Could any metro areas other than New York and LA support multiple teams?

[saskriders]

Are there any metro areas that can support a second team? Currently New York has three and LA has two, but there are some other areas with big populations that only have one team. Also, for the purposes of the hypothetical assume that the teams already in the market sign off on it because the expansion money or whatever it is just a hypothetical.

Could the Bay Area support a second team in San Francisco or Oakland? They have had two in two other big four leagues, but is the NHL to niche in the states? By the most liberal definition on Wikipedia the Bay is nearly at 10 million, not far behind LA.

Could the GTA support one in Hamilton? I think many would say yes, but how much difficulty would there be in converting Leafs fans or finding new fans? How about even closer to Toronto than Hamilton?

If you are including Baltimore as part of Washington's metro could they support a team? Could Chicago support two like they do in baseball? Is Montreal hockey crazy enough to have two teams again?

Click to read more...

 

[Bostonzamboni]

The Kings had a couple or more crowds of 11,000 late in the season. The Sharks have had a wild drop to 14,000 once or twice in February and March.

Seems these metros can barely support their teams in bad times. The Islanders, as usual, have had plenty of 9,000 to 11,0000 crowds, both at Barclays and Nassau. The Rangers only sold out three or four games this year.... unbelievable, especially with stars. Okay, they would've maybe sold out another game or two if the regular season played to completion. But only 15,000 to 16,500 announced at MSG, plus any no shows, is astounding. I've never seen that there since following the league attendance as a boy in 1971. And the Flyers had trouble most of the season getting 85%-90% capacity? Couldn't even sell out playoffs against Penguins last year, I think. Close, but not sellouts

But the Blackhawks....somehow, keeping selling out. But not sure how many no shows each night, though. And yes, StubHub prices for their games can start very low (plus big fees). Maaaybe Chicago could support another team if it were positioned maybe within 45 miles of Milwaukee and decent prices?

But as far as other metros supporting two teams, baseball doesn't do well nowadays in Baltimore, Oakland or the White Sox when faced with bad or even decent teams. Anaheim and Los Angeles are an exception, as both draw very well. But baseball fans have 81 home games to support versus only 41 in hockey, so maybe that's an excuse.

(But still, most regular season hockey tix are more expensive in most cities than baseball tix, I think. So most baseball teams can sometimes still attract a family sitting in the upper seats )

 

[Rob Brown]

The GTA is really the only other option.

 

[M88K]

I would think just in terms of population
LA, Toronto, and Chicago.
In terms of actual support probably just Toronto

 

[WeaponOfChoice]

I've always thought that Mississauga could support a team.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Depends on your definition of “support”. The Islanders have been holding on by their fingernails for decades. Montreal had a second team for an entire generation, then it folded because of economic pressures.

I think you could put a second team in Toronto, Chicago, SF, maybe Montreal and it would get “support”, but none of them would thrive.

 

[DeysArena]

For me, the really interesting question would be the branding for a second GTA team.

Do you try to sell it as a second Toronto team like the Cubs and the White Sox or do you brand it as a suburban team like the Mets or the Islanders?

 

[Ted Hoffman]

GTA we've discussed ad nauseum.

Montreal very likely could, but whether it would is a different story because the Canadiens are so ingrained there.

Chicago legitimately could. Whether it would is a different story. Pre-2008 the chances of it supporting two teams was significantly higher because there were a lot of Blackhawks fans who refused to drop a penny on the team as long as Bill Wirtz owned it; I suspect a bunch of them would have backed a 2nd NHL team in the area and a chunk of those would have stuck around once Team #2 had real success. Right now, I don't think it would work - it would be the old Cardinals to the Bears. Not to mention, it would require a new arena (no, Allstate Arena won't cut it beyond short-term) which would have to go somewhere in the suburbs (and then have a regular parade of shows going through it and not going to other venues already operating), and I don't see that happening.

Don't think San Francisco/Oakland could carry 2. It's kind of in a weird spot where there's almost more corporate money than there is casual fans willing and able to support sports teams. Plus, it's arguably a bandwagon metro area.

Baltimore/Washington is an even longer shot; Baltimore is pretty much maxed out at 2 pro franchises.

Beyond that, everything is a no.

 

[Bixby Snyder]

Not Toronto.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Boston metro could in a vacuum.

Circle around Boston, Providence, Hartford, Worcester, Manchester encompasses a handful of long time AHL cities, and arguably the longest/hottest hockey hotbed at all levels (with Minnesota). The passion, people and money all exist to have a 2nd team.

Obviously it wouldn't work given the reach of the Bruins

 

[Fatass]

The “Golden Horseshoe” is the only area that would support two NHL teams. But why do it? Likely only split off some of the Leaf’s revenue, so not really adding to the total enough to justify the second team.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Depends on your definition of “support”. The Islanders have been holding on by their fingernails for decades. Montreal had a second team for an entire generation, then it folded because of economic pressures.

Given that the Montreal Maroons existed 80-90 years ago and how much the league has changed, and how the "economic pressures" they faced was the Great Depression, I don't think that example is particularly helpful.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Given that the Montreal Maroons existed 80-90 years ago and how much the league has changed, and how the "economic pressures" they faced was the Great Depression, I don't think that example is particularly helpful.

The fundamentals haven't changed that much. Market-splitting has basically the same impact everywhere and in every era.

One of the Montreal franchises was destined to fail eventually. If the Maroons had survived the Depression they'd likely have failed during WWII. If they made it that far, they'd likely have failed during the 70s or the 90s. And if they survived all of that, it would have been because the Habs failed instead. One way or another, Montreal was simply not a big enough city to keep two franchises going through hard times.

Likewise, the NY Americans were always a little-sister franchise to the wealthier and more popular Rangers. They didn't make it through hard times. The Islanders have had a virtually identical experience, and if hypothetically COVID kept disrupting the economy for years on end they'd be in serious trouble. The same fundamental dynamics, 80 years apart.

 

[Fatass]

The fundamentals haven't changed that much. Market-splitting has basically the same impact everywhere and in every era.

One of the Montreal franchises was destined to fail eventually. If the Maroons had survived the Depression they'd likely have failed during WWII. If they made it that far, they'd likely have failed during the 70s or the 90s. And if they survived all of that, it would have been because the Habs failed instead. One way or another, Montreal was simply not a big enough city to keep two franchises going through hard times.

Likewise, the NY Americans were always a little-sister franchise to the wealthier and more popular Rangers. They didn't make it through hard times. The Islanders have had a virtually identical experience, and if hypothetically COVID kept disrupting the economy for years on end they'd be in serious trouble. The same fundamental dynamics, 80 years apart.

Would the Devils be close enough to NYC to be included in that market with the Islanders and Rangers?

 

[tarheelhockey]

Would the Devils be close enough to NYC to be included in that market with the Islanders and Rangers?

I would include them, yes. If you Thanos-snapped the Devils out of existence, most of their fanbase would clearly be within the Rangers' immediate sphere of influence.

 

[Fatass]

I would include them, yes. If you Thanos-snapped the Devils out of existence, most of their fanbase would clearly be within the Rangers' immediate sphere of influence.

So basically the National league is trying to have NYC support three teams. Considering that, the GTA could support 2 teams then.
Would a second team in the GTA be financially better for the league than a team in Quebec City?

 

[tarheelhockey]

So basically the National league is trying to have NYC support three teams. Considering that, the GTA could support 2 teams then.
Would a second team in the GTA be financially better for the league than a team in Quebec City?

Like I said upthread, I do think the GTA could "support" a second team, in the sense of having its head above water. But down-years for that franchise would be ugly, especially if the Leafs were good at the same time.

Better than QC is an interesting question. I don't think QC is a sustainable market (notwithstanding a rich owner who simply doesn't care) so I guess I'd say GTA would be better than that.

 

[93LEAFS]

Are there any metro areas that can support a second team? Currently New York has three and LA has two, but there are some other areas with big populations that only have one team. Also, for the purposes of the hypothetical assume that the teams already in the market sign off on it because the expansion money or whatever it is just a hypothetical.

Could the Bay Area support a second team in San Francisco or Oakland? They have had two in two other big four leagues, but is the NHL to niche in the states? By the most liberal definition on Wikipedia the Bay is nearly at 10 million, not far behind LA.

Could the GTA support one in Hamilton? I think many would say yes, but how much difficulty would there be in converting Leafs fans or finding new fans? How about even closer to Toronto than Hamilton?

If you are including Baltimore as part of Washington's metro could they support a team? Could Chicago support two like they do in baseball? Is Montreal hockey crazy enough to have two teams again?

You could easily have a second team at the Scotiabank Arena, or a new Arena in the North-end of the city (Downsview park) or in Vaughn. Logistically, it makes the most sense to have the second team at the SBA due to the fact its in close proximity of the dense downtown and stops a competition concert venue.

GTA is one of the fastest growing regions in North America, Quebec city is 13% the size of the GTA.

