With expansion over, what cities are the faves to get a relocated team?

[Montrealer]

I've always found it curious how little the Quebec expansion group and PKP reacted to the suspension of their expansion bid. Especially PKP. He's vocal about anything and everything but when it comes to the NHL they're quiet and cautious? Really?

My personal feeling is they privately have the assurance that if an Eastern team moves, they are ready to go and will be given priority much like TN had for Winnipeg. This isn't something the NHL would ever broadcast as the preference is not to have franchise movement but I also believe they're pragmatic and want to have contigencies in place. And Quebecor and PKP wouldn't say anything at all because it would torpedo their chances.

If no franchise moves, maybe expansion later, but that's a tougher road to travel for many reasons including the ever increasing expansion fee.

 

[Asheville]

no it won't

All it takes is a good owner and a favorable arena deal. Atlanta already has the TV leverage that a city like Quebec City will never have, and is thusly far more appealing to advertisers. It's the same reason the Panthers are in no danger of moving. If ASG wasn't such a formidable hurdle, the Thrashers would have got the Coyotes treatment

 

[libertarian]

Quebec City has had two chances and both failed as well.

As far as I know they have only had one chance of a NHL team. Like Winnipeg they will be successful in todays cap world that didn't exists when both Winnipeg and QC loss their teams. If Winnipeg with a smaller arena and smaller population can be profitable then so can QC. Their biggest issue is Montreal which would most likely fight any team to relocate to QC.

 

[Bonzo111]

As far as I know they have only had one chance of a NHL team. Like Winnipeg they will be successful in todays cap world that didn't exists when both Winnipeg and QC loss their teams. If Winnipeg with a smaller arena and smaller population can be profitable then so can QC. Their biggest issue is Montreal which would most likely fight any team to relocate to QC.

When you have teams like Arizone and Florida absolutely bleeding millions upon millions of dollars a year, one can't make an argument that QC wouldn't be viable. We have teams in the NHL that lose money every single season and lots of it. QC will not lose money and even if they did, it would be nowhere near the likes of the Panthers or Yotes.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

As far as I know they have only had one chance of a NHL team. Like Winnipeg they will be successful in todays cap world that didn't exists when both Winnipeg and QC loss their teams. If Winnipeg with a smaller arena and smaller population can be profitable then so can QC. Their biggest issue is Montreal which would most likely fight any team to relocate to QC.

They had two NHL teams but holding something against them from really anything over 30 years ago is kind of ridiculous but people do it to Atlanta. It's not really any different for QC. To be fair, I do want a team in QC but I also want a team in Atlanta because both can work under the right circumstances.

 

[libertarian]

They had two NHL teams but holding something against them from really anything over 30 years ago is kind of ridiculous but people do it to Atlanta. It's not really any different for QC. To be fair, I do want a team in QC but I also want a team in Atlanta because both can work under the right circumstances.

Do you live in Atlanta? The NHL has failed twice in Atlanta so I don't see why it would succeed on the third try. Unless you know something I don't I don't understand how another Atlanta expansion can be successful.

BTW Pink Floyd is my second favorite band after Rush so I love your name,

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Do you live in Atlanta? The NHL has failed twice in Atlanta so I don't see why it would succeed on the third try. Unless you know something I don't I don't understand how another Atlanta expansion can be successful.

BTW Pink Floyd is my second favorite band after Rush so I love your name,

I have family that lives in Atlanta but that doesn't mean I don't know why those two franchises in Atlanta failed. But holding it against Atlanta about the Flames leaving in 1980 makes about as much sense as it does to hold it against Quebec City that the Bulldogs failed in 1920. I certainly believe that Quebec City is in a supremely better position to take a team right now and moving forward. But if things were put in place the right way in Atlanta, it can work there. It didn't work the first time because they played in a building that wasn't good for revenue even when it was built. It didn't work the second time because ASG actively sabotaged the team. Now due to the renovations of Philips Arena, now State Farm Arena, they would need a new arena. If a group that actually wanted hockey to thrive there invested into it, the people will show up. I am not going to get my hopes up or anything because nothing like that is probably going to materialize anytime soon but I think it's lazy to believe that just because two franchises failed in a city that it means they should never get a team again because it completely loses any context that explains why those franchises failed.

 

[HisIceness]

Portland is number one option in USA no doubt! Why Houston? XD they don’t even have snow. Portland big market and hockey is huge there. Oh, and such a great rivalry with San Jose.

Houston and Atlanta are both better options than Portland. You could also make a case that Kansas City, San Diego, and even Austin are also better options as there is no NBA team to compete with.

I also don't get your last sentence. Wouldn't San Jose have more of a rivalry with the Southern California teams and Portland with Seattle?

 

[libertarian]

I have family that lives in Atlanta but I do not. That doesn't mean I don't know why those two franchises in Atlanta failed. But holding it against Atlanta about the Flames leaving in 1980 makes about as much sense as it does to hold it against Quebec City that the Bulldogs failed in 1920. I certainly believe that Quebec City is in a supremely better position to take a team right now and moving forward. But if things were put in place the right way in Atlanta, it can work there. It didn't work the first time because they played in a building that wasn't good for revenue even when it was built. It didn't work the second time because ASG actively sabotaged the team. Now due to the renovations of Philips Arena, now State Farm Arena, they would need a new arena. If a group that actually wanted hockey to thrive there invested into it, the people will show up. I am not going to get my hopes up or anything because nothing like that is probably going to materialize anytime soon but I think it's lazy to believe that just because two franchises failed in a city that it means they should never get a team again because it completely loses any context that explains why those franchises failed.

No insult intended. If someone wants to pay 650,000.000 and try a third time power to them. Since it failed twice this is not a investment I would make. As for Quebec City their team like Winnipeg's failed in a time when there was no cap and players salaries were rising exponentially. Today's NHL Cap lets every owner know what his cost are going to be going forward unlike the NHL in the 1990's. I don't live in Quebec and really have no idea if the NHL would succeed there but since it is succeeding in Winnipeg I would guess that QC would be the same. TBH the cap is the main reason Winnipeg has a team again but it will really hurt the Jets going forward because the Jets have to many good players that will get big raises that unlike in the past the ownership can afford to pay but the cap will prevent this. I find it ironic that the Jets management are actually hoping for a huge cap increase to hold onto the team they have. I know this because Chevy said it in a interview last spring that this would really help.

 

[LightningStorm]

Personally, I'd like to see Quebec City in the East (bringing back the Battle of Quebec) and Portland in the West (good new Pacific NW rivalry between Seattle and Portland).

 

[Oddbob]

Awwww, how sad. Chiming in and not understanding Atlanta Spirit Group's role in the matter; perhaps not knowing who they are at all.

When you average 14,000 out of 20,000 there is no need of "understanding" of a bad ownership group. Also, when the same city fails twice there is no need to understand anything other than the proven track record fact that ATLANTA IS NOT A HOCKEY CITY!

 

[hfman]

A great place for a new team would be in Avening, Ontario.

How come no one ever mentions them?

 

[Oddbob]

Dakotas/Wyoming/Montana don't have any markets big enough to rival Saskatoon, let alone big enough to host an NHL team. Nebraska only has the Omaha area, and it's still relatively tiny (sub-1m metro).

Indiana, on the other hand? Indianapolis is a former WHA city (as anyone who's a big fan of Gretzky and Messier would know), and it's growing fast - #34 metro area in the US by population, just slightly behind Columbus (which is #32). Could make for a very nice location.

* * *​

Get a clue. That team was deliberately sabotaged.

How where they sabotaged? Many of the failed teams had crappy owners. heck many of the current teams have bad owners. If fans like hockey they show up, regardless how shitty the product is, the Leafs sell out even when they absolutely suck. It isn't like Atlanta had 1 season of bad attendance, it was a growing problem each year. Then the second point, who says a new owner would care more? Thirdly, why should they get a 3rd opportunity when there are many more deserving cities that have never been given the chance?

 

[Future GOAT]

Quebec City.

 

[Rcknrollkillnmachine]

Barkov in a Nordiques sweater is quite a cool thought.

If Quebec is promised a team from East it's Florida but as far as I've read somewhere they're locked into a tight lease with their rink.

 

[Just Linda]

Well... I'll take the unorthodox answer. Not most likely but which one I'd prefer most.

Stockholm, Berlin, London, Seoul and Shanghai

Which NHL teams would I move?

Vladivostok, Steverstal, HC Amur etc

I'd have the NHL buy the KHL and expand it into Europe and Asia to create an opposing league. Every year the Stanley Cup Champs and the Gagarin Cup Champs play a series to decide the world champs. Eventual plan would be to create KHL/Euro Divisions in Scandanavia, Europe, East Russia and Asia. Build a huge global brand of hockey invested by the countries with lots of pride and all that.

Impossible? Probably. Practical, probably not.

It's just my selfish dream though.

 

[Rowlet]

Houston and Atlanta are both better options than Portland. You could also make a case that Kansas City, San Diego, and even Austin are also better options as there is no NBA team to compete with.

I also don't get your last sentence. Wouldn't San Jose have more of a rivalry with the Southern California teams and Portland with Seattle?

