North American League
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:33 am
- Location: Lake County
North American League
Triblocal is reporting the formation of the "North American League"...
"Earlier Monday, Northern League Commissioner Clark Griffith said teams in three leagues would play each other. But officials now say what is happening is formation of the North American League, with about 18 teams throughout the country."
http://triblocal.com/schaumburg/2010/11 ... r-leagues/
18 teams? Any idea as to where they intend to come up with 18 teams? Are the Washington Generals involved in this somehow?
"Earlier Monday, Northern League Commissioner Clark Griffith said teams in three leagues would play each other. But officials now say what is happening is formation of the North American League, with about 18 teams throughout the country."
http://triblocal.com/schaumburg/2010/11 ... r-leagues/
18 teams? Any idea as to where they intend to come up with 18 teams? Are the Washington Generals involved in this somehow?
I have some info. 76 game schedule (NL teams anyway), 24 out-of-division games.
Teams:
Calgary Vipers
Chico Outlaws (lease?)
Coastal Bend Thunder
Edinburg Roadrunners
Edmonton Capitals
Joliet Jackhammers (FL?)
Lake County Fielders
Na Koa Ikaika Maui
Omaha (?)
Orange County Flyers
Rio Grande Valley WhiteWings
Rockford Riverhawks
San Angelo Colts
Schaumburg Flyers
Tijuana Ambassadors/Tijuana Embajadores (?)
Yuma (?)
Omaha, Tijuana, and Yuma would be new teams. I'm not sure if Yuma would just buy the Scorpions or not though. And those teams are maybe's. And Chico and Joliet have issues to work out.
Teams:
Calgary Vipers
Chico Outlaws (lease?)
Coastal Bend Thunder
Edinburg Roadrunners
Edmonton Capitals
Joliet Jackhammers (FL?)
Lake County Fielders
Na Koa Ikaika Maui
Omaha (?)
Orange County Flyers
Rio Grande Valley WhiteWings
Rockford Riverhawks
San Angelo Colts
Schaumburg Flyers
Tijuana Ambassadors/Tijuana Embajadores (?)
Yuma (?)
Omaha, Tijuana, and Yuma would be new teams. I'm not sure if Yuma would just buy the Scorpions or not though. And those teams are maybe's. And Chico and Joliet have issues to work out.
- wellington
- Site Admin
- Posts: 580
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 12:52 am
- Location: Seattle, WA
[quote=""Jntg4""]I have some info. 76 game schedule (NL teams anyway), 24 out-of-division games.
Teams:
Calgary Vipers
Chico Outlaws (lease?)
Coastal Bend Thunder
Edinburg Roadrunners
Edmonton Capitals
Joliet Jackhammers (FL?)
Lake County Fielders
Na Koa Ikaika Maui
Omaha (?)
Orange County Flyers
Rio Grande Valley WhiteWings
Rockford Riverhawks
San Angelo Colts
Schaumburg Flyers
Tijuana Ambassadors/Tijuana Embajadores (?)
Yuma (?)
Omaha, Tijuana, and Yuma would be new teams. I'm not sure if Yuma would just buy the Scorpions or not though. And those teams are maybe's. And Chico and Joliet have issues to work out.[/quote]
Seems like a big money pit to me.
Teams:
Calgary Vipers
Chico Outlaws (lease?)
Coastal Bend Thunder
Edinburg Roadrunners
Edmonton Capitals
Joliet Jackhammers (FL?)
Lake County Fielders
Na Koa Ikaika Maui
Omaha (?)
Orange County Flyers
Rio Grande Valley WhiteWings
Rockford Riverhawks
San Angelo Colts
Schaumburg Flyers
Tijuana Ambassadors/Tijuana Embajadores (?)
Yuma (?)
Omaha, Tijuana, and Yuma would be new teams. I'm not sure if Yuma would just buy the Scorpions or not though. And those teams are maybe's. And Chico and Joliet have issues to work out.[/quote]
Seems like a big money pit to me.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 3:46 am
I'm very skeptical about this. I'll place the over/under at two seasons and I'll take the under. A team in Omaha? The Storm Chasers (former Royals) are moving into a new ballpark, and are the affiliate of probably the best minor league system in the country. Is this new league with a sketchy background gonna compete with that? Gonna try Tijuana again? Definitely have my doubts.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:56 pm
Big problem last season for the GBL was Maui...and the travel issue. Is the league going to pamper Maui the way they did in 2010? Not going to sit well with the Canadian teams.
