said:


> Tell that to 32-year-old Bracken Kearns!




Former Milwaukee Admiral who had holes in his game. Total NHL games equals 27.

His dad was a better player.


----------



## paul-laus

mfrerkes said:


> If the ECHL were a ten-team league, with four teams being owned by just two ownership groups and another being run covertly by the league, then more people would likely express cynicism about the ECHL's future as well. Yes, the E has some weak franchises that have been/will be going by the wayside. However, when you look at the big picture, the CHL is currently in a much more precarious position.
> 
> Furthermore, if you look at the teams who have recently jumped from the CHL to ECHL (Colorado, Evansville, Fort Wayne) it paints a vivid picture of reality. Rapid City and Allen are no dummies. They wanted to free themselves of the CHL this past summer, but were bound by legal restrictions. If those contracts didn't exist, you can bet the Rush and the Americans would already be in the ECHL this season.
> 
> The ECHL is far from perfect. It is also far from being extinct. The same cannot be said of the CHL.




Alright. Well to be fair, all I've heard from McKenna for years now is how the ECHL is not going to rush into markets without doing their due diligence and doing their homework first and are only looking at markets with solid ownership, a legitimate building to play in, and the potential for a fan base. Well using that logic, the ECHL completely missed the mark with San Francisco when it folds midseason a year and a half in. Its embarrassing how predictable this was. 

The truth is, and I think anyone can read between the lines here, the ECHL assumed that they were gonna poach a fair amount of Sharks fans with affordable minor pro hockey when the NHL shut down due to the labor impasse. The CHL tried to do the same with the Cuthroats in the Denver area with the Avalanche not playing. It was obvious that when the NHL started up again that attendance would plummet for these teams. 

There was no forethought by either league here and they both looked at the short-term benefits of hyping new markets and the status and prestige that goes along with expanding. Now they both look foolish and by no means am I downplaying how much of a tire-fire the CHL is, but rather am surprised at how nobody talks about how ridiculous he ECHL looks when folding their third franchise in five seasons in the middle of a season.....


----------



## tvboy11

Steelhead16 said:


> There are plenty of hockey fans in town if the Steelheads cared to invite them in but they don't. There are two adult leagues in town with a fair number of teams at 4 levels. The youth league has both house and travel teams at every level and there is also high school hockey as well. Boise State has a club team and there is a Tier III Junior A team as well.




I get what you're saying but, especially with the youth teams, the problem is that the parents are spending their money on their kids' team. That becomes the source of entertainment. Instead of season tickets, it becomes, "we'll catch a game here and there when we can" because the bulk of their investment - not only cash, but time - is on their children. They have their own games to worry about.

I try to catch a Steelheads game if business brings me to town. Was there a few weeks ago and it was packed. Great crowd. Was there last February for a mid-week game and it was pretty much exactly what you'd expect for a mid-week game. From what I hear, the D-League team would absolutely kill to draw a bad Steelheads crowd (in terms of actual behinds-in-seats).

As PCS laid out, the town/market seems to have changed pretty drastically. The newspaper is down to four pages and three of them are pretty much nothing but Boise State football (no matter the season). The "free" marketing and advertising well has completely dried up and traditional ads just don't have the bang that they had 10-15 years ago.


----------



## PCSPounder

tvboy11 said:


> I get what you're saying but, especially with the youth teams, the problem is that the parents are spending their money on their kids' team. That becomes the source of entertainment. Instead of season tickets, it becomes, "we'll catch a game here and there when we can" because the bulk of their investment - not only cash, but time - is on their children. They have their own games to worry about.




While there's a massive "I agree" in the answer, I'll go one better. Before ESPN started telling Boise State when to schedule football games, BSU did everything it could to avoid timing conflicts... with youth soccer. Also with the hunters. Games in September and October were always in the evening. Only in November would BSU play in the afternoon. BTW, after the BCS games subsided, ESPN tells BSU when to schedule games, and BSU fans complain of lack of sellouts. Well, you do have to add BCS-school pricing of tickets into that equation.



tvboy11 said:


> From what I hear, the D-League team would absolutely kill to draw a bad Steelheads crowd (in terms of actual behinds-in-seats).




You have understated this. With Boise, there is one advantage: strong segments of the business community keep the Steelheads from casting an eye elsewhere, and have kept the Stampede in town long past their sell-by date. I still can't help but think that the Portland Trail Blazers, who now own the Stampede, are likely considering the fairgrounds arena in Salem or even Memorial Coliseum in Portland for the Stampede.



tvboy11 said:


> As PCS laid out, the town/market seems to have changed pretty drastically. The newspaper is down to four pages and three of them are pretty much nothing but Boise State football (no matter the season). The "free" marketing and advertising well has completely dried up and traditional ads just don't have the bang that they had 10-15 years ago.




True... but I want to emphasize that this is happening EVERYWHERE. If I were an owner, it seems elementary to move advertising dollars from newspaper- and maybe radio- to television, but are my true fans more internet-savvy? If so, how do I reach them past the adblockers? In the pre-internet days, these weren't the easiest choices, but they were far more obvious then than they are now. Many TV stations don't even run sports segments on their news broadcasts anymore. Tagging a local ad on an ESPN broadcast more likely targets the fans of major sports who just aren't interested in season tickets. There's just no obvious answer here.


----------



## LadyStanley

http://sfappeal.com/2014/09/san-francisco-bulls/

STH still have not been repaid. No comments from sponsors.

However, interesting comment from league that as a "non-profit" entity, they do not have the funds to run a franchise (in place of its ownership).


----------



## returnoftheyeti

If anyone wants merch... 

http://www.sharksoutlet.com/sfbulls.html

http://www.sharksoutlet.com/sanfrbu.html


----------



## LadyStanley

Had Black Friday specials


----------

