Would Portland Oregon be a good place for an NHL team?

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,664
2,114
Successful businesses also tend not to over expand into new markets, especially at the expense of existing ones.

Yet, the NHL did just that.
There was no where in Canada to expand until recently. The NHL has not expanded since 2000.
 

Rocko604

Sports will break your heart.
Apr 29, 2009
8,562
273
Vancouver, BC
To build on the Pittsburgh talk...the overlap would be detrimental in a way to Portland, just because the schedules overlap each other so much more than the NFL and MLB teams do in Pittsburgh...but I still think it's being overstated there as the two sports do tend to cater to a different crowd and the only real harm done to the Penguins during Steelers season is that they're 3rd page news instead of 1st...the ratings and attendance don't slip, and when the team was struggling the attendance difference was fairly minimal from my experience (though the fact the NFL is a spectacle sport, playing only once a week, may have played into that). The biggest reason I think Pittsburgh couldn't support an NBA team is that the fan's dollar is already stretched thin...putting another team there would be asking a Rust Belt city too much. Portland's population base is significantly more affluent than Pittsburgh's and is greatly under-served. The money factor does a lot to compensate for the population questions in my opinion.

I would say that, if Seattle gets a NHL team, Portland would be best to look more at the NFL or MLB instead of the NHL...but there isn't a stadium in place for those (Jeld-Wyn Field is the only game in town, really, as far as stadiums go...and the renovations to turn it into a MLS stadium would up kicking the long-standing Beavers AAA baseball team out...Portland State still uses it as their home football field). The Rose Garden, on the other hand, would be NHL ready today.

Portland needs a 2nd team...it's just hard to get the circumstances to line-up where that seems likely in the near future. I don't see a new stadium getting built there with public funds, they'd be 3rd or 4th at best on the NFL relocation list, and outside of a couple possible stadium plans falling apart the MLB doesn't really have any mobile franchises (Tampa Bay is the only one I see as a possibility if they can't get their stadium built...but they're in no immediate danger at all...Oakland would be in danger if they can't get their stadium, but I fully expect that they will be making the small move to San Jose within 5 years). The NHL would have significantly fewer hurdles to jump over to get a team in Portland.

I still think it could work. Portland is an under-served market, and an affluent one at that...I'm not worried about the fans not being willing to spend the money to support two teams going simultaneously.

I wouldn't put them atop the relocation list in any circumstance...Seattle tops Portland because of the population and their status as the regional hub and I'd put a team in Quebec if I could...but I'd rather see a team in Portland than a new second team in an already-served market or Hamilton.

To ask whether Portland could support an NHL team, would be like asking if Vancouver could support an NBA team again, IMO.

Now obviously saying Vancouver could support the NBA doesn't mean Portland could support the NHL, but I think it's a more fair comparison, given neither city has a major fall/winter sport to rival the Blazers and Canucks respectively, the metro size is the same, and the corporate support is there.

I'd love to see the NHL in Portland, but I too can't see it happening unless Paul Allen lets it happen.
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
187,015
39,082
If we're using metro population areas, by Wikipedia's list, Portland is actually about to pass Pittsburgh in terms of population in the metropolitan area.
 

JawandaPuck

Lost Art of Dynasty
Apr 10, 2007
4,541
24
Vancouver BC
jawandapuck.blogspot.com
Because its a great place to live...

Portland_and_Mt_Hood.jpg


Portland_Night_panorama.jpg
 

beenhereandthere

Registered User
Jan 30, 2012
728
13
Evergray State
True about being a great place to live, but they have never really had, an above average or great economy there. Thanks in part to the "welcome to Oregon, now go home", frame of thinking that went on for way too long.
Like I said before, putting fannies in the seats wouldn't be a problem at all, but corporate support, very well could.
 

htpwn

Registered User
Nov 4, 2009
20,542
2,631
Toronto
There was no where in Canada to expand until recently. The NHL has not expanded since 2000.

