Winnipeg gets an NHL team back
- Thread starter freakofnature
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
-
91Replies
-
3KViews
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
simply becasue the AHL/NHL players move between the two fairly frequently, the Sens franchise is in NY state it would be dumb to have them in Arizona due tot he time and cost of moving players at short notice, belive me the AHL affiliates have no loyalty to their chosen locations
freakofnature
Vampire
My guess would be the teams would sooner change affiliation than location. Guess it depends on who owns the affiliates.
The Flames had their AHL affiliate out in New Brunswick for the longest time. I guess they didn't mind the extra travel.
freakofnature
Vampire
i wish them well
they better hope and pray the dollar stays strong
they better hope and pray the dollar stays strong
Alien Allen
Froggy the Prick
wish they had done this a few weeks ago.
hoping the Wings move to the east where they belong but it is too late to have that happen the upcoming season
if Bettman screws us and keeps us in the west he can go fuck himself
hoping the Wings move to the east where they belong but it is too late to have that happen the upcoming season
if Bettman screws us and keeps us in the west he can go fuck himself
I like how you did the last part in yellow... :willy_nilly:
will be interesting to see how they reshape the league
Detroit or Columbus would all be the best candidates to move to the east.
Actually, Nashville makes the most sense to be honest... they could move straight into the Southeast Division to replace the Thrashers.
Detroit,Boston,Montreal,New York,Toronto and Chicago should make up a division one year....
agreed:thumbup
Maybe you all should just form your own league... God, I don't get the whole "original six" shit. You don't see original NL or AL teams doing that. The NL Central is about as close as it gets to that with the Cubs, Cardinals, Reds, and Pirates. But the original six stuff would be like the Cubs, Braves, Giants, and Phillies demanded to be in the same division as each other (the only pre-1900 NL teams).
I guess I just don't understand. :shrug:
Nope, cause than you can't have a Detroit or Chicago vs Montreal or Boston for the Cup .. Having two originals from the original 6 is what makes those markets what they are..
it is the nostalgia...
I guess so... but the NL has a far longer history than the NHL (original six era) does, and you don't see those teams clamoring to be in the same division. It just doesn't make sense to me. Hell, the two oldest NL franchises are the Cubs and Braves, and they aren't even in the same division. The only pre-1900 teams in the same division currently are the Braves and Phillies.
Damn crazy hockey people. :24:
Here's what I think it is, just saying.
Hockey is different than baseball in that regard, as every region of the US has a warm season, and kids grow up playing baseball most commonly. I think that's why baseball is always called America's game. You play it in gym, in the yard, doesn't take much to play.
Hockey used to be more of a cold winter Canada/US regional thing when it started (obviously you can build an ice rink anywhere, and a lot of areas have, but it's only been relatively recently that hockey has exploded in popularity). In Canada and areas of the US that make backyard ice hockey possible...it's huge there. It was just about exposure initially, I think.
The Original Six teams just represent the heart of hockey to a lot of fans more than historical early teams in baseball. They win, they have huge fanbases.
I'm sure that phenomena will fade as other teams get more money and success.
79,563Threads
2,190,767Messages
5,007Members