Which Cities are Candidates to Get an NHL Team?

[CHRDANHUTCH]

There is no point having two 17,000+ seat arenas literally right next to each other, one which would be used exclusively for for minor league hockey team, a mid major basketball team and an indoor soccer team.

which is why the MECCA IS OUTDATED

 

[AdmiralsFan24]

which is why the MECCA IS OUTDATED

What?

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

What?

11K isn't that why the Bucks left, there's no suites there either

 

[patnyrnyg]

Entire state's team. That's basically every team we have. So why is it only Milwaukee that has to support it? A lot of fans come from outside the metro area.



No. It does nothing to change my point. They play two hours away. If Milwaukee area can go up to Green Bay to watch the Packers (they do), then Green Bay area residents can come to Milwaukee to watch the teams here (they do) as do residents of Madison, Kenosha, Fond du Lac, Sheboygan, Appleton, etc.

People from Green Bay will make the drive to Milwaukee for a regular season Bucks or Brewers game in the middle of the week?

 

[AdmiralsFan24]

People from Green Bay will make the drive to Milwaukee for a regular season Bucks or Brewers game in the middle of the week?

I know a partial season ticket holder for the Bucks from De Pere (Green Bay suburb) and there's a full time season ticket holder for the Brewers with seats right behind home plate from Oshkosh. My uncle and his girlfriend attend 20+ Brewer games a year from the West side of Madison.

 

[NickWIHockey]

People from Green Bay will make the drive to Milwaukee for a regular season Bucks or Brewers game in the middle of the week?

Yes, they do. Ditto for Madison. the teams in Milwaukee cross-promote each other. Admirals wear Brewers Glove logo patches. Bucks tickets include vouchers for Brewers tickets ( and vice versa). Everyone promotes heavily when Packer players show up. Adding the NHL would basically replace the Admirals with.. The Admirals NHL edition. we have a history of our major sport teams carrying on names from prior minor league teams, The Brewers name was used by a minor league team for more than 50 years prior to the Braves coming to town in 1953. there was a USHL team called the Sea Gulls in 1951 in Milwaukee, they only lasted 1 year,going 20-38-6, as the league folded, and were an affiliate to the Blackhawks. Wisconsinites come out in droves when the teams do well, and even when they suck, the Brewers still draw 2 million plus. Vegas' success shows that an expansion team doesnt have to suck, actually the NHL coming to town doesnt even mean the Admirals have to leave, they can become the affiliate of the NHL team. Sure, Nashville would have to be compensated with a new affiliate, but that can be worked out.

 

[WingsMJN2965]

The league would be salivating if Houston becomes receptive of having a team. #4 market in the States. May very well surpass Chicago in the next decade or two.

 

[BrainyBomber]

As much as I despise Toronto the GTA could easily support another franchise.

Yep there was a think tank report back in 2011 that analysed potential Canadian expansion with the country easily being able to support 12 teams.

Report: The New Economics of the NHL

The hockey hotbed Golden Horsehoe area surrounding Toronto and including Hamilton (9 million) could aeasily support 3 teams.

The Greater Toronto Area is the most potentially lucrative area for a team on the continent but ofcourse the Leafs will veto any attempt at that and Bettman doesn't want more Canadian teams.

 

[tucker3434]

Yep there was a think tank report back in 2011 that analysed potential Canadian expansion with the country easily being able to support 12 teams.

Report: The New Economics of the NHL

The hockey hotbed Golden Horsehoe area surrounding Toronto and including Hamilton (9 million) could aeasily support 3 teams.

The Greater Toronto Area is the most potentially lucrative area for a team on the continent but ofcourse the Leafs will veto any attempt at that and Bettman doesn't want more Canadian teams.

The sunbelt strategy is a long term one. There’s zero doubt the Hamilton Coyotes would be a consistent sellout and make plenty of money, but there’s so much more room for growth in the south. And advertisers are going to want a more national reach. To really grow hockey, they need the southern markets. You want TV revenue numbers the other major leagues get, you gotta have the whole country. Retreating back to Canada would be failure even if it meant more revenue in the short term.

 

[BrainyBomber]

The sunbelt strategy is a long term one. There’s zero doubt the Hamilton Coyotes would be a consistent sellout and make plenty of money, but there’s so much more room for growth in the south. And advertisers are going to want a more national reach. To really grow hockey, they need the southern markets. You want TV revenue numbers the other major leagues get, you gotta have the whole country. Retreating back to Canada would be failure even if it meant more revenue in the short term.

It's been nearly 30 years though and the sunbelt strategy has yielded very mixed results.

Arizona is obviously a complete and unmitigated disaster should have relocated ages ago. Florida and Carolina are massive loss leaders as well and let's face it after 2 decades in each city its not going to work.

The TV ratings and revenue that sunbelt expansion was promised to yield hasn't shown up and doesn't look like its trending upwards much either.

There's far more growth occurring in soccer in America than hockey.

How long do we have to wait for? Should pull the plug on a fair few sunbelt cities.

 

[gstommylee]

It's been nearly 30 years though and the sunbelt strategy has yielded very mixed results.

Arizona is obviously a complete and unmitigated disaster should have relocated ages ago. Florida and Carolina are massive loss leaders as well and let's face it after 2 decades in each city its not going to work.

The TV ratings and revenue that sunbelt expansion was promised to yield hasn't shown up and doesn't look like its trending upwards much either.

There's far more growth occurring in soccer in America than hockey.

How long do we have to wait for? Should pull the plug on a fair few sunbelt cities.

Carolina isn't going anywhere in the near future. Florida has a iron clad lease with penalties

 

[tucker3434]

It's been nearly 30 years though and the sunbelt strategy has yielded very mixed results.

Arizona is obviously a complete and unmitigated disaster should have relocated ages ago. Florida and Carolina are massive loss leaders as well and let's face it after 2 decades in each city its not going to work.

The TV ratings and revenue that sunbelt expansion was promised to yield hasn't shown up and doesn't look like its trending upwards much either.

There's far more growth occurring in soccer in America than hockey.

How long do we have to wait for? Should pull the plug on a fair few sunbelt cities.

As long as the results are mixed and not complete failure, they’ll keep at it. They don’t seem to mind dealing with the Arizona’s as long as there are some Nashville’s and Tampa’s to go along with it.

I’m sure Bettman is drooling over that Houston tv market and that team will happen before they add another team to Hamilton that won’t increase the tv audience. If the goal is to compete with the other sports leagues, it’s not going to happen with 12 Canadian teams. So they’ll take the (what they believe to be) short term losses in order to get a better foothold. I don’t see the strategy changing any time soon.

 

[LeafShark]

Nashville could still be another carolina given the same performance metrics. Heck Nashville was the team than was gone and Carolina was the team to keep post lockout. At the end of the day, these are mere toys for rich people, and as long as it doesnt lose too much money and accumulates net worth overtime, its all good.

 

[CaliforniaBlues310]

Seattle will be the 32nd team via expansion.

Calgary is probably gonna move to Houston, likely very soon.

Ideally, you’d also have Arizona move to Milwaukee, so Colorado could move to the Pacific.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Seattle will be the 32nd team via expansion.

Calgary is probably gonna move to Houston, likely very soon.

Ideally, you’d also have Arizona move to Milwaukee, so Colorado could move to the Pacific.

Milwaukee doesn't really have an arena if the trend is basketball centric, which Cali, you don't seem to get, is why GRA exists... Sarver's finding that out as TSRA GETS more age on it as the years pass, I do agree with Seattle, and Calgary to Houston is an intriguing option if necessary...

Colorado's AHL Team is in the Pacific, because there's no other option, and expansion team or not, you have no say where a league places you in an alignment....

 

[CaliforniaBlues310]

Milwaukee doesn't really have an arena if the trend is basketball centric, which Cali, you don't seem to get, is why GRA exists... Sarver's finding that out as TSRA GETS more age on it as the years pass, I do agree with Seattle, and Calgary to Houston is an intriguing option if necessary...

Colorado's AHL Team is in the Pacific, because there's no other option, and expansion team or not, you have no say where a league places you in an alignment....

I grew up in Central Illinois, so I know the region pretty well, and I definitely think a team would succeed there. They’d have instant rivalries with Chicago, Minnesota, and St. Louis.

However, I said ideally, because it’s likely not to happen as you’ve vehemently said to others in this thread.

As far as Calgary/Houston, it just really seems nothing is gonna get done with the arena and I know Houston would love getting a team without needing an expansion fee. Plus it helps that the Flames aren’t a bad team and have some cornerstone players.

It’s also pretty much a given that Seattle gets their team in a few years. They’ll sorta make up for Calgary leaving for Edmonton, and they become a quick rival to Vancouver and San Jose.

I agree with you about the alignment part, but it’d just make sense if that happened that way.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

I grew up in Central Illinois, so I know the region pretty well, and I definitely think a team would succeed there. They’d have instant rivalries with Chicago, Minnesota, and St. Louis.

However, I said ideally, because it’s likely not to happen as you’ve vehemently said to others in this thread.

As far as Calgary/Houston, it just really seems nothing is gonna get done with the arena and I know Houston would love getting a team without needing an expansion fee. Plus it helps that the Flames aren’t a bad team and have some cornerstone players.

It’s also pretty much a given that Seattle gets their team in a few years. They’ll sorta make up for Calgary leaving for Edmonton, and they become a quick rival to Vancouver and San Jose.

I agree with you about the alignment part, but it’d just make sense if that happened that way.

you have to remember, the primary rule is 50 miles between teams, that is why Milwaukee can have the Admirals, but you're within the Hawks territory, and the way the Bucks new ownership will not allow the existing franchise in their facility and hasn't really since 2011, hence why the Admirals are at the MECCA/UWM Panther Arena, if they aren't cordial with the hockey tenant now, what makes you think an NHL tenant would be any different? the rest of your latest post was fine until you brought Arizona into it, you're also forgetting how or where would you relocate the Road Runners, since the Coyotes own them in addition to the NHL Team....

 

[CaliforniaBlues310]

you have to remember, the primary rule is 50 miles between teams, that is why Milwaukee can have the Admirals, but you're within the Hawks territory, and the way the Bucks new ownership will not allow the existing franchise in their facility and hasn't really since 2011, hence why the Admirals are at the MECCA/UWM Panther Arena, if they aren't cordial with the hockey tenant now, what makes you think an NHL tenant would be any different? the rest of your latest post was fine until you brought Arizona into it, you're also forgetting how or where would you relocate the Road Runners, since the Coyotes own them in addition to the NHL Team....

It was just a hypothetical statement, I know the league isn’t gonna move Arizona. I also know of the other issues that you’ve pointed out, but I don’t think the Hawks would mind.

 

[BrainyBomber]

Nashville could still be another carolina given the same performance metrics. Heck Nashville was the team than was gone and Carolina was the team to keep post lockout. At the end of the day, these are mere toys for rich people, and as long as it doesnt lose too much money and accumulates net worth overtime, its all good.

Yep Nashville is only currently working because of the great success of GM Poile. Once they are no longer a contender they'll be another failed sunbelt franchise.

I would wager Vegas won't work either long-term once the novelty where's off and they go through a lean patch.

 

[BrainyBomber]

Seattle will be the 32nd team via expansion.

Calgary is probably gonna move to Houston, likely very soon.

Ideally, you’d also have Arizona move to Milwaukee, so Colorado could move to the Pacific.

Yes Seattle will be next and balances the current alignments.

But Calgary isn't going anywhere they sellout 19000+ every night with a team that's been crap for ages. You're reading too much into idle threats by Bettman. The very fact you think it's happening soon proves your comment is BS as Bettman has dropped all talk about Calgary.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Yes Seattle will be next and balances the current alignments.

But Calgary isn't going anywhere they sellout 19000+ every night with a team that's been crap for ages. You're reading too much into idle threats by Bettman. The very fact you think it's happening soon proves your comment is BS as Bettman has dropped all talk about Calgary.

uh, there's that other misconception.... who runs the NHL, BB, (hint, it resides in Boston via Buffalo....)

 

[CaliforniaBlues310]

Yes Seattle will be next and balances the current alignments.

But Calgary isn't going anywhere they sellout 19000+ every night with a team that's been crap for ages. You're reading too much into idle threats by Bettman. The very fact you think it's happening soon proves your comment is BS as Bettman has dropped all talk about Calgary.

Bettman has zero to do with my reasoning. It’s moreso Burke. He’s been quoted saying that he wouldn’t threaten to leave, he’d just do it.

 

[BrainyBomber]

Bettman has zero to do with my reasoning. It’s moreso Burke. He’s been quoted saying that he wouldn’t threaten to leave, he’d just do it.

Umm surely you must be aware that Burke has already stepped down as President.

The jig is up Calgary's owner and Bettman tried the old swindle to get a taxpayer funded arena which worked in Edmonton but this time the city called their bluff. The billionaire owner isn't going to leave because its a successful franchise.

They are just following the five-step strategy that Neil DeMause outlines in Field of Schemes:

1. The Home Field Disadvantage: the assertion that the current stadium is so old and in such poor shape that it simply must be replaced.
2. Faking a Move: claiming that unless the situation in the local city is remedied the owner will have no choice but to move the team.
3. Leveling the Playing Field: claims that the team is unprofitable and cannot compete effectively without a new stadium to draw fans to the game and raise revenue.
Playing the Numbers: commissioning one or more reports that argue that investment in a new stadium will yield a tremendous return through the creation of jobs, rise of investment in business near the stadium, and the like.
4. The Two-Minute Warning: owners setting a deadline for a decision to build a new stadium or a move of the team to another city will take place.
5. Moving the Goalposts: As agreement seems to be reached, even sometimes when the agreement is already signed, the owner demands more concessions from the city; cost overruns, technological add-ons such a retractable roof, and the like.

 

[GuelphStormer]

As far as Calgary/Houston, it just really seems nothing is gonna get done with the arena and I know Houston would love getting a team without needing an expansion fee. Plus it helps that the Flames aren’t a bad team and have some cornerstone players.

this idea continues to float around here and it is flawed. nobody is going to get a relo- team on the cheap. those days are long gone.

a relocated team will cost the buyer whatever the existing owner is willing to sell it for (if that owner even wishes to sell). the league permanently manipulated all franchise floor values when it crafted a crazy $305M valuation of Coyotes for tax/purchase purposes a couple years ago at a time when it was reported to be conservatively valued at only $220M. at that same time, Calgary was reported to be conservatively worth $440M - twice the value. so similarly, Calgary would have to have been valued by the league at well over $600M - and that was two years ago. to back down from that overall valuation scheme now would be to admit to fraud in the coyotes valuation (which we all know it was).

the league will also charge whatever it wishes for a relo-fee. and that will be based on valuations of the two markets. the league would be hard pressed to justify valuation of the houston market at less than calgary (both financially and optically), so a houston buyer will absolutely pay a relo- premium on top of purchase.

bottom line, all new teams will minimally cost $650M whether they are expansion or relocation. nobody is getting one for any less than that now. the only unknown is how much the buyer will pay to purchase the team and how much the league will charge for relocation.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Nashville could still be another carolina given the same performance metrics. Heck Nashville was the team than was gone and Carolina was the team to keep post lockout. At the end of the day, these are mere toys for rich people, and as long as it doesnt lose too much money and accumulates net worth overtime, its all good.

What seems to escape a lot of hockey fans, is that the American markets respond to hockey in the same way a normal market responds to any sport.

Canada has a “thing” for hockey that goes above and beyond, but that appetite is not bottomless (not economically, anyway) and is not replicable in other places. So at some point the league has to compete on merit in a marketplace of alternatives, rather than acting as though hockey tickets magically sell themselves.