A 32 team league.

[Bizz]

the theory of adding 2 more teams will "dilute the talent pool" in the NHL is absolute bunk. There are 4th liners with more talent now than most first liners from 2 decades ago.

 

[ColdSteel2]

No, 30 teams is plenty. It's extremely hard to win a Cup as is.

 

[MoreOrr]

the theory of adding 2 more teams will "dilute the talent pool" in the NHL is absolute bunk. There are 4th liners with more talent now than most first liners from 2 decades ago.

Yes, that's not really a valid argument. Sure, there are reasons against expansion, but that's not one of them.

 

[KevFist]

Personally, I'd love to eventually see expansion to Houston and WinningPeg. then, I'd like to see this alignment structure take place.

Eastern Conference
North
Montreal
Ottawa
Boston
Buffalo
NY Rangers
NY Islanders
NJ Devils
Toronto

South
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Washington
Columbus
Carolina
Atlanta
Tampa
Florida

Western Conference
North
Detroit
Chicago
Minnesota
Calgary
Edmonton
Vancouver
Winnipeg
St. Louis

South
Colorado
Nashville
Dallas
Houston
Phoenix
Los Angeles
Anaheim
San Jose

Two conferences of 16 teams...Each having 2 divisions of 8 teams. Top 2 in each division make the playoffs, other spots filled as wild cards in order of most points. highest division winner faces lowest wild card and so on.

 

[Fugu]

the theory of adding 2 more teams will "dilute the talent pool" in the NHL is absolute bunk. There are 4th liners with more talent now than most first liners from 2 decades ago.

Actually some of us don't subscribe to that view. Initially there is a diluting effect. The story goes that NHL level openings breed NHL-level talent.

I'm not convinced because the last expansion did drive teams to forage for talent in "new" areas--- Europe and the NCAA. North America is completely scouted and scoured. It's rare that hidden gems can be found in Russia or other countries today, unlike the 90's, imo. When you factor in that countries like the Czech Republic and Russia are providing a fraction of the talent we saw in the 90's.... the question needs to be asked. Where will all the extra talent come from for even more teams?

Yes, that's not really a valid argument. Sure, there are reasons against expansion, but that's not one of them.

Yes, it is.

 

[leoleo3535]

the theory of adding 2 more teams will "dilute the talent pool" in the NHL is absolute bunk. There are 4th liners with more talent now than most first liners from 2 decades ago.

WOW !

 

[Bizz]

I'm not against expansion (quite the opposite really), but it has to come at the right time, right now too many teams are losing too much money for it to be considered.

 

[Duke749]

Other then the main issues that we already have like the PHX, ATL, and NYI situations, wouldn't the American economy, the way it is right now, make it more difficult for expansion in a U.S. market?

 

[obsenssive*]

this is...... why do the mods deny people the right to bring up the POSSIBLE American bias of the NHL and its governing body? Why can't that be brought up? it's a legitimate issue that deserves discussion.

there has to be a reason that the original NHA was 100% Canadian, the first season of the NHL was 100% Canadian, the O6 league was 33% Canadian, but today the league is only 20% Canadian. whats happening? AMERICANIZATION. what other word can you use? simply stated, there are a growing number and proportion of American based clubs, and a declining amount and proportion of Canadian based clubs.

If the trends continue is it possible that there will be no Canadian clubs in the future? I believe it to be within the realm of plausibility, much to my horror.

 

[Dado]

No wide landscape equals no interest outside your small markets equals no big deal.

It seems to me that NYC, Philly, Boston, Chicago, Detroit and LA all qualify as something other than "small markets".

 

[MoreOrr]

Yes, it is.

Well not currently, I don't believe. Of course it is a reason though.

And of course expansion does dilute the talent pool, logically. But I'd say that there is certainly sufficient talent now to withstand a 2-team expansion dilution.

 

[JMROWE]

I do belive that we will see a 32 team NHL. within the next 10 years & here is what i see happening 4 relocations along with 2 expansion team

4 out of 7 will relocate
Coyotes
Thrashers
Panthers
Islanders
Blue Jackets
Predetors

Posible cites for expansion & relocation
Winnipeg
Hamilton
Quebec City
Portland
Seattle
Kansas City
Cleveland

 

[Dado]

whats happening? AMERICANIZATION.

I don't agree with that.

If you had written "MONETIZATION" instead, I'd be giving you two thumbs up.

