How many teams can the NHL support in total?

Status
Not open for further replies.

BallPointHammer

Los Angeles Kings - We're Back!
Oct 25, 2006
1,313
243
Maryland
I always thought 24 was perfect.

4 divisions of 6. Play each team in your division 6 times (30). Play the other division in your conference 4 times (24). Play the other conference twice (24). 78 game schedule. Divisional play-offs.

Makes too much sense in a world where bigger is better, even when it's not, because as long as the "right" people hoard the profits and prices NEVER go down for the fans it's a perfect world for those "right" people. point .02% is the new 1%.
 

boredmale

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 13, 2005
42,363
6,930
The difference between the best and 18th best will be the same regardless of the number of teams. Hockey was much more exciting in the 80s, when there was only 21 teams.

There is currently roughly the same amount of Canadians in the NHL as their was in the 80s. The current makeup of the extra 9 teams basically is made up from players from the US and Europe. It could be argued both of those places have gotten much better at producing a higher level of player.

It should also be pointed out in 1960(ie players who played in the 80s were born roughly around this time) the population of Canada was 18M, by 1980(ie players who played in the 2000s) the Population increased 133% to 24M

For the sake of argument 1990 we had 27M canadian(ie players playing int he 2010s). Now if the NHL had an equal amount of Canadian players taking the population increase into consideration we should have closer to 700-750 Canadians playing in the NHL to be on par with 1980 levels of Canadians in the NHL, instead we had 500 in the 80s(based on a smaller population) which is the exact same now(based on a larger population)

ETA: http://www.quanthockey.com/nhl/nationality-totals/nhl-players-2016-17-stats.html

I looked at the amount of Canadian players in the NHL and their is actually less in 2016/2017 then there was in 1985, which just goes to show you the influence of players from other countries and their impact on the league, especially with 9 more teams
 
Last edited:

Debrincat93

Registered User
Dec 4, 2002
22,669
468
Michigan
Nhl.com
without a doubt, 32 easily. People will cry and say there's not that much talent but that's completely blind and false to say. Every team like vegas will have years of growing paids (See minnesota, CBJ, Nashville) but once it solidifies, it will be just fine.

I would say 32 right now works very good. In the future, i dont think it could go over 34 and we're talking a solid 15-20 years from now.. Not 5-10.
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,546
2,006
without a doubt, 32 easily. People will cry and say there's not that much talent but that's completely blind and false to say. Every team like vegas will have years of growing paids (See minnesota, CBJ, Nashville) but once it solidifies, it will be just fine.

I would say 32 right now works very good. In the future, i dont think it could go over 34 and we're talking a solid 15-20 years from now.. Not 5-10.

So then 40 should be no problem then.
 

Debrincat93

Registered User
Dec 4, 2002
22,669
468
Michigan
Nhl.com
So then 40 should be no problem then.

where do you compile that logic? no where in there did i say 40 is practical.. i said 32 is sufficient right now based on all the talent the NHL could obtain from other leagues. Additionally based on the concept of population growth worldwide, the expansion towards 34 teams isnt overly non-practical.

But thanks for playing.
 

kurt

the last emperor
Sep 11, 2004
8,709
52
Victoria
without a doubt, 32 easily. People will cry and say there's not that much talent but that's completely blind and false to say. Every team like vegas will have years of growing paids (See minnesota, CBJ, Nashville) but once it solidifies, it will be just fine.

I would say 32 right now works very good. In the future, i dont think it could go over 34 and we're talking a solid 15-20 years from now.. Not 5-10.

Agree with 32, but I think it could certainly grow to 34 within the decade if it wanted to.
 

PurpleMouse

Registered User
Apr 27, 2014
393
171
There is currently roughly the same amount of Canadians in the NHL as their was in the 80s. The current makeup of the extra 9 teams basically is made up from players from the US and Europe. It could be argued both of those places have gotten much better at producing a higher level of player.

It should also be pointed out in 1960(ie players who played in the 80s were born roughly around this time) the population of Canada was 18M, by 1980(ie players who played in the 2000s) the Population increased 133% to 24M

For the sake of argument 1990 we had 27M canadian(ie players playing int he 2010s). Now if the NHL had an equal amount of Canadian players taking the population increase into consideration we should have closer to 700-750 Canadians playing in the NHL to be on par with 1980 levels of Canadians in the NHL, instead we had 500 in the 80s(based on a smaller population) which is the exact same now(based on a larger population)

ETA: http://www.quanthockey.com/nhl/nationality-totals/nhl-players-2016-17-stats.html

I looked at the amount of Canadian players in the NHL and their is actually less in 2016/2017 then there was in 1985, which just goes to show you the influence of players from other countries and their impact on the league, especially with 9 more teams

I'm amazed at how concrete and absolute these facts are and yet people continously come in and argue it's a watered down product.

