johngould21 Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 KC does have an new arena, remember the Balsilie/Nashville fiasco. San Antonio wouldn't be an option over say a Houston to give Dallas a rivalry. The Aero's did fairly well in the WHA. Portland and Seattle really make sense to me when they get their shovels into the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Ya our div would be Van,cal,edm,sea,por,ana,sj,la Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 KC does have an new arena, remember the Balsilie/Nashville fiasco. San Antonio wouldn't be an option over say a Houston to give Dallas a rivalry. The Aero's did fairly well in the WHA. Portland and Seattle really make sense to me when they get their shovels into the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BI3KSA- Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 I still think Houston or Atlanta would be a better venue if the league expands or moves a franchise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danthecanucksfan Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Stop Feeding the troll (Steve Bennett) You guys are going to make him fat. The guy has nothing better but to contradict everything we have to say and come up with bogus ideas that he knows will get us all riled up. Not me though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BI3KSA- Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 The two expansion teams have to be in the west, unless if they are going to switch the teams in the divisions around. Seattle for the Pacific and either Vegas, Kansas City or Houston for the Central is what's going to happen. The only way that QC gets a team is through either relocation or if Detroit moves back to the Central. I always wondered why Saskatchewan was never considered in terms of having a hockey club. They have a pretty sizable population and the best CFL fans (not sure if it would translate over to the NHL). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Seattle Population: 620,778 Las Vegas Population: 589,317 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Metro Seattle population: 4.6 million Metro Portland population: 2.25 million These cities are plenty big enough for the NHL. Seattle is in the top 15 media markets in the USA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB5 Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Ya our div would be Van,cal,edm,sea,por,ana,sj,la Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bookie Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Timing bizarre on NHL Seattle expansion rumors The Phoenix Coyotes ordeal (more on that in a minute!) coming to and end -- or what seems to at least look kind of like a resolution if you unfocus your eyes and squint a little bit -- seemed, for a fantastical moment, to put to rest the idea of an NHL team playing in Seattle any time soon. Motivated theoretical buyers or not, the chances that it actually happened always seemed at least a little slim considering how closely the league had held onto Making Hockey Work in a place where hockey is obviously and completely unworkable. The sale of the Coyotes to that shadowy cabal of out-of-town money men looked like it rolled a big stone in front of the cave above which was written "The Seattle Metropolitans or Whatever." But lo, just two months later, the stone has been rolled away and out has stepped reports of Gary Bettman, gaze averted in supplication to the league's owners begging them to consider allowing the Pacific Northwest to bring into the world an expansion team, with all the fees that would come with it. Easy to dismiss, at first blush. After all, how many local sports personalities who had pretensions of being plugged in came forth with false news of sales being signed and sealed with the blood of another Shane Doan elbowing victim, delivered by Greg Jamison and a host of others, only to have them evaporate in the hot desert sun? (Jude LaCava, we're looking at you here.) But then the details got specific: The team would come with an expansion fee of $275 million, about $95 million more than the agreed-to Coyotes sale price. Again, this is reasonable. Expansion costs more than buying a team on the very definition of its last financial legs, and certainly the league is always looking to make current owners richer, as is its ongoing purpose despite all the hockey it plays to distract fans from that fact. A whole new team? Despite the fact that it would bring the number of teams in the league to a cumbersome 31, that at least gets you a little closer to the 32 needed — and probably targeted — to even out the conferences from their current absurd 16-in-the-East-and-14-in-the-West format. Back to the mundanities, such an expansion effort would require a "solid" ownership group and a new arena. Both of which we already knew about, though one wonders what, exactly, the league would consider to be "solid" in 2013 given the kind of people it has allowed to get involved in this kind of thing in the near past: actual criminals and, more recently, guys with little more backing than a hope, a history in NHL boardrooms, and an ugly suit. The group that wanted in on the Coyotes is at least one of the current interested expansion bidders. Obviously the arena thing is theoretically taken care of, as was explored without end during the latest Coyotes ownership shuffle (which I promise I'm getting to), because some people want to build a new arena in the Emerald City that would ideally house both an NBA and NHL team. You'll recall that the Oilers were also recently linked to such a deal because Darryl Katz was being a crybaby about Edmonton's desire to finance an arena. Oh but here's the kicker on the rumored Seattle expansion: The team would enter the league at the start of 2014-15. You know, like, 15 months from now. I'm pretty sure you can't build an arena in that amount of time. So the team would instead play in KeyArena, with just 15,200 seats or so to its name, for what? Two seasons? Three? Even more? Granted, no one is going to have to care about a hypothetical new Seattle team beyond, "Wow isn't it great we have an NHL team?" for at least five years, since expansion teams pretty much stink universally for the first several years of existence, and sometimes more. While 15,200 seats' worth of revenues are better than the zero Seattle is generating now, isn't this exactly why the NHL is kind of dragging its feet on getting itself entrenched in what would likely be a far more fertile ground for adding another team — in terms of both interest and expansion fees — in Quebec City? The Colisée Pepsi seats almost the same exact number of people as KeyArena and the city is already building an arena purely on spec. Obviously, you'd have to imagine there is going to be an NHL team in this building in the relatively near future, but they will soon have more than a year's head start on Seattle, which hasn't even signed off on a memorandum of understanding for construction yet, meaning that it could be months or more before they even break ground. But here's the weird part, which, I'm sure should come as no surprise to you, involves the current Coyotesownership group. The Board of Governors was supposed to sign off on the deal this week. As of this writing, that hasn't happened yet. Why? Well, according to Mike Sunnucks of the Phoenix Business Journal (who has been right about this kind of thing in the past despite the naysayers), citing two sources, "ome financing for the sale has either not been finalized or has dropped out of the deal." Which would be a problem since the deal has to be finalized by Aug. 5. It is, as of this publication, Aug. 2. Craig Morgan of Fox Sports Arizona, meanwhile, says the deal is on track. Bill Daly says it's "still moving." Glendale spokeswoman Julie Frisoni says it's "moving forward." But it's starting to look like collar-tugging time is here again in Glendale. Supposing all the Coyotes stuff goes off without a hitch, which is a hell of a supposition to make given the history, Seattle is apparently where the NHL will turn its Eye of Sauron next, in constant search for the One Market to bring everything it ever wanted in an expansion franchise, and in the Northwest bind them. Hell, that might be the case even if Glendale Deal version Who.Knows? falls through. But from the way it looks right now, there would be as many questions about that market as would exist anywhere else, perhaps more. But then, I guess you can always count on this league to pursue something other than its most viable option available, because what's the fun in rooting for the favorite, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngould21 Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Timing bizarre on NHL Seattle expansion rumors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FullMetalOilDrum Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 I hope this happens. I've always had a soft spot for Seattle as a city and the Coyotes have no place in Phoenix. Seattle would be a better hockey market to support a team. Although with the way the Yotes seem to refuse to move or just die, they should be renamed the Phoenix Cockroaches as they are impossible to kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks#01fan Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Wow, this Glendale fiasco is getting curiouser and curiouser, by the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absent Canuck Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Houston has a lot going for it. It has strong hockey ties. It used to also have a WHA franchise. It has an NBA , NFL and MLB team to boot so the support for sports is there. Kansas City would also be a good sport for the 32nd team. It has a large population, a hockey history with a past NHL franchise, and would also play in the west too. I think the 32nd would be either Kansas City or Houston. No major 4 franchise has ever been tried in Las Vegas. The population is too transient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks#01fan Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 Vagas would be horrible, 90% of people there are tourist and could you imagine the gambling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vansicle Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 Metro Seattle population: 4.6 million Metro Portland population: 2.25 million These cities are plenty big enough for the NHL. Seattle is in the top 15 media markets in the USA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 Thank you. Someone needed to point out that attendance is not restricted to those who live, strictly speaking, "in the city". Nice to see people with imagination and non literal thinking abilities on CDC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danthecanucksfan Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 I think they should just expand to Portland and Seattle. 16 and 16 in each conference. Then in a few years, relocate either Florida or Pheonix to Quebec. (Most likely Pheonix) Then after a few more years, they could relocate the other one if it is still a reasonable idea. If the league is stable, a second relocation would be unlikely. What it would eventually look like... WESTERN CONFERENCE Anaheim Calgary Chicago Colorado Columbus Dallas Edmonton Los Angeles Minnesota Nashville Portland San Jose Seattle St.Louis Vancouver Winnipeg EASTERN CONFERENCE Boston Buffalo Carolina Detroit Florida (Possibly Relocated) Montreal New Jersey NY Islanders (Brooklyn Islanders) NY Rangers Ottawa Philadelphia Pittsburgh Quebec Tampa Bay Toronto Washington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonshinefe Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 Why would the NHL create a new team in Atlanta when the old one already failed there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonshinefe Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 I definitely think the NW deserves another team or two. The thing is, debatably there are already too many teams in the NHL. Maybe adding new teams would work, but come on, the Panthers selling tickets for $7? I don't see how it's good business to have these teams in the Southern US that have no fans and bleed money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.