That arena, BOK, seriously nice... state of the art.... won all kinds of awards for design & management. Has a fairly extensive display of Native American artwork throughout as well.
Back in the 60's OKC was where the Bruins had their primary farm club and Harry Sinden coached there before Boston. Bruins also had Hershey in the AHL as an affiliate but OKC was where they sent the prospects.
Oklahoma City Blazers (1965–77) - Wikipedia
Could Tulsa bid for an NHL expansion team?
Tulsa and OKC have had a civic rivalry ever since OK has been a state. Edmonton and Calgary are good comparisons.
Tulsa has the BOK center that seats almost 18k for hockey and exceeds OKC’s arena in some respects.
OKC got an NBA team even though it has an undersized metro of like 1.3million.
That NBA team drove Tulsa civic leaders batty, as that gave OKC a leg up in national awareness.
But OKC’s Thunder need the season ticket sold in the Tulsa metro area, which is 1.1 mill.
The combined OKC and Tulsa metro is nearly 2.5 mill, which is where the base season ticket holders come from.
Could Tulsa be priming for an NHL expansion run using the combined OKC-Tulsa metro population.
Tulsa has some big pockets with oil and nat gas.
Tulsa got a WNBA team shortly after OKC got the Thunder. The WNBA team flopped in attendance but almost all WNBA teams do.
The NHL is nearly the sole hope of Tulsa civic leaders to get on the pro sports map.
Could Tulsa bid for an NHL expansion team?
I assume you mean US market. Buffalo/WNY is bigger than Winnipeg. Also, while it doesn't matter for American viewers, Buffalo has an extra 9M people within a 2 hour drive of it if you factor in the Golden Horseshoe, although they only really capture the half million or so people that are south of Hamilton.There's only 1 way a market that small can support a team: Be as hockey mad as Buffalo is.
Could Tulsa bid for an NHL expansion team?
Tulsa and OKC have had a civic rivalry ever since OK has been a state. Edmonton and Calgary are good comparisons.
Tulsa has the BOK center that seats almost 18k for hockey and exceeds OKC’s arena in some respects.
OKC got an NBA team even though it has an undersized metro of like 1.3million.
That NBA team drove Tulsa civic leaders batty, as that gave OKC a leg up in national awareness.
But OKC’s Thunder need the season ticket sold in the Tulsa metro area, which is 1.1 mill.
The combined OKC and Tulsa metro is nearly 2.5 mill, which is where the base season ticket holders come from.
Could Tulsa be priming for an NHL expansion run using the combined OKC-Tulsa metro population.
Tulsa has some big pockets with oil and nat gas.
Tulsa got a WNBA team shortly after OKC got the Thunder. The WNBA team flopped in attendance but almost all WNBA teams do.
The NHL is nearly the sole hope of Tulsa civic leaders to get on the pro sports map.
Dallas Stars should be playing more games in places like San Antonio, Austin, New Orleans, Albuquerque. They should use preseason games to expand and take over the southern market.
so was OKC, and look what happened there, the AHL almost took Edmonton's franchise and that's why the Barons became reality, and that was before the Oilers bought Bakersfield.Tulsa was a strong market in the Central Hockey League before the IHL's rise.
I see them as a natural affiliate of Houston, should the Yotes move there.
When Vancouver goes West with its affiliate, with Colorado coming up, and Seattle likely putting an affiliate somewhere near home, the AHL will need a central division for its Central division NHL teams.
With Tulsa (Houston), Austin (Dallas), SanAntonio (St. Louis), Iowa (Minnesota), you can fill it out with Manitoba (Winnipeg), Milwaukee (Nashville), and Chicago's affiliate, perhaps Vegas stays in Chicago (though I think they would put an affiliate in Phoenix if they could), or Chicago finally takes over the Wolves, and Colorado fills out the division.
But I see them moving up a notch. It's good for growth and exposure.
If Houston decided a team wasn't worth it, Tulsa would probably be more attractive than K.C. for the NHL. In terms of dollars.
so was OKC, and look what happened there, the AHL almost took Edmonton's franchise and that's why the Barons became reality, and that was before the Oilers bought Bakersfield.
you're forgetting....Tucson and Arizona are operated by the same group, whether it's Barroway now or IA then, voyageur, part of the same contract when the Coyotes (Jets 1.0) went/returned to Springfield in 2013, they had a 2 to 3 year window option to buy the Falcons, which was exercised a year after the Pacific Division in the AHL was created, SO NO, Tulsa will not be a proposed affiliate of the Coyotes if they leave Glendale.... Chicago remains with Vegas independent of the demise of Quad City, as a GK Affiliate, you also will never see the two Chicago teams hookup as Rockford is the Hawks affiliate, and KC , ABSOLUTELY NOT in any lifetime, as the Mavericks likely have that market covered by their denial in 2017/18 and the AHL concurred in that belief.
