Report: Blues could host Hawks in 2017 Winter Classic

[abc789987]

Question for you all if this ever happens... Who all here would be going to this game? I know I'd be making a trip in town to see the blue play in Busch Stadium. That would be awesome.

[APOD]

Question for you all if this ever happens... Who all here would be going to this game? I know I'd be making a trip in town to see the blue play in Busch Stadium. That would be awesome.

I plan on going not sure I can afford seats, but should be able to buy standing room if its a winter classic. http://blog.tiqiq.com/2015/12/2016-wint ... ince-2014/

If its a stadium series I should be good to go http://avalanche.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=106616

[cprice12]

No. Detroit is in no way shape or form a top 2 rival of ours anymore. Yes, they are hated...but not a top rival anymore.
And you don't think the Predators are a rival of ours? They are a pretty big one actually. Much more so than Detroit is anymore. Our biggest rivals right now only include one original six team and that is Chicago.
I'd say, Chicago, Nashville, Minnesota & LA are our biggest rivals..and Dallas could be soon.

And the first Winter Classic in 2008 was Pittsburgh at Buffalo. Neither is an original 6 team.
In 2011 it was Washington vs. Pittsburgh. Neither is an original six team.
The other six have had original six teams.
While an original six team in the Winter Classic is a common thing, the NHL has proven in the past that it isn't some sort of unwritten rule that one of them has to be in there as the NHL has had two Winter Classics without an original six team participating.

Respectfully I believe you are dismissing the reasons why certain teams are chosen and others are not. I think we can figure out how teams would be chosen - I'll break it down into 4 categories
1) At least one time is from a big market
2) Marquee players on both teams
3) Rivalries
4) Intangibles - recent championships / relevance / sponsorships / logistics / stadium availability and size

While all 4 above are criteria I believe #1 is the main piece. So let's apply this to the Buffalo / Pittsburgh example you gave. You had a huge New York market in Buffalo. You have Crosby and Malkin. Rivalry? Eh not so much. Intangibles at the time was the huge stadium they were able to host it in. And don't forget it was the first one and that's huge.

Now let's apply it to St Louis and a couple pairings:
St. Louis vs. Nashville
1) At least one team from a big market? No, both teams are from smaller markets. The deal would die right here but let's continue.
2) Marquee Players from both teams? No. Tarasenko from St. Louis would qualify but Nashville doesn't have any marquee players. I wouldn't count Shea Weber as a marquee guy.
3) Rivalries? On a local scale I guess if you say so I'll agree. From a national standpoint no one would care.
4) Intangibles? Neither team has had a game. Busch stadium would be cool.
Outcome: Wouldn't happen - while you pass #3 and #4 test you fail on #1 and #2.

St. Louis vs. Blackhawks
1) At least one team from a big market? Yes, Chicago and proven ratings success in 3 previous outdoor games on national level
2) Marquee Players from both teams? Yes
3) Rivalries? Yes
4) Intangibles? Both teams have storied history with each other, original 6 team involved, new host team in Blues, Chicago's recent success
Outcome: This would work. I would apply the same thing to any of the other 3 Original Six teams as well as I believe these would all be exciting games. (i.e. substitute Blackhawks for NY Rangers)

I fully understand why the NHL does what they do. But it doesn't make it right. Myself and many, many others are just plain tired of seeing the same teams in it. If we are matched up against the Hawks, that will be the Hawks 4th outdoor game in 9 seasons.

Even you said you aren't crazy about seeing them in it this year. How do you think non-Hawk fans feel about them being in it again, and then possibly AGAIN next year as well?

I just disagreed with your comment about how the NHL needs to have an original six team in the WC for it to be a ratings success...and that's just not really true at all. Two of the eight WC's have not had original six teams in them. And while the Blues vs. Hawks would be a bigger marquee game and draw better ratings, the Blues do draw very well on tv locally and nationally. They don't necessarily "need" to be matched up with an original six team to have the WC be considered a success. That's an insult to the Blues and their fan base.

And as far as Nashville goes, Shea Weber is a pretty damn big name. He's an all-star with the hardest shot in the NHL. They also have an elite goalie...but I don't want too spend a lot of time comparing rosters. Both teams have enough star power, especially the Blues. It's not our fault others may not recognize the talent level of Tarasenko, Shattenkirk, Elliott/Allen, Parayko, Steen, etc.
Now, I'm not saying the Preds-Blues game is going to happen...it's not. But I'm just stating why I would like to see it and why it would be a good WC.

