Future Relocation Possibilities

Grudy0

Registered User
Mar 16, 2011
1,878
122
Maryland
I wouldn't argue that there is at least a significant % that like to watch pro sports, but just saying that this or that broad TV market has a certain audience number doesn't mean that any significant % of that number is going to tune in to the NHL, especially if proximity to the arena isn't close enough for many of them who have never had any other contact with hockey. On the other hand, give them a team that's directly in their vicinity, in addition to TV access, and now you've perhaps doubled the chances that they will either attend the games or watch them on TV or both.
My only point to use that list is because it was a hobby of mine, the TV measurement business. I don't have any links to the 2010 US Census, but I certainly found a link to BBM Canada for the approximate TV market households in North America.

It's simply some data that can be applied to the situation, especially when examining areas that can be considered for relocation or expansion, just like the arenas that I added to the list can be considered.

And let's face it. Next season, the NHL will be receiving $100 million for six (or seven) Canadian teams from CBC/TSN, and then $200 million for the US teams via Comcast/NBC/Versus or Disney/ABC/ESPN. The league will finally generate $10 million a team on average for a national television contract, not to mention the amount each of the teams local TV contracts.
 

BrianL*

Guest
How do you know nobody wants to bring a team to Milwaukee? Say a Milwaukee billionaire, let's call him Mr. Miller

Sorry, a precedent has been set. All potential owners must now be referred to as The Balkan. :D
 

AdmiralsFan24

Registered User
Mar 22, 2011
14,979
3,896
Wisconsin
Also, I have no idea what the economics are like in Milwaukee and whether the city could support both the Bucks and the NHL.

There's no way Milwaukee could support an NBA and NHL team, none. The only reason Milwaukee is ever mentioned for an NHL franchise is because the Bucks are always a possibility to move. With no arena and an aging owner with no family to give the team to, there's the assumption in Milwaukee that the team will be relocated when he dies if there is no arena in place.

Milwaukee makes no sense. Too small a market, it would cluster divisions, old arena, and the region is already served with Chicago and Minnesota.

The market is too small if the Bucks are still there, which is far from a guarantee. And would it really cluster divisions? Say for instance the Thrashers move to Milwaukee, then Nashville can move to the Southeast and Milwaukee could move to the Central. That doesn't really cluster divisions.

The arena is old, the only way it would work is if they could put in luxury boxes on par with newer arenas in a renovation, other than that there's nothing wrong with the Bradley Center.

Saying the region is served with Chicago I understand, even though a lot of people from Wisconsin hate all things Chicago and would never cheer for them, but Minnesota? They're six hours away. Nobody from Milwaukee is driving six hours each way to watch a hockey game.

I think that somewhere in Wisconsin would be a great place for hockey in the US. Im actually surprised that they have never had a there or had real serious talks of starting one up. Every other major sport is in Wisconsin and the University of Wisconsin is one of the biggest drawing teams in the NCAA.

There were serious talks back in the early 90s. Lloyd Pettit's dream was to bring an NHL team to Milwaukee, that's why the Bradley Center was built (and named after his wife Jane Bradley Pettit and the rink the Admirals play on is the Jane Bradley Pettit Rink). They did a market research study and concluded that Milwaukee would support a team as long as it was competitive, but with an expansion draft back then you weren't going to be competitive for a while when you included the $50 million expansion fee.

And every other major sport is the problem. The Milwaukee area isn't big enough and doesn't have enough disposable income to support the Brewers, Bucks and an NHL team plus the Packers.

From the sound of it, Milwaukee would need a new barn as well; Bradley Center isn't in terribly good shape.

As I said before, the Bradley Center is in fine shape. If they could do renovations on it to add the money making luxury suites that are needed, it would be a fine NHL building, certainly not the worst in the NHL and probably not even in the 10 worst.

Simply put, how do you know nobody is interested in a Milwaukee franchise? Because nothing has been reported in the media, or here on HFboards? Brilliant thinking! Just because you haven't heard of any interest in a Milwaukee franchise, doesn't mean such interest doesn't exist. Haven't lost you yet, have I?

If some Milwaukee billionaire wanted a team in Milwaukee, he would first approach bettman with his interest. If, as you contend, the Wirtz veto exists, then bettman would say that the nhl is not interested in a Milwaukee team at this point. Still with me? Then, if this Milwaukee billionaire wants to 'play by the nhl's rules', and keep his options open for a future nhl franchise, he shuts his mouth, and simply leaves bettman's office without another word. Nobody, including yourself and the rest of us here on HFboards, knows that the meeting ever took place.

