A better way to achieve the same result would be to reduce on-ice rosters from 18 to 16. Get rid of the 4th liners who only skate 1 minute a game and the goons whose only purpose is to fight other goons.

You achieve the same reversing of the distillation of talent while keeping the number of franchises up (and the revenue they bring).

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?id=2107129

Yet another article pointing out how badly the NHL keeps ing up.

 

Better? I don't think that the 10% (okay 12.5%) reduction could be as good as the 20% reduction. I don't know why else it would be better.

I do like the idea though as an Add-on. Why not do both?

 

DIdn't notice since I'm reading off Cdn press. They're right though.

Dummies.

 

My reasoning for better is that the 12.5% RIF would be enough to get the talent pool up a bit without affecting the league wide revenues and potential for drawing fans from new markets. If you want your 20%, then go to 15 skaters - 9 forwards and 6 defensemen. That's all most teams use anyway.

Anaheim, Carolina, Florida, Nashville, New York Islanders, Tampa Bay, and Washington... I think losing all those franchises would be a detriment to the league's well being. Relocating a few of the franchises (especially Carolina and Florida) to better markets would be better than dropping them.

 

Ageed. See you point. OTOH most of the teams that would fizzle are unable to fill the seats anyway... several are losing money. This isn't good for overall revenues.

Still like you idea... still say do both.

 

I'd like to see Carolina moved to Portland or Seattle (Paul Allen is willing to spend the money needed to make the team succeed, and you have natural rivals in Vancouver and Calgary) and florida move possibly to Chicago (northwest suburbs, perhaps), Hartford (restore the whalers! ) or maybe even Toronto (which would embrace and could support a 2nd team quite well). Keep the 30 though.

 

 

Will someone let Mom know when Marty's first game is???

 

Hockey schmockey