Using licensing in USL, CPSL

[Impact supporter]

I was talking to Bxl Boy last night as Puerto Rico is applying for a second USL franchise at the Timbers-Impact game and in a remark to him I wondered :

Should ''franchising'' and ''territorial rights'' be scrapped in the USL and CPSL and be replaced by a licensing system.(used in Ireland and other European soccer nations) i.e. if you have a club no matter what area of the US or Canada (the Bronx in New York or Sudbury or to be more general, a town or neighborhood of a city) want to be in the USL or CPSL you have to apply for a license to play in the league, meet its standards (re: stadiums, players, etc) and be inspected by league brass to ensure that the club is following the requirements.

I open the board to discussion and debate.

Enjoy!!

[mjoni]

Totally agree. Grass roots local interest and facilities should be the primary driving force. Clubs have to be more creative and competitive to survive. And then, instead of three teams folding at the end of every year, there could be a promotion/demotion with USL D2.

[Johnnie Monster]

While I like the idea of free market competitive licensing, there will **never** be performance-based pro-rel between USL D1 and D2.

Teams currently move up and down based on financial stability. Many teams have self relegated over the years to keep their costs down.

Some D2 teams can barely afford local regional travel let alone playing in a cross continental league.

[Guest HamiltonSteelers]

I seem to be one of the few who has a hate on for the Leafs for denying Hamilton an NHL team a few years back (and it WAS their fault, Buffalo was willing to negotiate a territorial fee).

Down with territorial! Up with licensing!

[DoyleG]

Such territroial issues deal with two things:

1) Player pool

2) Fan base issues

[argh1]

First of all "Leaf Nation" shouldn't be afraid of a team in Hamilton any more than Baltimore should be afraid of DC in MLB.

That being said I think a league any league any sport should look more at the ownership rather than the market size.

If the owners can commit to a 10 year plan and place some kind of insurance to have a team for at least that amount of time then by all means give them a team and let the market place decide which team becomes god in that market place. But there has to be some legal maybe down payment to the league that covers 10 years to ward off fly by nighters. It's the old protected market vs free enterprise but some kind deposit in advance should ward off any speculative advances vs real business guys who have a plan and the loonies to carry it through.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by argh1

First of all "Leaf Nation" shouldn't be afraid of a team in Hamilton any more than Baltimore should be afraid of DC in MLB.

That being said I think a league any league any sport should look more at the ownership rather than the market size.

If the owners can commit to a 10 year plan and place some kind of insurance to have a team for at least that amount of time then by all means give them a team and let the market place decide which team becomes god in that market place. But there has to be some legal maybe down payment to the league that covers 10 years to ward off fly by nighters. It's the old protected market vs free enterprise but some kind deposit in advance should ward off any speculative advances vs real business guys who have a plan and the loonies to carry it through.

The Leafs used the territorial issue to block Buffalo from entering the NHL in 67 and, along with Montreal, to block Vancouver's entry as well.

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by HamiltonSteelers

I seem to be one of the few who has a hate on for the Leafs for denying Hamilton an NHL team a few years back (and it WAS their fault, Buffalo was willing to negotiate a territorial fee).

Yeah, That's the way I understood it as well. Pity that the media in these parts propagated the notion that it was Buffalo who objected. Only sparingly was it reported that the Leafs objected to Hamilton.

But the many masses reported otherwise. Therefore, its now generally believed by many that it was all Buffalo's fault. Just goes to show that you cant always trust what you hear and read in the media since few actually bother to check this facts. I don't have a problem with what the Leafs did since they are well within their right to want to protect their territory. I just wish it was reported correctly.

No offense to Hamilton hockey fans, but I did question the proposal from hamilton and whether the NHL would make economic sense in that city. The pitfalls as I see them:

1) Too close to Toronto.

2) Not economically vibrant enough. The region is big but the actual core city is way too small IMO. There is only one daily newspaper and one small TV station in Hamilton.

