Cincinnati, Kansas City, and Omaha have shown interest in NHL expansion

[JMCx4]

... I am surprised Tulsa has never thrown its hat in the ring isn't Bok Center a major league caliber arena?

... I am just curious if BoK is major league ready or is it an OKC situation where its built basic with the plan to flesh it out if they got a team.

The closest BOK Center comes to "major league" is its 19K seating capacity. The building is almost 16 years old, and would need significant interior updates to satisfy an NHL tenant. Add to that its location in a downtown area with minimal public parking & supporting businesses to draw hockey customer traffic. Presuming anyone with big money wanted to have a go at an NHL franchise - and the League owners thought Tulsa was a fruitful market - BOK would need either a complete makeover or more likely a do over with the same happening to its neighbors. Leave the market to the ECHL & hope they survive the next U.S. economic downturn.

 

[BKIslandersFan]

Coyotes are being paid by the 31 other teams to be part of the league, for whatever the reasons.

I am not really sure anyone has ignored or denied that point.

Unlike people just ranting like lunatics about QC. Fair enough you want a team there. So can they at least give us some insight on who is going to own the team? Nope, just ignore it because its inconvenient to their narrative.

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

I missed the fifth one, but that actually makes this whole thing even worse.

It's hockey. My Wings haven't been in the playoffs in quite a while, and ... well, we know what happened to the Thrashers. Yet I watch the playoffs whenever I have a chance. Since when did Canadian fans need "incentive to watch"?

I get that a sunbelt only SCF would turn off some viewers, but still, the whole point of sunbelt expansion was to get to this exact point where sunbelt teams experience growth and success. If Canadians care that their teams aren't bringing home a Cup regularly, perhaps it's time for them to do something besides propose ridiculous realignment on the internet and engineer scenarios where they'll get to watch the Leafs lose yet another important series. Vote with your wallets.

I get how unfair the proposal is, but that's the thing - sometimes things in life aren't fair, like the instances in the NFL where a 10-6 team missed the playoffs while another team won their division with a losing record.

And again the Sun Belt teams became successful at the cost of TV ratings. The NHL should want as high ratings as possible - and something like last year will not do.

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

The entire NBC era went by without a Canadian team winning it all. The last season of this era made it substantially easier for it to happen, but the Habs came up short in the Finals.

And with my proposed alignment we'd be emphasizing regional rivalries among the American teams. It has been decades since the NHL had divisions that either contained all teams from the Midwest, Northeast or West and never in the South - not counting the pandemic season.

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

I also have a counter argument against opposition to the North Division existing on a permanent basis.

There are currently two Division I FBS conferences spanning three time zones, both of them in Eastern, Central and Mountain. Next year two more FBS conferences will span from coast to coast. If those conferences are fine with that then the permanent existence of the North Division should be fair game as well.

 

[hammer42]

All of that is BS....the NHL enjoys far higher ratings than the MLS. In fact, it is not even close.



New Jersey was always the #1 choice for the relocation of the Rockies. In 1978, just 2 years after Denver obtained a team, there was serious talk of them moving to NJ. Your pro-Hamilton bias is blinding you from facts. The NHL is not coming to Hamilton.

NO you are wrong the Rockies where all set to go to Hamilton even the compensation for the Leafs & Sabers was worked out but the Mayor at the time & I can name him for you William Powell screwed everything up because he did not like the back room deals it took to get it done that is why they became the Devils do your research .

 

[hammer42]

If I recall correctly, territory is measured as a radius of 50 miles outside the city limits, at the closest points between the two city limits.

The closest point to Hamilton's city limits that Buffalo's city limits extends to is at roughly 42.94 N, 78.91 W, in the middle of the Niagara River, on the US/CA border. The closest point to Buffalo's city limits that Hamilton's city limits extends to is at roughly 43.14 N, 79.66 W. The exact coordinates point to an area that looks like it's in the middle of nowhere, but it's Hamilton city limits, so it counts. Anyhow, If we plug these coordinates into a tool like this, you'll see this (link goes directly to the below map; full coordinates provided by Google Maps)

View attachment 815778

Hamilton is within Buffalo territory by roughly nine miles, by this measure.

As for the question of why Hamilton and Toronto can exist side-by-side in the CFL, there might not be any rules defining what team's market territory is in the CFL.

I Just went to Google Maps the fastest route to Buffalo is 63.8 miles the other route the long way is 67.3 miles outside miles outside the sabers territory & do recall during the coyotes fiasco a decade ago the sabers did say they have no territory claim to the Hamilton market it was just the Greed of the Leafs that don't want team in Hamilton .

 

[BMN]

If I wanted to take @Big Z Man 1990 's idea seriously (which I don't), I'd counter with....

