Monday, August 18, 2008

From The Ground Up, Part 2

We're moving forward with the fictional Icethetics-based hockey league I mentioned last Sunday. From those of you that voted, 69% are in favor of creating and branding a fake hockey league and 59% of you think it should be strictly set in North America.

Next, you're going to decide how many teams this North American-based league will have and how it will be divided up. I've created five scenarios that you can now vote on in the pollbar. They are as follows:

36 teams
2 conferences / 6 divisions

The 2 conferences will each be made up of 3 divisions. Each division will have 6 teams, meaning 18 in each conference.

32 teams
2 conferences / 4 divisions

The 2 conferences will each be made up of 2 divisions. Each division will have 8 teams, meaning 16 in each conference.

30 teams
2 conferences / 6 divisions

The 2 conferences will each be made up of 3 divisions. Each division will have 5 teams, meaning 15 in each conference.

27 teams
3 conferences / 6 divisions

The 3 conferences will each be made up of 2 divisions. Each conference will have 9 teams, meaning 4 or 5 in each division.

24 teams
2 conferences / 6 divisions

The 2 conferences will each be made up of 3 divisions. Each division will have 4 teams, meaning 12 in each conference.

I threw in the 27-team option just for something different — an odd number of teams, conferences and uneven divisions. I'm assuming most of you will just want as many teams as you can get and go for the 36 — and that's fine too.

None of it is set in stone. If you have a better idea, write it in the comments. The only thing I'd like to hold to is the maximum number of teams at 36 and minimum number at 24. I think 40 is too many and 20 is too few. Other than that, if you have a better idea of how they should be divided up, I'd love to hear it.

The poll will remain open until Saturday afternoon. Next week I imagine we'll move on to deciding which cities will get teams. Happy voting!

38 comments:

roccot said...

I vote 24, less quantity more quality.

Mike Phoenix said...

I voted for the 36 only because i know i may not do all 36 but i can have some time in doing at least 1 or 2 for each. I do hope there is a nice chunck of time to make logos.

Dare said...

I think 36, but in three conferences would be neat. If only because I'd like to see a Canadian conference of 12 (two divisions of six...east/west maybe?)

roohockey0023 said...

I really think we should only create teams for cities not currently represented in the NHL -- it's more creative, and also there would be less arguing about why some city didn't get in....think about it, there are a lot of cities, US and CAN, that could realistically support a pro hockey team, and don't already have one. If we let NHL cities into our league then we would almost be obligated to use all of them -- cut them out and there will be a lot less arguing.

Mike Phoenix said...

Hummmm i think Roo has a good point

Hockey Week said...

I disagree with Roo to a point. how can you let cities like Detroit, Montreal, Toronto, and New York go without teams?

there are plenty of NHL cities that don't need teams. Phoenix, Sunrise (Florida), Nashville, etc.

Are there really 30 cities that don't have NHL teams that would be hockey towns?

since we don't have to worry about talent levels and such, lets go all out and do the 36. probably 10 or so of those teams will be for new cities. i think that's good enough

Warrior19 said...

or we could include all nhl cities, and use a 36 team league where you could add 6 more teams. (Saskatoon, Winnipeg, Quebec, Hamilton, Hartford. Then maybe another US city like seattle)

Anyway i know its not up to me but that would be another fair approach.

I am kinda against roo's idea because theres no way in a major north american hockey league a city like toronto or new york or chicago would not have a team

My 2cents

jondp_83 said...

I like Roo's idea. No one can get offended at being left out if no current NHL cities are included. As a compromise, we could include the Original 6 cities as hockey musts, but I think the rest should be non-NHL cities.

roohockey0023 said...

Just something to look at; I put together a list of all metropolitan areas in the US and CAN that are bigger, in total population, than the smallest NHL hosting city -- Which is Buffalo, NY @ 229k(roughly).

US: Houston, San Antonio, San Diego, Jacksonville, Indianapolis, San Fransisco, Austin, Ft Worth, Memphis, Charlotte, Baltimore, El Paso, Milwaukee, Seattle, Las Vegas, Louisville, Portland, Ok City, Tucson, Albuquerque, Fresno, Long Beach, Sacramento, Kansas City, Cleveland, Virginia Beach, Miami, Oakland, Tulsa, Colorado Springs, Honolulu, Wichita, Cincinnati, Toledo, Newark, Anchorage, St. Paul, Jersey City, New Orleans = (39)

CAN: Quebec, Winnipeg, Hamilton, London, Kitchener, St.Catharines-Niagara, Halifax, Oshawa, Victoria, Windsor, Saskatoon, Regina = (12)

Not all 'Hockey Towns,' but something to look at...

freez said...

i think any city should be added we should just forget about the nhl and put wats best, it would be crazy to not have some cities of the nhl

roohockey0023 said...

also those are in order of population -- biggest to smallest. I'm not saying they all deserve a hockey team but I think a list needs to be gathered so that we know what we are working with.

motleybrent said...

