Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2010 7:16:03 GMT -4
Although I am a little Biased towards the Moose, I do agree that cities that haven't hosted the Mem cup should have priority. That's why I picked either 2021 or 2024 for the Moose to host again. I belive Saint John, Shawinigan, and Cape Breton are ahead of the Moose on the priority chart. You could even put Gatineau in that list, since they last hosted in 1997. Plus I'd like to see the Herd get there legit. 16 years in the league and no President's cup title Oh for sure same thing here as I dont believe from where the Mooseheads will be in their cycle that they would be great hosts as far as the product on the ice would go. And that is assuming even if their kids really start to click in the next year or so as it would take some mortgaging of the future to be sure fire contenders. IMO keep rebuilding and win a Presidents Cup within 3-4 years and if things are right for 2015 then try and host then.
|
|
|
Post by brec7 on Oct 18, 2010 8:00:39 GMT -4
So how long do teams such as Halifax, Moncton, Quebec and Gatineau have to wait until they can host again? 20 years, 50 years, never??? Ahem.... let's try this again, shall we? IMO there should be a minimum standard for Cup hosts and as long as there are teams that fit that standard that haven't hosted, it shouldn't go back to teams that already have.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2010 8:32:50 GMT -4
So how long do teams such as Halifax, Moncton, Quebec and Gatineau have to wait until they can host again? 20 years, 50 years, never??? Ahem.... let's try this again, shall we? IMO there should be a minimum standard for Cup hosts and as long as there are teams that fit that standard that haven't hosted, it shouldn't go back to teams that already have. Okay but under your scenario it sounds like what you are saying that if some team that has hosted and has a better bid should lose the Mem Cup bid to a team that hasn't hosted but has met the standard- that is what I am taking issue with.
|
|
|
Post by beauty on Oct 18, 2010 9:01:37 GMT -4
Don't forget it is the QMJHL My bet would be Shawinigan!
|
|
|
Post by brec7 on Oct 19, 2010 6:37:06 GMT -4
Okay but under your scenario it sounds like what you are saying that if some team that has hosted and has a better bid should lose the Mem Cup bid to a team that hasn't hosted but has met the standard- that is what I am taking issue with. That's exactly what I'm saying. And I don't understand why you'd take issue with it. Let's go back to 2003, shall we? That year the Remparts seemed to do a reasonable job hosting the Memorial Cup- as far as I can recall the crowds were big, we all know the Colisee is a fantastic building, and the team was competitive in spite of not winning any games- all 3 losses were by 1 goal I think. By your logic, they should have hosted the Memorial Cup again in 2006. After all, the Remparts only grew in popularity over those 3 years (Radulov + Roy) and the 2006 team was far more competitive than the 2003 one. If they were encouraged to bid again for the Cup, how could their bid have not been better than the last time? Would it have actually been a good thing for the Memorial Cup to be in Quebec in both 2003 & 2006? I don't think anyone would think that, but if it was just a matter of "best bid", they'd probably host it every time. Like I said... there should be a certain standard established for what a Memorial Cup host is, and as long as a team meets that standard and hasn't hosted before, they should host over a team who already has. If someone decides the Eagles team isn't competitive enough... the games don't look good enough on tv (could be an issue with the renovations ), the city doesn't have enough hotels (not a problem), the arena isn't big enough (not a problem), there's not enought community support (not likely a problem).. than yes, by all means give it to a repeat host. But for a city like Halifax to want to host the Memorial Cup again when there's a perfectly viable organisation available that hasn't hosted... that's just arrogant, selfish, and not good for the QMJHL.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2010 6:46:20 GMT -4
Okay but under your scenario it sounds like what you are saying that if some team that has hosted and has a better bid should lose the Mem Cup bid to a team that hasn't hosted but has met the standard- that is what I am taking issue with. That's exactly what I'm saying. And I don't understand why you'd take issue with it. Let's go back to 2003, shall we? That year the Remparts seemed to do a reasonable job hosting the Memorial Cup- as far as I can recall the crowds were big, we all know the Colisee is a fantastic building, and the team was competitive in spite of not winning any games- all 3 losses were by 1 goal I think. By your logic, they should have hosted the Memorial Cup again in 2006. After all, the Remparts only grew in popularity over those 3 years (Radulov + Roy) and the 2006 team was far more competitive than the 2003 one. If they were encouraged to bid again for the Cup, how could