Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

NHL Planning to Expand to 32 Teams? (Article)


  • Please log in to reply
101 replies to this topic

#31 Langdon Algur

Langdon Algur

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,580 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 07

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:00 PM

Another loser franchise.

And that's another thing about NHL expansion. You allow more plugs like John Scott to be employed over kids who are better and more deserving. This guy has been getting a free pass for years now. His career should have ended after college. Me, personally, I don't really care. But as a player in the AHL for example, I would be pissed that this guy is getting the chance to play over me.

Agreed 32 teams will just make the overall talent pool much worse, athough I don't really see your point about how more NHL franchises would be a bad thing for kids in the AHL. Personally I would rather see relocation over expansion. Quebec City, Seatle, Kansas City and Hamilton/Toronto all deserve an NHL franchise.
  • 0
"What is the good of having a nice house without a decent planet to put it on?" ~ Henry David Thoreau

CDC's 2014 draft preferences vs. Canucks actual picks
http://forum.canucks...g-2014-edition/

#32 goalie13

goalie13

    Osgoodian One

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,100 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 18 October 2012 - 02:41 PM

Agreed 32 teams will just make the overall talent pool much worse, athough I don't really see your point about how more NHL franchises would be a bad thing for kids in the AHL. Personally I would rather see relocation over expansion. Quebec City, Seatle, Kansas City and Hamilton/Toronto all deserve an NHL franchise.


I don't know about much worse. It would mean each team would have to replace 2 players from the bottom half of their roster with 2 guys that aren't currently in the NHL. So you replace a couple of guys that don't get much ice-time with a couple of guys that won't get much ice-time.

I worry more about the level of overall competition. Do we need 2 more Columbus calibre teams in the league competing for the first overall pick?

On the other hand, one positive I was thinking of though... it would make regular season games somewhat more meaningful. Exactly half the teams would make the playoffs. It's a far cry from the days when 16 of 21 teams made it in and the regular season was basically meaningless.
  • 0
Posted Image

#33 LeanBeef

LeanBeef

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,246 posts
  • Joined: 17-June 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 02:56 PM

You said Florida twice. I'd keep the Bolts personally. The other two, I agree with. While we're at it, Columbus needs to go too, and maybe 1 New York area team. (Isles or Devils)

Actually he said it 3 times haha (TB is in Florida)

And why would they shut down either of the Isles and Devils, both teams seem to be doing fine, and they have won multiple cups.
  • 0
Sig too big.
"Being a Canuck fan, maybe sometime down the road be a Vancouver Canuck.... that would conquer all my dreams"
-Milan Lucic

#34 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 18 October 2012 - 03:09 PM

Quebec City and Seattle hopefully. Toronto doesn't need another NHL team.


Have u ever been to Quebec City?

The biggest hockey market in the world absolutely needs another team.
  • 0

#35 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 18 October 2012 - 03:12 PM

Actually he said it 3 times haha (TB is in Florida)

And why would they shut down either of the Isles and Devils, both teams seem to be doing fine, and they have won multiple cups.


Really? Isles and Devils are doing fine?

I wouldn't want to see either of those franchises relocate but u are completely misinformed on the subject.
  • 0

#36 Where's Wellwood

Where's Wellwood

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,158 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 10

Posted 18 October 2012 - 03:15 PM

Actually he said it 3 times haha (TB is in Florida)

And why would they shut down either of the Isles and Devils, both teams seem to be doing fine, and they have won multiple cups.


The Devils recently declared bankruptcy.
  • 0
Posted Image
Credit to khalifawiz501 for the sig.
My old sig: http://tinypic.com/v...=5#.UlSrrlAWJ7U

#37 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,628 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 18 October 2012 - 05:17 PM

You said Florida twice. I'd keep the Bolts personally. The other two, I agree with. While we're at it, Columbus needs to go too, and maybe 1 New York area team. (Isles or Devils)


:blush:

I meant CBJ
  • 0

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.


Nobody breaks from Mafia... Mafia breaks YOU!


CDCFL - Montreal Canadiens GM
CDCEHL - Winnipeg Jets AGM


#38 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,344 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 05:20 PM

Instead of another Toronto team, why not expand to a more deserving city like Hamilton?
  • 0

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs

Gaudreau has one NHL goal whereas all your "prized" prospects have none.