Hey, thats a nice list. I'm from Texas, Fort Worth to be exact and I dont think....no I KNOW that hockey wont work in all those Texas cities. I'm going by the vision that we are starting a hockey league from scratch and there is no NHL to compete with. So that being said, Austin and Fort Worth are nice towns, but I dont see them with a hockey team and New York, Toronto or Dallas NOT getting one. And I'm not bashing, I live on the west side of Fort Worth. Our minor league team just moved to the suburbs.

We should be practical about this. Include all NHL cities, but no double dipping. New York and LA dont get 2 teams. I think the great debate will be what New Jersey will be considered. Where in New Jersey? Souther NJ people tend to root for Philly based teams.But hey, Chris says we are gonna vote on every aspect so.....

I just hope this goes well. Remember it's all for fun.

Vic DiGital said...

I vote for predominantly non-NHL cities, with maybe the Original Six being represented. The point of this league is to have fun creating new logos and identities. I've personally seen a bazillion (actual number...I've counted) variations of the current NHL cities and I long to see some new locations. People will continue to create new logos for existing cities anyway. Let them. Let's do something new and interesting.

I mean, do we really need another variation of a Buffalo logo?

And for added silliness after this is all done, I say we have a mock draft where we populate all 36 teams (to a point). That way, enterprising creative types can Photoshop some of the players into their new unis.

Stefan said...

How about a weird and crazy idea. Since its fantasy who cares about population. Why not go for smaller markets? I'd love to see a team from St. John's, or Drummanville, or Fargo, or Juno, or some other place that in reality would never see an NHL franchise even if the NHL expanded to 100 teams.
If thats not good we could do one for every Canadian province and every second U.S. state? Or if we have two divisions go one of NHL cities and one of non NHL cities?

PointMeAtTheSky said...

Yay. I'm very excited about this. I'm glad you've decided to do this Chris.

Wow, there's a lot of good ideas here.

I definitely think that we should concentrate on Non-NHL cities. This is a FANTASY league, so we can make any rules we want. So who cares if we leave out Toronto, Montreal etc? They have teams in real-life.

As mentioned previously, we don't want variations on current NHL teams. We want our own league.

On the other hand, this is also the chance to make, if only in fantasy, the perfect North American hockey league. Where franchises are granted to places where hockey really matters.

So, we could reach a compromise, where we include some of the current NHL cities, but create new identities for them, as well as invent completely new teams in Non-NHL cities. We could do an even split, half the teams from current NHL cities, and half the teams in new cities.

At the very least, I think the following cities should be included:

Saskatoon, Winnipeg, Hamilton, Quebec City and Seattle.

And the following cities should be at least considere:

Victoria, Regina, Portland, Milwaukee, Hartford, Halifax, Kitchener, London, Windsor.

I'm sorry for the length of this post, but I'm very excited. And I tend to ramble. But mostly excited.

Rayna said...

I would love to see a league put together where the players play for their hometowns. So divide up the teams based on where the hockey players are from. It would be interesting to look at what areas produce hockey players, not just what towns can afford to pay them. Add in up to 5 out of towners per team to account for Europeans. Just an idea.

PointMeAtTheSky said...

Oh, and here's another idea, it's just a suggestion.

Have everybody nominate our own home towns/city of residence (regardless of size or population, it's just our own little fantasy league anyway)

If more then 36 cities are nominated, the cities with the most nominations get in (so cities that have more Icetetiques regulars get priority)if any cities are tied, we can hold a poll.

Anyway, it's just an idea.

cptjeff said...

I like that suggestion... hometowns would be fun.

Hockey Week said...

i think you simply have to be logical about it. How did the NHL start out in 1917? how did they settle on Montreal (twice), Toronto, and Ottawa for that first year? because it was logical that those cities would bring in money and therefore be successful.

How did they later (by later i mean 1928), add Chicago, Boston, Detroit, and Pittsburgh? same logic: they'd be successful.

I think we have to imagine this as such: the NHL died (like so many professional and amateur leagues prior to the NHL's creation) some 20 years ago, and we feel there is a demand for pro hockey in North America.

So we know the history of hockey in North America, what cities did well (prior to the NHL's death) and we know that every NHL logo and name is still copywritten and cannot be used or copied for any reason.

so let's choose what cities will be successful cities that will bring in money for our new league. to hell with the NHL, just act like businessmen

Vlad said...

I see people are already clawing to defend the status-quo: 30 teams, Montreal, Detroit...

Let's do some research: what are the biggest metro areas that don't have NHL teams? I agree with Roo no NHL cities in the FANTASY league!

Mike Phoenix said...

