# Brampton in trouble



## JungleJON

Team may leave if no new deal struck. Sounds familiar.


http://www.bramptonguardian.com/new...ing-beast-hockey-club-turns-to-city-for-help/


----------



## mfrerkes

Perhaps there is a smaller town about 30 miles away with an old, decrepit arena that the Beast could purchase for $1 and then plow $6,000,000 into renovations. Also, if that nearby city allows them to open up a casino/OTB facility, that would practically guarantee success.

But first, the Beast must string along negotiations with the city of Brampton for weeks and weeks...pretending that they're close to a deal, so fans can have their hopes suddenly dashed.


----------



## Neill99

*Newmarket ONT*

Move them to Newmarket Ont and call them the Saint's.


----------



## Neill99

*Cornwall Ont*

Maybe Cornwall???


----------



## Mightygoose

Sadly not too surprising. 

I've always wanted to see MLSE buy them and have the 2 levels of their farm teams under one umbrella.

At 1.5 Million loss per season, it's chump change for them!


----------



## JackalsKnuckles

This was Brampton's last shot at having a team I would say. The demographics of the area will not support hockey. Cricket or soccer maybe, but not hockey. 

Brampton drew horribly when the Battalion were there and even had winning teams. 

I also doubt that developmental hockey will work in Canada, although Newmarket and Cornwall both have buildings big enough to fit a ECHL team. 

Even the fans that Brampton does have are on the Facebook page complaining about all the roster turnover, which is unfortunately what you get with the ECHL. 

Sounds pretty clear in the article that the city of Brampton has no plans to purchase a sports complex and subsidize a team. 

The Mississauga Steelheads are 7 km down the road on the same street and also drawing poorly with the OHL.


----------



## nickp91

Team president and general manager Cary Kaplan urged the City to open talks to purchase the Powerade Centre from owners Realstar and cover the teamâ€™s projected losses of up to a maximum of $1.5 million for the upcoming season (2016-17)


----------



## Duke Guy

The Beast won/ lost record since they arrived of 68 wins and 108 losses doesn't help. Maybe if they had a winning record more fans will come to the games.


----------



## mfrerkes

nickp91 said:


> Team president and general manager Cary Kaplan urged the City to open talks to purchase the Powerade Centre from owners Realstar and cover the team’s projected losses of up to a maximum of $1.5 million for the upcoming season (2016-17)




I'll never understand why these owners believe they're entitled to a free ride from taxpayers. Don't get me wrong. I love hockey, but the idea that it's on the same level as schools, streets, sanitation, and fire protection is just wrong. Cities generally don't have enough money to underwrite losses for a minor league sports team. Imploring them to do exactly that makes the public even more cynical towards the notion of responsible government.

Professional hockey is a business. If it can't sustain itself in a given market, then the owner has several options: 1) Continue operating at a loss but seek private investors, 2) Sell the franchise to a different owner, 3) Relocate the franchise to a more profitable market, or 4) Fold the franchise.

How many more hockey teams need to fail in Brampton before people realize it just doesn't work there? Making the city pay for something that has a history of failure is not fair to the taxpayers of Brampton...or any other city where hockey isn't selling enough tickets.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

They lasted longer than I thought.

Its things like this that people need to stop thinking of a 30-30-30. There's not even a lot of stable AA franchises as it is now.


----------



## 210

Sports Enthusiast said:


> They lasted longer than I thought.
> 
> Its things like this that people need to stop thinking of a 30-30-30. There's not even a lot of stable AA franchises as it is now.




30-30-30 is 100% going to happen. You can bet every penny you have on it.


----------



## JDogindy

JackalsKnuckles said:


> This was Brampton's last shot at having a team I would say. The demographics of the area will not support hockey. Cricket or soccer maybe, but not hockey.
> 
> Brampton drew horribly when the Battalion were there and even had winning teams.
> 
> I also doubt that developmental hockey will work in Canada, although Newmarket and Cornwall both have buildings big enough to fit a ECHL team.
> 
> Even the fans that Brampton does have are on the Facebook page complaining about all the roster turnover, which is unfortunately what you get with the ECHL.
> 
> Sounds pretty clear in the article that the city of Brampton has no plans to purchase a sports complex and subsidize a team.
> 
> The Mississauga Steelheads are 7 km down the road on the same street and also drawing poorly with the OHL.




When I was ultra critical of the Beast in the CHL, one of my issues was the fact that Brampton had an OHL club for 15 years and barely supported them. The location of the arena is one thing, but even when the Battalion were winning, they had a hard time drawing. I think it's due to the demographics in the area, possibly, considering a fair portion of Brampton's population is Asian.

Frankly, I just think that GTA hockey on any level besides the AHL might be a thing of the past in a decade or so.


----------



## JackalsKnuckles

210 said:


> 30-30-30 is 100% going to happen. You can bet every penny you have on it.





The only way this will happen is if the NHL owns a large number of the teams.

With the western move the ECHL essentially lost some of its best drawing markets in Ontario and Bako, and replaced them with weaker markets such as Adirondack.

Manchester may survive, but certainly can't be as financially strong as when they were in the AHL. Maybe Norfolk can be OK since fans there have no other alternative for hockey.

If there is a large number of teams owned by the NHL I think fans in those cities will see through the whole scheme and realize that their team is not there to win at all, but is just a place to stash prospects and "develop talent". 

There are at least 5 existing markets on shaky ground as in Kalamazoo, Wheeling, Elmira, Brampton, and Evansville. Adirondack is not looking good either.

They will need to come up with at least another 7 markets to place teams to get to the 30.

This is not baseball. 30-30-30 may happen, but this will not benefit the fans in any way, makes no financial sense, and relies on a bottom-down approach being forced on markets. 

If they do get to 30 they will have to keep replacing 3-4 teams each year as if there were that many viable AA level markets they would already have teams, so you are resorting to areas with marginal support and ultimately a lot of turnover.


----------



## 210

The ECHL wants 30-30-30, and they will make it happen.

They're a lot more particular about who owns franchises now. Previously all you needed to get a team was a check to buy the team and an "I think I can do it"-type business plan. Slowly these older "hand to mouth" owners are going to get weeded out and replaced with solid ownership groups in legitimately viable markets.

Trust me, it might take a few years, but it is going to happen.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

JackalsKnuckles said:


> The only way this will happen is if the NHL owns a large number of the teams.
> 
> With the western move the ECHL essentially lost some of its best drawing markets in Ontario and Bako, and replaced them with weaker markets such as Adirondack.
> 
> Manchester may survive, but certainly can't be as financially strong as when they were in the AHL. Maybe Norfolk can be OK since fans there have no other alternative for hockey.
> 
> If there is a large number of teams owned by the NHL I think fans in those cities will see through the whole scheme and realize that their team is not there to win at all, but is just a place to stash prospects and "develop talent".
> 
> There are at least 5 existing markets on shaky ground as in Kalamazoo, Wheeling, Elmira, Brampton, and Evansville. Adirondack is not looking good either.
> 
> They will need to come up with at least another 7 markets to place teams to get to the 30.
> 
> This is not baseball. 30-30-30 may happen, but this will not benefit the fans in any way, makes no financial sense, and relies on a bottom-down approach being forced on markets.
> 
> If they do get to 30 they will have to keep replacing 3-4 teams each year as if there were that many viable AA level markets they would already have teams, so you are resorting to areas with marginal support and ultimately a lot of turnover.




Isn't Reading kind of teetering on shaky ground? I know they aren't as strong as they used to be. I believe a couple summers back they had to have the county step up and buy a portion of the team because apparently there was interest to move it to Baltimore?


----------



## Jackets Woodchuck

JackalsKnuckles said:


> The only way this will happen is if the NHL owns a large number of the teams.
> 
> With the western move the ECHL essentially lost some of its best drawing markets in Ontario and Bako, and replaced them with weaker markets such as Adirondack.
> 
> Manchester may survive, but certainly can't be as financially strong as when they were in the AHL. Maybe Norfolk can be OK since fans there have no other alternative for hockey.
> 
> If there is a large number of teams owned by the NHL I think fans in those cities will see through the whole scheme and realize that their team is not there to win at all, but is just a place to stash prospects and "develop talent".
> 
> There are at least 5 existing markets on shaky ground as in Kalamazoo, Wheeling, Elmira, Brampton, and Evansville. Adirondack is not looking good either.
> 
> They will need to come up with at least another 7 markets to place teams to get to the 30.
> 
> This is not baseball. 30-30-30 may happen, but this will not benefit the fans in any way, makes no financial sense, and relies on a bottom-down approach being forced on markets.
> 
> If they do get to 30 they will have to keep replacing 3-4 teams each year as if there were that many viable AA level markets they would already have teams, so you are resorting to areas with marginal support and ultimately a lot of turnover.




You put the words "develop talent" in quotation marks. Do you think there's no such thing as development in hockey (the only players worthy of the NHL are those who can skate right off an OHL rink and make an NHL roster) or that there's no actual development in the ECHL because all the legitimate NHLers make their North American pro debut in the NHL or AHL?


----------



## Jackets Woodchuck

JDogindy said:


> When I was ultra critical of the Beast in the CHL, one of my issues was the fact that Brampton had an OHL club for 15 years and barely supported them. The location of the arena is one thing, but even when the Battalion were winning, they had a hard time drawing. I think it's due to the demographics in the area, possibly, considering a fair portion of Brampton's population is Asian.
> 
> Frankly, I just think that GTA hockey on any level besides the AHL might be a thing of the past in a decade or so.




You see the GTA losing the OHL entirely in a decade?


----------



## JackalsKnuckles

Jackets Woodchuck said:


> You put the words "develop talent" in quotation marks. Do you think there's no such thing as development in hockey (the only players worthy of the NHL are those who can skate right off an OHL rink and make an NHL roster) or that there's no actual development in the ECHL because all the legitimate NHLers make their North American pro debut in the NHL or AHL?




Sure there is some talent developed in the ECHL. Goaltenders in particular may end up in the NHL after a stint in the ECHL. Is it fun to see a guy who played 6 or 7 games for your team 3 years ago make the NHL? Sure, but why spend money to watch development when winning is not the goal. Might as well show up at the morning skate and watch them do drills for free.

The issue is that the ECHL is only focused on development and not on winning. Tell an OHL GM that he has to focus on developing players over winning. Every other league in hockey, from Tier 3 juniors to the CHL to college hockey has teams in place to win games. If the coaches don't win, eventually they are fired. The ECHL clearly states that it is in place to develop players as its sole intended purpose. The AHL is also the same to a lesser extent. This can work in an area where fans have no other alternative for watching live hockey, but if there is another team within driving distance I think a lot of folks will choose a lower level of hockey to watch where winning is the goal.

We've all seen AHL or NHL rostered guys forced to get ice time by the parent club in the name of development when it is clear that either they don't want to be there, or were a mistake draft pick who is taking up a more talented player's spot. 

If the league were more about winning and entertainment then their promotional materials and marketing would focus more on what is happening today and how great the games are rather than keeping a scorecard of the alumni who are in the NHL.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

JackalsKnuckles said:


> The only way this will happen is if the NHL owns a large number of the teams.
> 
> With the western move the ECHL essentially lost some of its best drawing markets in Ontario and Bako, and replaced them with weaker markets such as Adirondack.
> 
> Manchester may survive, but certainly can't be as financially strong as when they were in the AHL. Maybe Norfolk can be OK since fans there have no other alternative for hockey.
> 
> If there is a large number of teams owned by the NHL I think fans in those cities will see through the whole scheme and realize that their team is not there to win at all, but is just a place to stash prospects and "develop talent".
> 
> There are at least 5 existing markets on shaky ground as in Kalamazoo, Wheeling, Elmira, Brampton, and Evansville. Adirondack is not looking good either.
> 
> They will need to come up with at least another 7 markets to place teams to get to the 30.
> 
> This is not baseball. 30-30-30 may happen, but this will not benefit the fans in any way, makes no financial sense, and relies on a bottom-down approach being forced on markets.
> 
> If they do get to 30 they will have to keep replacing 3-4 teams each year as if there were that many viable AA level markets they would already have teams, so you are resorting to areas with marginal support and ultimately a lot of turnover.




I agree with your post entirely. I think the 30-30-30 model over any considerable time frame is a pipe dream unless NHL teams go into direct ownership or heavy subsidization of ECHL franchises.


The ECHL has huge issues, many of which, are linked to its "overaffiliated", if you will, model.