   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#39 avelanch

avelanch

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 33,557 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 07

Posted 18 October 2012 - 06:32 PM

Instead of another Toronto team, why not expand to a more deserving city like Hamilton?

they mean the toronto area, like hamilton. not directly in toronto itself.
  • 0

#40 Kevin-B

Kevin-B

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 160 posts
  • Joined: 13-November 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 10:32 PM

Is expansion really feasible for the league? As much as I would love to see Seattle and Quebec City with a team,I would think
that wouldn't really be an option considering the few teams that already have financial issues and leaving relocation
as the only means if the league wanted a franchise in these or other cities. But that's what I (think) and this might be why I don't
work in the business of hockey.
  • 0

#41 Lancaster

Lancaster

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,464 posts
  • Joined: 03-September 12

Posted 19 October 2012 - 01:28 AM

There is more than enough talent to support 2 extra teams.
Lots of players in the AHL, KHL, SEL, etc. are buried there or just never got the right shot.

That being said, the NHL should relocate the perpetually weak team (NYI, NJD, can rebound in the future) before expanding.
  • 0

#42 SkeeterHansen

SkeeterHansen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,140 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 11

Posted 19 October 2012 - 01:37 AM

You said Florida twice. I'd keep the Bolts personally. The other two, I agree with. While we're at it, Columbus needs to go too, and maybe 1 New York area team. (Isles or Devils)


Getting rid of Columbus, Phoenix, and even Florida seems ok. Without that winning tradition, such as in Quebec and Winnipeg of old, and the Thrashers recently, the teams just don't have that same feel in the city. Going to New Jersey or Long Island, while the teams may not be top notch anymore, the winning tradition still lives on, and that is why I don't think New Jersey or NYI will ever leave their respective cities, at least not in the relative near future.
  • 0

/=S=/


#43 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 19 October 2012 - 03:37 AM

This would be so stupid.


Why not lose PHO, FLA, TBL and CBJ instead.


Because the owners would get $100's of millions in franchise fees. Those other teams being moved to a lucrative market does not make the rest of the league money.

A new team in Toronto would cost around $500 million in franchise fee alone. The Leafs would get millions due to territorial rights which are 50 miles from ACC if a team went into Markham Ont.
  • 0

#44 MashedBananas

MashedBananas

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,671 posts
  • Joined: 30-October 09

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:07 AM

What? You can't lose a team twice? :lol: Look at Atlanta.


Well played my good sir!
  • 0
Posted Image

Sig Credit goes to Henrik Sedin

#45 MashedBananas

MashedBananas

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,671 posts
  • Joined: 30-October 09

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:49 AM

Actually he said it 3 times haha (TB is in Florida)

And why would they shut down either of the Isles and Devils, both teams seem to be doing fine, and they have won multiple cups.

Jersey recently declared bankruptcy, and the Isles lease agreement at Nassau runs out I believe in 2014, and arena negotiations are going badly.
  • 0
Posted Image

Sig Credit goes to Henrik Sedin

#46 Spitfire_Spiky

Spitfire_Spiky

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 744 posts
  • Joined: 28-March 09

Posted 19 October 2012 - 08:11 AM

I wouldn't mind seeing 2 more teams added to the league and then the four division proposal for re-alignment would make more sense and could be done evenly.
  • 1
Mess with the Best, Die like the Rest

#47 ajhockey

ajhockey

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,406 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 10

Posted 19 October 2012 - 11:02 AM

This league could use less teams, not more. That said, I would love to see more Canadian teams :D.
  • 1

14ndb35.jpg
Credit to -Vintage Canuck- for the awesome sig!

"Gino, Gino, Gino, Gino!"
Rest In Peace, Rypien, Demitra, and Bourdon


#48 Standing_Tall#37

Standing_Tall#37

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,901 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 09

Posted 19 October 2012 - 11:37 AM

Jersey recently declared bankruptcy, and the Isles lease agreement at Nassau runs out I believe in 2014, and arena negotiations are going badly.