1. There is nobody interested in a Milwaukee franchise. The market is too saturated as I said before. Maybe if the Bucks move there might be someone interested.

2. We're kind of low on billionaires right now. :)

The only ones I can think of from Wisconsin are Craig Leipold (already owns the Wild), Herbert Kohler (in his 70s, chances he wants to spend a ton of money at that age to bring a team here are slim to none), Four members of the S.C. Johnson & Son fortune. One is the widow of Sam Johnson, another is their daughter and then their two sons one who is facing the possibility of 40 years in prison if he's convicted of having sexual contact with a teenage girl. John Menard Jr. (same problem as Kohler, he's in his 70s).

I just find a team in Milwaukee at any point in the next 15-20 years at least extremely unlikely.
 

Buck Aki Berg

Done with this place
Sep 17, 2008
17,325
8
Ottawa, ON
As I said before, the Bradley Center is in fine shape. If they could do renovations on it to add the money making luxury suites that are needed, it would be a fine NHL building, certainly not the worst in the NHL and probably not even in the 10 worst.

You're right - just read some of the source articles that the wiki article (where I was getting my information) was based on, and the problem isn't with the building itself, but more with bringing in sponsorship opportunities (the Bradley Center BoD rejected the idea of a corporate name, and the configuration isn't conducive to ribbon-style video boards).
 

danishh

Registered User
Dec 9, 2006
33,018
53
YOW
tv markets are a bad fit for any sport but football.

with the nhl you're better off looking at metro populations and CSAs/CMAs.
 

throatguzzler

Registered User
May 18, 2010
107
0
Philly'ish
Why wouldn't Cleveland work? I'd seriously consider it. It's actually leading the AHL in attendance (even ahead of the "AHL mecca" Hershey) this playoff year.

Lake Erie 8,365
Hershey 8,197
W-B/Scranton 5,660
Manchester 5,297
Milwaukee 4,703
Houston 4,165

Houston has a metro twice the size of Cleveland, yet Cleveland still manages to double Houstons attendance.
 
Last edited:

Shanny

Let's Win It All
Jun 12, 2009
7,723
10
Bytown
In a perfect world; Winnipeg,Quebec City, Hamilton, Portland,Kansas City, Las Vegas would all have teams.:)
 

ChompChomp

Can't wait for Sharks hockey to return someday
Jan 8, 2007
11,005
1,575
El Paso, TX
Move the Yotes back to the Winnipeg and rename the Jets.

Move the Panthers to Hamilton or Quebec City.

Move the Thrashers to Quebec City or maybe even Sacramento.

and finally, consider moving the LA Kings to KC (because of the AEG connection and to shut up all the talk of the NHL going back to KC)
 

astrobuck

Registered User
Aug 13, 2009
67
6
Louisville, Kentucky
Then let's do this.
57|52||Louisville|1,596|||KFC Yum! Center (2010) ~20,000
[/table]
That arena is freakin' gigantic. I work right next to it and have been in it a couple of times. It makes Phillips Arena in Atlanta look quaint.
That arena was "technically" built for the University of Louisville, but I remember several years ago there was talk that either the Sacramento Kings or Houston Rockets were considering moving to Louisville. The main drawback was that Freedom Hall was built in 1950 something and completely sucked by the 80s.
There are several businessmen in town that want to lure a team here or get one via expansion.
I'd like to see Louisville get an AHL team or even an ECHL team. The Panthers minor league team was here in the late 90s, but was forced to play in Freedom Hall. Of course, I'm probably one of about 10 hockey fans in Louisville.
 

Mwd711

Registered User
Jan 20, 2006
624
0
Why wouldn't Cleveland work? I'd seriously consider it. It's actually leading the AHL in attendance (even ahead of the "AHL mecca" Hershey) this playoff year.

Lake Erie 8,365
Hershey 8,197
W-B/Scranton 5,660
Manchester 5,297
Milwaukee 4,703
Houston 4,165

Houston has a metro twice the size of Cleveland, yet Cleveland still manages to double Houstons attendance.

There's a team two hours south - Columbus and another team two hours east - Pittsburgh. They would have something to say about that. Cleveland falls into their territories. The only way I see it happening is if the CBJ completely fall apart and decide to stay somewhere in the state, rather then give up its territory.