their bid have not been better than the last time? Would it have actually been a good thing for the Memorial Cup to be in Quebec in both 2003 & 2006? I don't think anyone would think that, but if it was just a matter of "best bid", they'd probably host it every time. Like I said... there should be a certain standard established for what a Memorial Cup host is, and as long as a team meets that standard and hasn't hosted before, they should host over a team who already has. If someone decides the Eagles team isn't competitive enough... the games don't look good enough on tv (could be an issue with the renovations ), the city doesn't have enough hotels (not a problem), the arena isn't big enough (not a problem), there's not enought community support (not likely a problem).. than yes, by all means give it to a repeat host. But for a city like Halifax to want to host the Memorial Cup again when there's a perfectly viable organisation available that hasn't hosted... that's just arrogant, selfish, and not good for the QMJHL. Okay so Halifax has to wait for there to be no other viable bids for the Mem Cup even if Halifax's bid is better at that particular time and would bring more money to the Q- thanks for clearing that up
|
|
|
Post by brec7 on Oct 19, 2010 6:56:12 GMT -4
As I said above... if it worked the way YOU want it to, you'd never see the Cup again. It'd be in Quebec every time. Is that what you want?
|
|
|
Post by Reesor on Oct 19, 2010 7:05:20 GMT -4
Okay but under your scenario it sounds like what you are saying that if some team that has hosted and has a better bid should lose the Mem Cup bid to a team that hasn't hosted but has met the standard- that is what I am taking issue with. That's exactly what I'm saying. And I don't understand why you'd take issue with it. Let's go back to 2003, shall we? That year the Remparts seemed to do a reasonable job hosting the Memorial Cup- as far as I can recall the crowds were big, we all know the Colisee is a fantastic building, and the team was competitive in spite of not winning any games- all 3 losses were by 1 goal I think. By your logic, they should have hosted the Memorial Cup again in 2006. After all, the Remparts only grew in popularity over those 3 years (Radulov + Roy) and the 2006 team was far more competitive than the 2003 one. If they were encouraged to bid again for the Cup, how could their bid have not been better than the last time? Would it have actually been a good thing for the Memorial Cup to be in Quebec in both 2003 & 2006? I don't think anyone would think that, but if it was just a matter of "best bid", they'd probably host it every time. Like I said... there should be a certain standard established for what a Memorial Cup host is, and as long as a team meets that standard and hasn't hosted before, they should host over a team who already has. If someone decides the Eagles team isn't competitive enough... the games don't look good enough on tv (could be an issue with the renovations ), the city doesn't have enough hotels (not a problem), the arena isn't big enough (not a problem), there's not enought community support (not likely a problem).. than yes, by all means give it to a repeat host. But for a city like Halifax to want to host the Memorial Cup again when there's a perfectly viable organisation available that hasn't hosted... that's just arrogant, selfish, and not good for the QMJHL. I don't think it's selfish or arrogant. I think it's about business. Halifax would make money off the Memorial cup. We have all the pre-requisites in place (Other than a top-notch hockey team) so why not put your hat in the ring? It's been stated before that by Halifax showing interest and bidding for 2012, it'll increase the possibility that they may get chosen down the road. I don't think there's one person out there that expects Halifax to win this bid. But we hope that it'll pave the way for 3, 6, 9 years down the road when we bid again. Teams that haven't hosted before have priority for hosting this tournament. There's no denying that. But it doesn't necessarily mean that they have to go through every eligible host before they repeat a host. If Halifax, Quebec, Gatineau or Moncton want to bid for the 2018 Memorial cup, and Cape Breton hasn't hosted by then, they have every right to do so. This does not mean that I think Quebec/Halifax should host every 2nd Q Mem Cup. And I have absolutely nothing against Cape Breton or any other city hosting. Just stating my opinion is all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2010 7:14:27 GMT -4
As I said above... if it worked the way YOU want it to, you'd never see the Cup again. It'd be in Quebec every time. Is that what you want? Well obviously Quebec and Halifax arent going to bid for it every 3 years so that is a ridiculous argument. I believe that there should be 9 years in between bids, maybe 12. I have no problem with Cape Breton getting the Mem Cup, I just find it silly that you are saying that even if Halifax has the best bid for 2012 they should be ignored and the Cup goes to SJ, Shawinigan or Cape Breton regardless.
