Email Marc

Blog Tags


Archives

Thursday, December 07, 2006

What's next? I'm not sure...

Not much new to report this morning. As I mentioned in the comments section, the rumors of Jeremy Law being suspended by the WSHL/USA Hockey are untrue. I'm not sure how that one got started, but there is simply no basis for it.

On the player side, there's supposed to be a league conference call today to determine what to do next, and I suppose this will lead to a dispersal draft. I'm sure the league will find some way to complicate things, however. I'll go way out on a limb here and put my money on the communication being less than exemplary, but I hope I'm wrong.

From Topeka this morning there's a post-mortem column in the Capital-Journal on what happened - from the perspective of the relocation. It's also includes a "what's next" for Topeka hockey in general. I spoke to the author, sports editor Kurt Caywood, while he was working on it, and am a little disappointed he made no reference to the NAHL. Topeka's market size, history of support levels, and facility quality would seemingly make it an ideal NAHL market, and I told as much to Caywood. Oh well, at least he referenced the blog.

Update: Whoops... my early morning sleepy-eyed glossing of the column missed this:
"A low-budget junior team — those who know say that a North American Hockey League team would be the best option; I say whatever — would give them hockey and still be able to survive without widespread commercial appeal, the hockey version of a hearty houseplant that greens up a room but lives in spite of neglect."
I still think Caywood could have done more to present the NAHL as the best option, especially at a modest (say, 3,000 seats) sized facility such as Topeka Ice has been conceived to be.

Labels: ,

Comments on "What's next? I'm not sure..."

 

Blogger stickboy said ... (6:29 AM, December 07, 2006) : 

Caywood did make a NAHL reference...

"A low-budget junior team — those who know say that a North American Hockey League team would be the best option; I say whatever — would give them hockey and still be able to survive without widespread commercial appeal, the hockey version of a hearty houseplant that greens up a room but lives in spite of neglect."

 

Blogger Marc Foster said ... (6:56 AM, December 07, 2006) : 

Whoops... that's what I get for giving it a sleepy-eyed glossing at 5:30 in the morning. I guess now I can be disappointed Caywood didn't do more to drive that point home.

 

Blogger ezstreet said ... (8:00 AM, December 07, 2006) : 

I think for an article about some hockey related "failing", it did ok. Usually this stuff just gets pounded into us as "IT WILL NEVER WORK!". This time it mentions it can work. It also mentions that we need Topeka Ice for more grass roots support. I do believe that is where Hockey will be grown in Topeka. If we have a permanent place for the kids to play, more will.

If more kids play then more adults will be interested.

More adults interested = butts in seats for hockey games.

 

Blogger mctopeka said ... (9:44 AM, December 07, 2006) : 

We(Topeka Hockey '07) have an interview with another sports writer later this week or early next week and we will make sure the NAHL is mentioned as a viable option for the Topeka market. Even if we have to start out in the Junior B Division(CSHL) and move up after a year.

 

Blogger ezstreet said ... (10:03 AM, December 07, 2006) : 

CSHL or MJHL to start off would be fine with me. I think the NAHL is our best option. It's high up enough to please the fans who like to see good compition. Not too knock the Junior B guys.

Hey, with the CSHL, we could see Coombsie again. Is that a good thing?

 

Blogger PIA Hockey Fan said ... (11:09 AM, December 07, 2006) : 

The CSHL will not be in Topeka. I cannot see ownership of the teams being willing to travel that far west. Maybe MnJHL teams would be willing.

 

Blogger One Timer said ... (6:07 PM, December 07, 2006) : 

ezstreet-

What did you guys think of Coombsie? I'm a Dubuquer (when I'm not in school) and was just curious to your opinion.

 

Blogger GB Puck Fan said ... (6:22 PM, December 07, 2006) : 

OK, so what's the deal in Topeka?

Bad owners? Every time?

Bad lease? Every time?

Bad fans? Every time?

Just curious, as an outsider who saw the USHL team - and others - fail, what's the repeated problem there...

And what is the population, I ask, being too lazy to look it up,,,

 

Blogger Marc Foster said ... (6:40 PM, December 07, 2006) : 

Topeka was a market abused by ownership. I'll let the locals go into the details...

City of Topeka is 121k, Shawnee County is 170k.

 

Blogger mctopeka said ... (7:12 PM, December 07, 2006) : 

With the exception of the first owner, we have had owners that thought they could just put a team here and that was it. The USHL was great Hockey but they didn't hardly market the team or reach out to the community at all. We had good office staff that was handcuffed by the owner and the GM of the last team here.
For onetimer, Coombs will always have a spot in the hearts of Topeka Hockey fans. We follow what he does in Iowa. His last go here as coach was brutal. He did the best with what he was dealt. The owner and GM didn't give him any control at all.

 

Blogger ziggy said ... (11:58 PM, December 07, 2006) : 

maybe this tilt thing will open the door for the Santa Fe roadrunners to move to topeka? this team needs a home that will support them and the organization. hopefully this town would support the team better than santa fe has.wouldn't be hard to do. the owner ,coaches, and players need a better home and it sure seems that topeka at least from the blogs would try and support them

 

Blogger mctopeka said ... (8:23 AM, December 08, 2006) : 

The Topeka Hockey Community and Business Community can and will help whatever team wants to move here or start here. We will not let the Tilt fiasco stop us from getting Hockey back to Topeka. Our efforts will continue.

 

post a comment

Links to this post:

<\$BlogItemBacklinkCreate\$>