PDA

View Full Version : NHL to expand by two clubs in the West?


VonneMarie
06-03-2007, 05:07 PM
DON'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER!

The two cities likely are Las Vegas and Kansas City, Winnepeg has been rejected. Or so they say...

Fast forward to the 16:45 mark.

http://www.fan590.com/mediaplayer/au...2007-06-01.mp3

Just passing along this lastest hockey rumor involving KC. I found it on HFBoards.com.

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=385287

Oh and if this is a repost... bite me.

morphius
06-03-2007, 05:09 PM
Expansion could be difficult to sell in KC, as having a good team may need to be a must to get it to kick off.

chagrin
06-03-2007, 05:12 PM
I'm all for KC getting a Hockey team but it should be through a team moving - no more expansion through new teams that will certainly go bankrupt. Good lord, with the shotty job Bettman is doing with the TV coverage (moving to the outdoor life network coming out of that lockout was disastrous) and now only playing once a week on NBC and the rest on Vs and the OLN - they are really going to need help, and expansion isn't going to bring the league the revenue it wants.

Horrible decision, IMO

VonneMarie
06-03-2007, 05:12 PM
I personally would prefer the NBA over NHL. I would love nothing more then to stick to St.Loser...

Thig Lyfe
06-03-2007, 05:12 PM
Does anybody ever learn from the past these days? It was over-expansion that pushed the NHL on the brink of total irrelevance in the first place.

|Zach|
06-03-2007, 05:26 PM
I was all about a hockey team coming to town over an NBA team but after comparing the post seasons of the two sports? Forget that. Lets get a young exciting basketball team in KC. I believe the NBA is on the up and up.

chagrin
06-03-2007, 05:50 PM
I was all about a hockey team coming to town over an NBA team but after comparing the post seasons of the two sports? Forget that. Lets get a young exciting basketball team in KC. I believe the NBA is on the up and up.

That's exactly what Vancouver, Memphis, Toronto, Charlotte and New Orleans thought.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-03-2007, 06:09 PM
Horrible f*cking idea. The NHL needs to lose about 8 teams, not add 2.

morphius
06-03-2007, 06:12 PM
Horrible f*cking idea. The NHL needs to lose about 8 teams, not add 2.
I don't know about lose, 30 teams doesn't seem like much for a professional league.

BWillie
06-03-2007, 08:16 PM
Does anybody ever learn from the past these days? It was over-expansion that pushed the NHL on the brink of total irrelevance in the first place.

How many teams are in the NHL anyway? I know in the NBA, NFL, MLB I don't think many more expansion teams should be made. If the these leagues continue to expand, and get to around 40-45 teams, teams are going to go centuries without championships and fan bases will start to lose hope. The more teams you have, the harder it is for a dynasty to dominate. Like it or not, but professional sports benefit from dynasties. Look what the Bulls did for the NBA. Look what the Yankees do for the MLB. Look what the Patriots do for the NFL. Tiger for the PGA TOUR and on and on. It gets fans who normally wouldn't be interested in the sport on their feet and intrigued.

VonneMarie
06-03-2007, 08:29 PM
I was all about a hockey team coming to town over an NBA team but after comparing the post seasons of the two sports? Forget that. Lets get a young exciting basketball team in KC. I believe the NBA is on the up and up.
Agreed.

BWillie
06-03-2007, 08:31 PM
I was all about a hockey team coming to town over an NBA team but after comparing the post seasons of the two sports? Forget that. Lets get a young exciting basketball team in KC. I believe the NBA is on the up and up.

Why can't we have both?

Saulbadguy
06-03-2007, 08:50 PM
That's exactly what Vancouver, Memphis, Toronto, Charlotte and New Orleans thought.
Terrible regions for basketball.

ChiefsCountry
06-03-2007, 08:56 PM
That's exactly what Vancouver, Memphis, Toronto, Charlotte and New Orleans thought.

Piss poor ownership is more the reason why those cities struggled with the NBA.

|Zach|
06-03-2007, 09:43 PM
Why can't we have both?
Because we aren't New York

CanadaKC
06-03-2007, 09:58 PM
Vancouver had great attendance for basketball fool. It was Stu Jackson that f#cked it up...with terrible drafting and whiny players that didn't want to pay Canadian taxes.

Ebolapox
06-03-2007, 10:04 PM
Vancouver had great attendance for basketball fool. It was Stu Jackson that f#cked it up...with terrible drafting and whiny players that didn't want to pay Canadian taxes.

and/or didn't want to be paid in canadian dollars (f*ck you, exchange rate!1111oneelevel1!!1)

OnTheWarpath58
06-04-2007, 07:09 AM
I personally would prefer the NBA over NHL. I would love nothing more then to stick to St.Loser...

How exactly would getting a NBA team "stick it" to St. Louis?

OnTheWarpath58
06-04-2007, 07:12 AM
Horrible f*cking idea. The NHL needs to lose about 8 teams, not add 2.