The Monsters do have some strong attendance - it's not uncommon for weekend evening games to draw over 9,000 but it doesn't mean that the NHL would be a success here. The corporate base is dwindling as is the region's population. Outside of Dan Gilbert, I can't see anyone with any interest to bring a team here and he's not going to do it at the expense of his NBA team.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,551
4,322
Auburn, Maine
There's a team two hours south - Columbus and another team two hours east - Pittsburgh. They would have something to say about that. Cleveland falls into their territories. The only way I see it happening is if the CBJ completely fall apart and decide to stay somewhere in the state, rather then give up its territory.

The Monsters do have some strong attendance - it's not uncommon for weekend evening games to draw over 9,000 but it doesn't mean that the NHL would be a success here. The corporate base is dwindling as is the region's population. Outside of Dan Gilbert, I can't see anyone with any interest to bring a team here and he's not going to do it at the expense of his NBA team.
the only reason Gilbert has the Monsters IS when he bought the remaining assets from the Gunds/SVSE AKA SJ and the Worcester franchise wasn't going to be a part of tht portfolio.... when Utah backed out, said franchise was available
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,551
4,322
Auburn, Maine
That arena is freakin' gigantic. I work right next to it and have been in it a couple of times. It makes Phillips Arena in Atlanta look quaint.
That arena was "technically" built for the University of Louisville, but I remember several years ago there was talk that either the Sacramento Kings or Houston Rockets were considering moving to Louisville. The main drawback was that Freedom Hall was built in 1950 something and completely sucked by the 80s.
There are several businessmen in town that want to lure a team here or get one via expansion.
I'd like to see Louisville get an AHL team or even an ECHL team. The Panthers minor league team was here in the late 90s, but was forced to play in Freedom Hall. Of course, I'm probably one of about 10 hockey fans in Louisville.

Louisville likely won't see pro hockey back at either the A OR E level , it was never the arena issue, it was the economic factor of aligning w/ an owner who promised x, y, z, but failed to pay creditors at every opportunity tht eventually extended to the PDC WHICH is why Louisville collapsed once Florida found out their prospects weren't being paid... as compared to how USA Hockey ran Lexington for SVSE....
 

DetBigWangs

Registered User
Dec 15, 2009
2,215
0
It just seems right to my senses that large cities in northern longitudes should have NHL teams.

ATL, FLA, PHO > Quebec, Winnepeg, Seattle?
 

Jeffrey93

Registered User
Nov 7, 2007
4,335
46
There's a team two hours south - Columbus and another team two hours east - Pittsburgh. They would have something to say about that. Cleveland falls into their territories. The only way I see it happening is if the CBJ completely fall apart and decide to stay somewhere in the state, rather then give up its territory.

Cleveland is 140mi from Columbus....no matter how you interpret the territory rules...Cleveland is not in Columbus'. Pittsburgh is about the same distance.

Detroit 'as the crow flies' (like straight over Lake Erie) is probably the closest....and they would still be over 100mi. from Cleveland.

Last I checked the territory is a 50mi radius....even if you believe that Cleveland's territory can't overlap Pittsburgh's, Columbus' and Detroit's territories, essentially making the distance required 100mi, (this is something I don't believe) Cleveland would still be outside of any existing market.

It's a market that is big enough for the MLB, NFL & NBA....and has a 20,000 seat hockey-suitable arena. I don't think Cleveland should be ruled out....
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,551
4,322
Auburn, Maine
Cleveland is 140mi from Columbus....no matter how you interpret the territory rules...Cleveland is not in Columbus'. Pittsburgh is about the same distance.

Detroit 'as the crow flies' (like straight over Lake Erie) is probably the closest....and they would still be over 100mi. from Cleveland.

Last I checked the territory is a 50mi radius....even if you believe that Cleveland's territory can't overlap Pittsburgh's, Columbus' and Detroit's territories, essentially making the distance required 100mi, (this is something I don't believe) Cleveland would still be outside of any existing market.

It's a market that is big enough for the MLB, NFL & NBA....and has a 20,000 seat hockey-suitable arena. I don't think Cleveland should be ruled out....
Cleveland is out..... as long as Gilbert owns the real estate, Jeffrey..... he also is part owner of the corporate entity that sponsors the arena in Quicken Loans
 

Jeffrey93

Registered User
Nov 7, 2007
4,335
46
Cleveland is out..... as long as Gilbert owns the real estate, Jeffrey..... he also is part owner of the corporate entity that sponsors the arena in Quicken Loans

Could you be any more vague? Who is Gilbert? What real estate? What does owning part of an arena sponsor have to do with it?
 