3) Hamiliton, As I see it, is not much beyond a suburb in terms of infrastructure: Only one airport with practically no commercial flights in and out. On the other hand, a place like London is actually busier. There is also relatively little in the way hotels and tourist accomodation in Ham.

3) Given their proximity, they( Hamiliton Franchise )would find themselves competing for ticket sales with Toronto. And, also competing for Corporate dollars. I can see hamilton owners winning that battle.

4) Hell, Hamilton is now on the GO transit line. Many people who live there work and commute in the GTA. Its practically a suburb.

5) The proponents, in my opinion, were not reading correctly their market. One example that comes to mind was the notion that their fan base would include Toens like Guelph. Well, on a week night, would it be even possible to commute after work from Guelph to Hamilton to watch a game?

If you are looking for a S. Ontario city who, IMO, might be able to support an NHL team, I would say that London stands a better chance. Its more modern, got a stronger and more diverse economy, newer & better infrastructure, and its a little farther from Toronto. Plus, It might even be bigger population-wise. Again, nothing personal against people here who live in Hamilton. Its just my opinion and it is based on Personal observations. The few times that I have been through London I observe: a down town with many patios full of well dressed people spending $$$, More office towers than I imagined ( including the headquarters of several well know Financial institutions), pretty good instrastruction( Hotels, media outlets, public transit)etc etc. In Hamilton, I saw an empty downtown core except for people who looked homeless or on some chemical addiction and little in the way of a modern economic activity. I may be wrong of course.

[Guest HamiltonSteelers]

Hamilton has a reach of 5 million people within an hour's drive. Given that the Leaf marketing machine has no problem selling out the ACC and gouging the **** out of fans without any remorse, what Hamilton can/could have offered is NHL hockey at a lower price... and that certainly isn't a problem for the Leafs. Most coming to games in Hamilton would be going to a top flight hockey game. People in Toronto are paying for a Leafs-brand hockey game. Not quite the same.

The hotel issue isn't all that important, as that could be easily rectified since most of the hotels don't run at capacity to begin with. Reasons why we only have one paper... historically, it's been strong-arm tactics from the Spectator has run just about any and every chance of a 'Hamilton Sun' or whatever title it may have. TV, the market is arguably cluttered here anyways, but Niagara Falls/St. Catherines has been very recently applying for a license for their own station, much to the ire of CH. Our local media limitations are more politically driven than economically driven. I'll speculate that Hamilton has to be the largest city in Canada with only one major daily.

London's biggest population problem is that the suburban sprawl hasn't happened or isn't developed yet. London may be a city of 300,000+, but 30 minutes outside of it can't increase that number past 500,000. With Hamilton, we're just around or over 1 million.

Population aside, it never stopped Oklahoma City from applying to the NHL or getting mentioned when relocation is brought up. Huge crowds for minor league hockey and a craving for a major league sports team hasn't stopped them from trying. OKC has a metro of around 1 million, but it's in the middle of nowhere and would be top billing.

That being said, territorial rights are bull****. Toronto could easily support 2 NHL teams alone.

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by HamiltonSteelers

Hamilton has a reach of 5 million people within an hour's drive. Given that the Leaf marketing machine has no problem selling out the ACC and gouging the **** out of fans without any remorse, what Hamilton can/could have offered is NHL hockey at a lower price... and that certainly isn't a problem for the Leafs. Most coming to games in Hamilton would be going to a top flight hockey game. People in Toronto are paying for a Leafs-brand hockey game. Not quite the same.

The hotel issue isn't all that important, as that could be easily rectified since most of the hotels don't run at capacity to begin with. Reasons why we only have one paper... historically, it's been strong-arm tactics from the Spectator has run just about any and every chance of a 'Hamilton Sun' or whatever title it may have. TV, the market is arguably cluttered here anyways, but Niagara Falls/St. Catherines has been very recently applying for a license for their own station, much to the ire of CH. Our local media limitations are more politically driven than economically driven. I'll speculate that Hamilton has to be the largest city in Canada with only one major daily.

