Which American city is a natural for an new NHL franchise?

AgentNaslund*

Guest
Seattle is not a NHL city. NHL will struggle in a city like Seattle with Football, Baseball and Basketball well ahead of Hockey. On top of that, Seattle is not big on hockey anyways. I say Vegas
 

Ziggyjoe21

Registered User
Nov 12, 2003
9,028
2
Pitt
Houston and Chicago are good choices. Both are huge markets, and a real franchise in Chicago would draw lots more than the hawks.
 

Emerald City Bruin

I-90 W for 2500mi
Aug 3, 2004
985
4
Seattle,WA
Whawks33 said:
Sorry, but I don't see why you can't. When talking about a "large hockey fan base", that implies hockey in general, not just NHL. The fact that major junior hockey doesn't draw well doesn't suggest a large hockey fan base. Look at areas on the east coast that easily support (and by support I mean attendence) NHL, AHL, and college hockey at the same time. Without even looking it up I can sit here and think of 10+ plus hockey teams, pro and college within a couple hours of Boston.

Also, isn't Microsoft a T-Birds sponsor?

By that rationale, Toronto is not a hockey city since their OHL teams don't draw very well and the Marlies aren't a hot ticket in town.

Microsoft is not a sponsor of the TBirds. They do have the Microsoft Hockey Challenge at the end of the year, though, to raise money for the Ronald McDonald house.

http://www.seattlethunderbirds.com/corporate/sponsors.php
 

72projectmgr

Registered User
May 3, 2006
90
0
Thunderbird107 said:
By that rationale, Toronto is not a hockey city since their OHL teams don't draw very well and the Marlies aren't a hot ticket in town.

Microsoft is not a sponsor of the TBirds. They do have the Microsoft Hockey Challenge at the end of the year, though, to raise money for the Ronald McDonald house.

http://www.seattlethunderbirds.com/corporate/sponsors.php

Toronto is a very bad example of how a big fan base works. The Control that Maple leaf Sport & Entertainment have on the city is unbelievable. The only OHL team is the St. Micheals Majors owned by Eugene Melnyk (ottawa senators) and they play at St. Micheals Arena and it can only hold 1200. The Other team in Toronto is the Toronto marlies (AHL) owned by the Maple leafs. Now they play at the Ricoh Centre which is operated my the Maple leafs, now you would think that Eugene melnyk would play at the Ricoh Centre but ever since Melnyk attempted to buy the old Maple Leaf Gardens they dont even talk never mind share the sidewalk(big fued). The ticket prices at the AHL games are the same price as watching a Sabres game in Buffalo-not worth going.

Now if there was another team in Toronto-the blue nation would disapear very fast-if you take the worst team and locate them in Toronto it would be sold out.
 

bbison

Registered User
Oct 16, 2004
172
4
San Jose
PortlandRanger said:
That is the average price of an NHL game in a lot of markets give or take a few dollars.

The lower level seats at UW are $22. The uppers are $17 (all single game prices.) If NHL teams have seats that cheap, they're the last rows of the end zones.

I have SJ tickets, the cheapest lower level seats at the Tank is $57; some are double that.

CBJ lower level is $53-$150, Nashville is $49 and up for lower level seats, Carolina $52-$125...should I go on? And the Madison metro area is 40% the size of RDU, 35% the size of Nashville, less than a third of the size of Columbus...

Like Columbus, Big 10 sports is the major league in Madison. Columbus just happens to have a pro team as well.

Milwaukee would make more sense, it's a bigger metro area than any of the three teams I've mentioned and they have a big league arena already. Lloyd Petit, who owned the Admirals and donated the Bradley Center to the city made some inquiries years ago whe he was alive, but it never came to pass.
 

snakepliskin

Registered User
Jan 27, 2005
1,910
22
Wilmington NC
if i were watching out for my investment i would have to really consider investing in a possible 2nd team in toronto instead of another us city-but if it were me and my money and it HAD to be a US city i would lean heavily towward RIP CITY (portland)-but i woiuld definitely research a 2nd team in toronto first.
 

mre5765

Registered User
May 28, 2006
17
0
Colorado Springs
Interesting discussion

I'm with those who point out there aren't many
places to expand in the USA. Another point is that
with the revenue sharing and salary cap that have
hurt Colorado, Detroit, and Dallas, those teams are
going to scream bloody murder if the NHL expands
to another small market, especially one in the USA
with marginal hockey interest.

