Bad Expansion Cites that will become good hockey cites?

Status
Not open for further replies.

rekrul

Registered User
Mar 7, 2003
1,589
11
bittersville,ca
Visit site
San Jose has real potential, supported lousy and good hockey teams, large population base. best population of Disposable income of any NHL city. largest adult rec league in the USA is a at logitech ice, now with 4 sheets of ice there might be enough interest to develop some talent for at least NCAA Div 1 player. currently san jose st still just a 'club team'. Jr Sharks do well in large tourneys.

cons: San Jose second banana to San Francisco, any team even NHL Raiders and baseball A's are considered second class to SF giants and 49ers. most media here thinks hockey=soccer.
 

Shizuka

Registered User
Mar 16, 2002
3,060
835
In purgatory
DW3 said:
What football and baseball are near them? Cincinnati is about 2 hours south and Cleveland is about 1 1/2 hrs. eastward of them. Their only real compition is Ohio State University, which competes with them regularly for football and basketball games.

That's 4 major teams within a two hour radius (Reds, Indians, Browns, Bengals), in two other sports that easily outdraw hockey overall down south. Don't know why you're getting so defensive. Plus collegiate athletics, another big draw in the U.S. right? Point is hockey is doing quite well there, which is good to see.
 

Master Shake*

Guest
Kansas City is the next expansion spot along with either Vegas or Portland
 

nyrmessier011

Registered User
Feb 9, 2005
3,358
4
Charlotte/NYC
blitzkriegs said:
Because fans attend hockey games to watch the coach? :biglaugh:

You win, you generate interest. You lose, nobody wants to spend their 'entertainment dollar' on you. Simple as that.

my point was if phoenix is smart they will market gretzky along with there young team, ass
 

blitzkriegs

Registered User
May 26, 2003
13,150
1
Beach & Mtn & Island
Visit site
nyrmessier011 said:
my point was if phoenix is smart they will market gretzky along with there young team, ass

That's mature. Just about as narrow-minded as stating "those people in Arizona." Are 'those' people somewhat aloof to WHO Gretzky is? Are 'those' people different from you? Please ... Open your eyes and mind beyond Queens Blvd. :help:

That's a great marketing ploy - "Come see the Great One ...er...Behind the Bench."

Look at his moves as he walks back and forth 60 feet, and that wall street uniform, or that he's helmetless - did he sign the NHL waiver for that???
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
WC Handy said:
Before answering this question I would like to know what were the Bad Expansion Cities?
Atlanta, Columbus, Carolina, Nashville, Tampa Bay, Florida, Anaheim, Phoenix, NYI, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Vancouver, Ottawa, San Jose, LA, Calgary, Edmonton, Philly, St. Louis, New Jersey, Dallas, Washington, Minnesota, Colorado,
 

Johnnybegood13

Registered User
Jul 11, 2003
8,711
968
The Messenger said:
Atlanta, Columbus, Carolina, Nashville, Tampa Bay, Florida, Anaheim, Phoenix, NYI, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Vancouver, Ottawa, San Jose, LA, Calgary, Edmonton, Philly, St. Louis, New Jersey, Dallas, Washington, Minnesota, Colorado,
Even when Leaf fans joke they somehow allways seem to come off looking like dinks :razz:

Anyway,for me it's Columbus,i have met many fans from there and they love their hockey. I also think Cleveland would be a good market as well. Ohio is a wonderfull blue-collar sports mad state IMO.
 

jacketracket*

Guest
T@T said:
Even when Leaf fans joke they somehow allways seem to come off looking like dinks :razz:
Actually, he is a dink.

Anyway,for me it's Columbus,i have met many fans from there and they love their hockey. I also think Cleveland would be a good market as well. Ohio is a wonderfull blue-collar sports mad state IMO.
Not to be argumentative here, but Columbus was never a "bad expansion city" to begin with. The choice may have caught some by surprise, because their knowledge of Ohio is fairly limited to Cincinnati and Cleveland.

Columbus is the largest city in the state, and was (I believe) the largest metro area in the US without a major sport team.
 

sveiglar

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
8,585
4
I don't think any of the pure expansion cities are bad choices, but I think that Nashville, Minnesota (yeah, I'll call them expansion for arguments sake), and Columbus will all be (if they aren't already) good hockey cities.
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
T@T said:
Even when Leaf fans joke they somehow allways seem to come off looking like

Anyway,for me it's Columbus,i have met many fans from there and they love their hockey. I also think Cleveland would be a good market as well. Ohio is a wonderfull blue-collar sports mad state IMO.
I guess you can't be a purist and want the Original 6 NHL back again

Toronto, Montreal, Boston, Detroit, Chicago, NYR

Any expansion after that was bad expansion IMO ..
 

WC Handy*

Guest
The Messenger said:
I guess you can't be a purist and want the Original 6 NHL back again

Toronto, Montreal, Boston, Detroit, Chicago, NYR

Any expansion after that was bad expansion IMO ..