It's not just playing players who are bad-especially goalies-over better players, it's the overall style of hockey being played. The ECHL is a relatively low minor league and most of the fans aren't sophisticated hockey fans. As fighting and hitting become more rare by the season, these fans-along with sophisticated ones who enjoy the physical elements of the game-are becoming bored with the product. People would much rather see some heavy duty fighting than watch David Desharnais, Scott Darling, Anthony Bittetto, Logan Shaw and Byron Froese-all former Cyclones who are now in the NHL. Most fans at a Cincinnati game couldn't even name 8 players on the team if you put a gun to their heads. I doubt most could name more than one Cyclones alumnus currently playing in the NHL. For most in attendance at any given game, it's about action, goals and fighting to them, not "development" or even winning.

The Cincinnati management team has done a great job marketing the team. It appears to be healthy to me and I'm not worried about it leaving. But, there are so many teams in the league whose real attendance is probably in the 50-66% of what is announced and that is not good.

My list of health of ECHL franchises:

Good to Excellent:

Toledo, Colorado, Missouri, Fort Wayne, Cincinnati (5)

Mediocre Health:

Florida, Indy, Orlando, Quad Cities, Atlanta, Alaska, Idaho, Wheeling , Utah (9)

Poor Health:

Brampton, Evansville, South Carolina, Greenville, Reading, Elmira, Kalamazoo (7)

No opinion:

Adirondack, Norfolk, Manchester, Tulsa, Wichita, Rapid City, Allen(7)

By my measure, over half of the teams are not in real good shape and could be listed as doubtful to be in the ECHL anywhere from 1 to, say, 10 years down the line. 

I think the ECHL is 100% committed to its current business model (30/30/30, heavy NHL/AHL influence) and until the structure starts to crumble, I wouldn't expect any alteration in their basic strategy.

The 30/30/30 cannot be achieved long term without NHL subsidy. I can see the NHL going either way on ECHL subsidization.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

You guys are way overvaluing the ECHL because idiots like McKenna and Babik have brainwashed you. Sure....there's talent but not significant enough though either. That is the overall point. The only position where a guy starting in the E has hopes for a real shot is goalie. Its a fickle position to begin with. You see NHL backups the next year in the AHL and vice versa. I just don't think the demand is there. There's not even 30 solid franchises now. Heck believe it or not if you look at the AHL and ECHL outside of like 5-10 teams most aren't profitable. But when an NHL team owns an ahl team for many that won't matter. I don't think the NHL cares about the ECHL the way the ECHL wants them to. You have a purpose but its not as big as you think. Don't think teams are gunna be lining up to own an ECHL team. The only time its happened is Trenton.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Jackets Woodchuck said:


> You put the words "develop talent" in quotation marks. Do you think there's no such thing as development in hockey (the only players worthy of the NHL are those who can skate right off an OHL rink and make an NHL roster) or that there's no actual development in the ECHL because all the legitimate NHLers make their North American pro debut in the NHL or AHL?




Obviously there's some just not a lot. Keywords. 

In baseball almost nobody goes right to the MLB. In the NHL? Guys like Ovechkin don't spend a day trolling the minor league scene. That's the difference.


----------



## JDogindy

Sports Enthusiast said:


> You guys are way overvaluing the ECHL because idiots like McKenna and Babik have brainwashed you. Sure....there's talent but not significant enough though either. That is the overall point. The only position where a guy starting in the E has hopes for a real shot is goalie. Its a fickle position to begin with. You see NHL backups the next year in the AHL and vice versa. I just don't think the demand is there. There's not even 30 solid franchises now. Heck believe it or not if you look at the AHL and ECHL outside of like 5-10 teams most aren't profitable. But when an NHL team owns an ahl team for many that won't matter. I don't think the NHL cares about the ECHL the way the ECHL wants them to. You have a purpose but its not as big as you think. Don't think teams are gunna be lining up to own an ECHL team. The only time its happened is Trenton.




I really don't see how we're all "brainwashed". Yeah, I like the ECHL, but I don't drink the Kool-Aid, because I know that the league is always gonna be on shaky grounds. As Cyclones Rock pointed out, at best, half of the league is in some stable condition, and even then, I don't see all of those teams being around 10 years from now or even 5 years from now. Hell, in 2026, if the ECHL's still around, there's a better chance of it being a 16 team league as opposed to a 30-32 team league, even if the NHL decided to have en edict about even standing with their minor league system.

The ECHL will always want to be regarded as no higher than what it truly is; a depositing point for players whose best isn't good enough to be on an NHL practice squad. And, with the AHL, do any NHL teams, at any time, have too many projects on their hands that they wished they had a second alternative to develop them? This isn't MILB to the MLB, this is semi-pro league wanting to do everything to impress the big boys.

However, and we have this argument all the time, and it makes me question why you bother sometimes, is the fact that, in a lot of our situations, whenever we argue about ECHL-level hockey versus no level of hockey at all in our markets, you always seem to argue that no hockey is better. I mean, I'd love for Indianapolis to have an AHL team, but that'll happen when Elvis comes back on a spaceship to collect what was put in the safe deposit box that's buried underneath a new business skyscraper downtown. So, I gotta work with the hand that I'm dealt. I don't see any Fuel player ever making the NHL, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna be all "Oh, screw them! They're the ECHL".


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

JDogindy said:


> I really don't see how we're all "brainwashed". Yeah, I like the ECHL, but I don't drink the Kool-Aid, because I know that the league is always gonna be on shaky grounds. As Cyclones Rock pointed out, at best, half of the league is in some stable condition, and even then, I don't see all of those teams being around 10 years from now or even 5 years from now. Hell, in 2026, if the ECHL's still around, there's a better chance of it being a 16 team league as opposed to a 30-32 team league, even if the NHL decided to have en edict about even standing with their minor league system.
> 
> The ECHL will always want to be regarded as no higher than what it truly is; a depositing point for players whose best isn't good enough to be on an NHL practice squad. And, with the AHL, do any NHL teams, at any time, have too many projects on their hands that they wished they had a second alternative to develop them? This isn't MILB to the MLB, this is semi-pro league wanting to do everything to impress the big boys.
> 
> However, and we have this argument all the time, and it makes me question why you bother sometimes, is the fact that, in a lot of our situations, whenever we argue about ECHL-level hockey versus no level of hockey at all in our markets, you always seem to argue that no hockey is better. I mean, I'd love for Indianapolis to have an AHL team, but that'll happen when Elvis comes back on a spaceship to collect what was put in the safe deposit box that's buried underneath a new business skyscraper downtown. So, I gotta work with the hand that I'm dealt. I don't see any Fuel player ever making the NHL, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna be all "Oh, screw them! They're the ECHL".




You're top point is right on. That's what I'm trying to say. They have 28 now...quite a few shaky teams hanging by a thread. 

I'm not an NHL fan at all but I just don't like the false advertisement. There's junior hockey better than Tue ECHL. I'd rather see the better junior hockey in theory. I wouldn't MIMD this level but I don't enjoy how you're supposed to tell a AA team develop me all these guys...oh by the way they really don't fit in our long term plans for 99.9% of the cases but do it anyway. In the end its all monetary. Makes it easier to field a roster. Get guys sent to you on a two way AHL/ECHL contract.


----------



## Avsrule2022

Sports Enthusiast said:


> You're top point is right on. That's what I'm trying to say. They have 28 now...quite a few shaky teams hanging by a thread.
> 
> I'm not an NHL fan at all but I just don't like the false advertisement. There's junior hockey better than Tue ECHL. I'd rather see the better junior hockey in theory. I wouldn't MIMD this level but I don't enjoy how you're supposed to tell a AA team develop me all these guys...oh by the way they really don't fit in our long term plans for 99.9% of the cases but do it anyway. In the end its all monetary. Makes it easier to field a roster. Get guys sent to you on a two way AHL/ECHL contract.




So should the ECHL just cut all ties with the NHL and AHL? Should they say "No we don't develop players, this is just a league for guys who won't ever make the NHL? That would be a bad business decision. Lining up with the NHL? Good business decision. Maybe there will never be a stable 30 teams, but I believe the league will survive over any other than the NHL or AHL. Especially if they line themselves up with the NHL. I'll take a 16 team league as long as theres a team in my town!


----------



## JackalsKnuckles

Cyclones Rock said:


> I agree with your post entirely. I think the 30-30-30 model over any considerable time frame is a pipe dream unless NHL teams go into direct ownership or heavy subsidization of ECHL franchises.
> 
> 
> The ECHL has huge issues, many of which, are linked to its "overaffiliated", if you will, model.
> 
> It's not just playing players who are bad-especially goalies-over better players, it's the overall style of hockey being played. The ECHL is a relatively low minor league and most of the fans aren't sophisticated hockey fans. As fighting and hitting become more rare by the season, these fans-along with sophisticated ones who enjoy the physical elements of the game-are becoming bored with the product. People would much rather see some heavy duty fighting than watch David Desharnais, Scott Darling, Anthony Bittetto, Logan Shaw and Byron Froese-all former Cyclones who are now in the NHL. Most fans at a Cincinnati game couldn't even name 8 players on the team if you put a gun to their heads. I doubt most could name more than one Cyclones alumnus currently playing in the NHL. For most in attendance at any given game, it's about action, goals and fighting to them, not "development" or even winning.
> 
> The Cincinnati management team has done a great job marketing the team. It appears to be healthy to me and I'm not worried about it leaving. But, there are so many teams in the league whose real attendance is probably in the 50-66% of what is announced and that is not good.
> 
> My list of health of ECHL franchises:
> 
> Good to Excellent:
> 
> Toledo, Colorado, Missouri, Fort Wayne, Cincinnati (5)
> 
> Mediocre Health:
> 
> Florida, Indy, Orlando, Quad Cities, Atlanta, Alaska, Idaho, Wheeling , Utah (9)
> 
> Poor Health:
> 
> Brampton, Evansville, South Carolina, Greenville, Reading, Elmira, Kalamazoo (7)
> 
> No opinion:
> 
> Adirondack, Norfolk, Manchester, Tulsa, Wichita, Rapid City, Allen(7)
> 
> By my measure, over half of the teams are not in real good shape and could be listed as doubtful to be in the ECHL anywhere from 1 to, say, 10 years down the line.
> 
> I think the ECHL is 100% committed to its current business model (30/30/30, heavy NHL/AHL influence) and until the structure starts to crumble, I wouldn't expect any alteration in their basic strategy.
> 
> The 30/30/30 cannot be achieved long term without NHL subsidy. I can see the NHL going either way on ECHL subsidization.





You hit the nail on the head as far as being bored with the product and the lack of physicality in the current ECHL game. I don't think there needs to be a fight every game for the average fan who wants to attend 4 or 5 times a year to have a good time, but when it is obvious that there is no hostility between the teams, there are no rivalries since the rosters are different nearly every time 2 teams play, and there is no emotion in the games, then fans are kind of wondering where all the excitement is.

I will say the ECHL marketing scheme is ingenious in putting so much emphasis on the NHL affiliation as it can get the Joe Schmo who watches the NHL on TV on the weekends to buy a ticket and get into the door. Where they fail deliver is that once that fan is in the door they don't get a very exciting product to watch. The longtime fans have seen the decline in entertainment value if they have been around. I missed less than a dozen games total over 8 years with the Jackals until last season. Finally I said enough is enough after the product getting more boring each season. 

I also kinda ruined it for myself as I started travelling to different arenas about 6 or 7 years ago and have seen almost every pro, semi pro, college and junior league in the Eastern half of the US and Canada. It was at that point that I realized the ECHL product was so lacking. Junior A or Junior B in Ontario or Quebec offers a great product, strong rivalries and lots of emotion. So does the USHL, NAHL, and even leagues most fans ignore such as the NA3HL. Heck- there is no fighting in pro hockey now anyway so despite the cages college hockey is actually more physical these days than many leagues. Had I not seen the other options in person I would probably still be OK with what the ECHL is but being exposed to all of the other options and experiencing them first hand it has made me realize the ECHL is near the bottom of the list when it comes to entertainment value.

Why am I expressing these thoughts on this forum instead of staying away? Because I am in an ECHL market and am just trying to spread the word that there are a ton of more entertaining leagues out there for the fans, and they don't necessarily have to be higher level leagues. You'd be surprised how fun a Junior team can be (even at a low level) and it should not be seen as a step down in entertainment, which is why most fans attend games in the first place.


----------



## Cacciaguida

I still hope for the best with Brampton. Honestly the team needs stability if the market wants any chance to succeed. The fanbase needs time to grow.

I wish MLSE would buy the team. It would be a huge step forwards.


What would Brampton have to gain from an empty arena?


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Avsrule2002 said:


> So should the ECHL just cut all ties with the NHL and AHL? Should they say "No we don't develop players, this is just a league for guys who won't ever make the NHL? That would be a bad business decision. Lining up with the NHL? Good business decision. Maybe there will never be a stable 30 teams, but I believe the league will survive over any other than the NHL or AHL. Especially if they line themselves up with the NHL. I'll take a 16 team league as long as theres a team in my town!