London's biggest population problem is that the suburban sprawl hasn't happened or isn't developed yet. London may be a city of 300,000+, but 30 minutes outside of it can't increase that number past 500,000. With Hamilton, we're just around or over 1 million.

Population aside, it never stopped Oklahoma City from applying to the NHL or getting mentioned when relocation is brought up. Huge crowds for minor league hockey and a craving for a major league sports team hasn't stopped them from trying. OKC has a metro of around 1 million, but it's in the middle of nowhere and would be top billing.

That being said, territorial rights are bull****. Toronto could easily support 2 NHL teams alone.

yes, I agree that within an hours drive of Hamilton, you have a reach of 5 million people. But that includes mostly Toronto. Your point is very valid in your entire first paragraph but what I am picking up in your points is an argument for a second NHL team in the GTA rather than an argument for a team in Hamilton. And if you look at it in that sense, is Hamiliton a more viable location than say, Mississauga or Vaughan/York Region to name a few? Media is actually quite critical because it serves as probably the best kind of promotion you can have for product. But what is the viewership of CHCH even in the hamilton/ golden horseshoe area? I suspect most watch and read the Toronto media. Which will obviously give priority to the Leafs.

One counterargument you could make is case of New York Islanders. There are some similarities between having a team in Long Island competing against the Rangers and Having a team in Hamilton competeing against the Leafs. But the one differnece between Long Island and Hamilton is that Long island is a very affluent and wealthy community. Even with that advantage, things have not been all that rosy for the New York Islanders on the Financial side of things. they have changed ownership on a few occasions, have an antiquated arena that has often drew few fans.

[youllneverwalkalone]

I'm no F. Scott Fitzgerald, but I think Uniondale is more akin to Queens/Hoboken than to the beach communities of the Long Island sound. For what it's worth.

[Guest HamiltonSteelers]

The point I was attempting to make is that a second NHL franchise in the area is viable. I would prefer it to be in Hamilton, but you could put that team anywhere in and around Toronto and it could work. The media coverage is there. The established forces within the city has done a tremendous job at preventing media growth, which is why it will still be a long time coming before we get a second paper (it would certainly help current outlets for competition).

You will find the viewership for CH surprisingly large, as they really try to blanket the area from Oakville down to the Falls and Fort Erie. Whether people work in Hamilton or not is largely irrevalent since they live in Hamilton. It just means that the money made in Toronto or wherever is being spent in Hamilton.

If I'm not mistaken, no single city on Long Island has a population greater than 200,000 people, however 3 million do live on it. Between the Rangers/Islanders/Flyers, the Devils have largely survived since it was widely believed that the market could, and still does, support the product.

I personally get the idea that the whole 'small potatoes' mentality of our local media outlets serves them best and is most profitable. Doing the minimum and getting the maximum.

But I digress.

I would leave it up to the leagues to have a spine and make a decision about who gets what teams. If the league doesn't feel that, say, Hamilton couldn't support a second CPSL franchise, then so be it. But the cop-out of territoriality is just utter crap.

[jaydog2006]

It is hard to say if a second team would work toronto is a maple leaf town.Will they support a avg team i have my doubts.

[Jason]

If London can support 5-7 EPL clubs I don't see the GTA having much trouble supporting at least 2 or 3 NHL teams. The NYC area can support 3 NHL clubs and while there is more population, the total number of hockey fans is probably higher in the GTA than the NYC area.

I would love to see situations where a market has more than one club in it, regardless of league. In a way, it's only fair. Why do the Leafs own the Southern Ontario rights while the Flames for example just have the Calgary area? Both franchises are supposedly equal partners in the league but one has a exclusive rights over 1 million people and the other has control of 5 million(?). However, I don't see this changing anytime soon.

Jason