With all due respect to those defending Nashville,
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/attendance?sort=home_avg&year=2006

shows that at 84% of capacity, Nashville is near the bottom
of the league. Considering the season they had, and that
they've been a decent team for a while, this isn't good.
Carolina (Raleigh) is another disgrace. I don't care if the
playoff attendence has been good in either city;
bandwagons don't sustain a business.

The idea of a second team in Chicago is intriguing. But
it requires a facility. You'd need the NBA to expand their
too so that both teams could chip in. I don't see
it happenning.

The Economist recently pointed out that by
keeping the NFL out of LA, this gives team owners
in the other cities incredible leverage over the state
and local governments (because moving the a team
to LA is always an option), and thus forces the construction
of ever more profitable facilities. So from
that perspective, moving the Leafs to say Hamilton would
be genius. If nothing else it would wipe away
property taxes on team-owned arenas, which I think
should be done since new arenas tend to be the cause
of property values nearby going up.
 

OhioGuy

Registered User
May 26, 2006
544
0
Saint Teemu said:
Colour me stupid... are the Blue Jackets in bad financial shape?

No, the only other sports option we have here in Columbus is Ohio State football. It is like a religion in central Ohio. OSU football is more popular than the Jackets but at the same time, there are only a limited number of OSU football games on in the fall, so for the rest of the season everyone just goes to the Jackets games. This is why I think Vegas would be the perfect fit. They have nothing in the way of pro sports teams, and if the NHL was smart, they would be the first pro team in Vegas. It's a huge market and its only going to get bigger. Honestly, if they got either an NHL or an NFL team, I would seriously consider moving there. Make it Vegas and whatever Canadian city you guys want, that makes people on both sides of the border happy :)
 

Saint Teemu

Registered User
Aug 16, 2005
142
0
OhioGuy said:
No, the only other sports option we have here in Columbus is Ohio State football. It is like a religion in central Ohio. OSU football is more popular than the Jackets but at the same time, there are only a limited number of OSU football games on in the fall, so for the rest of the season everyone just goes to the Jackets games. This is why I think Vegas would be the perfect fit. They have nothing in the way of pro sports teams, and if the NHL was smart, they would be the first pro team in Vegas. It's a huge market and its only going to get bigger. Honestly, if they got either an NHL or an NFL team, I would seriously consider moving there. Make it Vegas and whatever Canadian city you guys want, that makes people on both sides of the border happy :)
Thanks for answering my question. I remember seeing an interview with Ron Tugnutt when they followed him to an OSU football game - I think he said something like you have to accept that football will always be number one there.

I think you've confirmed my earlier point about the value of being the only (pro) game in town - NHL hockey probably wouldn't have worked in Cleveland or Cincinnati because it would have had to take on the NFL, the NBA, and MLB.

As for Vegas, aren't the pro leagues antsy about being so close to legalized gambling? For some reason, gambling is the only unforgiveable sin (Pete Rose, anyone?).

While I'd like to see a team in Winnipeg so that I'd have NHL hockey to watch - I just don't think anyone in town here has deep enough pockets to buy/relocate a team. I think the idea of 'bringing back the Jets' sounds better than it really is.
 

72projectmgr

Registered User
May 3, 2006
90
0
Prediction:
Montreal Ownership change/swap with Ottawa (Gillette & Melnyk)
Ottawa to Portland
Pittsburgh to Kansas
Pheonix to Hartford/Cleveland
 

VANEKyo*

Guest
when i lived in seattle i thought there should have been a team there...
 

hockydude5000

Registered User
Jan 2, 2006
457
0
72projectmgr said:
Ottawa to Portland
Pittsburgh to Kansas

Not going to happen. Pittsburgh's new arena is almost at the final approval stage, and why would you abandon such a rabid hockey fan base in Ottawa to an unproven market such as Portland. Portland, Kansas City, Houston, Winnipeg, Hartford, Oklahoma City, Baltimore, Las Vegas, Hamilton, and Quebec City would be much better catered toward expansion, over a twenty year period to keep the talent level.
 

Verbeek

Human see, human do.
Jul 19, 2005
1,502
1
Pittsburgh
I'm against expansion, 30 teams is enough especially when some cities that shall not be named don't even deserve a franchise. Relocate them back to the north-east if anything at all.

I think its time to accept the fact that hockey shall not be forced on people and its time for lil experiements to come to an end.

Relocate markets that don't work and that should fix the popularity problem. All cities that care should reflect good numbers.


Sounds crazy I know, because say Phoenix moves back to Winnipeg, Winnipeg could go on to have bad numbers and we can go kill ourselfs. :help:
 

kingpest19

Registered User
Sep 21, 2004
12,298
693
SeattleCanucksFan said:
Believe or not there is a hardcore fanbase of hockey fans in Seattle and from the surrounding areas here in Seattle. Our neighboring sister cities Everett and Tacoma (both of whom have or had vibrant WHL and WCHL teams) have a devoted fans for their teams. Going to a Sabercat game in Tacoma is actually what turned me onto hockey. I actually see more Canuck and NHL clothing here than NBA or MLB at my work. This area could support and sustain a team.

The biggest problem as has been mentioned over and over is the issue of an arena. However, there is a lot of talk about re-modeling Key Arena and even talk of some new stadiums around town. The Sonics are supposedly moving to Renton (this ghetto *** suburb where I'm from... if you know the area you know that's ridiculous) I think there's a lot of possibilities here to bring in a team.

The Thunderbirds originally suffered from horrible marketing but with their games being broadcasted on Comcast here and with a new marketing approach they seem to be much improving. I went to a playoff game last season (my first playoff game) and the attendance and atmosphere was great (the upper sections are closed off... I don't know why)

Seattle is a fair-weathered town first and foremost, we only like successful teams. However, from everything I've seen in my town Baseball is king here. Followed by football. And then basketball. I think hockey could be the number two sport in town here following the Mariners.

I really think Seattle could sustain a team.

Theres talk of the Sonics moving to Renton? *** came up with that idea? Hacing lived in Seattle for a few years guys I played with and I had this discussion a few times. You could remodel Key Arena, but is it really worth it? IMO it would be better to build a dual use facility for the NBA and NHL. Only bad thing is , is that in Seattle itself not really any where to do it. Have to go to one of the outlying suburbs. Renton isnt the right place. SCF maybe you'll agree with me here. If the were to do something like this would it be better to put it on the other side of the lake in Bellevue or Kirkland?
 

jamiebez

Registered User
Apr 5, 2005
4,025
327
Ottawa
72projectmgr said:
Prediction:
Montreal Ownership change/swap with Ottawa (Gillette & Melnyk)
Ottawa to Portland
Wow.

Ottawa is in pretty much no financial peril whatsoever since Melnyk bought the team out of bankruptcy. They were something like 6th in the league in attendance this year and they play in a building with 150 private suites. What makes you think they're moving to Portland? Besides, how many times have two financially healthy franchises ever switched owners?
 

stan17

Registered User
Jul 31, 2003
76
0
Visit site
Hamilton

I know I know but what is different is that with a relocation, rather than expansion, approval is made by the Board not individual owners. Therefore Toronto and Buffalo can not stop the relocation, should the relocation show a strong business case. Money ... not an issue when the owner of RIM whose wife is from Hamilton is the deep pocket man. Population how about over 5 million within a half an hour drive. Arena ... Copps was designed to accommodate expansion including luxury boxes. Support .. when they lost to Ottawa Hamilton had 15,000 season tickets sold within hours, Canada Cups, World Cups, World Junior Championships. Natural rivalries look no further than Buffalo, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal
 

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
stan17 said:
I know I know but what is different is that with a relocation, rather than expansion, approval is made by the Board not individual owners. Therefore Toronto and Buffalo can not stop the relocation, should the relocation show a strong business case. Money ... not an issue when the owner of RIM whose wife is from Hamilton is the deep pocket man. Population how about over 5 million within a half an hour drive. Arena ... Copps was designed to accommodate expansion including luxury boxes. Support .. when they lost to Ottawa Hamilton had 15,000 season tickets sold within hours, Canada Cups, World Cups, World Junior Championships. Natural rivalries look no further than Buffalo, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal

Even with a relocation there are territorial rights. When the Isles came int the league they had to shell out $4M (in 1972 dollars) to the Rangers. Similarly the Devil's had to pay compensation to the Rangers and the Flyers when they moved.

A team in Hamilton will require a significant payment to both the Leafs and Sabres in order for them to waive their territorial rights.
 

stan17

Registered User
Jul 31, 2003
76
0
Visit site
kdb209 said:
Even with a relocation there are territorial rights. When the Isles came int the league they had to shell out $4M (in 1972 dollars) to the Rangers. Similarly the Devil's had to pay compensation to the Rangers and the Flyers when they moved.

A team in Hamilton will require a significant payment to both the Leafs and Sabres in order for them to waive their territorial rights.

I am sure the proposed ownership group is fully aware of those costs, the cost to renovate Copps and to purchase the existing team. All apart of the Business plan.
 

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
stan17 said:
I am sure the proposed ownership group is fully aware of those costs, the cost to renovate Copps and to purchase the existing team. All apart of the Business plan.

But the problem is that the Leafs and Sabres still have effective veto power - unless they choose to be bribed to waive their territorial rights, an NHL team in Hamilton is SOL.

Do you really think that the old-boys network of NHL owners would vote to allow a move/sale to Hamilton in the face of opposition from the Leafs/Sabres (even assuming that the territorial rights could be involuntarily overridden by a BOG vote)? Do you think any big market team will open up that Pandora's Box that could lead to another team encroaching on their territory.

No the only way that Hamilton could get a team (besides throwing enough money at the Leafs/Sabres that they would be doomed to financial failure) is for an owner to go all Al Davis on the league and try to buy/move a team without league approval. And Al Davis only won because the NFL does not have explicit territorial rights, and he already owned the Raiders, so no league vote was required for a change of ownership. An exiting owner may have a shot of trying to move a team to Hamilton, a new ownership group, no chance in hell.
 

Dolemite

The one...the only...
Sponsor
May 4, 2004
43,191
2,115
Washington DC
kingpest19 said:
Theres talk of the Sonics moving to Renton? *** came up with that idea? Hacing lived in Seattle for a few years guys I played with and I had this discussion a few times. You could remodel Key Arena, but is it really worth it? IMO it would be better to build a dual use facility for the NBA and NHL. Only bad thing is , is that in Seattle itself not really any where to do it. Have to go to one of the outlying suburbs. Renton isnt the right place. SCF maybe you'll agree with me here. If the were to do something like this would it be better to put it on the other side of the lake in Bellevue or Kirkland?


Former Seattle Resident here. I usually have a canned answer to this but since I don't want to write a novel here I'll just sum up why Seattle is a bad place for an NHL franchise.

- Key Arena is the remodeled version of what once was the Seattle Center Coleseum.

- Former Sonics owner Barry Ackerly purposely re-designed Key Arena into a NBA only arena so that an NHL franchise wouldn't take revenue away from his team. Now that Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz owns the team he is now realizing that the lease that Ackerly signed with the City is one of the worst ever in Professional sports.

- Seattle is a Football town hands down. There are a large number of Hockey fans in the Greater Seattle Area (many of whom are Canucks Ticket Package owners) but the key to moving a franchise here starts with the local media who have an ESPN like attitude to Hockey. They basically treat the NHL like the diseased ******* child of pro sports.

- If Seattle is to be considered a potential NHL franchise spot, the NHL needs to look at some of the asinine territory rules that are designed for towns like LA and NY but don't work for towns like Seattle. Did you all know that Seattle is not in the Canucks territory? From my research, Seattle is in the Avs territory. That means that Seattle is in a 'no mans land'. Change the territory rules for towns like Seattle so that they can get PPV local reports Sportsnet/TSN (CBC is available on Basic Cable in Seattle) etc from Vancouver to 'get the word out'.

- The main problem with the 'powers that be' in Seattle/Washington is that they are very reactive and not forward thinkers. Ackerely messed up Key Arena's and the Sonics future with the lease agreement he signed with the City of Seattle. The highway infrastructure of Seattle reached it's maximum capacity well over ten years ago and the State government has been dragging their feet for a solution because none of them are leaders who are willing to steak their reputations on improving the state (one of the many reasons why I moved from Seattle to San Diego). As a result, the infrastructure is that of a parking lot and is the reason why Seattle has some of the worst traffic in the nation. I know exactly where the proposed site of the Renton Arena is at and it is in the worst stretch of conjested Highway in the State. The Sonics and te NBA are pushing the issue in the same reactive manner that Key Arena was built with and if this goes through it will result in the same disastrous results as Key Arena ended up with.


Seattle is the absolute last area in the world that deserves an NHL franchise.
 
Last edited:

Gwyddbwyll

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
11,252
469
Oklahoma City

Has the highest minor league hockey attendance I believe and not many rival pro teams. Reasonably far from other NHL teams..
 

Sinurgy

Approaching infinity
Sponsor
Feb 8, 2004
12,425
3,877
AZ
The Coyotes are locked in at Glendale Arena for a longtime....they are not going anywhere!
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->