Depends on your definition of “support”. The Islanders have been holding on by their fingernails for decades. Montreal had a second team for an entire generation, then it folded because of economic pressures.

I think you could put a second team in Toronto, Chicago, SF, maybe Montreal and it would get “support”, but none of them would thrive.

The issue though is Hockey isn't really the most popular sport or even the discussion. In Toronto it is. The NYC has very strong secondary teams in the Jets (NFL), Mets (MLB), and the Nets (NBA) are doing quite well since their move to Brooklyn. Toronto/Golden Horseshoe is the biggest United States/Canada region to only have 3 professional sports teams. The other cities that are bigger or of comparable size in NYC region (has 9 big 4 teams), LA (has 8 big 4 teams) and Chicago (the most comparable size-wise, has 5 Big 4 teams). NYC and LA are much bigger, but they also have over double the amount of Big 4 teams, plus LA having two major College programs in UCLA and USC inside the city.

 

[Yukon Joe]

The fundamentals haven't changed that much. Market-splitting has basically the same impact everywhere and in every era.

Population of metro Montreal in 1921 - 774,000
Population of metro Montreal in 2016 - 4, 098,000

Plus factor in changes in income, changes in ticket prices, overall changes in demographics (the Maroons used to be the Francophone team, whereas the Canadiens were the Anglophone team), the rise of radio (and then later television)...

The fundamentals are completely different. I have no idea if Montreal could support a second team or not, but the history of the Maroons tells us nothing about the present day.

 

[tarheelhockey]

The issue though is Hockey isn't really the most popular sport or even the discussion. In Toronto it is. The NYC has very strong secondary teams in the Jets (NFL), Mets (MLB), and the Nets (NBA) are doing quite well since their move to Brooklyn. Toronto/Golden Horseshoe is the biggest United States/Canada region to only have 3 professional sports teams. The other cities that are bigger or of comparable size in NYC region (has 9 big 4 teams), LA (has 8 big 4 teams) and Chicago (the most comparable size-wise, has 5 Big 4 teams). NYC and LA are much bigger, but they also have over double the amount of Big 4 teams, plus LA having two major College programs in UCLA and USC inside the city.

The history of hockey in the GTA strongly suggests that people are lukewarm to pay for hockey which is not the Toronto Maple Leafs. It seems reasonable to conclude that a second NHL team would experience a similar phenomenon, where they are always the off-brand alternative.

I don't doubt that such a team could exist, but I find it very hard to imagine a scenario where they play to full arenas with high ticket prices. More likely, they are another Islanders, Clippers, White Sox situation.

 

[93LEAFS]

The history of hockey in the GTA strongly suggests that people are lukewarm to pay for hockey which is not the Toronto Maple Leafs. It seems reasonable to conclude that a second NHL team would experience a similar phenomenon, where they are always the off-brand alternative.

I don't doubt that such a team could exist, but I find it very hard to imagine a scenario where they play to full arenas with high ticket prices. More likely, they are another Islanders, Clippers, White Sox situation.

I would say the history of Toronto more indicates they are unwilling to pay for lower-tier professional sports (look at the CFL). Raptors are insanely successful, and the Jays are still a top 10 revenue team, although play in a stadium that is way too large.

I would think the situation would be much closer to the Mets or New York Jets. Not the premier team in the market, but will get a sizable following. They won't charge Leafs prices, but they will still sell tickets at a premium relative to the league. If they played a the SBA they would do well just off the increased prices in boxes that are retained, and if they built a new Arena they would have a long list of corporate support. Toronto being the media and financial center of Canada means that there will be massive corporate support right off the bat.

I'm a diehard Leafs fan, but its not that Leafs tickets are insanely expensive, they are essentially unattainable outside the secondary market at massive price increases.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Population of metro Montreal in 1921 - 774,000
Population of metro Montreal in 2016 - 4, 098,000

Plus factor in changes in income, changes in ticket prices, overall changes in demographics (the Maroons used to be the Francophone team, whereas the Canadiens were the Anglophone team), the rise of radio (and then later television)...

The fundamentals are completely different. I have no idea if Montreal could support a second team or not, but the history of the Maroons tells us nothing about the present day.

What the Maroons tell you is that even if a second Montreal team could be on equal footing with the Canadiens, the market is still simply too small to support two teams in one sport for very long.

It's a simple matter of supply versus demand, that's the fundamental. There is not enough demand in Montreal for a second NHL team to make this make sense for very long. As soon as a less-than-favorable situation emerged (whether that means an economic crash, or years of struggling to compete, or whatever) that second team would quickly become an afterthought in its own home. If we very generously say they could capture 25% of the market away from the Habs, then they would effectively be operating like a team in a metro of 1M. That's somewhere between the market size of Winnipeg and Edmonton, except this team would be playing second-fiddle in spaces like TV and merchandise. It's only sustainable if they can remain relevant (which the Maroons did for a while) but as soon as they're not relevant, they're dead.

I would say the history of Toronto more indicates they are unwilling to pay for lower-tier professional sports (look at the CFL). Raptors are insanely successful, and the Jays are still a top 10 revenue team, although play in a stadium that is way too large.

I would think the situation would be much closer to the Mets or New York Jets. Not the premier team in the market, but will get a sizable following. They won't charge Leafs prices, but they will still sell tickets at a premium relative to the league. If they played a the SBA they would do well just off the increased prices in boxes that are retained, and if they built a new Arena they would have a long list of corporate support. Toronto being the media and financial center of Canada means that there will be massive corporate support right off the bat.

I'm a diehard Leafs fan, but its not that Leafs tickets are insanely expensive, they are essentially unattainable outside the secondary market at massive price increases.

That's fair. I do think a second GTA team is plausible, it's just a matter of whether a Jets-equivalent is what the league really wants to add. It's certainly a better option than a QC or Hartford fever dream.

 

[93LEAFS]

What the Maroons tell you is that even if a second Montreal team could be on equal footing with the Canadiens, the market is still simply too small to support two teams in one sport for very long.

It's a simple matter of supply versus demand, that's the fundamental. There is not enough demand in Montreal for a second NHL team to make this make sense for very long. As soon as a less-than-favorable situation emerged (whether that means an economic crash, or years of struggling to compete, or whatever) that second team would quickly become an afterthought in its own home. If we very generously say they could capture 25% of the market away from the Habs, then they would effectively be operating like a team in a metro of 1M. That's somewhere between the market size of Winnipeg and Edmonton, except this team would be playing second-fiddle in spaces like TV and merchandise. It's only sustainable if they can remain relevant (which the Maroons did for a while) but as soon as they're not relevant, they're dead.



That's fair. I do think a second GTA team is plausible, it's just a matter of whether a Jets-equivalent is what the league really wants to add. It's certainly a better option than a QC or Hartford fever dream.

I think they would be pretty comfortable in the middle of the pack of the league with a potential to be top 10, and likely a team that share's revenue, instead of taking out of the revenue sharing. It should be kept in mind, that the Greater Golden Horseshoe is larger than all the Western Canadian teams and Ottawa's metro population combined. Just the GTA is about the same size as Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary's metropolitan population combined. The only expansions I think makes more sense is Houston, and possibly Austin due to its continued growth, transplants, and tech sector.

Now, I would say this about a team centered in Toronto, that is accessible for all parts of the GTA by car and public transport, so either at SBA or a new Arena off the 401 in the Downsview park area or at worst a the end of the University/Spidina line, along the 400 and 407 in the start of the northern suburbs. A team that is building that is in the Hamilton region or even Mississauga is much more capped as it won't be easily accessible by the TTC or people who work downtown, and while Toronto has wealthy suburbs, a very significant amount of wealth resides inside the old city limits and North York (now amalgamated into Toronto after it became the "mega-city"), so a team with aspirations of top 10 NHL revenue's likely needs to be easily accessible to the core of the city. If Hamilton or Sauga got a team, I'd be pretty indifferent, as they would be a nightmare to get to during the work week.

 

[Bostonzamboni]

Would the Devils be close enough to NYC to be included in that market with the Islanders and Rangers?

My research just revealed that MSG to the Prudential Center in Newark is 13 miles whereas MSG to Nassau Coliseum is 21 miles.

Thus, the Devils are much, much closer to midtown Manhattan than the Patriots are to Boston or the 49ers are to San Francisco.

 

[koteka]

I think the success of a 2nd Toronto team would depend on how they approached it. Give them a name like Toronto Ten-Ply or Toronto Hosers or Toronto Duct Tape and really try to be the antithesis of the Original 6. Make the games fun and not corporate. Use some cultural reference from Letterkenny or something and Americans will buy jerseys. Make fun of the Leafs and Canadiens and other teams in juvenile ways on social media that will make a 14 year old want his dad to take him to a game. Have good deals on beer. Bring in a guy or two with personality like Subban. But what would probably happen is they would try to emulate the Leafs and other franchises and it would always be second fiddle like the Mets in New York.