What's REALLY amazing is that this dip in Canadians comes at a time when Canada is probably more dominant than ever in international hockey. So it's not like you can make the argument that Canada is getting worse.
 

boredmale

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 13, 2005
42,363
6,930
I'm amazed at how concrete and absolute these facts are and yet people continously come in and argue it's a watered down product.

What's REALLY amazing is that this dip in Canadians comes at a time when Canada is probably more dominant than ever in international hockey. So it's not like you can make the argument that Canada is getting worse.

I don't think some people who didn't watch 80s hockey realize how rare it was for non Canadian born players to be playing in the NHL. Sure you might get the odd one here or there but in general most teams had a roster that was like 80% Canadian.

Probably more a coincidence then anything else but expansion and increase of players from Non Canadian countries definitely started to happen around the same time(very late 80s/early 90s)
 

patnyrnyg

Registered User
Sep 16, 2004
10,838
869
I don't think some people who didn't watch 80s hockey realize how rare it was for non Canadian born players to be playing in the NHL. Sure you might get the odd one here or there but in general most teams had a roster that was like 80% Canadian.

Probably more a coincidence then anything else but expansion and increase of players from Non Canadian countries definitely started to happen around the same time(very late 80s/early 90s)

It's not that hard to figure out. Youth hockey started to grow in the US in the 80s, and as some of those players came of age and were good enough, you saw a growth in the number of Americans. Fall of communism led to players from Russia, Czech Republic, Slovakia.
 

Kimota

ROY DU NORD!!!
Nov 4, 2005
39,188
14,060
Les Plaines D'Abraham
26 Teams and they should be:

Toronto(2)
Montreal(2)
New York(2)
(I would fuse the Isles and Devils and build them a state of the Art arena on Long Island)
Boston
Chicago
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Buffalo
St. Louis
Minnesota
Ottawa
Calgary
Edmonton
Winnipeg
Quebec
Hamilton
Saskatoon
Vancouver
Los Angeles
San Jose
Anaheim
Columbus
Kansas city
 

AdmiralsFan24

Registered User
Mar 22, 2011
14,979
3,896
Wisconsin
26 Teams and they should be:

Toronto(2)
Montreal(2)
New York(2)
(I would fuse the Isles and Devils and build them a state of the Art arena on Long Island)
Boston
Chicago
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Buffalo
St. Louis
Minnesota
Ottawa
Calgary
Edmonton
Winnipeg
Quebec
Hamilton
Saskatoon
Vancouver
Los Angeles
San Jose
Anaheim
Columbus
Kansas city

This is hilarious. :laugh:
 

boredmale

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 13, 2005
42,363
6,930
It's not that hard to figure out. Youth hockey started to grow in the US in the 80s, and as some of those players came of age and were good enough, you saw a growth in the number of Americans. Fall of communism led to players from Russia, Czech Republic, Slovakia.

But what about Sweden and Finland?
 

zetajerk

Registered User
Jan 1, 2015
738
589
26 Teams and they should be:

Toronto(2)
Montreal(2)
New York(2)
(I would fuse the Isles and Devils and build them a state of the Art arena on Long Island)
Boston
Chicago
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Buffalo
St. Louis
Minnesota
Ottawa
Calgary
Edmonton
Winnipeg
Quebec
Hamilton
Saskatoon
Vancouver
Los Angeles
San Jose
Anaheim
Columbus
Kansas city

Ah yes, the "Take teams I don't like out back and shoot them" Hockey League.

Good to know I get my team taken away in your world.
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
I think that if any one person had a magic wand to make the world how they wanted (first off, I think you start with creating peace and economic stability around the globe, THEN start tinkering with hockey), then absolutely a smaller league with teams where you'd want them is fine.

But realistically, the NHL ain't shrinking unless an earthquake makes California fall into the ocean, or some kind of world apocalypse transpires.
 

Gnashville

HFBoards Hall of Famer
Jan 7, 2003
13,683
3,510
Crossville
Ah yes, the "Take teams I don't like out back and shoot them" Hockey League.

Good to know I get my team taken away in your world.
Note how he left Anaheim and added Kansas City then deleted much stronger markets like Nashville, Dallas, Tampa, and Carolina.

Also Saskatoon :biglaugh:
 
Last edited:

Bucky_Hoyt

Registered User
Dec 11, 2005
600
46
Singapore
26 Teams and they should be:

Toronto(2)
Montreal(2)
New York(2)
(I would fuse the Isles and Devils and build them a state of the Art arena on Long Island)
Boston
Chicago
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Buffalo
St. Louis
Minnesota
Ottawa
Calgary
Edmonton
Winnipeg
Quebec
Hamilton
Saskatoon
Vancouver
Los Angeles
San Jose
Anaheim
Columbus
Kansas city

Uhh.... no!
 

Jeffrey93

Registered User
Nov 7, 2007
4,335
46
None of these cities have any incentive nor interest for NHL.

As a business, if any of these cities was worth spending half a billion on a hockey team, it would have been done ages ago.

If the NHL isn't interested in franchises being in Seattle, Houston, Hamilton/Toronto, Quebec City, etc. well....there is something wrong with the league then.

Only in the NHL can someone that follows the league (apparently, I assume you do powerstuck) would claim that franchise locations that would be a huge boost to the league revenues and exposure be of no incentive or interest to the league.

As a business, those markets should immediately get franchises at an enormous discounted rate....I'd even argue giving them franchises for free would be a smart business move.

That's IF....huge IF....the NHL wants to operate like a business and grow revenue.

The problem is, they don't. If they added 4 teams quickly that were immediately successful and huge money-makers (QC, Hamilton/Toronto, Seattle & Houston) that would rocket the cap up. Teams like the Panthers, Hurricanes and Coyotes would wind up in serious financial problems with salary cap (read: floor) increases.

So...it would also lower the profit of other teams. If you're the Rangers, Habs or Leafs and you're raking in $60-80M a year in profits.....why would you want league revenues to increase? That would increase the salary cap and and now you might only be making $55-75M a year.

The big NHL teams don't want the league to thrive.....the tiny NHL teams don't want the league to thrive......if anyone aside from the players wanted the league to thrive, as you said.....it would have been done ages ago.

This is why the NHLPA wants a say in relocation/expansion....because they KNOW the NHL isn't interested in quickly increasing their revenue.
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
If the NHL isn't interested in franchises being in Seattle, Houston, Hamilton/Toronto, Quebec City, etc. well....there is something wrong with the league then.


If they added 4 teams quickly that were immediately successful and huge money-makers (QC, Hamilton/Toronto, Seattle & Houston) that would rocket the cap up. Teams like the Panthers, Hurricanes and Coyotes would wind up in serious financial problems with salary cap (read: floor) increases.

I'm putting a choir robe and singing along!

Here's one thing that drives me nuts... every time the NHL has expanded, it's been RAPID FIRE with 4-6 teams in a short burst:
1967: 6 teams at once (three year gap until...)
1970-74: 6 teams in 5 years (five year gap)
1979: 4 teams at once (14 year gap)
1991-93: 5 teams in three years (4 year gap)
1997-2000: 4 teams in four years (17 year gap)

It works SO MUCH BETTER to add two teams (one per conference) every 8 years, than to wait 16 years and drop four new teams in at once.
 

Bucky_Hoyt

Registered User
Dec 11, 2005
600
46
Singapore
I'm putting a choir robe and singing along!

Here's one thing that drives me nuts... every time the NHL has expanded, it's been RAPID FIRE with 4-6 teams in a short burst:
1967: 6 teams at once (three year gap until...)
1970-74: 6 teams in 5 years (five year gap)
1979: 4 teams at once (14 year gap)
1991-93: 5 teams in three years (4 year gap)
1997-2000: 4 teams in four years (17 year gap)

It works SO MUCH BETTER to add two teams (one per conference) every 8 years, than to wait 16 years and drop four new teams in at once.

See this is what concerns me with the MLS who (let's face it) will outpace the NHL in popularity soon.

Their expansions up to recently had been relatively cautious. Don't want to see another league make the same mistake.

If the NHL had "done it right" we'd be talking about the 27th team this year.

As for how many teams... 32 max
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->