Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Inactive, Dec 12, 2004.
Do you think the NHL will expand agian? If so when and where?
Not for the next 10 years at least. We should see some teams moving though, rumored areas of relocation are Portland and Winnipeg.
Good god NO!!
I doubt we will see expansion anytime soon but contraction is very possible. We could also see relocation but I doubt we will see anymore Canadian teams unless there is a hard-cap.
If anything there is a need for contraction. The NHL over expanded with Bettman as the commish. please note, i am not saying there are no fans in Nashville/phoneix/winnipeg/hartford/wherever.
Hopefully Quecbec City and Winnipeg get NHL clubs one way or another. These 2 markets deserve teams and it would be great for hockey. If those were the 2 included teams I could live a 32 team league.
I think the nhl will go through an enormous down period and contract a couple teams, but then pull out of it and within about 8 years because of guys like Crosby/Ovechkin/Kovalchuck and all the young offensive and goaltending talent out there. Then the NHL will expand to someplace like Kansas City or Seattle/Portland or Houston or someplace like that.
The NHL should add six more teams.
Las Vegas NV
New Orleans LA
Kansas City MO
These six cities are all in key television markets, and would help the NHL further expand their footprint in the all-important US. Expansion money is also an important source of revenue for the league.
Yes cuz Phoenix and Carolina are proof that the NHL should expand more with American teams.
Winnipeg and Quebec City first.
Neither one of those towns is financially viable. Everyone knows that.
The only place I think would be viable choice, is somewhere in the NW, Portland or Seattle, but beyond that most of the Northern and Midwest markets are taken care of, and please no more teams in the South, Dallas is a success because Dallas is a winners city and The Stars didn't take long to make an impression (although the popularity is starting to fall, and I'm from Dallas and I see it with my own eyes) Tampa (unless they continue to win, doable) is going to be a short lived fad cause of the effects of the lockout on the new fans.
The argument that the NHL has over expanded seems ridiculous to me. Over-expanded compared to what?
Assuming that the complaints are about the expansion that occurred post 1990 (Ottawa, Tampa, Florida, etc). Here's how I look at it. The league has grown by what, 8 teams since then? 30/8 is an expansion of between 25-33%.
Now, keep in mind, since 1990, the NHL has seen an ENORMOUS increase in the number of European players. Before 1990, Euros were almost non-existent in any significant numbers. Currently, Euros account for 25-30% of the league I believe.
Well, if you have an increase in the area that the league draws from that is 25-30% of the league's current population of players, it only makes sense to expand by roughly the same percentage does it not?
And this, of course, does not include factors like the huge benefits of increasing local markets and such.
Good Point, But would you really want a 36 team leauge?
Sure. Why not? Ya gotta think big or you ain't going to grow.
The NHL could probably be 48-team league if it wanted to.
Well, not EVERYONE! If you go to my profile and look for all my posts, surely you will encounter a FEW who don't know that they aren't financially viable. :lol
Portland and Kansas City I can see, the others are iffy at best.
Las Vegas doesn't have the kind of fanbase that a team would need, it'd be dependant on the tourist income to survive.
New Orleans maybe, now that I think about it. Same with Kansas City and Portland, though Vancouver wouldn't be happy.
Cleveland I would say okay, but two teams in Ohio?
Houston same problem... too close to the Stars fanbase.
Disagree. Las Vegas has an affluent, growing resident population with no major sports competition.
I think the league needs to expand by another four teams. One each in Boston, Vancouver, Toronto and New York (maybe Westchester county). All four have proven to be pretty viable hockey markets.
On a serious note tho, right now before expansion can even be contemplated, the leagues finances need to be straightened out. Contraction won't help that any, as pullin from markets will only have revenue from merchandise sales, among other things, fall. At the very least for right now, maybe relocation of a franchise not workin in its present location would be the move to make, whether it be Florida or Carolina or any of the other sunbelt cities. But if relocation is to happen, it should be to a city that hasn't had an NHL team in twenty years, like Kansas, or to a fresh city completely, like Portland. But I also believe that before any city gets an NHL club, they should have an AHL club as a trial period.
Major pro sports won't work in Las Vegas due to gambling. They are afraid the temptation of the quick money will lead to the games bein fixed by others than just the officials.
You need to be in Las Vegas to gamble?
While I agree that there is absolutely no need for contraction (the very worst thing that should happen is relocation), I'd disagree that the NHL is ready to expand again. I think the major european markets are pretty much tapped out, now you need the less traditional markets to start stepping it up if you want to expand some more. Which they are, places like Germany and Switzerland. Or Asia, with places like Japan starting to show some life. I'm pretty sure they got their first NHL draft pick out last draft.
As a hockey fan, the only thing I wouldn't like about more expansion is the playoff picture. When you have as many teams as say Baseball does, I'm sure there are teams that never make the playoffs, let alone win a championship. Right now with 8 teams in, 7 out, per conferance, thats the best set up (+/- a team, 8-6 or 8-8 works). With that your home team is either competing for a spot, or in a beneficial rebuild mode where you know you can be there in a few years.
To everyone who blames Bettman for "too much expansion" ... in the 11 years he's been commish, only 4 new teams have been added: Nashville, Atlanta, Columbus, and Minnesota. In the three years before he became the commissoner, five new teams were added: San Jose (1991), Tampa and Ottawa (1992), and Anaheim and Florida (1993). So blame John Zeigler if you want, although I think 30 teams is the right amount.
While I would be more favorable to expansion than contraction, I say we are fine with 30 teams. If we do expand, I don't feel the NHL should be obligated to add teams in Canada if it isn't feasible. Put the teams in cities where they will work, countries aside.
I honestly don't think we'll be seeing expansion any time soon, and severely hope we won't be seeing contraction either....
That's what I always heard. Something about if the city got a pro team then the gambling/oddsmaking would have to be stopped for that particular sport. But apparently there are no laws against Nevada sports books taking bets on a local professional team, just a "conflict of interest" by the different leagues.
True. Las Vegas population has soared to around 1.5 million people in the last few years, and it continues to grow (they say around 5,000 people move there each month).
I don't think another expansion is going to happen any time soon. But I believe with a new CBA, and all 30 teams healthy and stable for a good period of time, expansion could very well happen again, or at least be looked into.
I agree with those who say 30 teams are perfect for the league, I don't think there should be anymore extra teams, but I do think some teams from the south should locate to cities with a better fanbase, Winnipeg and Quebec are a good start, and maybe even Hamilton in the future, but I don't see it happening unless some major changes happen in the league.