I think its a must for this I was so tired of all the Wineing about Ottawa has toronto colours and its stupid. or this logo should pay hommage to a past NHL team. we need new and fresh and diffrent. Thats why i voted for the International. version. we dont know nothing about all the internationl citys and would be a better fit.

Hockey Week said...

yes, but certain cities demand certain colors. any team here in Pittsburgh that doesn't wear black and gold is basically shunned.

the major problems with colors, if my interpretation of the comments is correct, is the lack of matching the name of the team (The Ottawa Capitals didn't have Canada's national colors, the Vancouver Dynamo's colors don't look very electric, etc).

i'm really amazed that it's such an issue it is to completely ignore the NHL.

How was the WHA going to do it during the lockout? they created a league in the NHL's absence without using anything from the NHL, why can't we? seriously people, just be logical about things

Darrell Sharpe said...

I'd love to see St. John's getting a team, i dont think it really matters if the city could most certainly support it, this is fantasy afterall. I also think St. John's could bring forth some great ideas and possibilities for names, etc.

Vic DiGital said...

I second the hometown idea (or at least the nearest metropolitan area). We can even do regions, like Gulf Coast, or Four Corners or Rocky Mountains or whatever.

All I know is that if this league is populated with Montreal, Boston, Pittsburgh, Dallas, New York, etc, I'll immediately lose interest from boredom. Viable economics or hockey history is utterly meaningless in this FANTASY league. Make it fun. Use cities we haven't seen a million variations on already.

Please.

I also vote for one six-team international division. Who wouldn't want to take a crack at the Cairo Pharaohs or Tokyo Suns or Athens Furies or Moscow Hammers? By going international, we introduce so many cool cultural themes that never get represented in North America.

Puddleglum81 said...

I think after reading all the comments it seems that including the Original 6 sites makes total sense. so:
New York, Toronto, Montreal, Chicago, Detroit and Boston (6)

Add 1 Canadian hockey crazy town: Vancouver
and 1 American fairly succesful hockey town: Denver or Philadelphia, maybe Minnesota (maybe St. Paul so it's not the same) (2)

We're up to 8

Add in cities which used to have franchises next: Winnepeg, Quebec City, Hartford, Hamilton (a long time ago), Oakland, Cleveland, Kansas City and I'll include Seattle. (The Metropolitans won a stanley cup but weren't technically part of the NHL) (8)

That brings the total up to 16.

Next would be some large cities that don't have an NHL franchise but would make sense: Houston, San Diego, Vegas, Baltimore, Milwaukee, New Orleans, Indy and Oklahoma City. (8)

Followed by 6 small market teams, 2 U.S. and 4 Canadian: Portland and Anchorage from the U.S. and Saskatoon, Halifax, Niagara and London from Canada. (6) (I even have a name for the team from London, Foresters. London is known as the Forest City)

That brings the total to 30 teams. 6 divisions 5 in each division. I'll break them down in my next post.

Puddleglum81 said...

Ok. Conferences. East and West. I made up silly nicknames for the divisions just for fun, but they should make sense

WEST:
Orca division;
Anchorage
Vancouver
Seattle
Portland
Oakland

Tumbleweed division;
San Diego
Las Vegas
Houston
Oklahoma City
Kansas City

Tundra division;
Saskatoon
Winnepeg
St. Paul
Milwaukee
Chicago

EAST:
Lakes division;
Detroit
Hamilton
Niagara
London
Toronto

Frost division;
Boston
Hartford
Quebec (City)
Halifax
Montreal

Apple Pie division;
New York
Baltimore
Cleveland
Indianapolis (Indiana)
New Orleans

Those are my picks, I'm interested to see what you guys think!

canucklehead said...

How about bringing back the old names for the NHL divisions? Smythe, Patrick, Norris and Adams? Or are we just making up new names all together?

Hockey Week said...

seriously people, how hard is it to imagine that the NHL doesn't exist? or never existed? or if it still exists, that we can't use ANYTHING from it?!

jondp_83 said...

I could be ok with Puddleglum81's suggestion. I could also be ok with the hometown idea. I really agree that we need to use non-NHL cities, with the exception of the Original 6.

Also, I think we need to stay away from deciding which cities are "successful" or "deserve" NHL teams. No matter which city we say is unviable or undeserving, we're going to make an entire city mad. That's not the point of this project. Better to stick to non-NHL cities, make no subjective judgements about NHL cities being undeserving of their teams, and then have fun and be creative with the new cities and team names.

jondp_83 said...

Hockeyweek,

I understand your idea of completely ignoring the NHL. I think that would be a great way to set up a new hockey league in the real world. Unfortunately we have some overly-sensitive, whiney, gripey people here who take these things way too seriously. They'll make this whole project a living hell if we happen to insult their city by not including it.