I can't see that Maui makes any sense at all, unless there are 3 more teams in an island division. Tucson's sitting out the 2011 season. Maui needs to do the same, unless there are 3 more island teams in place for 2011.
Tijuana? Yeah, right. Just what the league needs. How many times did we try that, last season? We don't need teams incurring the expense to travel to a war zone and play on a rec field in front of a crowd of 15.
Unless the new league makes some hard choices, I gotta go with Cyclones under figure.
I can't see that Maui makes any sense at all, unless there are 3 more teams in an island division. Tucson's sitting out the 2011 season. Maui needs to do the same, unless there are 3 more island teams in place for 2011.
Tijuana? Yeah, right. Just what the league needs. How many times did we try that, last season? We don't need teams incurring the expense to travel to a war zone and play on a rec field in front of a crowd of 15.
Unless the new league makes some hard choices, I gotta go with Cyclones under figure.
- LaVidaLoca
- Site Admin
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:19 pm
Nal
ElPaso et all...If this works, these owners, and CEO's will be looked upon as visionaries...and if it fails...no real loss. I'm not saying it WILL work, but, if it makes it thru 2011, look for more teams looking for stability to jump in the mix in 2012. I have had many doubts about the GBL, but when you throw in 2 other leagues I am more apt to wait and see and hope it succeeds for all of the scouts, Indy fans and the cities.
I say good luck and keep playing!
I say good luck and keep playing!
Keep in mind that:
1. Joliet (city and possible new owners) want to go to the FL.
2. Lake County still doesn't have a permanent stadium
3. Schaumburg has a huge debt that's now supposedly structured as a Lien
4. The ULB lost its top franchise (Amarillo) and another location (Laredo) and is now down to some of its weakest locations
5. The ULB barely survived into 2010 when court injunctions prevented the GBL from taking the best locations. It's hard to believe it will survive 2011 in the current form.
6. As an amalgamation of 3 leagues there will be a lot of management issues between centrally owned clubs (of the GBL) and those run by individual owners (which in the NoL are used to overriding anything the commissioner says). At the very least they'll have to muzzle Cluck Griffith who lost all credibility years ago with his losing track record on expansion.
The NAL reflects desperate measures that try to prop up 3 leagues that would otherwise have lost all credibility. The winner in this is the AA which added 4 strong franchises and appears to be moving one to a stronger location. Even if the NAL survives 2011, they're unlikely to be viewed as visionaries. They will still be a major risk when competing against the AA or AtL.
If it would "succeed" the question is "in what form?" Is the NoL dead or will it try to break away again. Remember that the NoL in 2002 had 16 teams in two "conferences" and the owners roundly split it up. The league is now 1/4 of its former size and likely to be 1/4 of that if/when Joliet moves to the FL.
1. Joliet (city and possible new owners) want to go to the FL.
2. Lake County still doesn't have a permanent stadium
3. Schaumburg has a huge debt that's now supposedly structured as a Lien
4. The ULB lost its top franchise (Amarillo) and another location (Laredo) and is now down to some of its weakest locations
5. The ULB barely survived into 2010 when court injunctions prevented the GBL from taking the best locations. It's hard to believe it will survive 2011 in the current form.
6. As an amalgamation of 3 leagues there will be a lot of management issues between centrally owned clubs (of the GBL) and those run by individual owners (which in the NoL are used to overriding anything the commissioner says). At the very least they'll have to muzzle Cluck Griffith who lost all credibility years ago with his losing track record on expansion.
The NAL reflects desperate measures that try to prop up 3 leagues that would otherwise have lost all credibility. The winner in this is the AA which added 4 strong franchises and appears to be moving one to a stronger location. Even if the NAL survives 2011, they're unlikely to be viewed as visionaries. They will still be a major risk when competing against the AA or AtL.
If it would "succeed" the question is "in what form?" Is the NoL dead or will it try to break away again. Remember that the NoL in 2002 had 16 teams in two "conferences" and the owners roundly split it up. The league is now 1/4 of its former size and likely to be 1/4 of that if/when Joliet moves to the FL.
aabfan.com: covering the American Association from its very start in 2006
nlfan.com & nlfan forums: covering the Northern League online since 1996.
nlfan.com & nlfan forums: covering the Northern League online since 1996.
- Ken, Steelheads fan
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2415
- Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 7:59 pm
- Location: Gary, Indiana. Otherwise, known as G.I.
- Contact:
[quote=""nlfan""]Keep in mind that:
1. Joliet (city and possible new owners) want to go to the FL.
2. Lake County still doesn't have a permanent stadium
...[/quote]
Bill,
The Lake County Fielders have a permanent stadium. This is it:
All home games are now played here. What they don't have is a permanent seating bowl. Their fans seem to love coming to home games regardless, so the ballpark is yet another non-issue.
...with that said. The Fielders' future has begun to seem cloudy to me because of a firm lack of league choice at this late date. It has nothing to do with the ballpark. If I was a Fielders season ticket holder, then I would sit on my hands until I was certain the team was having a season before writing a check. The Rockford Riverhawks seem to be the only remaining Northern League team with a contingency plan. If the NAL doesn't pan out then they can go back to the Frontier League. If not the Frontier League then they can partner up with Gary in the AA down the road. I wouldn't have a problem writing them a check if I was a season ticket holder.
[quote=""nlfan""]
...
The NAL reflects desperate measures that try to prop up 3 leagues that would otherwise have lost all credibility. The winner in this is the AA which added 4 strong franchises and appears to be moving one to a stronger location. Even if the NAL survives 2011, they're unlikely to be viewed as visionaries. They will still be a major risk when competing against the AA or AtL.
...
[/quote]
Agreed. The NAL notion that they can attract and share national sponsors (suggested in their press release) is a fallacy. Other minor leagues have tried the group approach before and it doesn't work with regional teams.
...and with THAT said. The winner is the AA as of...this is November 2010? As of November 2010 the AA has stronger franchises. However, the conditions still exist that caused teams like Schaumburg and Joliet to have problems. No one is immune for now.
1. Joliet (city and possible new owners) want to go to the FL.
2. Lake County still doesn't have a permanent stadium
...[/quote]
Bill,
The Lake County Fielders have a permanent stadium. This is it:
All home games are now played here. What they don't have is a permanent seating bowl. Their fans seem to love coming to home games regardless, so the ballpark is yet another non-issue.
...with that said. The Fielders' future has begun to seem cloudy to me because of a firm lack of league choice at this late date. It has nothing to do with the ballpark. If I was a Fielders season ticket holder, then I would sit on my hands until I was certain the team was having a season before writing a check. The Rockford Riverhawks seem to be the only remaining Northern League team with a contingency plan. If the NAL doesn't pan out then they can go back to the Frontier League. If not the Frontier League then they can partner up with Gary in the AA down the road. I wouldn't have a problem writing them a check if I was a season ticket holder.
[quote=""nlfan""]
...
The NAL reflects desperate measures that try to prop up 3 leagues that would otherwise have lost all credibility. The winner in this is the AA which added 4 strong franchises and appears to be moving one to a stronger location. Even if the NAL survives 2011, they're unlikely to be viewed as visionaries. They will still be a major risk when competing against the AA or AtL.
...
[/quote]
Agreed. The NAL notion that they can attract and share national sponsors (suggested in their press release) is a fallacy. Other minor leagues have tried the group approach before and it doesn't work with regional teams.
...and with THAT said. The winner is the AA as of...this is November 2010? As of November 2010 the AA has stronger franchises. However, the conditions still exist that caused teams like Schaumburg and Joliet to have problems. No one is immune for now.
Last edited by Ken, Steelheads fan on Sat Nov 20, 2010 9:35 pm, edited 3 times in total.
- LaVidaLoca
- Site Admin
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:19 pm