The league isn't chasing Americans, it's chasing money. If Bettman became convinced the pot of gold was in London, you can bet your fanny teams would be playing a transatlantic schedule within 2 years.

The other thing to point out - if you want the wide-open glory days of Gretzky back - expand the league to 40 or more teams, toot de sweet.

 

[Buck Aki Berg]

Wrong assumption Haymaker. I dont watch regular season games on TV; catching the highlights post game. The seasons' too long, their are too many teams, just on & on.... Bores me to tears quite Frankly.

Fine, let me rephrase:

It can't be that bad if you're still following it.

(Hopefully I've avoided another semantic minefield...)

 

[Duke749]

I do belive that we will see a 32 team NHL. within the next 10 years & here is what i see happening 4 relocations along with 2 expansion team

4 out of 7 will relocate
Coyotes
Thrashers
Panthers
Islanders
Blue Jackets
Predetors

Posible cites for expansion & relocation
Winnipeg
Hamilton
Quebec City
Portland
Seattle
Kansas City
Cleveland

I'd like to hear an explanation for this.

 

[Retail1LO*]

I love the idea of expansion. We need to make sure that the good folks of Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, and Montana aren't missing out on things. Remember, these are markets that could be cultivated. If we eventually have at least one team in every state, the game should be so on the radar, that kids won't grow up wanting to play baseball anymore. Hockey will be the pinnacle of sports. You won't be able to move without it being in your face. With all the markets fully tapped, the talent pool will include every single kid born in this country. The entire first round of the draft will be comprised of nothing but Americans. Canada will become the feeder system for the mother league. With every kid playing hockey, who will even bother tuning into the NFL, NBA, or MLB?

 

[MoreOrr]

I don't agree with that.

If you had written "MONETIZATION" instead, I'd be giving you two thumbs up.

The league isn't chasing Americans, it's chasing money. If Bettman became convinced the pot of gold was in London, you can bet your fanny teams would be playing a transatlantic schedule within 2 years.

The other thing to point out - if you want the wide-open glory days of Gretzky back - expand the league to 40 or more teams, toot de sweet.

Of course there is a "United Statesization" of the NHL, but I not necessarily in the way the other poster was meaning. Yes, there is now a greater % of US teams than in most of the NHL's history, so in that's also true. But furthermore, in the 90's there was a "Europeanization" of the League, and over the past 20+ years there has been a "Statesization" of the League also because of more and more US-born players in the League, and an increasing US fanbase.

Personally, I'd be very pleased with a 36-team League, 6 Divisions with 6 teams each (8-10 Canadian teams, 1 less Florida team).

 

[MoreOrr]

I'd like to hear an explanation for this.

It could be a missing spelling of Predebtors.

 

[Retail1LO*]

I don't agree with that.

If you had written "MONETIZATION" instead, I'd be giving you two thumbs up.

The league isn't chasing Americans, it's chasing money. If Bettman became convinced the pot of gold was in London, you can bet your fanny teams would be playing a transatlantic schedule within 2 years.

The other thing to point out - if you want the wide-open glory days of Gretzky back - expand the league to 40 or more teams, toot de sweet.

Yeah. Spread the talent so thin that many teams will have one good line at best...exploiting the **** out of the rest of the other team's sorry line up. Half the teams will have backup goaltenders as starters, and the backups for each team will be atrocious. Then it'll just look like players are better than they are.

If the league contracted, I think you'd find scoring go down even more.

 

[jkrx]

Personally, I'd love to eventually see expansion to Houston and WinningPeg. then, I'd like to see this alignment structure take place.

Eastern Conference
North
Montreal
Ottawa
Boston
Buffalo
NY Rangers
NY Islanders
NJ Devils
Toronto

South
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Washington
Columbus
Carolina
Atlanta
Tampa
Florida

Western Conference
North
Detroit
Chicago
Minnesota
Calgary
Edmonton
Vancouver
Winnipeg
St. Louis

South
Colorado
Nashville
Dallas
Houston
Phoenix
Los Angeles
Anaheim
San Jose

Two conferences of 16 teams...Each having 2 divisions of 8 teams. Top 2 in each division make the playoffs, other spots filled as wild cards in order of most points. highest division winner faces lowest wild card and so on.

No way Illitch let's Detroit remain in the western conference as he have pressured NHL for move to the east next time there is a conference re-alignment.

 

[Dado]

If the league contracted, I think you'd find scoring go down even more.

I agree. You'd end up with a lot more ice time for Selke-types - I'd expect scoring to go down the toilet.