No, they haven't expanded in the last decade, although Hamiltonians might challenge your assertion.

The league, however, added a total of 9 teams from 1991-2000. Out of those 9, 4 of them were placed in markets that had zero hockey base whosoever (Atlanta, Nashville, Florida, Tampa). Another, Anaheim, was placed in a city that probably didn't warrant a second franchise. Additionally, the league commissioned moves from more established markets to new, unproven ones (Phoenix, Denver, Carolina, Dallas).

By the end of the expansion cycle, the league had added or moved 13 teams. At least 8 of them had been placed in cities with little-to-no hockey base in a rush to gain a "national footprint" to get that still elusive national TV deal. The league expanded too quickly and too much during the 1990s, leading to not only a dilution of talent, but a lack of viable owners, and the troubles that still plague them today.
 

MoreOrr

B4
Jun 20, 2006
24,421
439
Mexico
The league, however, added a total of 9 teams from 1991-2000. Out of those 9, 4 of them were placed in markets that had zero hockey base whosoever (Atlanta, Nashville, Florida, Tampa). Another, Anaheim, was placed in a city that probably didn't warrant a second franchise. Additionally, the league commissioned moves from more established markets to new, unproven ones (Phoenix, Denver, Carolina, Dallas).

By the end of the expansion cycle, the league had added or moved 13 teams. At least 8 of them had been placed in cities with little-to-no hockey base in a rush to gain a "national footprint" to get that still elusive national TV deal. The league expanded too quickly and too much during the 1990s, leading to not only a dilution of talent, but a lack of viable owners, and the troubles that still plague them today.

I would say that the most serious issue of all has been the part I bolded. Yes sure, the NHL expanded fast in the final decade of last century, and yes into a lot of cities where hockey didn't already have a strong foothold, but with decent management most of those franchises wouldn't have had the problems they've had. If the League is going to take those kinds of risks then at least it should assure that owners of teams in places where hockey isn't established should be duly qualified to give the franchise a potential of success.

But still, after all "errors" that supposedly have been made, the League stands today at 30 teams and, other than a couple relocations or potential relocations, there are no dire signs that the League will go into contraction. So have the risky ventures into questionable markets for hockey truly been damaging to the sport? I don't think so. I think that to some degree, no great gains are ever made without some degree of trial and error, and if in the end you're still ahead of where you were then the errors have been less than the gains.
 

dwreckm

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
75
0
Alaska
I wish they'd bring an NHL team to me in Anchorage. This city goes nucking futs for their ECHL team, I'd like to get a real team.
 

Northender

Registered User
Feb 11, 2012
232
0
I wish they'd bring an NHL team to me in Anchorage. This city goes nucking futs for their ECHL team, I'd like to get a real team.

I'd love that. I live in Whitehorse, so Anchorage would be the closest team to me!

I've always thought Anchorage would be a great spot for a CFL team, stadium and and an owner not withstanding...
 

beenhereandthere

Registered User
Jan 30, 2012
728
13
Evergray State
While it may be irrelevant in the arguments about Portland's NHL chances, this is pretty interesting. Bet most hockey fans, didn't even know about Mark Messier, getting started in organized hockey, not in Canada and Edmonton (even though he blossomed there) , but........

Doug Messier, was a journeyman defenceman. Doug Messier has been drafted by the NHL's Detroit Red Wings, but the senior Messier turned down an invitation to the team's training camp in order for him to pursue education and business pursuits. Mark grew up in Portland, Oregon after the Messier family settled there, with Doug having been bought by the Portland Buckeroos of the WHL. Doug would wear #11 for Portland, a number that would be associated with another Messier shortly.

The Messiers had a farm out near Beaverton, and they owned a log cabin up on Mount Hood. It was in the Oregon setting that Mark took up hockey, whether it be on ice, on a street, or simply shooting a ball or puck against a wall. Messier began his hockey career as a youngster in Portland, Oregon in the Portland Amateur Hockey Association. However, in 1968-69, Doug Messier retired from hockey, and the family moved back home to Edmonton.
 

No Fun Shogun

34-38-61-10-13-15
May 1, 2011
56,333
13,182
Illinois
I wish they'd bring an NHL team to me in Anchorage.

Probably shouldn't hold your breath.... though, tbqh, wouldn't be at all surprised if the CFL looked your way whenever they look at expansion again. I base this on absolutely no information other then just sitting and thinking about it a while ago.
 

TTOMO

Registered User
Aug 30, 2011
1,257
0
Port Moody, BC
Probably shouldn't hold your breath.... though, tbqh, wouldn't be at all surprised if the CFL looked your way whenever they look at expansion again. I base this on absolutely no information other then just sitting and thinking about it a while ago.

There's as much chance of the CFL coming to Anchorage as there would be of the NHL coming to Saskatchewan. It would be an interesting experiment, and I'm a fan of football in cold conditions (plus, the league could use a few more teams), but, the CFL has always dragged its feet on expansion, as it is (With the exception being the States in 1993-95, of course. I still can't believe there were once CFL teams in places like Texas and California. It's mind-boggling. Baltimore took to the CFL game, though.). Ottawa will be back in 2013 or 2014, and then at most, there's long been the thought that Halifax should build a stadium and get a team (as opposed to Moncton), but that would be it. I think Quebec City or Windsor might be good places if they had stadiums (Football is big in the province of Quebec and Quebec City has one of the best university teams in the country. In the original Quebec City arena plans, they wanted to build a CFL stadium. Windsor, maybe they could draw from Michiganers that like their football but can't afford Lions tickets.). The stadiums don't even need to be that big, 20,000 seats ought to do it.

I wouldn't complain if Anchorage ever did get a team, though.
 

Jazz

Registered User
No, they haven't expanded in the last decade, although Hamiltonians might challenge your assertion.

The league, however, added a total of 9 teams from 1991-2000. Out of those 9, 4 of them were placed in markets that had zero hockey base whosoever (Atlanta, Nashville, Florida, Tampa). Another, Anaheim, was placed in a city that probably didn't warrant a second franchise. Additionally, the league commissioned moves from more established markets to new, unproven ones (Phoenix, Denver, Carolina, Dallas).

By the end of the expansion cycle, the league had added or moved 13 teams. At least 8 of them had been placed in cities with little-to-no hockey base in a rush to gain a "national footprint" to get that still elusive national TV deal. The league expanded too quickly and too much during the 1990s, leading to not only a dilution of talent, but a lack of viable owners, and the troubles that still plague them today.
I would say that the most serious issue of all has been the part I bolded. Yes sure, the NHL expanded fast in the final decade of last century, and yes into a lot of cities where hockey didn't already have a strong foothold, but with decent management most of those franchises wouldn't have had the problems they've had. If the League is going to take those kinds of risks then at least it should assure that owners of teams in places where hockey isn't established should be duly qualified to give the franchise a potential of success.

But still, after all "errors" that supposedly have been made, the League stands today at 30 teams and, other than a couple relocations or potential relocations, there are no dire signs that the League will go into contraction. So have the risky ventures into questionable markets for hockey truly been damaging to the sport? I don't think so. I think that to some degree, no great gains are ever made without some degree of trial and error, and if in the end you're still ahead of where you were then the errors have been less than the gains.

I would concur with virtually all of what MoreOrr has mentioned above.

Additionally, I would also argue the part I bolded in blue. The league has never had more talent than it did 5 years ago (before the KHL's birth took returned a small portion of it back to Europe).
The 70's and 80's were the era of heavy dilution as NHL (and WHA's) North American footprint expanded from 6 teams to almost 30 in the 1970's prior to the Europeans making their way over here.
(Everyone seems to look back to what they call the great offensive era of the early 80s, well the problem was the defense were on a whole very week). The only reason for the lower scoring now is simply coaching, not any dilution of talent.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad