The Curiosities of Hockey History
You're going to read a lot about the history of the Ottawa Senators this week as the team prepares for the return of the Stanley Cup final to the nation's capital for the first time in 80 years.
Since the modern Senators are only 15 years old, however, it's not quite waxing nostaligic.
It's more about looking back and marvelling at how the Sens landed their franchise in the first place.
![]() |
| SHAUN BEST/REUTERS |
| After becoming an NHL expansion team in 1990, the Ottawa Senators reached the Stanley Cup final in 2007. |
And probably how they didn't deserve to. I'll never forget being there on Dec. 6, 1990 at the plush Breaker's Hotel in West Palm Beach as then NHL president John Ziegler sat at a press conference with Bruce Firestone of Ottawa on one side and Phil Esposito of the successful Tampa bidder on the other, announcing the NHL's two newest teams.
Esposito was all wisecracks and smiles, having somehow convinced the NHL board of governors to give him a team. The phlegmatic Firestone looked mostly surprised. Stunned, really, as he should have been. He knew he'd just pulled a fast one.
No one has ever proven anything, of course, but it's reasonable to assume that the undying greed of the Maple Leafs - then owned by Harold Ballard - was largely responsible for helping Ottawa get a team, an intriguing happenstance given that the Sens have now managed to supercede the Leafs as the province's top NHL team, at least in terms of on-ice achievements.
Back in August, 1990, Ottawa was one of 11 initial bidders for two NHL franchises during the final days of John Ziegler's rather unimpressive run as NHL boss. The other bidders were Hamilton, Milwaukee, St. Petersburg, Tampa Bay, Houston, Miami, Orlando, Phoenix, San Diego and Seattle. Milwaukee - failed suitors for Pittsburgh this year - and Phoenix - which eventually landed the Winnipeg Jets - soon dropped out.
The St. Petersburg bid was backed by Peter Karmanos, who eventually got his mitts on the Hartford Whalers and moved them to Raleigh, with Jim Rutherford set to operate the hockey team. The Miami bid was fronted by John Henry, current owner of the Boston Red Sox.
Hamilton, however, became recognized as the front runner because it was the only city that came even close to meeting all the NHL's "requirements" for a team, including an arena, a lease, 10,000 season tickets and a wealthy owner. Tim Hortons king Ron Joyce was the money man.
Ottawa brought a marching band to the final meeting in West Palm Beach, but didn't have the money or an arena. Firestone headed Terrace Investments, and the bid for an NHL team was largely a cover for a multi-million dollar real estate play in Kanata.
The biggest problem for Hamilton was that it would have to pay indemnification fees to Toronto and Buffalo, but the NHL refused to allow negotiations on a figure before the franchises were awarded.
That left Joyce in a tough spot. Without being able to budget his total costs, he suggested to the NHL board that he would pay his $50 million franchise fee in pieces - $5 million that day, $25 million the next year and the rest over the following seven years.
That gave the NHL governors their out. They instead took the two bids that agreed to pay the $50 million up front, Ottawa and Tampa Bay, even though neither had the money nor would ultimately be able to adhere to the payment schedule. The NHL wanted to be in the Sunshine State, so clearly Ottawa got the nod ahead of Hamilton.
The Leafs, on the other hand, didn't want Hamilton, just as more than a decade later they didn't want Eugene Melnyk, the current owner of the Sens, to buy Maple Leaf Gardens as a home for his St. Mike's Majors. The Leafs didn't have to formally "block" Hamilton - every other NHL team knew going in what the deal was.
On the basis of quality and meeting the league's criteria, the two winning bids should have been St. Petersburg, with Karmanos, and Hamilton. But they were denied. Screwed, really. Karmanos eventually got the Whalers, while Joyce for a time owned a piece of the Calgary Flames before getting out of the hockey business again.
Would Hamilton have been more successful than Ottawa or Tampa Bay? Certainly, Hamilton would have caused far fewer headaches for the league in the initial seven or eight years after expansion. That said, rising salaries in the late 1990s might well have driven Hamilton out of business, and it's not clear whether the city would have been able to replace Copps Coliseum over time with the top quality rinks both Ottawa and Tampa enjoy today. Maybe yes, maybe no.
That said, desperation, both financially and competitively, forced both the Senators and Lightning to eventually work out their problems and succeed. In both cases, quality ownership eventually arrived, and economic uncertainty meant both had to work a little harder at putting a good team on the ice. Sinking so low in the standings, it's also worth pointing out, allowed both teams to add good young players over time.
The fact that the Leafs have always been terrified of competition, on the other hand, is why they've been able to live such a cushy existence and have never faced the urgency to win in order to stay alive.
That's a big part of the reason why the Leafs haven't hosted a Stanley Cup final game in 40 years, while the Lightning already have a Cup and the Sens will be the home team for Game 3 of the 2007 Stanley Cup final in 10 days.


It's just all so true. I remember when I was younger living in Whitby where people would talk about why Hamilton never had an NHL team, I would generally agree that Toronto should own this GTA market. Now, I attend university at McMaster U in Hamilton and realize how passionate Hamiltonians are about their hockey. I would have loved to see a team here. When the rumors surfaced about Pittsburgh coming to Hamilton, I was ready to buy my season tickets. Not just because Crosby, Malkin, Staal and Fluery would come (although, a huge deal nonetheless), it was because I would be able to buy tickets at a reasonable price and would not have to venture far to watch an NHL game. Even though I do not understand all of the economic implications of a 2nd NHL team in the GTA, I cannot see a downfall, other than lower profits for MLSE, which does not bother me either because being a Leaf fan for 20 years has not shown any results. There are 7-9 Million people in golden horseshoe attempting to get tickets to a Leaf game, a second team cannot hurt. It still amazes me to think about how die-hard of a Leaf fan I am and have never watched the Leafs play in a Stanley Cup Final or Win a Cup.
Posted by: Kevin Black | May 23, 2007 at 01:06 PM
Has anyone realized that since 93, ALL FIVE other Canadian based NHL hockey teams has been to the cup finals except the Leafs? '93 - Montreal, '94 - Vancouver, '04 - Calgary, '06 Edmonton, '07 - Ottawa. This hockey city is cursed...
Posted by: Andrew | May 23, 2007 at 01:10 PM
Damien, in a manner evincing your true sardonic genius, and perhaps the angst many leafs fans are feeling these days, you managed to simultaneously knock Leaf management past and present and impugn the big-league worthiness of the Ottawa Senators.
Posted by: Newton | May 23, 2007 at 01:23 PM
cox, why dont you move to ottawa and write for the newspaper there. you obviously have a hard on for ottawa, and you never write anything positive about toronoto! im so happy when this sesason is over, so we don't have to read your crap anymore.
Posted by: StarReader | May 23, 2007 at 01:43 PM
As rabid as the fans are in Ottawa Damien, Hamilton would have been an even better addition to the league because it would have given many long suffering Buds fans an alternative. It has long been suggested Toronto, of any NHL city could support 2 teams and the rivalry between the two would quickly become the NHL's best. It could only help the Leafs. Hamilton should be destination number 1 for a relocating team (Columbus, Atlanta, Phoenix, etc.). The Teachers should go back to marking.
Posted by: Darryl Weinberg | May 23, 2007 at 01:53 PM
All I have to say is, that Ottawa is in the final and Toronto is not. I grew up in Toronto and moved to Ottawa for University in the early 1990’s and currently live in the US. I have seen how the people in Toronto don’t want Ottawa to be around. Even when they were playing the Sabers most of the leaf nation was hopping that Ottawa will lose again. Mr Cox is no different, just a sore loser. No need to think about what if could have should have. Leafs had their chance with the Gilmore years to get it done and time has passed. Its Ottawa’s turn, they are the Canadian team, so lets just get behind them. Including the leaf nation.
Posted by: Niranjan Sathiya | May 23, 2007 at 02:01 PM
All too true . . . save that Ballard had already croaked by December '90 and the stalinesque thaw had begun set in. But, sadly, his immediate legacy in Leafland wasn't much better (and look where they are today). Hamilton was completely robbed, as I recall. Leafs could've used the close-by competition, of course, but they've pretty much always been too stupid and greedy to see that. Why actually care about the on-ice product?
Posted by: J.P. Zingrone | May 23, 2007 at 02:17 PM
What the Leafs need are a few years of near empty arenas. Maybe then they will stop taking us for granted and put out a decent team. Sadly in this market a near empty arena will never happen. Just look at the Ballard years.
Posted by: Andrew Hammans | May 23, 2007 at 02:37 PM
I like Cox but this is a badly written article. i read it several times and i cannot get a clear or vivid picture as to how Hamilton was screwed??
Posted by: Sony | May 23, 2007 at 02:40 PM
Do you know what you sound like Damian? A bitter Leaf Fan that isn't willing to give Ottawa its fair praise. That is because that is what you are. Say what you want about the Sens and whether they deserve to be where they are, or whether they deserve to be here at all. It doesn’t make the Leafs and less of a team that rewards its fans loyalty after 40 years of futility with a raise in ticket prices. The fact of the matter is there is a Canadian team in the Cup final and rather than be happy for them, everyone in Toronto is finding ways to discredit them...like this article. I don’t like you Damian I never have, I am just happy that you are ridiculously wrong about Hockey this time, And I don’t have to read you fumble or feign understanding of any other sport. How you still have a job is amazing to me but you do, must be your haircut.
Posted by: Joey Mack | May 23, 2007 at 02:47 PM
Perhaps Hamilton would have been able to survive the onslaught of rising salaries, and perhaps not. However, I guarantee that Hamilton would have had stronger ticket sales than places like Nashville or Anaheim, which rarely sell out their arenas even when their teams are among the strongest in the League.
1990 was the beginning of not only the league's over-expansion, but its expansion into a lot of shaky, articificial markets that never "grew the game" as promised. The NHL would have been far better off in the long run to ignore Florida and the rest of the Sun Belt, and concentrate on places like Hamilton where people actually care about hockey.
What a shocking, radical thought--sell your product where people actually want to buy it!!!
Posted by: Alex Lofthouse | May 23, 2007 at 03:04 PM
Good post by DC... so many variables. Hamilton now has a AHL team that a couple weeks ago was struggling to get 2,000 fans out for playoff games, and a lot of people say this is due to Hamilton's commercial and industrial base eroding... would a Hamilton franchise have been forced to move?
Meantime, since 1990 Ron Joyce's net worth has probably increased many times over as Tim's has become iconic. What if he'd had that kind of cash then?
Posted by: NRS | May 23, 2007 at 03:15 PM
Thanks, Damien.
I'm so glad you constantly (and with great glee in your tone) rub the Senators salt into the gaping wounds of Leafs fans this playoffs.
As a Leafs fan that really doesn't have the means to to attend a home game every other night and where a personal boycott wouldn't amount to a pebble at the bottom of a pond, what do you suggest I do...obviously, continuing to cheer for the failing franchise is wrong (according to you). Shall I give up on hockey, back the Senators and become a sports adulterer?
You've decried the blind support Leaf Nation provides the hockey club...give us a solution
Posted by: J. R. P. | May 23, 2007 at 03:21 PM
The feeling between Toronto and Ottawa is mutual - it's not just Toronto fans who are cheering heartily for the Ducks. In the reverse situation the same would be true times 10. I have friends in Ottawa, and I visit there often enough to see what the ad campaigns and restaurant promotions are like. The number one priority in Ottawa is that the Leafs don't in. Number two is that it would be nice if the Senators did. So don't go preaching at Toronto fans to be nice or patriotic or whatever and cheer for the Canadian team - the Senators are our #1 rival, the mutual hatred runs deep.
Posted by: MattK | May 23, 2007 at 04:33 PM
Dear crazy readers;
Cox didn't write that Ottawa doesn't deserve to have a team, or that the Senators aren't a "worthy" franchise. He wrote that Firestone didn't deserve to win (and likely didn't even expect to win) his expansion bid. Hamilton's bidders got screwed because they clearly had the best bid and still lost out to teams that didn't meet the league's supposed "requirements".
None of this should take anything away from the quality of fans in Ottawa or the accomplishments of the Senators in recent years.
Posted by: Adam C | May 23, 2007 at 04:46 PM
Everyone....
I am an immigrant in Toronto for the last 10 years. I am in the US fr work reasons now (in Carolina), the way I see it, I will cheer any Canadian team with my friends here.
Oilers defied all odds last year to reach the finals, I was torn between supporting Hurricanes and Oilers. Now I will cheer for Ottawa.
Do Leafs deserve to be in the final this season?, probably not. I will support any Canadian team that is passionate (like Oilers,Flames) and hungry to win.
Show some solidarity, and support good hockey.
Posted by: Satish | May 23, 2007 at 05:09 PM
Damien,
It's no wonder the world is falling apart when you read the responses to your article. People can't even understand what they are reading in black and white. What Toronto needs is a billionaire willing to pay the money and locate a team across the street from the ACC. Then and only then might the leafs actually be forced to ice a winner. Keep up the good work, you are one of the few hardcore Leafs critics with a voice in the media.