Tulsa is drawing 6 000 fans per game as an ECHL affiliate of the Jets. That has to put them on the radar. I think the AHL is continuing to grow outside of its traditional New England, New York, Pennsylvania boundaries.
Look at it logically.
You have Vancouver and Seattle looking to put affiliates in the West soon.
Let's say Abbotsford and Tacoma/Boise join San Diego, Ontario, San Jose, Bakersfield. Tucson stays if Phoenix does. If Arizona moves, Phoenix will get an AHL team. Glendale will get something from the NHL. Calgary in Stockton not so sure, maybe Sharks move there, Utah would be a good market to bring back up to the A.
If Houston is the market for Arizona, Tulsa is the ideal affiliate.
Part of the pipeline.
Manitoba
Chicago
Milwaukee
San Antonio
Austin
Tulsa
would all be big league arenas in the A. Iowa and Colorado fill it out, keeping the divisional affiliates within the division. Grand Rapids can stay in the Eastern Time Zone
Vancouver won't keep their affiliate in Utica. Abbotsford a suburb of Vancouver makes more sense as a Vancouver affiliate than a Calgary one. If not Abbotsford, Victoria would be a consideration. So you have Colorado coming in next year too, staying close to home. That's taking Texas out of the Pacific division of the AHL, applying the same standard the NHL has with their divisions.
So you have wherever Vancouver puts their affiliate. Five California teams. One in Colorado, one in Tuscon. Would make sense for a team like Calgary to put its affiliate in Utah? Less operating expenses, Stockton is last in AHL attendance. Like I said might do better with San Jose, to grow their fanbase.
Tulsa would make a good affiliate for someone, I still think that someone is Houston, when they get their team. Probably after next season, to keep the momentum going. From Vegas to Seattle expansion (likely announced in the offseason) to Houston in 2019.
nope...
did you forget AGAIN, Victoria tried pro hockey and it wasn't successful, and the WHL took that market back, voyageur, the WHL Victoria Royals....
Abbotsford likely wants nothing to do with hockey after the Flames were bought out of that agreement, which at the time, Orca Bay didn't have a team and Calgary owns the Heat outright, a very similar arrangement to what the Flames did in Omaha, Saint John, Quad City, a 50/50 partnership with private owners, the exact same contract the Canucks have currently with Esche and the Comets.... Vancouver has stated they are perfectly content to be in Utica and are not open to change, so care to explain why Calgary would sell a team they own in Stockton, to anyone, SVSE HAS ZERO INTEREST in Stockton as a landing spot for the Barracuda, why does HP Pavilion operate both franchises out of San Jose.... Calgary blocked Vancouver from entering or buying out the agreement in Abbotsford, as I recollect.
It's good you like to argue. I do too. Winnipeg moved their AHL affiliate from St. John's back to Winnipeg for these reasons: they found it harder to scout their prospects with so much travel involved, and they wanted to have them train in 1st class facilities. True North also felt compelled to offer affordable hockey to fans who can not pay NHL prices. I am sure similar reasoning applies to SanJose moving their farm team from Worcester to San Jose.
Abbotsford you may remember was a lone wolf when they were brought in as a Flames affiliate. There were no California AHL teams. They I believe had to pay a subsidy like St. John's for teams that travelled there, which is an unnecessary expense for operating an affiliate. To make it worse they were in Canucks territory, trying to sell tickets for a Flames team.
The landscape is a little different. I can't see how Vancouver would really want an affiliate in Utica, on the other side of the continent when they could develop and scout their players in their own backyard. It makes no sense.
I simply suggested Utah as a logical Calgary affiliate because again the landscape is changing with a team in Colorado and Tuscon. Utah definitely fits in there, in a partnership, which would mitigate operating expenses, as I think Utah is a 7-9 thousand fan per game AHL market, and no further travel wise than Stockton from the parent club. It was an idea that I think makes sense? Stockton as an AHL affiliate of San Jose was more of a conceptual idea of spreading their fan base, as I think they would want to, in California, with no idea on how their management feels about their current situation.
As this is a Tulsa thread, keep on supporting those Jets prospects Tulsa, and hope you take a step to the next level soon. Getting a pro game means people are paying attention to your interest.
Cedar Park (Austin) has likely been done, tbth... with the Stars affiliate there.... I don't see the other 3 cities mentioned really garnering support... and San Antonio's interest is their own franchise within the Spurs corporate banner (Rampage), which has a presence in Austin also... I don't think the Spurs would sign off on a Dallas exhibition game...