A new 15000 capacity(for hockey...I believe basketball is 18,000) arena was built in Brooklyn... If the Isles go anywhere it will be there...if they can get a NBA franchise as well.
  • 0

#49 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,237 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 20 October 2012 - 09:46 AM

Here's a better idea. Fold the Phoenix franchise. Offer the owners of Florida or the Islanders a chance to fold for a one time $168 million dollar buyout. That would cost each remaining of the 28 teams $6 million dollars each (Have the league work out a loan so that teams pay under a million a year for 10 years absorbed through merchandise sales). That leaves New Jersey who's on a rocky ground and either the remaining team of Florida or the Islanders to move to Seattle and Quebec City.

All the teams get better by getting roughly 40+ players and prospects (You can hold a 2 round supplemental draft). The league gets hopefully stronger by having two markets that might actually embrace the game. I know the league wants the expansion fees but at 30 teams the talent pool is pretty much tapped out.

The NHL should look at working with US and Canadian schools to build rinks and help subsidize more kids getting into hockey. Maybe create a separate pipeline for high school hockey with say fighting gets you tossed, working on skill and hitting, and a larger european sized rinks to have players with different skill sets getting into hockey. That way you're working on improving the talent level in the draft. You could also try and get more university hockey and improve the CIS so players can get an education in Canada instead of going down south to play in the US.

Just a wild thought.

Edited by Ghostsof1915, 20 October 2012 - 09:47 AM.

  • 0
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#50 avelanch

avelanch

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 33,557 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 07

Posted 20 October 2012 - 10:19 AM

Here's a better idea. Fold the Phoenix franchise. Offer the owners of Florida or the Islanders a chance to fold for a one time $168 million dollar buyout. That would cost each remaining of the 28 teams $6 million dollars each (Have the league work out a loan so that teams pay under a million a year for 10 years absorbed through merchandise sales). That leaves New Jersey who's on a rocky ground and either the remaining team of Florida or the Islanders to move to Seattle and Quebec City.

All the teams get better by getting roughly 40+ players and prospects (You can hold a 2 round supplemental draft). The league gets hopefully stronger by having two markets that might actually embrace the game. I know the league wants the expansion fees but at 30 teams the talent pool is pretty much tapped out.

The NHL should look at working with US and Canadian schools to build rinks and help subsidize more kids getting into hockey. Maybe create a separate pipeline for high school hockey with say fighting gets you tossed, working on skill and hitting, and a larger european sized rinks to have players with different skill sets getting into hockey. That way you're working on improving the talent level in the draft. You could also try and get more university hockey and improve the CIS so players can get an education in Canada instead of going down south to play in the US.

Just a wild thought.

there is no way the NHLPA allows that to happen
  • 1

#51 Hobble

Hobble

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,662 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 07

Posted 20 October 2012 - 11:05 AM

NHLPA don't want teams folding to lose jobs. Also don't want to put more of their money to keeping these teams afloat.

Just relocate Islanders to Brooklyn, Phoenix to Seattle when possible, expand to QC and Toronto area.
  • 0

#52 canuck73_3

canuck73_3

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,618 posts
  • Joined: 11-May 04

Posted 20 October 2012 - 01:35 PM

http://deadspin.com/...d-up-to-call-it


Yes let's get rid of Columbus...

I can't stand how Canadians continually lump Columbus into the move them bandwagon. They've only had one winning season and have maintained decent support considering nothing but garbage to watch. Let them build a solid team and give them a shot before pulling the plug.
  • 0


credit to canuckforever00 for the sig :)

RIP Luc Bourdon

#53 VIC_CITY

VIC_CITY

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 721 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 10

Posted 22 October 2012 - 11:39 PM

The League needs to lose teams, not add more. The talent level is watered down enough as it is.


I don't believe talent is an issue. You're talking about a 6% increase in players. Think of all the players outside of the NHL, whether it be KHL or the AHL where teams often bury bad contracts . You wouldn't even notice a difference in talent and it's a win for the NHLPA because it means more jobs.
  • 0

#54 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 23 October 2012 - 12:18 AM

http://sports.yahoo....30812--nhl.html

Thoughts?


They can barely afford to have 30 teams. now they want to add 2 more? With 3 lockouts in less than 18 years and crappy financial status of some of the teams in US, I think maybe just maintaining those 30 teams should be their priority. NHL is a freaking joke of a league. A league should only expand if they have enough revenue to support more teams and are already successful. NHL is failing in some markets and they should either maintain the status quo of having 30 teams or reduce it to 28 teams.
  • 0

Posted Image


#55 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,217 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 23 October 2012 - 12:24 AM

We have to fix the mistakes first before we add.