What you'd really want is North-South, not Canada-U.S. (creating an absurd balance of probabilities and would greatly diminish anyone taking hockey seriously as a major league sport). I'm not really sure if nor how that could be practically done (I strongly suspect it couldn't) but I actually don't buy that the other O6 teams, for e.g., don't hold a ratings factor in Canada. Growing up in Atlantic Canada, I knew as many Bruins fans as I did of the other Canadian teams.

Plenty of all-American finals would do fine in Canadian ratings, just as I don't necessarily buy that having a Canadian team in the Finals is a deathknell for American ratings. This is not even remotely close to a problem that would merit such a laughable solution.

The reason that VGK-FLA as a final isn't appealing ratings wise can probably just be drawn up as much to the historical newness of the teams than their geographic location (a six year old franchise vs. a 30 year old franchise whose national "folklore," such as it is, is "that one place where they threw the rats a lot in the 90s").

 

[GindyDraws]

Its still in the planning phase. I am just curious if BoK is major league ready or is it an OKC situation where its built basic with the plan to flesh it out if they got a team.

The WNBA left Tulsa because the team was garbage and fans refused to show up. So if they failed miserably in the WNBA, what are the odds for a major league team?

 

[dj4aces]

I Just went to Google Maps the fastest route to Buffalo is 63.8 miles the other route the long way is 67.3 miles outside miles outside the sabers territory & do recall during the coyotes fiasco a decade ago the sabers did say they have no territory claim to the Hamilton market it was just the Greed of the Leafs that don't want team in Hamilton .

You looked at driving directions. That's incorrect. It's as I described: As-the-crow-flies, from the two closest points between city limits. It's literally a straight line between two points, and both the map I attached and link I provided show that it's not 63 miles, it's almost 41 miles between the two points.

Hamilton is within Buffalo territory. Full stop.

 

[CTHabsfan]

I also have a counter argument against opposition to the North Division existing on a permanent basis.

There are currently two Division I FBS conferences spanning three time zones, both of them in Eastern, Central and Mountain. Next year two more FBS conferences will span from coast to coast. If those conferences are fine with that then the permanent existence of the North Division should be fair game as well.

College football teams play one game per week, with most being played on Saturday, so it's not comparable to NHL schedules. You say that you are worried about Canadian TV viewership, but your plan would have Montreal, Toronto, and Ottawa playing one-third of their games outside the Eastern time zone, which isn't a recipe for high ratings.

 

[aqib]

The WNBA left Tulsa because the team was garbage and fans refused to show up. So if they failed miserably in the WNBA, what are the odds for a major league team?

Yeah I don't count WNBA as a indicator of the health of a sports market. Also, I am not saying Tulsa can/should/deserves a team. I am just surprised they haven't tried.

 

[jetsmooseice]

The closest BOK Center comes to "major league" is its 19K seating capacity. The building is almost 16 years old, and would need significant interior updates to satisfy an NHL tenant. Add to that its location in a downtown area with minimal public parking & supporting businesses to draw hockey customer traffic. Presuming anyone with big money wanted to have a go at an NHL franchise - and the League owners thought Tulsa was a fruitful market - BOK would need either a complete makeover or more likely a do over with the same happening to its neighbors. Leave the market to the ECHL & hope they survive the next U.S. economic downturn.

It sounds to me like you have described Canada Life Centre as it was in 2011.

At that time the building was in no way up to NHL spec, but it had the minimum size. After the NHL returned, millions of dollars were spent renovating and upgrading the building to the point where a little over a decade later it looked like a proper NHL arena.

And if downtown Tulsa is capable of handling thousands of office commuters every day then there will be no issue with hockey crowds. I remember they said the same thing when the arena was built here in Winnipeg, "where will everybody park" etc. but it turned out to be a total non-issue.

There may be other issues with Tulsa but I doubt that the arena is one of them.

 

[dj4aces]

And if downtown Tulsa is capable of handling thousands of office commuters every day then there will be no issue with hockey crowds. I remember they said the same thing when the arena was built here in Winnipeg, "where will everybody park" etc. but it turned out to be a total non-issue.

I think the issue with both Tulsa and Omaha isn't whether they're capable of drawing for hockey or handling crowds for a NHL team. It's more demographic -- specifically whether the locals have money enough to shell out for season tickets, and whether any local corporations can afford to sponsor a team.

I don't know enough about either Tulsa or Omaha to say what disposable income is like in those cities, but do know they rank 54th (Tulsa and ~1m) and 56th (Omaha at ~980k) in the list of largest MSAs by population in the US, which leaves very little room for error.

 

[JMCx4]

It sounds to me like you have described Canada Life Centre as it was in 2011.

At that time the building was in no way up to NHL spec, but it had the minimum size. After the NHL returned, millions of dollars were spent renovating and upgrading the building to the point where a little over a decade later it looked like a proper NHL arena.

And if downtown Tulsa is capable of handling thousands of office commuters every day then there will be no issue with hockey crowds. I remember they said the same thing when the arena was built here in Winnipeg, "where will everybody park" etc. but it turned out to be a total non-issue.

There may be other issues with Tulsa but I doubt that the arena is one of them.

Nothing made public yet by the Downtown Tulsa Partnership re. transforming BOK Center into a top-notch & can't-miss NHL venue that Tulsa so richly deserves (just like dozens of other such U.S. cities). But y'all feel free to stay tuned.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Yeah, I don't mean to disparage the WNBA, but the success or failure of a team in that league really has no bearing on if a billion dollar franchise in one of tbe big four would do.

That being said, Tulsa is essentially OKC Lite. For the life of me, I don't see the NHL being interested in the second city of a state as small as Oklahoma.

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

College football teams play one game per week, with most being played on Saturday, so it's not comparable to NHL schedules. You say that you are worried about Canadian TV viewership, but your plan would have Montreal, Toronto, and Ottawa playing one-third of their games outside the Eastern time zone, which isn't a recipe for high ratings.

You assume football is the only college sport. It isn't.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

The NCAA analogy doesn't fit, as they're de facto leagues in and of themselves.

And the Big Ten's expansion across four time zones isn't a good move for consumers or athletes, it's entirely for nothing more than a seizing markets mindset.

That is not a remotely sensible thing to try to copy for actual divisions, nor is giving Canadian teams a significantly easier and shorter path to a SCF something that any American team would support. It's a moot point not even worth discussing any more than a suggestion to expand to Fairbanks, Alaska.

 

[KevFu]

I get how unfair the proposal is, but that's the thing - sometimes things in life aren't fair, like the instances in the NFL where a 10-6 team missed the playoffs while another team won their division with a losing record.

And again the Sun Belt teams became successful at the cost of TV ratings. The NHL should want as high ratings as possible - and something like last year will not do.

This is another argument in favor of "aligning into geographic divisions is bad for business" and not that we need more of it.

The reason that so many people pointed to "southern expansion" as a "failure" was because of how many teams took a long time to grow a fan base and had financial issues, and fans foolishly think that it had to do with North/South. The reality is (A) New Brands Take Time (B) Winning helps a lot. (C) The NHL foolishly put 8 new brands into two 5-teams divisions with only one long-tenured member.

The effect of C was: fan bases feeling like an annex to the NHL instead of part of it; limiting the amount of quality inventory to their fans; ensuring there wasn't mutual success for new brands/markets.

ANA, ARZ, DAL and SJ fought for one division title; ATL, CAR, TB, FLA fought for another. They couldn't all be successful.

The idea of eliminating geographic divisions and instead making better inventory is a good one. Doing it based on "north/south" or "all Canada" is really bad for business.

It's really not "southern markets vs northern ones." You and I have discussed sports administration tactics frequently over the last decade or more... and you know I'm the type of nerd who will go on insane data projects from time to time and then reference them for another decade. Maybe it's time to update the numbers.

With a few minor exceptions, the interest in the visiting team by each market's fan base has nothing to do with North/South, or really any kind of geography, or really even winning/losing that much. It's essentially the historical significance of the BRAND.

Ottawa, Columbus, the Minnesota Wild are really no different as visiting opponents than Florida, Arizona, Nashville, etc. Now, Winnipeg rode a wave of nostalgia to being a good draw on the road, and so far, Vegas/Seattle have new car smell -- creating a really good visual identity really helped those two.

Teams in the same division didn't automatically become rivals because of geographic proximity.

Teams in the same division who are far apart geographically can become rivals over stakes -- like how a lot of "Adams Division" fan bases probably hate Tampa a lot after the last five seasons. We see it in other sports: Dallas Cowboys vs Philadelphia Eagles. New York Mets vs Atlanta Braves. Colorado Avalanche vs Detroit Red Wings.

The idea of scraping geographic conferences is a good one, the idea of "All Canada, Northeast USA, Central USA, Southeast USA and Western USA" is a very terrible idea. Because you're talking about making two divisions where 7 or 8 brands have ridiculously long history. And three divisions where only teams like LA, CHI, STL, and WAS have a long one.

You want to make a non-geographical alignment that increases inventory (by limiting non-conference play to geographic rivals like baseball does), and increases rivalries with conference opponents who might be far away, while also balancing BRANDS (and travel while you're at it)... I'm on board.

Plenty of all-American finals would do fine in Canadian ratings, just as I don't necessarily buy that having a Canadian team in the Finals is a deathknell for American ratings. This is not even remotely close to a problem that would merit such a laughable solution.

The reason that VGK-FLA as a final isn't appealing ratings wise can probably just be drawn up as much to the historical newness of the teams than their geographic location (a six year old franchise vs. a 30 year old franchise whose national "folklore," such as it is, is "that one place where they threw the rats a lot in the 90s").

Trying to rig the playoffs for a TV audience is a fools errand. Plus it completely ignores that a deep playoff run is how fan bases grow!

 

[CTHabsfan]

You assume football is the only college sport. It isn't.

I didn't assume football is the only college sport. You stated "FBS conferences", which refers to football, not all college sports.

 

[KevFu]

The difference between college conferences and pro sports as it pertains to the feasibility of cross-continent scheduling is that the colleges are sending DIFFERENT KIDS to all the games all season long...

The football team plays 5
the basketball teams and volleyball team play 10 each (30 games)
The softball and baseball teams 4 series each (24 games)

That's totally different than the same team playing 41 games from Vancouver to Montreal, down to Miami and Los Angeles and everywhere in between.


I'm totally on board with a 8 divisions of four, ZIPPER format where you play 19 teams 4x each (15 conference opponents in W-C-E-E; and 4 in the rival division), and take 4 years to rotate through seeing everyone else home/away.

That increases inventory:
Your 32 W/C vs E/E games have conference standings stakes instead of not having any.
Your 16 non-conference games vs the rival division are geographic and historic rivals.
Only 4 non-conference games would be against teams far away with little stakes (instead of 32).

The conference standings could make fans watch a 10pm ET or 4 pm PT game they otherwise wouldn't before. Either now I definitely need to stay up late because it's a 4-point game, or scoreboard watching teams around you in the standings.

That makes business sense. But enabling an excuse to never really pay attention to anyone outside your division does not.

 

[Takuto Maruki]

The NCAA analogy doesn't fit, as they're de facto leagues in and of themselves.

And the Big Ten's expansion across four time zones isn't a good move for consumers or athletes, it's entirely for nothing more than a seizing markets mindset.

That is not a remotely sensible thing to try to copy for actual divisions, nor is giving Canadian teams a significantly easier and shorter path to a SCF something that any American team would support. It's a moot point not even worth discussing any more than a suggestion to expand to Fairbanks, Alaska.

Not to mention, all of this being the utterly bizarre hobby horse of some dummy who thinks that his ramblings on networks is ever going to get more play then eyerolls on this very forum.

Trying to rig the playoffs for a TV audience is a fools errand.

If you listened to some Canadian hockey fans, they basically ignore this and think that a hare-brained idea that only came out of cross-border intricacies during the pandemic is a good idea to half guarantee a spot in the Finals.

 

[hammer42]

You looked at driving directions. That's incorrect. It's as I described: As-the-crow-flies, from the two closest points between city limits. It's literally a straight line between two points, and both the map I attached and link I provided show that it's not 63 miles, it's almost 41 miles between the two points.

Hamilton is within Buffalo territory. Full stop.

Yes people who do go to games drive there that is the way territory is measured so Buffalo is between 63 - 67 miles from Hamilton & with the border there Buffalo has no claim to the market they even said that over decade ago during the Balsille \ Coyotes fiasco it is just the Leafs that is it the Sabers know that why don't you .

The Buffalo Sabers don't market them selves to the southern Ontario market will maybe Niagara Region but Hamilton & the rest of southern Ontario\western Ontario it is just the Leafs you go in stores like Walmart , Canadian Tire , Sportschek ect all you see is Leafs merchandise & maybe the odd Canadians & Senators merchandise that is it no sabers .

 

[dj4aces]

Yes people who do go to games drive there that is the way territory is measured so Buffalo is between 63 - 67 miles from Hamilton & with the border there Buffalo has no claim to the market they even said that over decade ago during the Balsille \ Coyotes fiasco it is just the Leafs that is it the Sabers know that why don't you .

At this point, I'm inclined to believe you're trolling. A radius of anything is not measured by driving distance, as geometry as a study of math knows no concept of driving.

 

[Jets4Life]

Yes people who do go to games drive there that is the way territory is measured so Buffalo is between 63 - 67 miles from Hamilton & with the border there Buffalo has no claim to the market they even said that over decade ago during the Balsille \ Coyotes fiasco it is just the Leafs that is it the Sabers know that why don't you .

The distance between both cities when it comes to territorial rights, is measured by corporate city limits of each city, and the radius of the distance between the cities, not the driving distance.