 

[Killion]

this is...... why do the mods deny people the right to bring up the POSSIBLE American bias of the NHL and its governing body? Why can't that be brought up? it's a legitimate issue that deserves discussion. There has to be a reason that the original NHA was 100% (ya, your talking what, 1916?) Canadian, the first season of the NHL was 100% Canadian, the O6 league was 33% Canadian, but today the league is only 20% Canadian. whats happening? AMERICANIZATION. what other word can you use? simply stated, there are a growing number and proportion of American based clubs, and a declining amount and proportion of Canadian based clubs. If the trends continue is it possible that there will be no Canadian clubs in the future? I believe it to be within the realm of plausibility, much to my horror.

With all due respect Deislrae, that is just so wrong on so many levels I'm almost at a loss to know where to begin. Look, Im as "Old School" as they come, but to suggest some evil cabal of American interests has somehow hi-jacked the NHL is just hilarious, early 20th century & provincial to extremes. Why not just form a Canadian only pro league with teams from Halifax to Victoria?. See how that flys' with the Habs, Leafs, Sens, Oil, Flames & Canucks?. I guess Im just different, because I ignore the 49th parallel and look at it as a North American dealeo', not a Canada vs. USA thing at all in anyway shape or form. We need them & they need us. Its a 2 way street for goodness sakes. Are you seriously suggesting that we, the Toronto's & Ottawa's, Winnipegs & Quebec City's cant compete on the stage, on the ice & in the boardrooms with our American Cousins?. This attitude that the balance favors the US is just totally incorrect. And thats all I have to say about that.

 

[Fugu]

this is...... why do the mods deny people the right to bring up the POSSIBLE American bias of the NHL and its governing body? Why can't that be brought up? it's a legitimate issue that deserves discussion.

there has to be a reason that the original NHA was 100% Canadian, the first season of the NHL was 100% Canadian, the O6 league was 33% Canadian, but today the league is only 20% Canadian. whats happening? AMERICANIZATION. what other word can you use? simply stated, there are a growing number and proportion of American based clubs, and a declining amount and proportion of Canadian based clubs.

If the trends continue is it possible that there will be no Canadian clubs in the future? I believe it to be within the realm of plausibility, much to my horror.

What in the world are you whinging about this time??????



And furthermore, are there no greedy Canadians? Are all Canadian owners altruistic who only own teams for the "good of the game" as defined by posters who wish to make this a nationality versus a business issue?

Canadian owners have been onboard with every expansion made, or not made if you go back to the WHA days.


There's a thread discussing the power brokers of the league. Why don't you go there and add your two cents? It's not 'just' Americans or 'just' Canadians.

To belabor this further, did you stop to consider that there are 300m Americans, and 30m Canadians (+/- a few million, someone can correct me). DO YOU THINK THAT MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT?

And another thing..... what if the NHL adds teams in Winnipeg and QC? What is that going to do to your proportionality argument? Are you going to draw up more lists where Canadian teams should be added just for kicks because you really do start running out of bigger cities at that point.

 

[obsenssive*]

With all due respect Deislrae, that is just so wrong on so many levels I'm almost at a loss to know where to begin. Look, Im as "Old School" as they come, but to suggest some evil cabal of American interests has somehow hi-jacked the NHL is just hilarious, early 20th century & provincial to extremes. Why not just form a Canadian only pro league with teams from Halifax to Victoria?. See how that flys' with the Habs, Leafs, Sens, Oil, Flames & Canucks?. I guess Im just different, because I ignore the 49th parallel and look at it as a North American dealeo', not a Canada vs. USA thing at all in anyway shape or form. We need them & they need us. Its a 2 way street for goodness sakes. Are you seriously suggesting that we, the Toronto's & Ottawa's, Winnipegs & Quebec City's cant compete on the stage, on the ice & in the boardrooms with our American Cousins?. This attitude that the balance favors the US is just totally incorrect. And thats all I have to say about that.

between 95-96 and 00-01 the proportion of Canadian teams in the NHL fell from 31% to 20% - 11% in 5 years. If it had nothing to do with American manipulation of circumstance, please explain.

 

[Fugu]

I agree. You'd end up with a lot more ice time for Selke-types - I'd expect scoring to go down the toilet.

Here's an interesting conundrum. The greatest scoring eras ostensibly arose during the periods of the greatest amount of disparity (distribution of talent by team).

The Dead Puck Era, aka Low Scoring Era, arose during [allegedly] a period of great disparity.

How's that parity thing doing?