Move Columbus and Pheonix and maybe other's to better markets (Seatle, Quebec, Saskatoon, Maybe Hamilton too)

Then once that all goes well THEN we think about adding more teams.

What's the point of adding if some teams are still struggling, adding a team in Seatle doesn't fix the mess in Columbus. for example.
  • 0

zackass.png


#56 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,052 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 23 October 2012 - 10:19 AM

This would be so stupid.


Why not lose PHO, FLA, TBL and CBJ instead.


Florida and Tampa had higher attendance last season than Winnipeg, New Jersey and Dallas. Tampa's attendance was also higher than the NYR, Bruins, Oilers, and Kings. Their tickets prices may not be as high, but they are doing a good job of developing a fan base. Now the Islanders are a team that should be moved. They've been in the bottom two for attendance for 6 of the past 7 seasons.
  • 0
Posted Image

#57 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,052 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 23 October 2012 - 10:35 AM

They can barely afford to have 30 teams. now they want to add 2 more? With 3 lockouts in less than 18 years and crappy financial status of some of the teams in US, I think maybe just maintaining those 30 teams should be their priority. NHL is a freaking joke of a league. A league should only expand if they have enough revenue to support more teams and are already successful. NHL is failing in some markets and they should either maintain the status quo of having 30 teams or reduce it to 28 teams.


Adding two Canadian teams would be an automatic money maker. They'd be among the teams sharing revenue which helps the weaker markets. Meaning it would strengthen the league. Now if they were adding New Orleans and Jackson Mississippi I'd say they were making matters worse.
  • 0
Posted Image

#58 Langdon Algur

Langdon Algur

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,580 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 07

Posted 23 October 2012 - 10:43 AM

http://deadspin.com/...d-up-to-call-it


Yes let's get rid of Columbus...

I can't stand how Canadians continually lump Columbus into the move them bandwagon. They've only had one winning season and have maintained decent support considering nothing but garbage to watch. Let them build a solid team and give them a shot before pulling the plug.


It's likely cause next to the Coyotes they are the NHL team that tends to losse money the festesthttp://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/#p_1_s_a6_
  • 0
"What is the good of having a nice house without a decent planet to put it on?" ~ Henry David Thoreau

CDC's 2014 draft preferences vs. Canucks actual picks
http://forum.canucks...g-2014-edition/

#59 zombieksa

zombieksa

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,051 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 11

Posted 23 October 2012 - 10:44 AM

They can barely afford to have 30 teams. now they want to add 2 more? With 3 lockouts in less than 18 years and crappy financial status of some of the teams in US, I think maybe just maintaining those 30 teams should be their priority. NHL is a freaking joke of a league. A league should only expand if they have enough
revenue to support more teams and are already successful. NHL is failing in some markets and they should either maintain the status quo of having 30 teams or reduce it to 28 teams.


The expansion fees charged for two teams could be in excess of 1B+ or over 30m per existing team. This mixed with the prospects of high revenue if placed in financial viable cities such as Quebec, Hamilton,, Toronto, Portland or Seattle could lead to higher percentage of financially successful franchises which offers more revenue that can be shared amongst the hurting franchises. I see no financial risk in expanding to 32 franchises.
  • 2
"All religion, my friend, is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination, and poetry."
-Edgar Allen Poe

#60 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,052 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 23 October 2012 - 10:55 AM

We have to fix the mistakes first before we add.

Move Columbus and Pheonix and maybe other's to better markets (Seatle, Quebec, Saskatoon, Maybe Hamilton too)

Then once that all goes well THEN we think about adding more teams.

What's the point of adding if some teams are still struggling, adding a team in Seatle doesn't fix the mess in Columbus. for example.


The only real mess in Columbus is the management. They had a good fanbase that has run out of patience. One playoff appearance in 11 seasons without a playoff victory to date. Their first season they averaged over 17,000 per game and over 18,000 their second season (more than Vancouver both years). Their 5th season was their first to dip just below 17,000. There's hockey fans there, but it can be tough to be a fan of a team that repeatedly misses the playoffs. Vancouver fans showed less patience prior to the WCE emerging.
  • 0
Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.