The Blues & Hawks are a bigger rivalry an would draw better numbers...but quite frankly, I'm tired of seeeing the Hawks in the outdoor games. That is my overall point. I'd much rather see a team in it's first WC than see same old teams out there. It's not novel for them anymore. I get a kick out of seeing teams out there for the first time. THAT is what interests me.

I would have loved to have seen the Blues vs. Hawks few years ago. But right now, meh. I'd rather see them play a team that hasn't bee in it yet, like Nashville.

[glen a richter]

I'm not wild about the outdoor games at all, I've expressed my suggestion at least once that if there has to be an outdoor game make it the ASG and have it as a multi-day community event with local juniors teams playing an outdoor tournament and a legends of the NHL game the day before.

If the Blues have to play an outdoor game, I'd prefer it was against Minnesota.

[Kerfuffle]

If we are matched up against the Hawks, that will be the Hawks 4th outdoor game in 9 seasons.

Actually it'd be our 5th outdoor game - we have #4 against Minnesota later this month. Tickets aren't selling well I heard and I'm not surprised being it's Minnesota and too many repeat appearances by us.

Even you said you aren't crazy about seeing them in it this year. How do you think non-Hawk fans feel about them being in it again, and then possibly AGAIN next year as well?

True - it's not special anymore in Chicago. I also know injury risk is greater in the cold weather and I want our guys healthy for the playoffs. The 2009 Winter Classic had so much hype being the first one. I was very much against the NHL adding 2 additional (Stadium Series) games each year - I feel it diluted the uniqueness of the Winter Classic. As always it comes down to the almighty dollar and where Bettman thinks he can wring the most cash from - and unfortunately that means repeating teams.

[dmiles2186]

True - it's not special anymore in Chicago. I also know injury risk is greater in the cold weather and I want our guys healthy for the playoffs. The 2009 Winter Classic had so much hype being the first one. I was very much against the NHL adding 2 additional (Stadium Series) games each year - I feel it diluted the uniqueness of the Winter Classic. As always it comes down to the almighty dollar and where Bettman thinks he can wring the most cash from - and unfortunately that means repeating teams.

Sure, he's repeating teams, but the problem is that 75% of teams in the league haven't played outdoors. And Bettman has diluted the crap out of this thing before most of them can even play one. It is an absolute joke that the Hawks will have played in 5 outdoor games before most of the league has played in one.

[glen a richter]

I, by the way, would not go to an outdoor game even if I was in favor of the concept. I can't begin to imagine the difficulty of watching a game from a nosebleed seat in a football or baseball stadium. Arenas are relatively small for a reason.

[WaukeeBlues]

Yea whatever. I'll believe it when it's officially announced. The Blackhawks part of that I believe.

Do the Blackhawks even have any more retro jerseys left to wear for outdoor games? They've had so many I can only assume they've gone through every vintage jersey design they own.

[Kerfuffle]

Do the Blackhawks even have any more retro jerseys left to wear for outdoor games? They've had so many I can only assume they've gone through every vintage jersey design they own.

Our only retro jersey was the 2009 Winter Classic. The 3 games after that were all ones newly created for the event. Bettman needs a new thing to sell each time.

[WaukeeBlues]

Do the Blackhawks even have any more retro jerseys left to wear for outdoor games? They've had so many I can only assume they've gone through every vintage jersey design they own.

Our only retro jersey was the 2009 Winter Classic. The 3 games after that were all ones newly created for the event. Bettman needs a new thing to sell each time.

I was mostly kidding just to emphasize the prior points of the Hawks having been in so many outdoor games already

I'm caring less and less about the whole "diluting" the outdoor game thing. Every team could have one every year (they don't) and at least locally for that market you know it would be a huge event, would sell out, be promoted heavily at the local level and nearly without exception fans that go say it's an amazing experience.

I don't watch all the outdoor games just because they're being played outdoors and quite frankly after the first 3-4 Winter Classics a lot of the novelty of it wore off on me even then before they were doing the "Stadium Series." I'll still watch them if I can and they're pretty cool still but if I don't have a dog in the fight it's not like it was in 2008 and 2009 when it was like "WOW!!! This is SO COOL" But that's just me.