Sorry for the double post, I'll try not to do it again.

Hockey Week said...

jondp,

unfortunately, you're completely right. i'm slowly beginning to believe that Puddleglum has something there...though i'd like to see some other cities included...but i guess that'd be too NHL-ish.

some people just amaze me...

but thanks Jondp, your double post was well worth it

Stefan said...

I must say I agree with going for at most the original six cities, and then bringing in all new non NHL cities. I really like the home town ideas but I think the majority of people may be from NHL cities or regions. For example, what about Vancouver? IF many people are from there they would vote it in as a home town but then again should it be considered since it is currently an NHL city? Also, should we consider cities that were once NHL cities but are not now? I think yes, but we run the risk of picking colours and names that were once used by the NHL and that would defeat the purpose of the fantasy league. Finally, although I voted for just north America, a international division would be fun, since we do not have to worry about the logistics and travel required in the real NHL if international cities were given teams.

Vlad said...

The largest cities in US and Canada which do NOT have NHL teams:

1. Houston United States 2028500
2. San Diego United States 1260000
3. San Antonio United States 1188500
4. Jacksonville Florida 805,605
5. Indianapolisa[›] Indiana 795,458
6. San Francisco California 764,976
7. Austin Texas 743,074
8. Quebec City (LĂ©vis) Quebec CMA 715,515
9. Winnipeg Manitoba CMA 694,668
10. Hamilton (Burlington) Ontario 692,911
11. Memphis Tennessee 674,028
12. Charlotte North Carolina 671,588
13. Baltimored[›] Maryland 637,455
14. El Paso Texas 606,913
15. Milwaukee Wisconsin 602,191
16. Seattle Washington 594,210
17. Las Vegas Nevada 558,880
18. Louisvillea[›] Kentucky 557,789
19. Portland Oregon 550,396
20. Oklahoma City Oklahoma 547,274
21. Tucson Arizona 525,529
22. Albuquerque New Mexico 518,271
23. Fresno California 470,508
24. Sacramento California 460,242
25. London Ontario CMA 457,720
26. Mesa Arizona 452,933
27. Kitchener (Cambridge, Waterloo)451,235
28. Kansas City Missouri 450,375
29. Cleveland Ohio 438,042
30. Virginia Beachd[›] Virginia 434,743
31. Omaha Nebraska 424,482
32. St. Catharines-Niagara 390,317
33. Tulsa Oklahoma 384,037
34. Colorado Springs Colorado 376,427
35. Honolulub[›] Hawaii 375,571
36. Halifax Nova Scotia CMA 372,858

roohockey0023 said...

go back thirty posts and start there...then make your comment. btw nice list vlad.

Peter said...

I would love to have an Indianapolis team. I love my city, and this would be fun.

motleybrent said...

So much fighting already. Jeez. If you are gonna put teams in non NHL cities, fine. I think thats dumb, but lets at least call it a minor league ok. I like the assumption that the NHL folded 20 years ago. But if this fantasy league is gonna make it. You gotta have a team in the major cities. And quit with the lists of cities that are big but dont have a team. At least do it right and use METRO AREA! San Francisco at #6.The Bay area is how it's known. Ok I'll buy that, but you do realize that San Jose is in the Bay area? San Antonio? Yeah right. I've already addressed all the Texas teams.

I think everyone all agrees that the Original 6 cities are in right? And a plethora of teams in Canada. Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnepeg, Ottawa, Quebec city....they are in for sure.

We could vote one at a time. Denver. In Yes or no. But that would take way too long.

Someone is gonna get their feelings hurt. My head hurts already.

If you use the NHL but no doubles, that gives you 28 teams. With 36 teams, thats 8 teams to play with. Unless we all want to admit that no one on here likes the Thrashers or something. Does anyone on here like the Thrashers? Panthers? Ok thats all I have.

Puddleglum81 said...

Patience everyone, patience. Let's make sure we enjoy this. After all, it's fantasy. I wouldn't care if it took us a whole year to make this right. And, more than anything, it's about the artwork to me, not the cities. Frankly, we'll have a much harder time coming up with mascots that aren't corny or already used (see IHA) than picking cities. Everybody keep their cool and have fun with this and maybe we'll create some awesome stuff.
I just hope Chris isn't pulling his hair out about this undertaking. We'll know in a couple days how many teams we're working with and then we'll have to figure out which cities are in. I don't think going city by city is needed. Maybe the first pole should be how many cities from the current NHL should be carried over (Original 6, 10, 20, all, etc). Then we can move on from there? I'm gonna start brainstorming mascots, just to get a head start. I'm excited about this opportunity and I just hope everybody can enjoy it.

jondp_83 said...

I agree with you completely Pudleglum; i had already started brainstorming team names as well, can't wait to see what we come up with.

Post a Comment