Expansion Teams

Richer

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
295
0
Toronto
I vote for Bangor Maine. It would be a hockey mecca. I also thing the NHL should absorb the AHL and expand to a 60 team league. Along with the KC expansion these would all be really smart moves for the NHL.

Bettman Commish for life.:handclap:
 

Blackhawkswincup

RIP Fugu
Jun 24, 2007
186,842
20,298
Chicagoland
I will not be happy at all if Bettman decides to expand to KC.

I wouldn't be too happy either. I think Houston should get a team before KC. It is 4th most pop in US, has hockey history, a ready arena and a wanting owner. Texas is big enough for 2 NHL teams. In fact it would be smartest thing for NHL to do. But this is the NHL so i should expect a team in Compton, Cali before Houston.:sarcasm:

If NHL does expand which i expect they will. (Cash grab and media attention) they should consider one of these expansion plans.

A-Houston, Ontario (This one would be most logical pick since it would be 1 Southern US and 1 Canada team. NHL head office could keep expanding to new market in South and a 7th team in Canada would make up for lose of Jets):amazed:

B-Houston, Winnipeg (If Winnipeg built a real stadium it would be possible):)

C-Houston, KC ( It would balance out Western Conference allowing Blue Jackets to move. (Detroit cant move it would kill rivalrys with Chi, Stl, Nas and Col the NHL BOG would have to put a foot down on Ilitch and explain the importance of Detroit to Western Conferance. KC has a great arena and built in rivalry with Stl as its good points. But it failed miserably last time. At least Atlanta, Colorado and Minnesota showed good potential before they lost there teams, thus thats why they got 2nd chances):teach:

D-Houston, Oklahoma (This would be least like by fans in Canada and would be ripped apart in media but it does make sense. Houston has Pop, History, Arena and ownership waiting while Oklahoma City has Arena and was nearly successful in mid 90's during expansion bids. They put on a great presentation for board and showed that Hockey could work. It would also be great rivalry wise with Dal, Hou and Nas. It would also balance out Western Conference allowing Columbus to move to East).:handclap:

E-Las Vegas and KC (Ugh, this is the one i expect the NHL to do) :shakehead:(:help::cry:

I would want expansion B but Winnipeg doesn't have an NHL arena. So i hope to see expansion A or Expansion D.:yo:

I dont want to see expansion E but it looks more and more likely that will be the leagues choice.:(:cry:
 

Winger23

Registered User
May 3, 2007
5,759
622
Quite the opposite, actually.

Really?? So, every team has a strong 6 man defensive corpse? Every team has 2-4 guys that can score 30 goals +?

I'd rather the league contract than to expand. saying the league has too much talent per team now is silly.
 

Bear of Bad News

Your Third or Fourth Favorite HFBoards Admin
Sep 27, 2005
13,345
26,522
Really?? So, every team has a strong 6 man defensive corpse? Every team has 2-4 guys that can score 30 goals +?

I believe that corpses are prohibited in the new collective bargaining agreement (although IB is free to correct me if I am wrong).

The real best part of your argument is that if every NHL team had a strong six-man defensive corps, then no team would have 2-4 guys that can score 30 goals +.
 

td_ice

Peter shows the way
Aug 13, 2005
32,957
3,504
USA
Quite the opposite, actually.

I agree. Talent has never been better.

As for expansion cities.

I would pick the two best Canadian candidates from the list.

Whether it is Winnipeg or Hamilton, or another Canadian city, I would prefer that they go to Canada.
 

jamiebez

Registered User
Apr 5, 2005
4,025
327
Ottawa
I believe that corpses are prohibited in the new collective bargaining agreement (although IB is free to correct me if I am wrong).
Talk about your dead cap space.

Thank you! Thank you! I'm here all week. Don't forget to tip your waitress!
 

Granlund2Pulkkinen*

Guest
Diluting the talent even more?

No lets remove a few teams... go to 24 teams.
 

Fugu

Guest
I agree. Talent has never been better.

As for expansion cities.

I would pick the two best Canadian candidates from the list.

Whether it is Winnipeg or Hamilton, or another Canadian city, I would prefer that they go to Canada.


Is the availability of talent the sole criterion upon which to base league size?
 

Chinstrap

Registered User
Jun 30, 2007
302
0
If I could pick two, I would take Winnipeg and Milwaukee...two strong hockey markets. Even though I've never been to Winnipeg, I have a Jets jersey and I've always dreamed about their return.
 

sloanfan16

Registered User
Jul 14, 2007
31
0
winnipeg would be great but considering they just opened an arena that too small so the Peg isnt really an option for 15+ years and also has the coperate situation really changed since the Jets left??

houston has an arena but does it really have fan support?

so. ontario makes perfect sense has everything but an arena outside of the sabre and leafs restrictions

kc has an arena ready to go and would let the wings move east....


the fact ideally 2 more teams makes 8 divisons of 4 teams...
 

td_ice

Peter shows the way
Aug 13, 2005
32,957
3,504
USA
Is the availability of talent the sole criterion upon which to base league size?

No.

Never said it was. Was disagreeing with the notation NOT to do it because it would dilute talent.
 

Enstrom39

Registered User
Apr 1, 2006
2,174
0
www.birdwatchersanonymous.com
I'm not if favor of expansion, but if they were to add two more teams my priorities would be:

1. Houston
2. Toronto
3. Seattle (especially if the NBA team leaves, real opening there)
4. Portland
5. Kansas City
 

saskganesh

Registered User
Jun 19, 2006
2,368
12
the Annex
it wouldn't dilute talent. it would increase offseason bidding for better-than-average FA's and RFA's though. it would also increase competition and so decrease the chance any given team would make it to the Cup.

for some teams, it might decrease travel.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,232
4,218
Auburn, Maine
winnipeg would be great but considering they just opened an arena that too small so the Peg isnt really an option for 15+ years and also has the coperate situation really changed since the Jets left??

houston has an arena but does it really have fan support?

so. ontario makes perfect sense has everything but an arena outside of the sabre and leafs restrictions

kc has an arena ready to go and would let the wings move east....


the fact ideally 2 more teams makes 8 divisons of 4 teams...


SINCE When is MTS Centre considered a new arena if it sits essentially on the same site as the Winnipeg Arena, the team that houses them also playing in the original arena that the Jets played in (it's less than a decade old)
 

pondnorth

Registered User
Dec 16, 2005
1,232
0
SINCE When is MTS Centre considered a new arena if it sits essentially on the same site as the Winnipeg Arena, the team that houses them also playing in the original arena that the Jets played in (it's less than a decade old)
The MTS Centre is build downtown nowhere near the old arena.You don`t know anything about the MTS Centre,the Winnipeg Jets or the city of Winnipeg so maybe don`t talk about them.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->