Its actually backwards. The NHL should cut ties with them. They don't really need them. You can assign a guy anywhere though. The jackals got a goalie sent to them by St. Louis this year and they aren't affiliated together. I'm not sure how they convinced the NHL to even get in bed with them on the affiliations stuff because if you look at the structure its fools gold.


----------



## mfrerkes

Cacciaguida said:


> What would Brampton have to gain from an empty arena?




As things currently stand, it sounds like Brampton has a mostly empty arena with the Beast playing there. I highly doubt the city will find a significant return-on-investment if it dumps seven figures into keeping the team solvent. This is where the local market needs to step up and decide if keeping the ECHL around is a priority. Minor league hockey is an entertainment-related business, not a vital municipal service requiring taxpayer support.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Elmira has/had the same problem. Not much else going on at the place outside of hockey and the hockey wasn't/isn't making money. I wonder how common that is for some of these arenas. I'd picture a place like Wheeling and Adirondack being similar.


----------



## mfrerkes

Sports Enthusiast said:


> I wonder how common that is for some of these arenas.




Given the massive amount of market turnover we see in minor league hockey, I'd imagine this is a very common problem. Cities build these arenas and hope that everybody in town will suddenly become a hockey fan to keep the bills paid. Unfortunately, it usually becomes a novelty act whose popularity fades over time.

That was happening in Evansville, as the IceMen's attendance has been going downhill for several years. Most people originally showed up to see the shiny new arena, and once the hockey no longer held their interest, ticket sales fell off quickly.

In the case of Brampton, it sounds like local interest in hockey has been very weak for quite some time. I don't think making the city subsidize a professional team would help bring back fans, either.


----------



## royals119

Sports Enthusiast said:


> Isn't Reading kind of teetering on shaky ground? I know they aren't as strong as they used to be. I believe a couple summers back they had to have the county step up and buy a portion of the team because apparently there was interest to move it to Baltimore?




No, not really. The team was originally owned 50/50 by SMG and AEG (Kings parent company). When AEG was looking to sell their half there was a guy from Baltimore who supposedly was interested in buying the team. The government authority that was created to build the arena and pay the bonds ended up buying AEG's half of the team. It is a separate entity from the county government that receives a portion of the hotel taxes collected in the county, plus income from the operations of the arena. 

Two years ago a local businessman (Jack Gulati) bought the entire time (both the arena authority's share and SMG's share). He is a rich old guy who has started and sold multiple businesses, and is also an investor in the new Doubletree Hotel that opened across the street from the arena in November. The team has solid backing now, and for the forseeable future. They have invested quite a bit of money in upgrades to the building (new scoreboard, new lighting, new sound system, new dasherboard system and glass). The drop in attendance that has been occurring over the last several years has leveled off, and with the investment in marketing, upgrades in the game day experience, and the affiliation with Philly I expect to see some modest improvements in attendance going forward.


----------



## royals119

Sports Enthusiast said:


> You have a purpose but its not as big as you think. Don't think NHL teams are gunna be lining up to own an ECHL team. The only time its happened is Trenton.




That isn't correct. The Royals were originally owned by the Kings, then the Kings owned both the Royals and the Reign for a while. Now they own the Monarchs.


----------



## jason2020

Cacciaguida said:


> I still hope for the best with Brampton. Honestly the team needs stability if the market wants any chance to succeed. The fanbase needs time to grow.
> 
> I wish MLSE would buy the team. It would be a huge step forwards.
> 
> 
> What would Brampton have to gain from an empty arena?




I would be careful what i wish for if Mlse was to buy them i could see them moving the Echl team and moving the Ahl team to Brampton.


----------



## Disengage

jason2020 said:


> I would be careful what i wish for if Mlse was to buy them i could see them moving the Echl team and moving the Ahl team to Brampton.




Yeah no, there's 0% chance of MLSE moving the Marlies to Brampton.


----------



## jason2020

Disengage said:


> Yeah no, there's 0% chance of MLSE moving the Marlies to Brampton.




Don't be to sure about that.


----------



## Disengage

jason2020 said:


> Don't be to sure about that.




Why? There's no point to move to a smaller arena that they don't operate in an area that has demographics less conducive to hockey.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

royals119 said:


> No, not really. The team was originally owned 50/50 by SMG and AEG (Kings parent company). When AEG was looking to sell their half there was a guy from Baltimore who supposedly was interested in buying the team. The government authority that was created to build the arena and pay the bonds ended up buying AEG's half of the team. It is a separate entity from the county government that receives a portion of the hotel taxes collected in the county, plus income from the operations of the arena.
> 
> Two years ago a local businessman (Jack Gulati) bought the entire time (both the arena authority's share and SMG's share). He is a rich old guy who has started and sold multiple businesses, and is also an investor in the new Doubletree Hotel that opened across the street from the arena in November. The team has solid backing now, and for the forseeable future. They have invested quite a bit of money in upgrades to the building (new scoreboard, new lighting, new sound system, new dasherboard system and glass). The drop in attendance that has been occurring over the last several years has leveled off, and with the investment in marketing, upgrades in the game day experience, and the affiliation with Philly I expect to see some modest improvements in attendance going forward.




You say old rich guy. If he kicks the bucket(the fact that he's old)then I guess it gets interesting. Maybe attendance will come back to a degree...maybe it won't. Personally I think the league product has a lot to do with it. I would never buy season tickets in a city like Elmira or reading. You're seeing musical rosters because a lot of AHL poaching goes on due to location. They are the closest locations for a lot of teams to just get guys "quick" the goal is to not even win really. Though I've been fortunate enough to see exceptions to the rule in Martinson and Bingham but coaches like then for this level don't grow on trees.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

royals119 said:


> That isn't correct. The Royals were originally owned by the Kings, then the Kings owned both the Royals and the Reign for a while. Now they own the Monarchs.




Well they obviously at one point became a 50/50 venture on the Royals. So what happened? The fact they got a team in Ontario or did they just start to lose interest? Even then its an example of it was done but over time they went to a half share to now gone. I still stay with my stance that teams aren't lining up to own ECHL teams and the supply vastly beats out the demand. The demand just isn't there except for the odd team that may decide to do it. I would love to ask them if they've actually turned a profit in the ECHL in the 15 or so years they've been in it as owners.


----------



## royals119

Sports Enthusiast said:


> You say old rich guy. If he kicks the bucket(the fact that he's old)then I guess it gets interesting. Maybe attendance will come back to a degree...maybe it won't. Personally I think the league product has a lot to do with it. I would never buy season tickets in a city like Elmira or reading. You're seeing musical rosters because a lot of AHL poaching goes on due to location. They are the closest locations for a lot of teams to just get guys "quick" the goal is to not even win really. Though I've been fortunate enough to see exceptions to the rule in Martinson and Bingham but coaches like then for this level don't grow on trees.




He is 71 I believe, so not an immediate concern. I'm sure he has some estate planning as well, so things would continue on for at least some period of time if something happened to him.

You do have to understand what you are getting when you buy ECHL tickets. The rosters are going to fluctuate, that is they way it works. If you can't accept that, then you won't be happy. As a 15 year season ticket holder for the Royals I don't have a problem with it. We typically use ~50 players per season, and less than 10 will come back next year. Yes, they are developing players for the next level, but for the last several years they have also managed to win games, and even a championship. It does come down to the coach in most cases. Can he handle the changing roster, can he find replacements when needed, can he balance having enough high end talent with having enough ECHL lifers who will be happy to play a full season in Reading without a callup? 



Sports Enthusiast said:


> Well they obviously at one point became a 50/50 venture on the Royals. So what happened? The fact they got a team in Ontario or did they just start to lose interest? Even then its an example of it was done but over time they went to a half share to now gone. I still stay with my stance that teams aren't lining up to own ECHL teams and the supply vastly beats out the demand. The demand just isn't there except for the odd team that may decide to do it. I would love to ask them if they've actually turned a profit in the ECHL in the 15 or so years they've been in it as owners.




The Royals were originally 50/50 between the Kings (AEG) and SMG (arena management company). When the Kings had the opportunity to put a team in Ontario they went for it, obviously thinking long term about putting their AHL team there. They didn't need two ECHL teams, so they eventually sold their half of the Royals. 

The point is, the Kings see value in owning an ECHL team. They have done it continuously for 15 years, and for at least a few years they owned two teams.


----------



## Captain Crash

royals119 said:


> The Royals were originally 50/50 between the Kings (AEG) and SMG (arena management company). When the Kings had the opportunity to put a team in Ontario they went for it, obviously thinking long term about putting their AHL team there. They didn't need two ECHL teams, so they eventually sold their half of the Royals.
> 
> The point is, the Kings see value in owning an ECHL team. They have done it continuously for 15 years, and for at least a few years they owned two teams.




Not to mention Calgary and Edmonton own their ECHL teams.


----------



## Canucks21

royals119 said:


> The point is, the Kings see value in owning an ECHL team. They have done it continuously for 15 years, and for at least a few years they owned two teams.






Captain Crash said:


> Not to mention Calgary and Edmonton own their ECHL teams.




The Hurricanes also own the Florida Everblades Franchise


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Canucks21 said:


> The Hurricanes also own the Florida Everblades Franchise




Are you sure about that? I know that they own the Checkers but somehow I'm not sure how that would make sense because the Checkers were an old ECHL team and they were both in the same division.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Captain Crash said:


> Not to mention Calgary and Edmonton own their ECHL teams.




Wasn't always the case for Calgary as the Adirondack team was just swapped for the Stockton team. I believe Stockton was independently owned. I believe the AHL going West and the flopping had something to do with that. I can't imagine Adirondack lasts long though unless they get some boost in attendance.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

royals119 said:


> He is 71 I believe, so not an immediate concern. I'm sure he has some estate planning as well, so things would continue on for at least some period of time if something happened to him.
> 
> You do have to understand what you are getting when you buy ECHL tickets. The rosters are going to fluctuate, that is they way it works. If you can't accept that, then you won't be happy. As a 15 year season ticket holder for the Royals I don't have a problem with it. We typically use ~50 players per season, and less than 10 will come back next year. Yes, they are developing players for the next level, but for the last several years they have also managed to win games, and even a championship. It does come down to the coach in most cases. Can he handle the changing roster, can he find replacements when needed, can he balance having enough high end talent with having enough ECHL lifers who will be happy to play a full season in Reading without a callup?
> 
> 
> 
> The Royals were originally 50/50 between the Kings (AEG) and SMG (arena management company). When the Kings had the opportunity to put a team in Ontario they went for it, obviously thinking long term about putting their AHL team there. They didn't need two ECHL teams, so they eventually sold their half of the Royals.
> 
> The point is, the Kings see value in owning an ECHL team. They have done it continuously for 15 years, and for at least a few years they owned two teams.




I guess. Just sucks going to the arena every night wondering who is actually there. It kills the chemistry. I wouldn't have that big of an issue with it if guys really went somewhere on the norm going forward. Most will be lucky to stay in the AHL for the rest of their careers. 

It certainly hasn't hurt reading that they for awhile had some continuity on the team with guys like Gordon, Caruthers, Labelle and even Tifu. The lockout that year definitely helped them. They had a stacked playoff roster because of it and the higher up teams were bad and that's another thing I hate about the league. The AHL season ends like a week later. So you're often shortchanged guys for the first round because the AHL teams are greedy even if they are out of the race. The playoffs are a crapshoot but getting guys back can make or break you. I'll never figure out why these leagues can't end their season on the same weekend. It'd be nice if the ECHL recognized this. 

I guess I just don't see whatever value they see in it because they are in the minority. I know Manchester wasn't always a for sure go when the AHL West was announced it was happening.


----------



## offkilter

Sports Enthusiast said:


> Are you sure about that? I know that they own the Checkers but somehow I'm not sure how that would make sense because the Checkers were an old ECHL team and they were both in the same division.




It is correct. Charlotte is now and always has been owned by a seperate ownership(Michael Khan) than the Carolina Hurricane's Peter Karminos. They only affiliated with and bought into the Hurricanes when the Checkers ownership jumped up to the AHL in 2011. When they were ECHL they were most of the time affiliated with the New York Rangers.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

offkilter said:


> It is correct. Charlotte is now and always has been owned by a seperate ownership(Michael Khan) than the Carolina Hurricane's Peter Karminos. They only affiliated with and bought into the Hurricanes when the Checkers ownership jumped up to the AHL in 2011. When they were ECHL they were most of the time affiliated with the New York Rangers.




Seems bizarre they'd own them and not make a play for the Checkers. When did this happen because I thought I recalled reading an article a couple years back that the Everblades owner was looking to sell and there were two different options. One where the team and the arena came together and one just for the arena and the arena was apparently going to become something else and then the Everblades would have been no more I guess.


----------



## Canucks21

Sports Enthusiast said:


> Seems bizarre they'd own them and not make a play for the Checkers. When did this happen because I thought I recalled reading an article a couple years back that the Everblades owner was looking to sell and there were two different options. One where the team and the arena came together and one just for the arena and the arena was apparently going to become something else and then the Everblades would have been no more I guess.




Peter Karmanos Jr. The owner of the Hurricanes was trying to sell the Everblades but couldnt get a good enough offer


----------



## BladesFan10

Canucks21 said:


> Peter Karmanos Jr. The owner of the Hurricanes was trying to sell the Everblades but couldnt get a good enough offer




Their trying to sell the franchise and arena for $20 million. Its a package deal and from what I've been told by management and in the press releases, neither will be sold separate from the other. 

The only reason their was talk of it being split is if Lee county would have bought the arena and leased it to the Blades for 20 years, which the county has turned down.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

BladesFan10 said:


> Their trying to sell the franchise and arena for $20 million. Its a package deal and from what I've been told by management and in the press releases, neither will be sold separate from the other.
> 
> The only reason their was talk of it being split is if Lee county would have bought the arena and leased it to the Blades for 20 years, which the county has turned down.




Probably a smart move. He arena business can work but chances are you will just lose a lot of money and I think it would be something that ticks off a lot of residents because while you could argue an arena can bring revenue in a few ways there's also more important things in American cities that money should go to first from a practical standpoint. Its a dividing "political" issue that from both sides I could understand. They are probably better off that they didn't do that.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Canucks21 said:


> Peter Karmanos Jr. The owner of the Hurricanes was trying to sell the Everblades but couldnt get a good enough offer




Even though this was a few years ago are they still being shopped in any way? I still find it odd that any NHL owner would want an ECHL team.


----------



## BladesFan10

Sports Enthusiast said:


> Even though this was a few years ago are they still being shopped in any way? I still find it odd that any NHL owner would want an ECHL team.




Karmanos has owned the team (or a super majority of it) since the teams inception. Back then, it may have been a good business venture. Even now the team is making an operational profit, though I suspect that means that there still losing some money every year, but not in the amounts of other ECHL teams.


----------



## JDogindy

Sports Enthusiast said:


> You're top point is right on. That's what I'm trying to say. They have 28 now...quite a few shaky teams hanging by a thread.
> 
> I'm not an NHL fan at all but I just don't like the false advertisement. There's junior hockey better than Tue ECHL. I'd rather see the better junior hockey in theory. I wouldn't MIMD this level but I don't enjoy how you're supposed to tell a AA team develop me all these guys...oh by the way they really don't fit in our long term plans for 99.9% of the cases but do it anyway. In the end its all monetary. Makes it easier to field a roster. Get guys sent to you on a two way AHL/ECHL contract.




Don't take this the wrong way, but I wished you had mentioned your love of the developmental leagues more like the NAHL, USHL, and NA3HL far more often, because I do agree that they have more intensity than some other professional leagues. If you were gonna complain about the ECHL, mention the alternatives you'd suggest as well.

Though, really, I'm looking at the 3 teams that have issues right now that's being discussed here (Brampton, Evansville, and Kalamazoo), and Brampton is finished as a market for any level of hockey. Evansville has the NA3HL Thunderbolts and they have a healthy support level in the local media and fanbase, and just name the developmental team the Wings in Kalamazoo and they'll still go to them, to be honest.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

JDogindy said:


> Don't take this the wrong way, but I wished you had mentioned your love of the developmental leagues more like the NAHL, USHL, and NA3HL far more often, because I do agree that they have more intensity than some other professional leagues. If you were gonna complain about the ECHL, mention the alternatives you'd suggest as well.
> 
> Though, really, I'm looking at the 3 teams that have issues right now that's being discussed here (Brampton, Evansville, and Kalamazoo), and Brampton is finished as a market for any level of hockey. Evansville has the NA3HL Thunderbolts and they have a healthy support level in the local media and fanbase, and just name the developmental team the Wings in Kalamazoo and they'll still go to them, to be honest.




You could add the big one....the OHL. Only thing is while these guys have more passion they really aren't allowed to fight or anything so that is taken away. I don't need to see a fight to be intrigued but knowing its an occasional option I don't mind seeing them. There is a place for them. 

The ECHL isn't terrible but if you're watching a bad team or your roster getting shredded then its tough. Unless you're team is good its just become a hard league to watch.


----------



## JackalsKnuckles

Fighting is down in the OHL compared to the past, but there is still plenty of fighting in major junior. In the NAHL and USHL it is more rare as they carry a misconduct penalty in addition to the 5 minute major, but fighting still happens there as well. 






Sports Enthusiast said:


> You could add the big one....the OHL. Only thing is while these guys have more passion they really aren't allowed to fight or anything so that is taken away. I don't need to see a fight to be intrigued but knowing its an occasional option I don't mind seeing them. There is a place for them.
> 
> The ECHL isn't terrible but if you're watching a bad team or your roster getting shredded then its tough. Unless you're team is good its just become a hard league to watch.


----------



## Mightygoose

Council to defer a decision.

http://www.bramptonguardian.com/spo...ecision-on-hockey-club-s-request-for-bailout/



> Following Wednesday’s meeting, Kaplan called the City’s request for more time to consider his proposal “fair.”
> “We brought this on the City very fast. So we are very happy with the decision. I think we will have a more definitive response after the *March 9* council meeting,” Kaplan said




I thought they wanted an answer by Feb 4? This saga continues.....


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Mightygoose said:


> Council to defer a decision.
> 
> http://www.bramptonguardian.com/spo...ecision-on-hockey-club-s-request-for-bailout/
> 
> 
> 
> I thought they wanted an answer by Feb 4? This saga continues.....




So I guess regardless they will finish this season?


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

JackalsKnuckles said:


> Fighting is down in the OHL compared to the past, but there is still plenty of fighting in major junior. In the NAHL and USHL it is more rare as they carry a misconduct penalty in addition to the 5 minute major, but fighting still happens there as well.




Truthfully outside if the Memorial Cup I don't get to watch junior hockey much. I sometimes see OHL games appear on NHL Network but what little junior I've seen on top of the World Championships I haven't seen any fighting. I figured they just didn't allow it like in college.


----------



## Canucks21

Sports Enthusiast said:


> Truthfully outside if the Memorial Cup I don't get to watch junior hockey much. I sometimes see OHL games appear on NHL Network but what little junior I've seen on top of the World Championships I haven't seen any fighting. I figured they just didn't allow it like in college.




In the OHL and the Q every players are allowed 9 fights per season after that you get suspended for x amount of games. In the Memorial cup last year there was 4 fights including 2 in the semi-final game. In the World juniors they arent allowed to fight


----------



## PCSPounder

Sports Enthusiast said:


> Its actually backwards. The NHL should cut ties with them. They don't really need them. You can assign a guy anywhere though. The jackals got a goalie sent to them by St. Louis this year and they aren't affiliated together. I'm not sure how they convinced the NHL to even get in bed with them on the affiliations stuff because if you look at the structure its fools gold.




You act like the NHL team is paying for the affiliation. It's probably the other way around.

You might argue that the promotion is dubious, but it still gets the NHL team's name out in front of a different set of customers. That gets a little play in local media in the ECHL market. It promotes the semblance of a system... *especially to a population geared to "minor leagues feed to major leagues" the way baseball does.* Never mind that the ECHL doesn't send a whole lot of people up, but it creates that perception in the minds of those who are used to the system.

If you want to doubt that, you should see how many times, IN PORTLAND, I've had the discussion about the Winterhawks' "place" in the system. As a soccer fan, it's funny how many times I talk about how Europe operates and what the Timbers do with Timbers2 as a development team (and sometimes used as a reserve team) and hear the "why isn't Timbers2 in Eugene or Boise" response. Not only do people have expectations, they want them enforced, never mind what's true on the ground or on the ice.


----------



## PCSPounder

JackalsKnuckles said:


> Fighting is down in the OHL compared to the past, but there is still plenty of fighting in major junior. In the NAHL and USHL it is more rare as they carry a misconduct penalty in addition to the 5 minute major, but fighting still happens there as well.




While in Boise, more fighting in WCHL than when the ECHL appeared... but it's not like Boise had a choice given the WCHL was on its last legs. It's also not hurt attendance as much as other economic decisions made by the Steelheads.

Definitely more fighting in the WHL, definitely not as much as in the 80s before I left Portland. (Grew up there, U of Oregon, 2 years between Seattle and Vancouver, 2 years in the Bay Area just as the Sharks were born, 15 long years in Idaho, back in Portland)

However, in Portland, with several seasons of a team built for speed instead of bulk, not all that much more. Probably different for, say, Seattle.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

PCSPounder said:


> You act like the NHL team is paying for the affiliation. It's probably the other way around.
> 
> You might argue that the promotion is dubious, but it still gets the NHL team's name out in front of a different set of customers. That gets a little play in local media in the ECHL market. It promotes the semblance of a system... *especially to a population geared to "minor leagues feed to major leagues" the way baseball does.* Never mind that the ECHL doesn't send a whole lot of people up, but it creates that perception in the minds of those who are used to the system.
> 
> If you want to doubt that, you should see how many times, IN PORTLAND, I've had the discussion about the Winterhawks' "place" in the system. As a soccer fan, it's funny how many times I talk about how Europe operates and what the Timbers do with Timbers2 as a development team (and sometimes used as a reserve team) and hear the "why isn't Timbers2 in Eugene or Boise" response. Not only do people have expectations, they want them enforced, never mind what's true on the ground or on the ice.




Not a soccer nerd or anything so I'm not sure about the Euro thing though I know some BPL franchises have a U21 team. Teams like City, Liverpool, Chelsea and such. The bigger teams.


----------



## Torts

JackalsKnuckles said:


> This was Brampton's last shot at having a team I would say. The demographics of the area will not support hockey. Cricket or soccer maybe, but not hockey.
> 
> Brampton drew horribly when the Battalion were there and even had winning teams.
> 
> I also doubt that developmental hockey will work in Canada, although Newmarket and Cornwall both have buildings big enough to fit a ECHL team.
> 
> Even the fans that Brampton does have are on the Facebook page complaining about all the roster turnover, which is unfortunately what you get with the ECHL.
> 
> Sounds pretty clear in the article that the city of Brampton has no plans to purchase a sports complex and subsidize a team.
> 
> *The Mississauga Steelheads are 7 km down the road on the same street and also drawing poorly with the OHL.*




To be honest attendance has increased substantially from the first year. Lot's of promos plus a great team this year has helped attendance. Larger focus on community groups have helped a lot as well. Do we still have the odd game where only 2,400 people show up yeah of course but it is definitely getting better.


----------



## JackalsKnuckles

Torts said:


> To be honest attendance has increased substantially from the first year. Lot's of promos plus a great team this year has helped attendance. Larger focus on community groups have helped a lot as well. Do we still have the odd game where only 2,400 people show up yeah of course but it is definitely getting better.




Glad they are drawing a bit better. It really is good hockey. I went to a game last year against Niagara and they had announced attendance of less than 2k and there were really about 500 people there.


----------



## Duke Guy

Last year the Beast finished last and drew 2,572 fans. This year they are last and drawing 2,808. I just can't see them surviving after this season.


----------



## JDogindy

Duke Guy said:


> Last year the Beast finished last and drew 2,572 fans. This year they are last and drawing 2,808. I just can't see them surviving after this season.




Didn't Brampton also finish last in the CHL's last year in attendance (which was their best year ever on-ice)?


----------



## Duke Guy

In the last year of the CHL Brampton finished 6th in points in the 10 team league and 9th in attendance.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

I think that The Beast are another case of "ready, fire, aim" in minor league hockey.

The ONLY way this team could have possibly succeeded in the over crowded Toronto Metro Area is to have been affiliated with the Marlies and Leafs. Barring that niche, there are far too many superior and equivalent product options for the hockey consumer in the area. Without that affiliation, media coverage and basic fan interest couldn't reach minimal levels needed for survival.

If an affiliation couldn't be secured prior to the Beast's inception, then it was pointless to go forward. Perhaps they felt that they could secure one once the franchise was launched, but that's always an iffy proposition.

It's almost as if most minor league hockey owners don't even look at the experiences of other minor league teams. ECHL teams have failed twice in Chicago and once in Phoenix over the past decade. Chicago was never affiliated in either incarnation with the Hawks and I can't recall if Phoenix was. It doesn't really matter, because the notion of two pro teams in Phoenix is absurd in and of itself.


----------



## Canucks21

Cyclones Rock said:


> It's almost as if most minor league hockey owners don't even look at the experiences of other minor league teams. ECHL teams have failed twice in Chicago and once in Phoenix over the past decade. Chicago was never affiliated in either incarnation with the Hawks and I can't recall if Phoenix was. It doesn't really matter, because the notion of two pro teams in Phoenix is absurd in and of itself.




Whats the 1st ECHL team in Chicago?


----------



## Avsrule2022

Cyclones Rock said:


> I think that The Beast are another case of "ready, fire, aim" in minor league hockey.
> 
> The ONLY way this team could have possibly succeeded in the over crowded Toronto Metro Area is to have been affiliated with the Marlies and Leafs. Barring that niche, there are far too many superior and equivalent product options for the hockey consumer in the area. Without that affiliation, media coverage and basic fan interest couldn't reach minimal levels needed for survival.
> 
> If an affiliation couldn't be secured prior to the Beast's inception, then it was pointless to go forward. Perhaps they felt that they could secure one once the franchise was launched, but that's always an iffy proposition.
> 
> It's almost as if most minor league hockey owners don't even look at the experiences of other minor league teams. ECHL teams have failed twice in Chicago and once in Phoenix over the past decade. Chicago was never affiliated in either incarnation with the Hawks and I can't recall if Phoenix was. It doesn't really matter, because the notion of two pro teams in Phoenix is absurd in and of itself.




Add in the fact that the CHL was desperate to add teams at the time, with Colorado and Ft. Wayne already gone and rumors swirling about other teams leaving. The CHL would have put a team in Hawaii if there was an owner stupid enough to try it.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Canucks21 said:


> Whats the 1st ECHL team in Chicago?




There wasn't. It was in the UHL(though basically equivalent)with the Chicago Hounds.


----------



## Canucks21

Sports Enthusiast said:


> There wasn't. It was in the UHL(though basically equivalent)with the Chicago Hounds.




I though the UHL was like the FHL today


----------



## 210

Canucks21 said:


> I though the UHL was like the FHL today




UHL folded with some teams joining the CHL, who then later merged with the ECHL. I guess by default that makes the UHL and ECHL somewhat equal.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

UHL, CHL and ECHL were all the same to me. AA hockey is AA hockey and a good AA player will do fine in any of the leagues. Only difference is the "affiliation" nonsense and the vet rule. UHL teams were on the average way older to a degree. That was probably the biggest difference.


----------



## mfrerkes

Canucks21 said:


> I though the UHL was like the FHL today




Not in terms of talent. When the Mallards were in the UHL, they had players that went to the IHL (back when it was AAA) and saw actual playing time during their stints at that level.

The UHL was legitimate AA-level hockey. Some players were much better than others, but the good ones would earn call-ups to AAA periodically.


----------



## 210

mfrerkes said:


> Not in terms of talent. When the Mallards were in the UHL, they had players that went to the IHL (back when it was AAA) and saw actual playing time during their stints at that level.
> 
> The UHL was legitimate AA-level hockey. *Some players were much better than others, but the good ones would earn call-ups to AAA periodically.*




A pretty good description of the current ECHL...


----------



## royals119

Sports Enthusiast said:


> UHL, CHL and ECHL were all the same to me. AA hockey is AA hockey and a good AA player will do fine in any of the leagues. Only difference is the "affiliation" nonsense and the vet rule. UHL teams were on the average way older to a degree. That was probably the biggest difference.






mfrerkes said:


> Not in terms of talent. When the Mallards were in the UHL, they had players that went to the IHL (back when it was AAA) and saw actual playing time during their stints at that level.
> 
> The UHL was legitimate AA-level hockey. Some players were much better than others, but the good ones would earn call-ups to AAA periodically.




I would agree that the UHL was a lot better than the FHL, but I think there was a "half-step" between the ECHL and the UHL/CHL. Some of the top UHL players could make the jump to the AHL/oldIHL, particularly in the earlier years. However, over the last 5-10 years we had a number of players come from the UHL or CHL to the Royals (ECHL) and vice versa. Third liners who were sometimes getting healthy scratched because there were more talented players on the Royals roster became first liners in the other leagues, and first line players from the other leagues would come to the Royals and end up on the third line or cut.


----------



## JDogindy

Avsrule2002 said:


> Add in the fact that the CHL was desperate to add teams at the time, with Colorado and Ft. Wayne already gone and rumors swirling about other teams leaving. The CHL would have put a team in Hawaii if there was an owner stupid enough to try it.




So they were a lot like the Continental Basketball Association, which in their day, actually had teams in Alaska, Hawaii, and Mexico City (though not at once).


----------



## 210

JDogindy said:


> So they were a lot like the Continental Basketball Association, which in their day, actually had teams in Alaska, Hawaii, and Mexico City (though not at once).




And Puerto Rico...


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

royals119 said:


> I would agree that the UHL was a lot better than the FHL, but I think there was a "half-step" between the ECHL and the UHL/CHL. Some of the top UHL players could make the jump to the AHL/oldIHL, particularly in the earlier years. However, over the last 5-10 years we had a number of players come from the UHL or CHL to the Royals (ECHL) and vice versa. Third liners who were sometimes getting healthy scratched because there were more talented players on the Royals roster became first liners in the other leagues, and first line players from the other leagues would come to the Royals and end up on the third line or cut.




I'll throw out a name who used to play for Muskegon. Todd Robinson for an example. Guy was awesome for them but he was also(I would guess)a top line player. In the ECHL he wouldn't be because he was older. I dong think its necessarily you're a better player in this league and at the moment I think its more of a numbers game and you're a younger guy and a "prospect" so you have more value versus the vet who will never play on my NHL team.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

JDogindy said:


> So they were a lot like the Continental Basketball Association, which in their day, actually had teams in Alaska, Hawaii, and Mexico City (though not at once).




Well it was also weird because you had the "IHL" teams and then a lot of the CHL teams as I understood it were kind of backed by something called Global. Definitely I guess a unique situation I guess I'd say. So they tried to keep the league afloat all they could.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

210 said:


> A pretty good description of the current ECHL...




Can't recall anyone making the NHL. Don't recall too many callups. I know the jackals had a couple of guys called up to the ahl but it wasn't like the potential of now where if they go up they might never come back.


----------



## 210

Sports Enthusiast said:


> Can't recall anyone making the NHL. Don't recall too many callups. I know the jackals had a couple of guys called up to the ahl but it wasn't like the potential of now where if they go up they might never come back.




I would reply, but it would take a significant amount of time to list all the ECHL players that became AHL regulars (never mind just got an AHL call up), and just this season there were 74 former ECHL players/coaches on NHL rosters.


----------



## Canucks21

mfrerkes said:


> Not in terms of talent. When the Mallards were in the UHL, they had players that went to the IHL (back when it was AAA) and saw actual playing time during their stints at that level.
> 
> The UHL was legitimate AA-level hockey. Some players were much better than others, but the good ones would earn call-ups to AAA periodically.




any reason why the UHL didnt worked?


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Canucks21 said:


> any reason why the UHL didnt worked?




Part of the country it was in. The northeast teams minus Elmira ended up in trouble. Adirondack couldn't secure a lease and the mob squad in Danbury got busted. They had a year with Elmira and the rest all Midwest teams. They wanted a Midwest bus league. Elmira went to the E and the league became the IHL and Chicago folded after 07. The Michigan teams not named Muskegon were in financial ruin. The recession probably didn't help.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

210 said:


> I would reply, but it would take a significant amount of time to list all the ECHL players that became AHL regulars (never mind just got an AHL call up), and just this season there were 74 former ECHL players/coaches on NHL rosters.




Was talking about the U days to now.


----------



## SemireliableSource

Sports Enthusiast said:


> There wasn't. It was in the UHL(though basically equivalent)with the Chicago Hounds.




Wrong again. The Chicago Express were in the ECHL but on lasted one season, 2011-12.

Simple research, bud.


----------



## 210

FrancoRussianAlaskan said:


> Wrong again. The Chicago Express were in the ECHL but on lasted one season, 2011-12.
> 
> Simple research, bud.




I hate to defend Sports Enthusiast, but you've misunderstood what was being said.

The Chicago Express is the singular ECHL team that has failed in Chicago in relation to a post that claimed two ECHL teams failed there. Sports Enthusiast noted the other recent minor league hockey team that failed in Chicago was the Hounds of the UHL.


----------



## JDogindy

Sports Enthusiast said:


> Part of the country it was in. The northeast teams minus Elmira ended up in trouble. Adirondack couldn't secure a lease and the mob squad in Danbury got busted. They had a year with Elmira and the rest all Midwest teams. They wanted a Midwest bus league. Elmira went to the E and the league became the IHL and Chicago folded after 07. The Michigan teams not named Muskegon were in financial ruin. The recession probably didn't help.




Pretty much this. At one point, the UHL had quite a stronghold from upstate New York all the way to Missouri. Then the league went kaput.

You know, I know we tend to go off-topic, but I do miss the original IHL.


----------



## SemireliableSource

Welp. My bad, guys. That what I get for skimming.


----------



## crimsonace

JDogindy said:


> Pretty much this. At one point, the UHL had quite a stronghold from upstate New York all the way to Missouri. Then the league went kaput.
> 
> You know, I know we tend to go off-topic, but I do miss the original IHL.




UHL, like just about every independent minor pro league, didn't survive the recession. It was in a lot of very small Midwestern markets, and some of the better ones (Quad City, for example) or more stable ones (Kalamazoo) ended up moving into other leagues, or lower-cost leagues (hi, Bloomington). It lost a little bit of its focus when it began spreading into the northeast (AHL territory) and the southeast (ECHL/and for a while, CHL country). It allowed a LOT of vets (9, IIRC), which means costs tended to be higher, and there's no NHL/AHL team to help supply 3-4 players or help with marketing. By the end, Fort Wayne was basically propping up half the league (while trying to seize the history of the original IHL at the same time). 

It and the CHL - another league where many of the teams at the time were owned by the Global arena company that was basically the backbone behind the old WPHL that merged into the CHL in 2001 - eventually merged, but that league obviously was not long for the world either. The old southeastern markets that got abandoned by the CHL eventually resurfaced in the SPHL, but that is a much lower-cost league than the old CHL or UHL were. Salary cap is barely over half the ECHL's. 

The ECHL has the DNA of the WCHL, CHL, WPHL & UHL in it. Pretty impressive.

I loved the original IHL. Hated that it basically killed itself by trying to be a very expensive AAAA independent league that couldn't stay afloat outside of a couple of cities. Most of those cities/names/teams that didn't make it have resurfaced in the ECHL, but the original IHL, especially from about 1985-97, was a great league.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

JDogindy said:


> Pretty much this. At one point, the UHL had quite a stronghold from upstate New York all the way to Missouri. Then the league went kaput.
> 
> You know, I know we tend to go off-topic, but I do miss the original IHL.




UHL had some northeast teams at one point before just Adirondack, Danbury and Elmira. Before Danbury they had the BC Icemen, New Haven Knights and a team called the Mohawk Valley Prowlers. 

Man this stuff really makes you realize just how much the landscape has changed the last 10+ years.


----------



## Scoutin1

210 said:


> UHL folded with some teams joining the CHL, who then later merged with the ECHL. I guess by default that makes the UHL and ECHL somewhat equal.




That would be true only if you've never seen any games in either league.


----------



## Scoutin1

Sports Enthusiast said:


> UHL, CHL and ECHL were all the same to me. AA hockey is AA hockey and a good AA player will do fine in any of the leagues. Only difference is the "affiliation" nonsense and the vet rule. UHL teams were on the average way older to a degree. That was probably the biggest difference.




So what you're admitting is that you know little of any of those leagues. I read you lima charlie.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Scoutin1 said:


> So what you're admitting is that you know little of any of those leagues. I read you lima charlie.




I've seen them all. Only difference is the affiliation game and in the ECHL a veteran who could dominate at this level will see his role reduced because he's "over the hill" and of no value to the organization you're affiliated with. The goal in the ECHL sadly isn't about winning.


----------



## Scoutin1

Sports Enthusiast said:


> I've seen them all. Only difference is the affiliation game and in the ECHL a veteran who could dominate at this level will see his role reduced because he's "over the hill" and of no value to the organization you're affiliated with. The goal in the ECHL sadly isn't about winning.




I agree with you that the ECHL isn't about winning -- it's about the perception of "development", but the best UHL or CHL teams couldn't hang with the ECHL. The E was just young and too fast for the older vets in the U or C. I saw it; it wasn't even close. As a Komet fan I saw a dominate team in the CHL that couldn't hang with the young, fast pups in the E. It's just the way it was....


----------



## Clinton Comets EHL

Scoutin1 said:


> I agree with you that the ECHL isn't about winning -- it's about the perception of "development", but the best UHL or CHL teams couldn't hang with the ECHL. The E was just young and too fast for the older vets in the U or C. I saw it; it wasn't even close. As a Komet fan I saw a dominate team in the CHL that couldn't hang with the young, fast pups in the E. It's just the way it was....




I disagree. Thought the talent level was equal or close....I saw it as well.

As I've said before, I always thought the ENTERTAINMENT value was much better in the CoHL / UHL / IHL2 than the E.

The E survived because it's business plan...although seriously flawed...still....was better than the others. There is no question the UHL was much more entertaining.


----------



## Scoutin1

6768clintoncomets575 said:


> I disagree. Thought the talent level was equal or close....I saw it as well.
> 
> As I've said before, I always thought the ENTERTAINMENT value was much better in the CoHL / UHL / IHL2 than the E.
> 
> The E survived because it's business plan...although seriously flawed...still....was better than the others. There is no question the UHL was much more entertaining.




Ok, but I watched a Komet team roll to a CHL title and then the next season look woefully mediocre in the E with nearly the same team. I saw it, it was ugly. With regard to entertainment, I don't think I'd necessarily disagree; but with regard to play on the ice, there was a serious gap in the play.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Scoutin1 said:


> I agree with you that the ECHL isn't about winning -- it's about the perception of "development", but the best UHL or CHL teams couldn't hang with the ECHL. The E was just young and too fast for the older vets in the U or C. I saw it; it wasn't even close. As a Komet fan I saw a dominate team in the CHL that couldn't hang with the young, fast pups in the E. It's just the way it was....




Fort Wayne has turned a corner it appears. Good team this year. I think they overplayed their hand and thought they could just bring in their loyal guys from the IHL/CHL and it would work. Chemistry can be important but yeah an old guy like a Collin Chaulk is gunna get skated right around in this league. I guess from a defensive standpoint that would be huge but on offense they still might be able to produce their points. I guess I was talking from an offensive standpoint


----------



## Scoutin1

Sports Enthusiast said:


> Fort Wayne has turned a corner it appears. Good team this year. I think they overplayed their hand and thought they could just bring in their loyal guys from the IHL/CHL and it would work. Chemistry can be important but yeah an old guy like a Collin Chaulk is gunna get skated right around in this league. I guess from a defensive standpoint that would be huge but on offense they still might be able to produce their points. I guess I was talking from an offensive standpoint




I agree with you that the K's front office thought the UHL/CHL/IHLv2 model would work in the ECHL. But it took them all of one season to learn that it wouldn't. The K's have done a nice job adapting to their new development model -- they had a solid team last year. In any event, it is what it is; all teams in the E are faced with the same issues.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Scoutin1 said:


> I agree with you that the K's front office thought the UHL/CHL/IHLv2 model would work in the ECHL. But it took them all of one season to learn that it wouldn't. The K's have done a nice job adapting to their new development model -- they had a solid team last year. In any event, it is what it is; all teams in the E are faced with the same issues.




I suppose though teams like Elmira, Reading and Adirondack do get poached more than the rest because they have so many AHL teams within their vicinity and its easy to get them there. Now with a team in Manchester and soon Worcester that may help things a bit maybe.


----------



## Scoutin1

JDogindy said:


> You know, I know we tend to go off-topic, but I do miss the original IHL.




I do too (the pre 1994 IHL). After that the League tried to be something that it shouldn't, and that what's led to its demise. The Komet/Ice rivalry was awesome. There was pure hatred on each side for the other. Good times.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Scoutin1 said:


> I do too (the pre 1994 IHL). After that the League tried to be something that it shouldn't, and that what's led to its demise. The Komet/Ice rivalry was awesome. There was pure hatred on each side for the other. Good times.




I miss rivalries too. Thanks for ruining that affiliated hockey!

I miss jackals and Adirondack icehaek brawls and little ***** like littlejohn.


----------



## Scoutin1

Sports Enthusiast said:


> I miss rivalries too. Thanks for ruining that affiliated hockey!
> 
> I miss jackals and Adirondack icehaek brawls and little ***** like littlejohn.




This site needs a "like" button.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Scoutin1 said:


> This site needs a "like" button.




I haven't been to an ECHL game in over 2 years but when I was still going regularly by the end I just noticed there was no intensity, very little passion. I don't need fights but I'd kill for rivalries and some intense games. Instead it was like watching a rich man's beer league. Lots of skating and scoring. While that's all good watching a game where every shift is tough and interesting is good theatre. Even the playoff series were lackluster. I think people confuse wanting to see fighting with wanting entertainment and interesting. I mean it seems like they hardly throw checks.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Scoutin1 said:


> This site needs a "like" button.




I haven't been to an ECHL game in over 2 years but when I was still going regularly by the end I just noticed there was no intensity, very little passion. I don't need fights but I'd kill for rivalries and some intense games. Instead it was like watching a rich man's beer league. Lots of skating and scoring. While that's all good watching a game where every shift is tough and interesting is good theatre. Even the playoff series were lackluster. I think people confuse wanting to see fighting with wanting entertainment and interesting. I mean it seems like they hardly throw checks.


----------



## toledo109

To get into ECHL hockey, it truly depends on what market your in. Some market are totally great while some are truly a pit.


----------



## JDogindy

Does anybody really think that the city board is going to bail out the Beast? I think they might consider, but it's not like the team has done much to develop some kind of bond with the city. I mean, with the OHL, you can tell which cities suffer when a team moves and which cities have apathy. When Belleville lost the Bulls to Hamilton, you could've felt the heart being ripped out. When the Battalion moved to North Bay... you probably could've heard crickets chirp.

Of course, if Brampton does move... where do they go?


----------



## Hurricane Ron

With the issues in Brampton and Evansville, wondering if the ECHL drops back to 26 teams next season?

With Brampton in a 4 team division, their loss would result in another team from the East having to move into their division, if the ECHL keeps the 3 divisions in one conference format. As Evansville is in a 5 team division, their loss wouldn't have the same impact on the current division setup. The other option would be to move to 2 divisions (as they did in 2014-2015) in each conference. 

With Worcester joining the league in 2017-2018, this would give the league a year to find a location for another team to bring the league back up to 28 teams.

The unknown at this time is if the Evansville to Owensboro move actually takes place; and if the Brampton owners have another location ready to roll for next year, if their issues can't be worked out. If these two things happen, then there isn't an issue.

Seems like this is the norm this time of year every season; teams in trouble, and teams on the move.


----------



## JDogindy

Hurricane Ron said:


> With the issues in Brampton and Evansville, wondering if the ECHL drops back to 26 teams next season?
> 
> With Brampton in a 4 team division, their loss would result in another team from the East having to move into their division, if the ECHL keeps the 3 divisions in one conference format. As Evansville is in a 5 team division, their loss wouldn't have the same impact on the current division setup. The other option would be to move to 2 divisions (as they did in 2014-2015) in each conference.
> 
> With Worcester joining the league in 2017-2018, this would give the league a year to find a location for another team to bring the league back up to 28 teams.
> 
> The unknown at this time is if the Evansville to Owensboro move actually takes place; and if the Brampton owners have another location ready to roll for next year, if their issues can't be worked out. If these two things happen, then there isn't an issue.
> 
> Seems like this is the norm this time of year every season; teams in trouble, and teams on the move.




Well, if you lose both, what they'd likely do would be to move Reading to the North Division in the Eastern Conference. That'd be the only shift.

Of course, things get really crazy if Brampton moves out West. Evansville to Owensboro is no real shift and they can stay in their division, but to me, where Brampton may go is the wild card of it all.


----------



## JackalsKnuckles

JDogindy said:


> Well, if you lose both, what they'd likely do would be to move Reading to the North Division in the Eastern Conference. That'd be the only shift.
> 
> Of course, things get really crazy if Brampton moves out West. Evansville to Owensboro is no real shift and they can stay in their division, but to me, where Brampton may go is the wild card of it all.




Why would we think Brampton is moving? I don't think there are too many cities beating down the door to get an ECHL team. They will likely just fold or go dormant.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

I'm not sure why they would move Reading to the North. It doesn't make much sense to me. Then you have a division of Elmira and the Chesters. I guess Adirondack if they last but if Elmira or Adirondack fold then that won't be necessary. This is a season and a half out. 

Its already dumb to me that Brampton is in the North and that Norfolk is in the other division.


----------



## JDogindy

JackalsKnuckles said:


> Why would we think Brampton is moving? I don't think there are too many cities beating down the door to get an ECHL team. They will likely just fold or go dormant.




They'll likely find somebody dumb enough or desperate enough to want something resembling a pro team. I personally believe they might find that market that'll think "You know what? We need a hockey team."

I don't mean to sound harsh, but that's just the way I view it.


----------



## JDogindy

Sports Enthusiast said:


> I'm not sure why they would move Reading to the North. It doesn't make much sense to me. Then you have a division of Elmira and the Chesters. I guess Adirondack if they last but if Elmira or Adirondack fold then that won't be necessary. This is a season and a half out.
> 
> Its already dumb to me that Brampton is in the North and that Norfolk is in the other division.




Problem is math and the desire for evenness. You dump Evansville, and their division still has 4 teams. You dump Brampton, and suddenly they have just 3, and you're forced to transplant somebody to fill in that division so you have a 5-4-4 alignment.


----------



## Cacciaguida

Worcester and New Orleans would fill the gap.

Still keeping my fingers crossed. Why oh why did they pick the name the Beast?! Not even Beasts! Nor Bears, nor Bombers.


----------



## jason2020

JackalsKnuckles said:


> Why would we think Brampton is moving? I don't think there are too many cities beating down the door to get an ECHL team. They will likely just fold or go dormant.




I could see them moving to Belleville.


----------



## digiblader

jason2020 said:


> I could see them moving to Belleville.




Why Belleville?


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Cacciaguida said:


> Worcester and New Orleans would fill the gap.
> 
> Still keeping my fingers crossed. Why oh why did they pick the name the Beast?! Not even Beasts! Nor Bears, nor Bombers.




New Orleans? Will the arena stay above water for a full year?


----------



## Hurricane Ron

Cacciaguida said:


> Worcester and New Orleans would fill the gap.
> 
> Still keeping my fingers crossed. Why oh why did they pick the name the Beast?! Not even Beasts! Nor Bears, nor Bombers.




New Orleans?

Unless the ECHL wants another team on an island, I can't see that happening. There are too many locations in the league, in my opinion, where teams arrive for 2 or 3 games in a row. Adding New Orleans would only add one more, and provide no natural geographic rivals for the fan base.


----------



## jason2020

digiblader said:


> Why Belleville?




They lost there Ohl team last year and need a tenet for the arena.


----------



## CrazyEddie20

Cacciaguida said:


> Worcester and New Orleans would fill the gap.
> 
> Still keeping my fingers crossed. Why oh why did they pick the name the Beast?! Not even Beasts! Nor Bears, nor Bombers.




Ahhh, another pie-in-the-sky fanboi who thinks you can just put a team anywhere...

New Orleans has no arena. The ECHL's New Orleans Brass played in the Smoothie King Center - until they were kicked out when the NBA came to town. There's no other rink there, the Morris F.X. Jeffs Coliseum is in no shape to host anything, and the State of Louisiana is broke. So keep dreaming.


----------



## CrazyEddie20

jason2020 said:


> I could see them moving to Belleville.




Belleville has a population under 100K. Unless they get the arena for basically zero rent, retain all the concessions, get all the advertising inventory, and sell 4,000 season tickets, it won't work.


----------



## Cacciaguida

Cornwall still an option? Perhaps with a Ottawa/Montreal affiliation?

_Adding New Orleans would only add one more, and provide no natural geographic rivals for the fan base_

Was thinking of Florida teams+Atlanta and whoever else they can add. Are they too far?


----------



## CrazyEddie20

Cacciaguida said:


> Cornwall still an option? Perhaps with a Ottawa/Montreal affiliation?
> 
> _Adding New Orleans would only add one more, and provide no natural geographic rivals for the fan base_
> 
> Was thinking of Florida teams+Atlanta and whoever else they can add. Are they too far?




Approximately 15 hours from New Orleans to Fort Myers, 12 hours to Orlando, 10 hours to Atlanta, 8 hours to Dallas.

Look on a map.


----------



## CrazyEddie20

Cacciaguida said:


> Cornwall still an option? Perhaps with a Ottawa/Montreal affiliation?
> 
> _Adding New Orleans would only add one more, and provide no natural geographic rivals for the fan base_
> 
> Was thinking of Florida teams+Atlanta and whoever else they can add. Are they too far?




Cornwall? Really? The city hasn't had pro hockey since '93, hasn't hosted major junior in almost as long, is smaller than Belleville, and even more economically depressed. Keep reaching.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

The obvious market is.....

Fairfax, Virginia


----------



## JDogindy

CrazyEddie20 said:


> Cornwall? Really? The city hasn't had pro hockey since '93, hasn't hosted major junior in almost as long, is smaller than Belleville, and even more economically depressed. Keep reaching.




People just want Cornwall to have a team because reasons.

Realistically... if you're gonna put a team in a new market, try to move them to, like, Greensboro or something.


----------



## SemireliableSource

Greensboro isn't new and the same issues that hindered the Generals and Monarchs are still around. 1. The Greensboro Coliseum is just too massive. 2. It hosts UNC-Greensboro men's basketball already.

They're also getting a D-League team next season that gives the building another 24 dates along with easier conversion than ice. Account for the lack of utilities cost needed to maintain ice, the ACC and NCAA tournaments taking up key late season dates, and the fact that the Coliseum is having no issues finding events, hockey's just not gonna happen unless they have an Annex like in Winston-Salem.


----------



## Cacciaguida

I'm operating under the assumption that a pro team will subsidize the smaller market as a hub for prospects. 

Obviously it would lose money at first.


----------



## BladesFan10

One thing I have not seen considered is if a new, RICH, owner gets involved in Brampton or a new expansion franchise, what about them building their own arena. The Florida Everblades own their arena and have done pretty well over the years. I know its a *real longshot*, but if you get someone involved that needs to dump some money for tax or other purposes, what would stop them from potentially moving the team and building a new arena in a new city.


----------



## Canucks21

BladesFan10 said:


> One thing I have not seen considered is if a new, RICH, owner gets involved in Brampton or a new expansion franchise, what about them building their own arena. The Florida Everblades own their arena and have done pretty well over the years. I know its a *real longshot*, but if you get someone involved that needs to dump some money for tax or other purposes, what would stop them from potentially moving the team and building a new arena in a new city.




Owners don't build arenas cuz they dont get any money out of it


----------



## BladesFan10

Canucks21 said:


> Owners don't build arenas cuz they dont get any money out of it




Maybe not in just Hockey, but in all the other events they can host it does. Whether they can get those events is another question. Looking at Germain Arena, owned and operated by the Everblades and has events going on including Hockey at least 120-150 days per year depending on acts and other things. If an owner had money they needed spent, owning an arena and team would allow them to spend spend spend on the Hockey side triggering an overall loss.

Once the team is finished they will still have an arena that could make them good profits if it's in the right geographical area. For Germain Arena, it's the only 8500 seat (concerts) closed venue in a major area between Miami and Tampa and is located right off I-75. If the geography and ownership is right, it can work


----------



## Canucks21

BladesFan10 said:


> Maybe not in just Hockey, but in all the other events they can host it does. Whether they can get those events is another question. Looking at Germain Arena, owned and operated by the Everblades and has events going on including Hockey at least 120-150 days per year depending on acts and other things. If an owner had money they needed spent, owning an arena and team would allow them to spend spend spend on the Hockey side triggering an overall loss.
> 
> Once the team is finished they will still have an arena that could make them good profits if it's in the right geographical area. For Germain Arena, it's the only 8500 seat (concerts) closed venue in a major area between Miami and Tampa and is located right off I-75. If the geography and ownership is right, it can work




Thats one example and if someone go and build a new arena in Brampton would they have that many events when Toronto is only 30mins away


----------



## BladesFan10

Canucks21 said:


> Thats one example and if someone go and build a new arena in Brampton would they have that many events when Toronto is only 30mins away




I do agree with you on the Brampton part. What I mean is if the team relocates to another city and builds its own arena. Building an arena near toronto and expecting it survive would be economic suicide, I agree with you on that,


----------



## Scoutin1

JDogindy said:


> People just want Cornwall to have a team because reasons..




Perhaps, but it doesn't mean those reasons are sound or viable.


----------



## Canucks21

BladesFan10 said:


> I do agree with you on the Brampton part. What I mean is if the team relocates to another city and builds its own arena. Building an arena near toronto and expecting it survive would be economic suicide, I agree with you on that,




Then yes if you buy the team and move it in another market in your own arena yes you might make some money


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Canucks21 said:


> Owners don't build arenas cuz they dont get any money out of it




Unless your Mostafa Afr


----------



## Nightsquad

jason2020 said:


> I could see them moving to Belleville.




The ECHL in Belleville is a better option then the FHL. The FHL are playing neutral site "showcase" games in Belleville. Is the FHL going to educate the Belleville fans on their product lol? We see how well Petroveks education of fans in New York's North Country turned for the Adirondack Thunder...Ouch

http://www.federalhockey.com/view/thefederalhockeyleague/news-739/news_313776


----------



## Cacciaguida

Minor league teams making money? What kind of bizarro world, do you live in.


----------



## Cacciaguida

I also find it funny how the city Brampton expects a minor league team that's been around for less than half a decade to cough up 1.5 million dollars out of nowhere.

I mean if you want no money at all, go right ahead. Boot the team out.


----------



## Duke Guy

Does anyone have any details on how the 3 games in Belleville did? This is the first time I have heard about these games.


----------



## Cacciaguida

will Belleville be able to call themselves the Bulls or is that owned by the OHL?


----------



## Duke Guy

It was previously reported that Brampton Council would review a report on the Beast request for bail-out money sometime in March. Anyone have an exact date of that meeting?


----------



## jpc7734

Duke Guy said:


> It was previously reported that Brampton Council would review a report on the Beast request for bail-out money sometime in March. Anyone have an exact date of that meeting?




Not sure on the council meeting but the ECHL gave the Beast till March 10th to figure its mess out. As per Brampton Guardian.


----------



## Artie Fufkin

Nightsquad said:


> The ECHL in Belleville is a better option then the FHL. The FHL are playing neutral site "showcase" games in Belleville. Is the FHL going to educate the Belleville fans on their product lol? We see how well Petroveks education of fans in New York's North Country turned for the Adirondack Thunder...Ouch
> 
> http://www.federalhockey.com/view/thefederalhockeyleague/news-739/news_313776




The FHL Belleville experiment was cancelled.


----------



## xmcd

Duke Guy said:


> It was previously reported that Brampton Council would review a report on the Beast request for bail-out money sometime in March. Anyone have an exact date of that meeting?




The committee meeting was on Wednesday (March 2, 2016) and the staff reported that there was little indication that the team would generate a profit. The committee amended the request for a $1.5m infusion to a $300K/yr over 5 years (basically the cost of rent) with possible consideration about the purchase of the rink. The council will review this committee report next Tuesday (March 9, 2016) and vote on the amended report.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Watched the game tonight. Nobody was there.


----------



## Captain Crash

I went to their home game a few weeks back when they hosted the Wheeling Nailers. There were actually quite a few Nailers fans that made the trek. Attendance was certainly less than what was listed (2,776). Arena was meh, but the staff was great. I will say this: the lack of attendance certainly wasn't for a lack showmanship. The gameday presentation for the Beast went far above and beyond what is the norm for minor league hockey, with multiple fog machines, an extensive pregame laser light show, and plenty of goofy but fun filler in the timeouts and intermissions. I was impressed.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Captain Crash said:


> I went to their home game a few weeks back when they hosted the Wheeling Nailers. There were actually quite a few Nailers fans that made the trek. Attendance was certainly less than what was listed (2,776). Arena was meh, but the staff was great. I will say this: the lack of attendance certainly wasn't for a lack showmanship. The gameday presentation for the Beast went far above and beyond what is the norm for minor league hockey, with multiple fog machines, an extensive pregame laser light show, and plenty of goofy but fun filler in the timeouts and intermissions. I was impressed.




The nailers have fans?!

Watching on TV I thought they had a quality feed. I wasn't expecting much. Maybe the best one I've seen this year. Its up there anyway with South Carolina, Florida and Toledo. 

Some of the worst are Wheeling, Kalamazoo, Manchester, Reading and Adirondack.


----------



## Captain Crash

Sports Enthusiast said:


> The nailers have fans?!




Yeah, plenty of them. I make the hour drive from Pittsburgh to Wheeling a few times a season, as do many other Pens fans. Many also travel for road games. Wheeling's attendance isn't great, but it's a very small city so there's not a lot to draw from. They also report attendance pretty accurately-- not much, if any, juicing to the numbers. 

Something to keep in mind (since you regularly bash Wheeling) is that attendance is only one small piece of a the puzzle to a franchise's financial standing. So while Wheeling's gate revenue may be low in comparison to other ECHL teams, they also have much lower operating costs. The ownership is a nonprofit specifically designed to simply keep the team there, so they anticipate operating at a loss and write it off. They have a sweetheart deal in the lease, so rent is cheap. Cost of living in Wheeling is low, so they spend little on player housing and expenses. Their location is a short drive from many opponents, so their travel costs are reasonable. They're the only sport in town, so they do pretty well in sponsor and ad revenue. 

Wheeling is a pretty good reminder that judging which teams might collapse based on attendance alone is silly.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

Captain Crash said:


> Yeah, plenty of them. I make the hour drive from Pittsburgh to Wheeling a few times a season, as do many other Pens fans. Many also travel for road games. Wheeling's attendance isn't great, but it's a very small city so there's not a lot to draw from. They also report attendance pretty accurately-- not much, if any, juicing to the numbers.
> 
> Something to keep in mind (since you regularly bash Wheeling) is that attendance is only one small piece of a the puzzle to a franchise's financial standing. So while Wheeling's gate revenue may be low in comparison to other ECHL teams, they also have much lower operating costs. The ownership is a nonprofit specifically designed to simply keep the team there, so they anticipate operating at a loss and write it off. They have a sweetheart deal in the lease, so rent is cheap. Cost of living in Wheeling is low, so they spend little on player housing and expenses. Their location is a short drive from many opponents, so their travel costs are reasonable. They're the only sport in town, so they do pretty well in sponsor and ad revenue.
> 
> Wheeling is a pretty good reminder that judging which teams might collapse based on attendance alone is silly.




These teams in small markets are constantly in trouble. Especially in today's game. I don't think its if teams like them, Kalamazoo and Elmira will disappear, its when.


----------



## Captain Crash

Sports Enthusiast said:


> These teams in small markets are constantly in trouble. Especially in today's game. I don't think its if teams like them, Kalamazoo and Elmira will disappear, its when.




Ah, yes, now that you have rebutted my series of facts central to the financial reality of the team with your opinion based on hasty, unsubstantiated generalization, I see your point.


----------



## crimsonace

Captain Crash said:


> Ah, yes, now that you have rebutted my series of facts central to the financial reality of the team with your opinion based on hasty, unsubstantiated generalization, I see your point.




According to SE, all leagues that aren't the old UHL/CHL are awful and dying. Yes, you can see the irony in that statement.


----------



## royals119

Sports Enthusiast said:


> The nailers have fans?!
> 
> Watching on TV I thought they had a quality feed. I wasn't expecting much. Maybe the best one I've seen this year. Its up there anyway with South Carolina, Florida and Toledo.
> 
> Some of the worst are Wheeling, Kalamazoo, Manchester, Reading and Adirondack.



I'm curious how you rate the feeds and how you are watching it.

In the Reading area the local cable system broadcasts the away games using the feed from ECHL-TV/Neulion, so we watch most of the away games that way. 

My wife had surgery last week and couldn't get to the home games this weekend, so we watched a couple of Reading home games on Neulion. I streamed it to my laptop and used Chromecast to put it up on the TV. Looked great. Good quality image, no stuttering or freezing. It is a little different from most other arenas in that there is no center ice camera due to the luxury boxes, so the view switches between two cameras located around the middle of each offensive zone. Otherwise I found the quality to be much higher than most of the away games I've watched this year. I'm going to try a couple of road games that way instead of watching via Comcast to see if there is a difference. I'm interested in why you think Reading has a "bad" feed - maybe you haven't watched any games this season? They did put in all new HD cameras this year and upgraded the in arena video system to support the new video scoreboard. Last year they were using the new board with the old cameras and equipment, so the quality was lower.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

royals119 said:


> I'm curious how you rate the feeds and how you are watching it.
> 
> In the Reading area the local cable system broadcasts the away games using the feed from ECHL-TV/Neulion, so we watch most of the away games that way.
> 
> My wife had surgery last week and couldn't get to the home games this weekend, so we watched a couple of Reading home games on Neulion. I streamed it to my laptop and used Chromecast to put it up on the TV. Looked great. Good quality image, no stuttering or freezing. It is a little different from most other arenas in that there is no center ice camera due to the luxury boxes, so the view switches between two cameras located around the middle of each offensive zone. Otherwise I found the quality to be much higher than most of the away games I've watched this year. I'm going to try a couple of road games that way instead of watching via Comcast to see if there is a difference. I'm interested in why you think Reading has a "bad" feed - maybe you haven't watched any games this season? They did put in all new HD cameras this year and upgraded the in arena video system to support the new video scoreboard. Last year they were using the new board with the old cameras and equipment, so the quality was lower.




Same way you're watching. I don't think most teams do it. I know wheeling also did it(they may have been the first)not sure how "costly" it is. 

My ranking system isn't anything spectacular but obviously delays are a part of it. A couple of places I have noticed a lag where they are ahead in the call but the footage is like 2 seconds behind. This happened at Wheeling and atleast one Florida game. Some places just don't seem like they necessarily come in with a clear feed. What you said there's no center ice cameras. I guess it's not a gigantic deal but it was a little unusual. I guess its something you could adjust to if you saw it often it probably wouldn't register. The scoreboard that appeared on the screen wasn't the easiest to read if you had just turned the game on. I t said home and guest and was just a small box. Most of them seem to actually have the team and logo.


----------



## Sports Enthusiast

crimsonace said:


> According to SE, all leagues that aren't the old UHL/CHL are awful and dying. Yes, you can see the irony in that statement.




Slowly and painfully they are. While affiliations have cut the costs they have brought the quality down because teams have to use unqualified players to fill spots at times. There's also no rivalries because teams change every off season a lot. This doesn't register to the sheep but to diehards it does.


----------



## crimsonace

Sports Enthusiast said:


> Slowly and painfully they are. While affiliations have cut the costs they have brought the quality down because teams have to use unqualified players to fill spots at times. There's also no rivalries because teams change every off season a lot. This doesn't register to the sheep but to diehards it does.




Been a diehard for 30+ years ... and there's a reason the affiliated leagues have survived and the unaffiliated ones all died. The one thing the unaffiliated leagues had were tough guys who tended to stick around, and maybe 1-2 other guys, but there was significant roster turnover at every level. The ECHL at least provides some sense of stability and the teams with a lot of affiliate players are, not surprisingly, the best teams in the league (and the independents are struggling).


----------



## JungleJON

*City to pledge $1.5 mil. for hockey team*

http://www.bramptonguardian.com/new...-5m-lifeline-to-struggling-beast-hockey-club/


----------



## mfrerkes

JungleJON said:


> http://www.bramptonguardian.com/new...-5m-lifeline-to-struggling-beast-hockey-club/




I wonder how Brampton taxpayers feel about their dollars being used to prop up an insolvent team in a market that has not supported hockey. This is a misuse of public funds, and will probably not be enough to keep the team around more than a few additional years.

What a waste.


----------



## jpc7734

mfrerkes said:


> I wonder how Brampton taxpayers feel about their dollars being used to prop up an insolvent team in a market that has not supported hockey. This is a misuse of public funds, and will probably not be enough to keep the team around more than a few additional years.
> 
> What a waste.




Nailed it,


----------



## Clinton Comets EHL

mfrerkes said:


> I wonder how Brampton taxpayers feel about their dollars being used to prop up an insolvent team in a market that has not supported hockey. This is a misuse of public funds, and will probably not be enough to keep the team around more than a few additional years.
> 
> What a waste.




Agree, truly amazing.


----------



## JackalsKnuckles

Best line in the whole article:


" Councillor Gurpreet Dhillon, the only other dissenting vote, said taxpayers shouldnâ€™t be on the hook when private enterprise fails. 

â€œI canâ€™t support a bailout, at the expense of taxpayers, for poor planning and poor business decisions,â€ said Dhillon. "


Can't believe the team owner had the balls to ask for a handout in the first place.


----------



## Mightygoose

We just may have Glendale North. Though it's not fully what the Beast wanted (1.5/year) I take this will keep them in for the next three season despite the continues losses.

My understanding the Steelheads claim Brampton in their territory so no chance on another OHL team coming to town ever. Plus Raptors 905 forced the NBLC's A's up to Orangeville, they won't get another major tenant, so they caved.

Oh well, I'm not a Brampton taxpayer but it sure shows how the build it and they will come planning can be the gift that keeps on giving.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

The City of Brampton has an operating budget of $607 million for 2016. There's also a $113 million capital budget. Half a million bucks is a rounding error. The payback in taxes generated (payroll taxes, sales taxes, lodging taxes, etc.) is probably a third of that. Net cost around $350,000. 

http://www.brampton.ca/EN/City-Hall/budget/Budget-Archive/Pages/2016-Budget.aspx

I guarantee that I could find millions upon millions of wasted funds in the Brampton OP and CE budgets with my eyes closed. They could easily be found in unnecessary or duplicate services-and that's just scratching the surface of budget inefficiencies. 

The moral indignation about this subsidy is comical. Much ado about nothing.


----------



## mfrerkes

Cyclones Rock said:


> I guarantee that I could find millions upon millions of wasted funds in the Brampton OP and CE budgets with my eyes closed. They could easily be found in unnecessary or duplicate services-and that's just scratching the surface of budget inefficiencies.




Well, then I guess every failing business owner in Brampton should just line up in front of city hall and ask for their free $500,000 every year for the next three years. If that's the precedent they're going to set, I don't see why anyone wishing for a handout should be denied.

I'd support propping up a team (temporarily) if there's a strong case that one could make for doing so. However, history shows Brampton couldn't make the OHL work. Their lack of fan support in the ECHL is equally disturbing. Pouring over $1,000,000 of public funds into an already proven loser isn't going to change the eventual outcome.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

mfrerkes said:


> Well, then I guess every failing business owner in Brampton should just line up in front of city hall and ask for their free $500,000 every year for the next three years. If that's the precedent they're going to set, I don't see why anyone wishing for a handout should be denied.
> 
> I'd support propping up a team (temporarily) if there's a strong case that one could make for doing so. However, history shows Brampton couldn't make the OHL work. Their lack of fan support in the ECHL is equally disturbing. Pouring over $1,000,000 of public funds into an already proven loser isn't going to change the eventual outcome.




I happen to think that The Beast won't survive even with this amount of subsidy-unless they affiliate with the Leafs. Even that might not be enough. The hockey market is very crowded in the Greater Toronto Area and that there really is no fundamental need for an ECHL franchise in the area-even if they are affiliated with the Leafs. 

I also know that it's the equivalent of 4-6 hours of the city's spending when annualized. It's an even smaller amount when one considers aggregate governmental-city, province, federal and whatever constitutes a county in Canada-spending in Brampton. The subsidy probably comes to less than 15 minutes of yearly aggregate governmental expenditures in Brampton. It's a needle in a hay stack.

Governments prop up all sorts of losing propositions-many over extremely long periods of time. It's not a political board so I'll leave it at that. So when they toss money at a sport I enjoy in a league which I follow, it doesn't bother me in the least. It wouldn't bother me even if were a Brampton taxpayer.


----------



## JDogindy

JungleJON said:


> http://www.bramptonguardian.com/new...-5m-lifeline-to-struggling-beast-hockey-club/




Sorry, I kinda laughed a bit when I saw that.

I can understand it in some ways, but the fact of the matter is that Brampton just isn't a hockey town. The demographics of the city lean more towards Asians, who aren't as interested in hockey as other boroughs of the GTA. Also, it doesn't help when you had an OHL team for 15 years that couldn't draw flies, and you have had a really bad hockey team, which doesn't help for attendance because who wants to pay good money to see a chronic loser?


----------



## Cacciaguida

People complaining over paying these taxes will complain that their taxes are going towards something else.

Then others will complain there's no local sports team and a lack of community.

This is the same city that bought a giant screen to watch Leaf games.


----------



## Cacciaguida

JDogindy said:


> Sorry, I kinda laughed a bit when I saw that.
> 
> I can understand it in some ways, but the fact of the matter is that Brampton just isn't a hockey town. The demographics of the city lean more towards Asians, who aren't as interested in hockey as other boroughs of the GTA. Also, it doesn't help when you had an OHL team for 15 years that couldn't draw flies, and you have had a really bad hockey team, which doesn't help for attendance because who wants to pay good money to see a chronic loser?





Whaler fans 

The team needs to stick around and not be a mickey mouse organization. Still waiting on a winning season in the ECHL.


----------



## uncleben

The ECHL needs investment from the NHL.


What I would like is for Brampton to be purchased by MLSE and run as Leafs property.
Solidify that affiliation and show the fans that there is an ownership group that cares, and that could go a long way.


----------



## mfrerkes

Cyclones Rock said:


> I happen to think that The Beast won't survive even with this amount of subsidy




You're probably correct. That's why it's an even bigger waste of money, IMO, because it won't really achieve the desired objective. The people of Brampton have already voted with their feet, and the results of that demonstrate they're not really into ECHL hockey. I doubt the city's interference in this matter will change the final result all that much.




Cyclones Rock said:


> So when they toss money at a sport I enjoy in a league which I follow, it doesn't bother me in the least. It wouldn't bother me even if were a Brampton taxpayer.




I'm sure it wouldn't. Socialism is great, as long as it supports the particular things you want. Even so-called conservatives in America love having a socialized military. However, I believe government functions best when it sticks to the very basics. Extraneous ventures (like minor league hockey) aren't life-saving services, so using public funds to keep them around seems like an abuse of the taxpayer's trust.


----------



## Cyclones Rock

mfrerkes said:


> I'm sure it wouldn't. Socialism is great, as long as it supports the particular things you want. Even so-called conservatives in America love having a socialized military. * However, I believe government functions best when it sticks to the very basics. * Extraneous ventures (like minor league hockey) aren't life-saving services, so using public funds to keep them around seems like an abuse of the taxpayer's trust.




It hasn't done that since the 1930s. Get used to it


----------



## LeafChief

Cacciaguida said:


> People complaining over paying these taxes will complain that their taxes are going towards something else.
> 
> Then others will complain there's no local sports team and a lack of community.
> 
> This is the same city that bought a giant screen to watch Leaf games.




Just wait until the Leafs are good. That screen will need to quadruple in size.


----------



## jason2020

uncleben85 said:


> The ECHL needs investment from the NHL.
> 
> 
> What I would like is for Brampton to be purchased by MLSE and run as Leafs property.
> Solidify that affiliation and show the fans that there is an ownership group that cares, and that could go a long way.




I think Mlse would move them out of Brampton.


----------



## Flukeshot

As a soon to be Brampton tax payer, this is a joke. What's the average attendance? 2,500? I hate that my money is going to be given to a millionaire to help stroke his ego and owning a minor league hockey team. He's clearly not a good businessman if he agreed to a lease the team can't afford all of three years later. So frustrating that he used the line you'll never get a team again. No one cares! If the OHL failed what chance does the ECHL have?

The city would be better off buying $500,000 worth of tickets and handing them out for free to the public or schools.

The population of Brampton is about 500,000. I guarantee if you held a referendum people would vote to save $1 each than have the team.

In regards to the outdoor big screen, more ppl watch it than the Beast. It's centrally located. The arena complex is all alone in a field and many predicted from the beginning that would prevent any team from drawing well. There are no other businesses benefitting from the team.


----------



## jason2020

Flukeshot said:


> As a soon to be Brampton tax payer, this is a joke. What's the average attendance? 2,500? I hate that my money is going to be given to a millionaire to help stroke his ego and owning a minor league hockey team. He's clearly not a good businessman if he agreed to a lease the team can't afford all of three years later. So frustrating that he used the line you'll never get a team again. No one cares! If the OHL failed what chance does the ECHL have?
> 
> The city would be better off buying $500,000 worth of tickets and handing them out for free to the public or schools.
> 
> The population of Brampton is about 500,000. I guarantee if you held a referendum people would vote to save $1 each than have the team.
> 
> In regards to the outdoor big screen, more ppl watch it than the Beast. It's centrally located. The arena complex is all alone in a field and many predicted from the beginning that would prevent any team from drawing well. There are no other businesses benefitting from the team.




Say Brampton buys the arena saves the team and next year attendance drops to 1500 and the owner says we need more money my point is the city could be opening a door they might not want to open.


----------



## Flukeshot

jason2020 said:


> Say Brampton buys the arena saves the team and next year attendance drops to 1500 and the owner says we need more money my point is the city could be opening a door they might not want to open.




The City actually already owns the facility, but it is operated by Realstar Inc. For those unfamiliar with the Powerade Centre, it is a multi-rink arena primarily used for Youth and Rec hockey/lacrosse, with Baseball and cricket field. It's a Community Centre. It hosts many non-sporting events. It'd be fine without the Beast or a tenant of the like. Just check the events list at poweradecentre.com and you'll see what sells. It ain't AA hockey.

And this is all coming from me, a hockey fan, with two young boys I'd love to take to an affordable hockey game. But I'm the minority and the other tax payers shouldn't have to be penalized, as we know there is no return on the investment here.


----------



## Cacciaguida

I'm sure the city has already found worse ways to spend that type of money.

I'm a hockey fan and I get to see more hockey at least for a few more years. This pleases me.


----------

