bigbadcanucks Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Why would it make the playoffs longer, just keep the same numbers of teams qualifying for the playoffs as before so expansion would just mean a few more teams miss the p[layoffs which could make the regular season more interesting. In a couple of words -- ownership greed. I'm sure if the owners could have the opportunity to squeeze an extra playoff game or two to their gate receipts, they would want to do it in a heartbeat. If I were an owner in a 32 or 34 team league, I would want this. But I would agree with you that the league needs to keep making efforts to make the regular season more interesting so that hockey fans can be excited 82 games plus the playoffs, as opposed to the last month of regular season and the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ovi one kenobi Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Don't we have enough teams already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Well I haven't read them or seen them. And seeing as this was a different take and on news I just heard today, I thought I would throw it out there for discussion. Thanks for your insight though. Edit - also I made sure to mention the potential Vancouver VS Seattle rivalry that would happen, so it does involve the Canucks. Just because you haven't read or seen them doesn't mean they aren't there. It's in your interest to use the search (try the word 'expansion' and see what you get - and don't just search in Canucks Talk, search in all the sub forums) before creating a thread. And no, a tenuous connection to the Canucks doesn't equal Canucks Talk. As the Canucks Talk forum description states: "For Canucks related talk only. Game day threads and team specific info." This isn't Canucks specific, so it's not Canucks Talk. EDIT: adding the links to the three existing threads from August 26, all in Around the NHL: [speculation] NHL to Las Vegas a 'done deal' NHL expansion to Las Vegas a 'done deal' per report Quebec City, Seattle, Toronto, and Las Vegas expansion by 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kesler+Horvat Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Arizona/Florida to Quebec City and Seattle + Las Vegas Expansions. Would love this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kesler+Horvat Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Just because you haven't read or seen them doesn't mean they aren't there. It's in your interest to use the search (try the word 'expansion' and see what you get - and don't just search in Canucks Talk, search in all the sub forums) before creating a thread. And no, a tenuous connection to the Canucks doesn't equal Canucks Talk. As the Canucks Talk forum description states: "For Canucks related talk only. Game day threads and team specific info." This isn't Canucks specific, so it's not Canucks Talk. EDIT: adding the links to the three existing threads from August 26, all in Around the NHL: [speculation] NHL to Las Vegas a 'done deal' NHL expansion to Las Vegas a 'done deal' per report Quebec City, Seattle, Toronto, and Las Vegas expansion by 2017 I knew this was coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kesler+Horvat Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 How about stability for ALL 30 teams before we put franchises in cities that can't handle them. This is why I'd like to see relocation as well as expansion. If Phoenix or Florida relocate to QC And Seattle + LV expand, then that would create stability + Expansion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bissurnette Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 I think a 4 team expansion is way too aggressive. I would prefer an expansion of 2 teams (Seattle and Quebec City), and like others have said maybe the relocation of Phx to Las Vegas if they really want a team there (why they'd want that is beyond me but whatever...). Toronto doesn't need another team but if they're going to throw a fit because they won't get their wish then I'd be all for the relocation of another American team (like Florida) to the Toronto area. But there's no need for 2 HOCKEY teams in 2 separate deserts ffs bettman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyHatnDart Posted August 28, 2014 Author Share Posted August 28, 2014 I knew this was coming. Is this guy a mod? Sheesh. No wonder people troll for fun on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Lord Baltimore Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 I'd be in favor of a 32 team league, with two expansion teams and two relocation teams. For relocation, I would suggest that Florida moves to Quebec City and Phoenix moves to Las Vegas. That would mean, to have a balanced east/west conference (each having 16 teams), the expansion targets could be Seattle and another western city -- maybe Portland or Houston? So that would mean no second team in the GTA. I would love to see this happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letsgonucks89 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Quebec, Seattle, and a second team in the GTA make sense. Hartford and possibly Portland make sense as well. All are in hockey markets/can draw from a hockey market. Vegas makes no sense to me. For one, hockey isn't big in the states, two no other pro sports team is there yet. Wait for a sport that the US actually enjoys like basketball or baseball to give Vegas a shot first and see how it pans out. maybe theres a reason they haven't already tried it. The majority of people attending would be from the strip which, if it sells out is good, but the uncertainty of this because of a lack of season ticket sales is unsettling. My guess is it would be Phoenix 