I suppose if I were a Leafs fan I'd want only 6 teams in the league again. Any more than 5 opponents has proven to be too much for the Leafs.
 

jacketracket*

Guest
WC Handy said:
I suppose if I were a Leafs fan I'd want only 6 teams in the league again. Any more than 5 opponents has proven to be too much for the Leafs.
:D
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
WC Handy said:
I suppose if I were a Leafs fan I'd want only 6 teams in the league again. Any more than 5 opponents has proven to be too much for the Leafs.
Your Blues entered the league the very next year 1967 and have the exact same Cup record ..

Strange that you were so quick to point out one situation but failed to recognize your own weakness.

When people quote that 1967 was Leafs last Cup .. 1967 was also the year your team entered the NHL .. So I guess its 38 years for you without a Cup as well ..

How does that make you feel as a Blues fan??

Then when you see the Levitt report and see the Leafs made the most money in the NHL and the Blues lost the most last year and judge that success in terms of on ice, it sure sends a message..
 

WC Handy*

Guest
The Messenger said:
Your Blues entered the league the very next year 1967 and have the exact same Cup record ..

Strange that you were so quick to point out one situation but failed to recognize your own weakness.

When people quote that 1967 was Leafs last Cup .. 1967 was also the year your team entered the NHL .. So I guess its 38 years for you without a Cup as well ..

How does that make you feel ??

The difference between mean and you is that I'm not asking to contract 24 teams to improve my team's chances at winning the Cup.
 

WC Handy*

Guest
The Messenger said:
Then when you see the Levitt report and see the Leafs made the most money in the NHL and the Blues lost the most last year and judge that success in terms of on ice, it sure sends a message..

It only sends a message to dip****s that don't understand the Blues finances.

The Blues didn't lose money because of their inability to generate reveue. The Blues lost money because their owner was more than willing to do so and he felt that's what needed to be done to contend. The only message it sends is that the Blues have one of the best owners in all of sports.
 

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
WC Handy said:
The difference between mean and you is that I'm not asking to contract 24 teams to improve my team's chances at winning the Cup.

And you don't refer to your franchise as the "storied" St. Louis Blues, who btw have been to three more Stanley Cups than Toronto has since the league expanded past six teams.

;)
 

Magnus Fulgur

Registered User
Nov 27, 2002
7,354
0
Atlanta should do well, they have young stars, but they need a better set of forwards from top to bottom. They have a great arena right downtown and on the subway. They'll do fine...

Nashville. Unbelievable support and passion from the fans...and the style of play is perfect for them. Give them some playoff time and they're set.

Carolina...I love NC and Raleigh, but I don't think so...
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
WC Handy said:
The difference between mean and you is that I'm not asking to contract 24 teams to improve my team's chances at winning the Cup.
NO I was focussing on the teams that lost the most money in the NHL which your Blues were #1 so that is why I recommended them for contraction ..

They have no success on or off the ice .. and require a new CBA to prevent Chapter 11 .. I just thought this was the better option ..

I don't see the need to punish all teams for the lack of management of others ..
 

WC Handy*

Guest
The Messenger said:
NO I was focussing on the teams that lost the most money in the NHL which your Blues were #1 so that is why I recommended them for contraction ..

They have no success on or off the ice .. and require a new CBA to prevent Chapter 11 .. I just thought this was the better option ..

I don't see the need to punish all teams for the lack of management of others ..

I can't say that I'm surprised that you still don't get it...
 

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
The Messenger said:
Then when you see the Levitt report and see the Leafs made the most money in the NHL and the Blues lost the most last year and judge that success in terms of on ice, it sure sends a message..

Hey smart guy, hasn't it been you that has been arguing that teams should not be focusing on making money and should be allowed to over-spend to try and be successful? So by your "scale of success" the Leafs are failing miserably compared to the other teams out there because they are making money! So which is more imporant again? Spending the most money or making the most money? Can't have it both ways there Sparky. Watch the paint!!!
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
WC Handy said:
I can't say that I'm surprised that you still don't get it...
I quess its quite fitting that ..

Current NHL

Leaf fans & Leafs Team >>>>>>>> NHL Profitability

Blues Fans & Blues Team <<<<<<< NHL Profitability

Solution :

Align the whole New NHL to compensate for the Blues poor management...

I get it all right.
 

WC Handy*

Guest
The Messenger said:
I quess its quite fitting that ..

Current NHL

Leaf fans & Leafs Team >>>>>>>> NHL Profitability

Blues Fans & Blues Team <<<<<<< NHL Profitability

Solution :

Align the whole New NHL to compensate for the Blues poor management...

I get it all right.

No, you don't get it. Not that that's different from any other thread you participate in though.

The Blues lose money because Bill Laurie chooses to do so. They don't lose money because they don't have fans. They don't lose money because they don't generate revenue. They lose money because Bill Laurie was willing to spend on his team until the new CBA was put in place because he felt that he needed to for his team to contend for the Cup.

Oh, and why again are we comparing the Blues and Leafs? Have I said anything that leads you to believe that I think the Blues are a better franchise than the Blues? If you'd like, we can talk about the Cardinals and the Blue Jays. Because that conversation would be just as relevent to this thread as the one that we're having now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->