|
|
|
Post by brec7 on Oct 19, 2010 7:25:54 GMT -4
I think we're pretty much saying the same thing here reesor.
I've said before I have no problem with a repeat host... if the teams that haven't hosted are unable to live up to the previous established standard. Set up a criteria; if the potential first time hosts can't match it, then go to a repeat host.
I was at the whole 2006 Memorial Cup, and saw the semi-finals/finals of the 2009 Memorial Cup. I might be a bit biased because I didn't arrive in Rimouski until after the Oceanic were eliminated, but I assure you that based on what I saw there, I have a hard time believing CB couldn't do as good of a job hosting. (With the exception of the club on the ice- but as I said before, CB of next year could put a team of the same calibre as the '00 Moose or '03 Remparts out there.)
Also, the whole money argument isn't as simple as people make it out to be. There may be more simple direct profit in repeatedly going to big cities, but long term there's financial benefits in spreading the tournament around. For one, the less repetition you see in host cities, the more of a big deal it is for a city when they host it, which raises the profile of the tournament.
More importantly (and this is the point people miss, unfortunately), a franchise can be strengthened by hosting a touranment financially. Since the tournament is more likely to be a big deal in a smaller community, they're the ones who most benefit from a raised profile.
The more strong franchises you have, the stronger your league is. If every team in the league had the financial backing of a Halifax or Quebec, the league would be that much stronger. Take Halifax spending the money to bring in Frk... if you give Halifax the Memorial Cup, is it going to change their capability to bring in a big Euro? Well, no... because they've already shown they can do it.
But maybe if you make Cape Breton a Memorial Cup host, they can rise to that level. Which in turn raises the quality of play in the league, which makes all its franchises stronger.
|
|
|
Post by brec7 on Oct 19, 2010 7:29:33 GMT -4
Well obviously Quebec and Halifax arent going to bid for it every 3 years so that is a ridiculous argument. I believe that there should be 9 years in between bids, maybe 12. I have no problem with Cape Breton getting the Mem Cup, I just find it silly that you are saying that even if Halifax has the best bid for 2012 they should be ignored and the Cup goes to SJ, Shawinigan or Cape Breton regardless. Why is it a ridiculous argument? How did you come upon that exact figure of 9 to 12 years? Your preference for what a Memorial Cup host should be seems to be directly in line with what would allow Halifax to host the most. What a coincidence. ;D You find it silly that Quebec would host the Memorial Cup every year... but I find it silly that you could have a perfectly capable team that's never hosted before and would choose to put it somewhere else. If it's about the money, put it in Quebec every year. If it's about the good of the league, spread it around. Seems simple to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2010 7:40:27 GMT -4
Well obviously Quebec and Halifax arent going to bid for it every 3 years so that is a ridiculous argument. I believe that there should be 9 years in between bids, maybe 12. I have no problem with Cape Breton getting the Mem Cup, I just find it silly that you are saying that even if Halifax has the best bid for 2012 they should be ignored and the Cup goes to SJ, Shawinigan or Cape Breton regardless. Why is it a ridiculous argument? How did you come upon that exact figure of 9 to 12 years? Your preference for what a Memorial Cup host should be seems to be directly in line with what would allow Halifax to host the most. What a coincidence. ;D You find it silly that Quebec would host the Memorial Cup every year... but I find it silly that you could have a perfectly capable team that's never hosted before and would choose to put it somewhere else. If it's about the money, put it in Quebec every year. If it's about the good of the league, spread it around. Seems simple to me. Okay so should Halifax have to wait until Baie Comeau has hosted before we get the green light to host again?
|
|
|
Post by Reesor on Oct 19, 2010 7:48:11 GMT -4
I think we're pretty much saying the same thing here reesor. I've said before I have no problem with a repeat host... if the teams that haven't hosted are unable to live up to the previous established standard. Set up a criteria; if the potential first time hosts can't match it, then go to a repeat host. I was at the whole 2006 Memorial Cup, and saw the semi-finals/finals of the 2009 Memorial Cup. I might be a bit biased because I didn't arrive in Rimouski until after the Oceanic were eliminated, but I assure you that based on what I saw there, I have a hard time believing CB couldn't do as good of a job hosting. (With the exception of the club on the ice- but as I said before, CB of next year could put a team of the same calibre as the '00 Moose or '03 Remparts out there.) Also, the whole money argument isn't as simple as people make it out to be. There may be more simple direct profit in repeatedly going to big cities, but long term there's financial benefits in spreading the tournament around. For one, the less repetition you see in host cities, the more of a big deal it is for a city when they host it, which raises the profile of the tournament. More importantly (and this is the point people miss, unfortunately), a franchise can be strengthened by hosting a touranment financially. Since the tournament is more likely to be a big deal in a smaller community, they're the ones who most benefit from a raised profile. The more strong franchises you have, the stronger your league is. If every team in the league had the financial backing of a Halifax or Quebec, the league would be that much stronger. Take Halifax spending the money to bring in Frk... if you give Halifax the Memorial Cup, is it going to change their capability to bring in a big Euro? Well, no... because they've already shown they can do it. But maybe if you make Cape Breton a Memorial Cup host, they can rise to that level. Which in turn raises the quality of play in the league, which makes all its franchises stronger. I agree that hosting the Mem cup can only make your team stronger. Stats: Average attendances of Q Mem Cup Hosts: Halifax 99-00 - 8452 Up 9.5% from the previous year Quebec 02-03 - 5443 Up 62.53% from the previous year Moncton 05-06 - 5800 Up 25.79% from the previous year Rimouski 08-09 - 4110 Up 1.85% from the previous year In this respect is a shame that the smaller markets with smaller arenas can't host the Memorial Cup. I understand there are TV concerns as well as financial concerns, but it doesn't give the franchises like Bathurst or PEI that aren't filling their arenas a chance to build momentum. It's no secret that there are more season ticket subscribers for a team in their Memorial Cup season because it gives them first crack at the Memorial Cup ticket packages, but it makes for extra butts in the seats and extra money for the franchise.
|
|
|
Post by brec7 on Oct 19, 2010 9:37:42 GMT -4
Okay so should Halifax have to wait until Baie Comeau has hosted before we get the green light to host again? Have you even read one word I've posted? Like I said... there should be a certain standard established for what a Memorial Cup host is, and as long as a team meets that standard and hasn't hosted before, they should host over a team who already has. If someone decides the Eagles team isn't competitive enough... the games don't look good enough on tv (could be an issue with the renovations ), the city doesn't have enough hotels (not a problem), the arena isn't big enough (not a problem), there's not enought community support (not likely a problem).. than yes, by all means give it to a repeat host. Clearly, CB is in position to meet the criteria based on previous Memorial Cup hosts. Unfortunately, Baie-Comeau (nor a number of other Q markets) are not.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Oct 19, 2010 11:03:21 GMT -4
(With the exception of the club on the ice- but as I said before, CB of next year could put a team of the same calibre as the '00 Moose or '03 Remparts out there.) How exactly? By my count we only have a 2012 1st to trade and if we're lucky that's a down payment on an all star but we need a good 8-10 of those to come close to that 2000 Moosehead team on paper. We have zero impact 20's unless you count Hertzberg but our 2011 Euro pick is our only marketable asset as it should be in the top 10 and land us an impact player. Is the young core already here enough to acquire 7 or 8 proven QMJHL all stars over the next 14 months? It seems like a hell of a task for something you seem to think is attainable. Personally I don't think you're giving enough credit to the previous hosts you're speaking of.
|
|