Seattle is the north of Washington, almost in Canada and Portland is southern Oregon, almost in California

 

[biturbo19]

I mean sure, but as you said Markham would have the same uphill fight that Hamilton would. You can just sort of lump in if you will any GTA options into one. Because you have to believe the Leafs organization would fight till their last breath to stop a GTA expansion regardless of where it was. But I also do agree the rivalry would be absolutely intense.

I'm not so sold on that whole "rivalry" aspect of a second GTA team. I can understand why the Leafs would fight tooth and nail to protect the integrity of their juggernaut market against any perceived threat to their NHL monopoly. But i have a harder time seeing a bunch of GTA Leafs fans just up and changing loyalty en mass. It'd certainly be a threat in that it'd potentially undercut the price of Leafs tickets for an "NHL Experience"...but in terms of actually building up a real rivalry, and all the merch considerations and whatnot that come along with that...i'm just not so convinced it would be a total slam dunk.

I've always found it curious how little the Quebec expansion group and PKP reacted to the suspension of their expansion bid. Especially PKP. He's vocal about anything and everything but when it comes to the NHL they're quiet and cautious? Really?

My personal feeling is they privately have the assurance that if an Eastern team moves, they are ready to go and will be given priority much like TN had for Winnipeg. This isn't something the NHL would ever broadcast as the preference is not to have franchise movement but I also believe they're pragmatic and want to have contigencies in place. And Quebecor and PKP wouldn't say anything at all because it would torpedo their chances.

If no franchise moves, maybe expansion later, but that's a tougher road to travel for many reasons including the ever increasing expansion fee.

I don't know about a private assurance that they're on deck for a relocation. I think there's kind of an implicit understanding that the NHL is keeping Quebec City in its back pocket as just that sort of contingency plan.

But either way...i think it's entirely reasonable to assume that the QC bidding group are just keeping largely quiet so as to not shoot themselves in the foot. The NHL likes quiet, stable owners. Raising a big fuss and kicking up dust and publicly throwing shade at the NHL or some other struggling market, would be a good way to get yourself de facto "blacklisted". With nothing to really gain. Bettman and Co. certainly haven't been big on caving to public opinion pressure on things. Especially not from a small market loudmouth. Keeping their heads down and continuing to just wait it out is the smart play for any QC bid.

 

[Rcknrollkillnmachine]

I'm not so sold on that whole "rivalry" aspect of a second GTA team. I can understand why the Leafs would fight tooth and nail to protect the integrity of their juggernaut market against any perceived threat to their NHL monopoly. But i have a harder time seeing a bunch of GTA Leafs fans just up and changing loyalty en mass. It'd certainly be a threat in that it'd potentially undercut the price of Leafs tickets for an "NHL Experience"...but in terms of actually building up a real rivalry, and all the merch considerations and whatnot that come along with that...i'm just not so convinced it would be a total slam dunk.

Any team in GTA e.g. Hamilton would need quick success like NY Islanders to bring onboard new fans in that part of Canada IMO. I wouldn't rule out a team there but it would come to relocation and Quebec is firmly ahead in that situation regarding the East.

 

[voyageur]

The second time around was on Atlanta Spirit Group. The fan support was there.

Colby Armstrong was on Hockey Central this week, describing playing in Atlanta. He said quite the opposite.

Houston is the likely destination.

After that I think Quebec just sits and waits. As the safety valve for the next crisis.

 

[voyageur]

The second time around was on Atlanta Spirit Group. The fan support was there.

Colby Armstrong was on Hockey Central this week, describing playing in Atlanta. He said quite the opposite.

Houston is the likely destination for Arizona.

After that I think Quebec just sits and waits. As the safety valve for the next crisis.

 

[BKIslandersFan]

When you average 14,000 out of 20,000 there is no need of "understanding" of a bad ownership group. Also, when the same city fails twice there is no need to understand anything other than the proven track record fact that ATLANTA IS NOT A HOCKEY CITY!

Washington failed twice in MLB, still got a third team. Stop being lazy with these arguments.

 

[Oddbob]

Washington failed twice in MLB, still got a third team. Stop being lazy with these arguments.

How is it lazy? What is "LAZY", about posting my thought on it, please ELABORATE! Also, one sport does not compare to another.

 

[Kale Hulls]

I'd rather give Toronto a second team than Quebec City a first.

 

[BKIslandersFan]

How is it lazy? What is "LAZY", about posting my thought on it, please ELABORATE! Also, one sport does not compare to another.

I am not comparing the sport, I am comparing the fact that both cities lost their teams multiple times.

Its lazy because you can't explain to me why MLB giving DC three teams is not somehow comparable to NHL giving Atlanta multiple teams. Its a different sport cannot be the answer, that's a lazy argument.