Exactly.

Expansion into Phoenix, Atlanta, Nashville, Miami, etc. is partly to blame for the league's woes.

Dallas is the only southern team that gets continuous fan support win or lose.

Expanding again is the worst move the NHL could make right now.

chagrin
06-04-2007, 07:14 AM
Piss poor ownership is more the reason why those cities struggled with the NBA.


that's your opinion, but it doesn't take away from the fact that a current competitor in the NHL would be a helluva better idea than a n00b NBA team.

Pushead2
06-04-2007, 07:36 AM
I am a Ducks fan living in NYC and there shouldn't be an expansion. The NHL is trying to figure out how to get it's mojo back and that is NOT the way. Every sport goes through it for a bit except the NFL because it's seasonal.

Baconeater
06-04-2007, 07:47 AM
How many teams are in the NHL anyway? I know in the NBA, NFL, MLB I don't think many more expansion teams should be made. If the these leagues continue to expand, and get to around 40-45 teams, teams are going to go centuries without championships and fan bases will start to lose hope. The more teams you have, the harder it is for a dynasty to dominate. Like it or not, but professional sports benefit from dynasties. Look what the Bulls did for the NBA. Look what the Yankees do for the MLB. Look what the Patriots do for the NFL. Tiger for the PGA TOUR and on and on. It gets fans who normally wouldn't be interested in the sport on their feet and intrigued.
Bleh. Dynasties suck, unless you happen to be a fan of that team. It gets old watching the same teams win every year, and frankly, I don't give a shit what people who aren't normally interested in a particular sport think.

KCChiefsFan88
06-04-2007, 08:09 AM
Why would KC want to be associated with a league, whose championship event, the Stanley Cup can barely beat out the likes of women's softball in the TV ratings??

If I am KC and the Sprint Center I would do everything in my power to convince the Sonics and NBA to move that franchise to KC.

ChiefsCountry
06-04-2007, 09:56 AM
that's your opinion, but it doesn't take away from the fact that a current competitor in the NHL would be a helluva better idea than a n00b NBA team.

Yeah I agree with that but those cities in the NBA suck mainly bc ownership was horrible.

ChiefsCountry
06-04-2007, 09:57 AM
Why would KC want to be associated with a league, whose championship event, the Stanley Cup can barely beat out the likes of women's softball in the TV ratings??

If I am KC and the Sprint Center I would do everything in my power to convince the Sonics and NBA to move that franchise to KC.

NHL tv ratings suck but attendance for the NHL is good. Sprint Center wants butts in the seats not really looking for tv ratings.

OnTheWarpath58
06-04-2007, 10:16 AM
NHL tv ratings suck but attendance for the NHL is good. Sprint Center wants butts in the seats not really looking for tv ratings.

Attendance figures for the NBA and NHL are nearly identical.

17,760 average for the NBA this year.

16,956 average for the NHL this year.


Considering the NHL is coming of a work stoppage and have teams located in much smaller markets, I'd say they're doing just fine.

ChiefsCountry
06-04-2007, 10:46 AM
Attendance figures for the NBA and NHL are nearly identical.

17,760 average for the NBA this year.

16,956 average for the NHL this year.


Considering the NHL is coming of a work stoppage and have teams located in much smaller markets, I'd say they're doing just fine.

Thats what I was getting at. Even with poor tv ratings, the NHL is still drawing well at the box office.

VonneMarie
06-04-2007, 11:05 AM
How exactly would getting a NBA team "stick it" to St. Louis?
They've been wanting an NBA team for years. I want KC to get one first.

OnTheWarpath58
06-04-2007, 12:59 PM
They've been wanting an NBA team for years. I want KC to get one first.

I've lived in STL my entire life, and I can assure you the interest in a NBA franchise from a fans perspective is lukewarm at best.

Bill Laurie (ex-owner of the hockey team) was looking to bring a team here. And my guess is that if he had, attendance would have been miserable.

STL is a baseball town first, hockey town second and football town last.

It's just not a big enough market to support a 4th franchise, IMO.

In most years, only 2 of the 3 teams here get solid support.

The Cardinals always are near the league leaders in attendance, the Blues are back on the rise with new management, and the Rams are on the way down. People are dumping PSL's right and left.

The biggest basketball games in town are usually attended by out-of-town fans. The MVC Tourney and the Mizzou/Illinois game wouldn't draw worth a damn if it wasn't for the out-of-towners.

When the NBA does come to town for preseason games, no one shows.

POP
06-06-2007, 12:14 PM
Talking Las Vegas Baby

from Liz Mullen at SportsBusiness Daily (paid sub.),

NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly confirmed that the league has been in discussions with powerful film and television producer Jerry Bruckheimer about owning a franchise in Las Vegas, amid growing speculation that the NHL is on the verge of proposing expansion to Las Vegas and K.C. A group led by Bruckheimer, an avid hockey fan, is the front-runner for the Las Vegas expansion and has been in talks with NHL officials for months, sources said....

Daly, asked to confirm or deny whether the NHL had discussions with Bruckheimer about owning an NHL team in Las Vegas, said in an e-mail, “Bruckheimer is one of many people we have spoken to about their desire to own a team in Vegas.” Daly added that “no decisions have been made” by the NHL BOG about expanding the league from 30 to 32 teams and that “there’s no ‘agreement’ with anyone” to own an expansion team. But he said, “There have been many expressions of interest by a number of individuals and a number of cities,” including Las Vegas and K.C., where AEG manages the city-owned Sprint Center, set to open in October. At the Stanley Cup Finals Game Four in Ottawa on Monday, there was a buzz that an announcement about the league considering expansion to Las Vegas and K.C. was imminent, hockey sources said. Asked about that, Daly wrote, “I don’t know if or when there might be an announcement. We will update the Board on the expressions of interest we have received.”

http://sportsbusinessdaily.com/index.cfm?storyid=SBD2007060613&requesttimeout=500&fuseaction=sbd.main

Hmmm...

Pushead2
06-06-2007, 12:58 PM
They need to relocate 2 teams not add another 2

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2007, 01:03 PM
They need to relocate 2 teams not add another 2

They really need to go back to 24 teams.

Downsize by 6 teams.

Phoenix, Washington, Atlanta, Florida, Nashville and either Columbus or the Islanders.

But to your point, yes, it would be better for the league to relocate 2 current teams rather than expand again.

Pushead2
06-06-2007, 01:16 PM
They really need to go back to 24 teams.

Downsize by 6 teams.

Phoenix, Washington, Atlanta, Florida, Nashville and either Columbus or the Islanders.

But to your point, yes, it would be better for the league to relocate 2 current teams rather than expand again.

Unfortunatly 3 of those 6 made the playoffs this year :( so I don't see them getting the boot.

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2007, 01:34 PM
Unfortunatly 3 of those 6 made the playoffs this year :( so I don't see them getting the boot.


Yet they are consistently in the bottom 25% in attendance.

Plus, downsizing by 6 teams would redistribute some talent. Part of the league's problem is that they expanded too quickly and it diluted the level of talent necessary to play in the NHL.

Roughly 24 players x 6 teams = 144 players back in the pool distributed over 24 teams.

6 new players per team.

It's never gonna happen, but it's what would be best for the league.

That, or Gary Bettman getting hit by a bus and the league getting a REAL commish.....

Bearcat
06-06-2007, 04:51 PM
Yet they are consistently in the bottom 25% in attendance.

Plus, downsizing by 6 teams would redistribute some talent. Part of the league's problem is that they expanded too quickly and it diluted the level of talent necessary to play in the NHL.

That, or Gary Bettman getting hit by a bus and the league getting a REAL commish.....

That's why I didn't think a salary cap was a good idea... I think the NHL needs dynasties, because if you spread the talent there's not enough to go around. I'm glad, a couple of years into it, I've been proven wrong.... and a team like Buffalo has depth with no superstars and was obviously a Cup contender.

Prior to the salary cap, it was hard to come by a team that didn't have a couple of really good scoring lines and a stud or two on defense, that can be a Cup contender, while not relying on the clutching/grabbing/trapping play (thank god it's dying) or a wall at goalie.


That, or Gary Bettman getting hit by a bus and the league getting a REAL commish.....
That, or Gary Bettman getting hit by a bus and the league getting a REAL commish..
That, or Gary Bettman getting hit by a bus and the league getting a REAL commish..
That, or Gary Bettman getting hit by a bus and the league getting a REAL commish..
That, or Gary Bettman getting hit by a bus and the league getting a REAL commish..
That, or Gary Bettman getting hit by a bus and the league getting a REAL commish..

Uh, sorry, I just like reading that :D

Bearcat
06-06-2007, 05:27 PM
I was all about a hockey team coming to town over an NBA team but after comparing the post seasons of the two sports? Forget that. Lets get a young exciting basketball team in KC. I believe the NBA is on the up and up.

I haven't watched the NBA playoffs this year, so I can't compare, but I think the NHL playoffs have been exciting :shrug: IMO, the Western Conference has been kinda dull at times, with some teams getting 3-5 shots in an entire period.... but there have been several good series, including both conference finals and the Cup finals.

I guess it's two different kinds of excitement... when someone takes over a football or basketball game, it's usually on offense. If it happens in hockey or baseball, it's the goalie or pitcher :shrug:


I'm recording SA/Cleveland tomorrow night, so I can see what all the excitement is about :)

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2007, 06:13 PM
Good article from Tim Cowlishaw of the Dallas Morning News.

He also believes contraction would be good for the game. 4 teams, not 6.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/060607dnspocowlishaw.2cb3128.html