2.0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thema Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Terrible idea... Vegas?? Really... This. LV couldn't make an IHL team work so why would an NHL team be any better? It's only a good idea if PHX goes there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesman60 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 What about the expansion draft? Is no one else pissed that we will be losing players... Do you remember how many players a team was allowed to protect during the last expansion phase....18 forwards, 3 dmen and 1 goalie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warrchief Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Do you remember how many players a team was allowed to protect during the last expansion phase....18 forwards, 3 dmen and 1 goalie? Correction: 26 of the 28 teams existing in the league at the time of the draft were each allowed to protect either one goaltender, five defensemen, and nine forwards or two goaltenders, three defensemen, and seven forwards. source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_NHL_Expansion_Draft all first years and second year pro contracts are protected though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyHatnDart Posted August 29, 2014 Author Share Posted August 29, 2014 Quebec, Seattle, and a second team in the GTA make sense. Hartford and possibly Portland make sense as well. All are in hockey markets/can draw from a hockey market. Vegas makes no sense to me. For one, hockey isn't big in the states, two no other pro sports team is there yet. Wait for a sport that the US actually enjoys like basketball or baseball to give Vegas a shot first and see how it pans out. maybe theres a reason they haven't already tried it. The majority of people attending would be from the strip which, if it sells out is good, but the uncertainty of this because of a lack of season ticket sales is unsettling. My guess is it would be Phoenix 2.0 Can't say I disagree. I'm just going off of what I've read and heard. Every time I hear this come up I keep hearing Vegas. There's got to be a reason why Vegas doesn't (have they ever?) have a professional team. I personally don't think the NHL to start there is the way to go. But like I said, apparently they're front runners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.S.Strowbridge Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 Terrible idea... Vegas?? Really... I agree. I don't think Vegas is a good fit for an NHL team. If we are to add two cities, I would go with Seattle and Quebec City. If we were to move teams, Florida to Hamilton makes the most sense to me, but I haven't given it a ton of thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinphase Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 How about stability for ALL 30 teams before we put franchises in cities that can't handle them. Wouldn't mind doing this but its obvious that Quebec City and Ontario could support a successful franchise. However it seems like the league against any Canadian expansions, fearing that it would make hockey seem too Canadian or European to outsiders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 There are reasons for the re-alignment, part of which was to make room for two more teams. They could come from any of these four places - but I think only two will make it (and then the league should stop - it is big enough for good). Vancouver would be affected by this as they would likely have another team in their division vying for a playoff spot as they are in one of two divisions with only seven team (while the other two have eight). I can see this happening and being the long view in the league strategic expansion plans for the last couple years. Either Vegas or Seattle would be welcome additions and hope they do it - would be nice to have a patsy in our division for five years or so that would help pad our teams stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfstonker Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 I'd be in favor of a 32 team league, with two expansion teams and two relocation teams. For relocation, I would suggest that Florida moves to Quebec City and Phoenix moves to Las Vegas. That would mean, to have a balanced east/west conference (each having 16 teams), the expansion targets could be Seattle and another western city -- maybe Portland or Houston? So that would mean no second team in the GTA. As far as playoffs go, I would suggest that it be expanded to 10 teams in each conference...top six get a bye, and bottom four play a best of five wild card series. Agreed, 2 more teams make sense. 4 more is a bit too many. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger-Hearted Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 32 teams should be the very max. Quebec City and Seattle are a given. I'm skeptical about Las Vegas but considering that there is no major pro sports competition in that market, perhaps the NHL can succeed in "The City of Lights". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saw234 Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I would love to see Florida move to Quebec City and Arizona to move to Portland. An NHL team in Portland would be so much better than a team in Las Vegas. Expansion teams then could be Seattle and either Hartford for nostalgia sake or GTA for revenue. I wouldn't object to a team in Markham or Windsor because that would give the NHL another absolute cash giant organization to help the league with stability. We would have a balanced 32 team league with 16 team conferences and 8 team divisions where each team can succeed in a hockey market. Finally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.