Posted by: Moe Green | May 23, 2007 at 05:12 PM
Damien,
This probably isn't the appropriate placce to post it, but I have a question. When the NHL was born, I would assume the the "National" referred to Canada else it would have been called the "North American" or "International" Hockey League. Now it seems that "our" cup and "our" league is primarily owned south of the border. Who ownes the rights to the NHL? Who owns the Stanley Cup? Wasn't it donated to reward Canadian hockey excellence? I would appreciate a little clarification here. If we still own the rights to the goblet, then let's start a Canadian only NHL. Surely we could affard to pay even higher salaries than the NHL teams we subsidize south of the border. I for one would be just as interested seeing Ottawa and Edmonton play the leafs than any American team. Would it fly and if not, why not?
Posted by: Moe Green | May 23, 2007 at 05:23 PM
Good article. Why people keep paying to watch the Make Beliefs is beyond me. If fans got together and gave the MLSE two weeks of an empty arena, no LeafsTV, no purchasing of Leafs articles, they may (underline may) wake up. I, unfortunately as it turns out, am a Make Beliefs fan. I used to say that the Sens fans did not have a cup in their recent history to backup their claim of having a better team than the Make Beliefs; well, not any more! Now the Sens have demonstrated that they are a better team and a better club than the Leafs. Right now, I am cheering the Sens, they're Canada's team.
Posted by: LeoSC | May 23, 2007 at 05:36 PM
Point taken about Hamilton's missed opportunity, but why the Leafs tie-in? Is it misguided of me to think comparing the Senators and Leafs organizations is like comparing apples and oranges?
The Leafs have always had money and a huge fan base... Ottawa started as a humble expansion team in a smaller market. Leafs management knows it can sign past-their-prime, future-Hall-of-Fame free agents... Ottawa historically grows prospects into high-priced talent but has a hard time retaining them. Before the cap, the Leafs have always had a large player payroll... Ottawa always worked with a smaller budget.
These factors produce two management styles that have both had their success and failures.
Ottawa is finally in the Finals, but let's not forget the cellar-dwelling years, followed by constant post-season heartache. They really do remind me of the Red Wings team from the early/mid 90s that eventually found greatness. As for the Leafs, let's not forget Fletcher's veteran-laden team that made back-to-back Conference Finals. Or Quinn's Leafs, who won the division with its team-record-breaking 100 points in 2000, sandwiched between two other Conference Finals appearances. Granted, none of that comes REMOTELY close to a Cup, or even a Cup Finals appearance, but let's not go as far as to say this franchise has accomplished NOTHING in recent history.
Yes, the Senators are in the Finals, and the Leafs haven't been there in 40 years. Yes, the Sens have had to deal with the urgency to win in order to stay alive. But I don't think those two statements can be intertwined in any meaningful way. It's hardly a model a team like the Leafs can follow (step 1: finish dead last 4 seasons in a row...).
If anything, the Leafs should be compared to the Dallas Stars, and some Islanders columnist should be comparing them to the Senators.
Posted by: kenny | May 23, 2007 at 07:08 PM
In some respects it is incredible that Tampa and Ottawa still have franchises, given the shenanigans of Espo and previous absentee ownership in FL and the economic situation that existed in Ottawa pre-salary cap.
Posted by: Jason | May 23, 2007 at 07:17 PM
Thanks Matt K
some of the comments are truly bizarre - this is a well written article that highlights the reason that expansion teams like Tampa and Ottawa have Cup contenders while Leafs have excuses
Kevin B - add to the fact that Leafs are the ONLY Canadian team to not make it to Cup final since 93 ,that they are also the ONLY ORIGINAL SIX Team to NEVER make it to final at least once since first expansion in 1967
Posted by: Terry B | May 23, 2007 at 08:03 PM
Can you imagine Leaf management having to compete with two Stanley Cup contenders, Ottawa and Buffalo in their market. Heaven forbid they might actually have had to put a competitive team on the ice. Naw, Leaf fans are drones. They would still pack the AC Center to watch crap.
Posted by: Bill Wilkinson | May 23, 2007 at 08:27 PM
With it just announced that Jim Balsillie is picking up the Nashville Predators, I think we'll finally see an NHL team playing in Hamilton for the 2008-2009 season.
Posted by: Nick D | May 23, 2007 at 09:55 PM
Dear kenny 7:08 pm
your arguments can be summariazed as follows
Leafs almost...almost...almost...
here's a fact - the Leafs have NEVER won 3 playoff series in one year - never - no spin can that ugly stat
Posted by: Terry B | May 23, 2007 at 10:02 PM