Jeffrey93

Registered User
Nov 7, 2007
4,335
46
who do you think owns the Cavaliers, Jeffrey, and the arena they play in, which includes, among other things, Lake Erie:shakehead

Gateway Economic Development Corp. owns the arena.

Dan Gilbert owns the majority of the Cavaliers and Monsters.

He's worth over a billion....I'm sure changing the 8,000 the Monsters draw to 18,000 an NHL team could draw might interest him.

He doesn't own 'the real estate' which now apparently means the venue/arena.

The arena is OPERATED by Gilbert's businesses....which means he could stand to gain from an NHL team in the arena....if he owns it or not.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,551
4,322
Auburn, Maine
Gateway Economic Development Corp. owns the arena.

Dan Gilbert owns the majority of the Cavaliers and Monsters.

He's worth over a billion....I'm sure changing the 8,000 the Monsters draw to 18,000 an NHL team could draw might interest him.

He doesn't own 'the real estate' which now apparently means the venue/arena.

The arena is OPERATED by Gilbert's businesses....which means he could stand to gain from an NHL team in the arena....if he owns it or not.
and it's not happening even w/ the uncertainties of Manitoba, Jeffrey
 

Mwd711

Registered User
Jan 20, 2006
624
0
Cleveland is 140mi from Columbus....no matter how you interpret the territory rules...Cleveland is not in Columbus'. Pittsburgh is about the same distance.

Detroit 'as the crow flies' (like straight over Lake Erie) is probably the closest....and they would still be over 100mi. from Cleveland.

Last I checked the territory is a 50mi radius....even if you believe that Cleveland's territory can't overlap Pittsburgh's, Columbus' and Detroit's territories, essentially making the distance required 100mi, (this is something I don't believe) Cleveland would still be outside of any existing market.

It's a market that is big enough for the MLB, NFL & NBA....and has a 20,000 seat hockey-suitable arena. I don't think Cleveland should be ruled out....

In the world of television, Columbus and Pittsburgh share Northeastern Ohio. You would have a ton of overlap especially in the Youngstown area where there is a strong base of Pens fans. The Jackets have enough problems. They don't need another team encroaching on their territory.
 

Jeffrey93

Registered User
Nov 7, 2007
4,335
46
and it's not happening even w/ the uncertainties of Manitoba, Jeffrey

I had forgotten what it was like to discuss things with you....and I'm beginning to wish I could forget it again.

What do uncertainties of Manitoba (whatever you mean by that) have to do with discussing potential NHL markets in the future?
 

blueandgoldguy

Registered User
Oct 8, 2010
5,284
2,538
Greg's River Heights
I was simply tossing in Salt Lake as a possible option for the NFL, but how is it less unlikely than cities like Buffalo and New Orleans that support two major league franchises? Salt Lake City is at least growing, whereas those other two are shrinking. Milwaukee also isn't that much larger, also with two major league franchises, plus the NFL just up the road, and yet people still talk about it possibly supporting an NHL team. And although Milwaukee is still growing, SLC growth rate is 4 times that of Milwaukee.

Just saying that I don't think it was such an outlandish suggestion, plus, with the NFL, attendance is only needed for 16 games a year, plus the playoffs.

Good point about the other teams but they came into the league decades ago. The NFL was not so concerned with market size back then. As of right now, the only possibilities in my mind would be Los Angeles and San Antonio. LA supposedly has a deal in place with a corporation that would see the naming rights pay for the vast majority of the stadium, and well, it just makes sense to have a team in the second biggest market in the US whether by expansion or relocation.

San Antonio has a stadium ready to go in a mid-sized US city in a football mad state. All they would need is a few hundred million dollars in upgrades to the Alamodome to get it up to NFL standards. A task, I'm sure, could be accomplished through the sale of seat licenses.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,551
4,322
Auburn, Maine
Good point about the other teams but they came into the league decades ago. The NFL was not so concerned with market size back then. As of right now, the only possibilities in my mind would be Los Angeles and San Antonio. LA supposedly has a deal in place with a corporation that would see the naming rights pay for the vast majority of the stadium, and well, it just makes sense to have a team in the second biggest market in the US whether by expansion or relocation.

San Antonio has a stadium ready to go in a mid-sized US city in a football mad state. All they would need is a few hundred million dollars in upgrades to the Alamodome to get it up to NFL standards. A task, I'm sure, could be accomplished through the sale of seat licenses.
the problem w/ SA is you already have Houston and Dallas already w/ newer facilities, blue
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad