Nominate US cities for NHL teams

[PromoTheRobot]

TL;DR:

Maybe: Houston, Kansas City

Maybe not: Milwaukee, Sacramento, Indianapolis

Hell no: Las Vegas, Salt Lake

 

 

 

Downtown Milwaukee is VERY close to the 90 mile radius from the United Center. I think it's definitely a market that would embrace a new NHL team, but I question whether the metro Milwaukee area, being only 1.7M people, is a town that has enough high-end luxury advertising and spectating dollars to support all four major sports (Bucks, Brewers, and essentially Packers). They'd probably grab the attention/money of a lot of the state of Wisconsin (some just to spite the Wild and the Blackhawks), but Wisconsin seems to be pretty hockey-happy with college (Badgers), juniors (Gamblers), and the AHL (Admirals).

 

I HATE the idea of Las Vegas, and it's not just a well-founded anti-southern hockey bias. I have a hard time believing that a Las Vegas fan base would be well rooted in the community and that the team would not just be a marketing attraction for tourists. I know people actually live in LV, but most major corporate sponsors, obviously, would be tourism dollars. That, and that town is over-saturated with entertainment attractions to distract sports spectating dollars. No major sports teams have taken root there, despite the existence of population and wealth, and that's likely for a reason.

 

Salt Lake City only has 1.1M in its metropolitan area. Probably a good spot for Western expansion by the AHL, unless SLC is surprisingly NUTS about hockey, like Buffalo-nuts about hockey. Hard to believe.

 

Kansas City has a good chance at a team. The metro area has 2.1M people. The Sprint Center opened in 2007 and isn't in use (but it only seats 17,500 for hockey- marginal). KC already has the Royals and the Chiefs, so whether the town could support another major team might be a little questionable. I'm not sure how popular hockey is in Missouri outside of St Louis.

 

Houston, being the 4th largest city in the US, is an enormous TV market ($$$$, Bettman = 8-D). The Aeros seem to do well and hockey seems to have taken root surprisingly well in Dallas. The city has a lot of large corporate sponsor possibilities (oil money). There might some distraction/money-competition from the three other major sports teams (Royals, Texans, Rockets). The Toyota Center seats 17,800 for hockey and is the home of Rockets and Aeros (probably movable). On paper, like I'm sure Phoenix did, it looks like a solid prospect, but this hockey-in-the-south thing is far from a sure bet. I can see why the availability of huge, rich cities like Houston make it hard for Bettman to do the right thing and put hockey back in Winnipeg or QC.

 

Sacramento, for the same reasons as the more populous San Diego, seems like AHL expansion territory. There's a lot of people and money, but hockey in California is a surely-but-slowly growing endeavor. Sacramento is also almost exactly 90 miles from San Jose. The upside is that with the Sacramento Kings departing for Orange County, Sacramento has an open arena, no other major sports teams, and likely a large number people hungry for pro sports, albeit not necessarily hockey-crazy.

 

Indianapolis is also another decent candidate. It's a large TV market (2M people + rest of Indiana) and a midwestern hockey climate. But the HUGE detractor is that there's no arena suitable for an NHL team. The Conseco Field House could be used temporarily (it seats 14,400 for hockey) while a new arena is being built. There would be competition with the Pacers, Colts, and motor sports.

Excellent review, but I must stand up for Las Vegas in one respect: the ECHL Wranglers actually draw very well. That doesn't necessarily make them NHL-ready but they aren't quite a hockey "black hole" either. I only included Vegas because, well, it's Vegas. A city with gobs of money in need of endless distraction.

 

PTR

[X. Benedict]

I can't find the link now but some web site did a study on most active internet fans, and Portland won, with the Bulls in second place... this study was about most active forums and blogs. I belong to realgm.com, one of the most popular NBA web sites, and Portland fans out number any team there, so maybe the study was right?

 

Also, i believe this means they have the 4th best TV ratings in the NBA.... http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/32/basketball-valuations-11_Portland-Trail-Blazers_324837.html although i am not too sure what it stands for.

 

And i just looked at season ticket pricing, i don't think their tickets are that cheap. If compared to rest of the NBA, i think they'd be in the upper half. Their cheap seats, are VERY cheap though. But besides a few hundred of those, it's pretty pricy. And those are season ticket holder prices.

 

I've spent my time in Portland. Maybe things have changed quite a bit. Coming from the East perhaps we have different standards for sports passion.

 

I don't doubt the internet traffic...Portland is a pretty well wired town. I guess I always thought it was an entertainment option in Oregon....not something that could break anyone's heart.

[LastPommerFan]

Depends on how you define "southern" teams.

 

I can pick a parallel that 10 of the 11 teams below it fall in the bottom 14 teams for attendance. The last team below that parallel, LA, is 16th lowest.

 

17. Sharks

18. Lightning

19. Oilers

20. Hurricanes

21. Predators

22. Panthers

23. Stars

24. Devils

25. Avalanche

26. Ducks

27. Thrasher

28. Blue Jackets

29. Coyotes

30. Islanders

 

So, to recap 10 of 11 from below it vs. 4 of 19 from above it fall in the bottom 14, while all of the top 13 are from above it.

 

The other telling problem with this is that the 4 northern teams had low attendance because they were TERRIBLE. The Ducks, Coyotes, Predators, Sharks, and Lightning were all competative this year. If the Isles or Oilers could win, fans would come. That's clearly not the case in the south. I personally don't see a problem with Dropping a few southern teams to fill in some of the gaps up north. And with a national TV deal nailed down for 10 years, I don't see the league protecting the southern teams as much. It was a ploy to get the deal all along.

[OverPowerYou]

Cities I can think of that will be good for NHL teams besides Winnipeg and Quebec

 

Milwaukee (somewhere in Wisconsin)

Baltimore

Indianapolis

Portland

Hartford?

 

 

It would be nice to see another Minnesota OR Michigan team. I'm sure there's enough hockey fans in those states to support new teams.

[LastPommerFan]

I like Indy best because it would add another Sabres games that would be drivable from my house. Best case would be atlanta moves to indy, and they move columbus to the Southeast. then I'd get 2 more games.

[PromoTheRobot]

Cities I can think of that will be good for NHL teams besides Winnipeg and Quebec

 

Milwaukee (somewhere in Wisconsin)

Baltimore

Indianapolis

Portland

Hartford?

 

 

It would be nice to see another Minnesota OR Michigan team. I'm sure there's enough hockey fans in those states to support new teams.

Nix Baltimore. Too close to the Caps and a bad history with hockey. Hartford might be good if they built a new barn. If Winnipeg and QC think they deserve new franchises then why not resurrect the Whale?

 

PTR

[OverPowerYou]

Nix Baltimore. Too close to the Caps and a bad history with hockey. Hartford might be good if they built a new barn. If Winnipeg and QC think they deserve new franchises then why not resurrect the Whale?

 

PTR

 

I seriously like the idea of Alaska having a team. Maybe they can take Minnesota's spot in their division. haha that would be interesting.. and strange

[Swedesessed]

there is just something wrong about 'warm weather and hockey'

 

 

I guess you can say the same about 'cold weather and basketball' but it works in Northern cities.

[IKnowPhysics]

Vegas. A city with gobs of money in need of endless distraction.

 

Las Vegas' population has been exploding with no end in sight. Maybe a franchise could get in early, endear the people, and ride that wave until it's fanbase is cemented as LV's population reaches towards four million people. But currently I'm not sure if even LV can financially support endless distraction, especially if that distraction doesn't have tits or semiannual cast changes.

 

One market I overlooked somewhat is Seattle. It's 110+ miles from Vancouver, setting it up as a perfect border battle. The market is huge (3.5M+) and growing; it's basically much the largest US market without a team (not counting downtown SF near SJ and the Inland Empire of LA). The downside is that the only arena suitable for hockey is the KeyArena, which is totally unsuitable for hockey (built in 1962, 11,000 capacity for hockey, and the worst sight lines imaginable). The arena used to be home to the SuperSonics (NBA) and the Thunderbirds (WHL), but both have left; they left at least in part because they couldn't renovate or build a new stadium. The only tenants left are a little D-I NCAAB school, a WNBA team, and roller derby. Laughable.

 

If the SuperSonics' departure served as a big enough embarrassment, maybe Seattle could straighten its ###### out and build a new building. If they did that, I'm sure it would make them the new #1 US destination for an NHL franchise on the go (and likely another NBA franchise).

[Knightrider]

Gray hubcaps on the Zamboni....

 

ROFL!

[Taro T]

Houston.

Maybe things have changed significantly in the past 15 years, but I would state not just 'No' to Houston having an NHL squad but 'Hell No.'

 

Houston, on paper looks like an ideal market, but the huge # of transplants there gives the locals very little 'home' team loyalty. Let's face it, there are few cities in the country more football crazy (there are several LARGE (10,000+) high school stadiums in the area) than Houston and they couldn't / wouldn't support an Eulers team that made the playoffs ~7 consecutive years. The Astrodome held ~65k for football and unless the Steelers or Pokes were coming to town, a local grocery store had to buy 2-6k tix each week to get the games on TV DURING that 7 year stretch.

 

Even though they have the history w/ the WHA's Aeros and the current IHL team, there would be great difficulty getting fans to buy tix at NHL prices. I understand that Dallas has been successful overall as a hockey market. Houston and Dallas are VERY different demographically. I truly don't see a team in Houston lasting 1 full decade.

 

If they could get an NHL quality rink, my 1st choice would be Seattle.

[ColdBlueNorth]

I would agree with Milwaukee - Wisconsin already has a good history of college hockey and there would surely be an instant rivalry with the Minnesota Wild.

 

I like the Seattle idea too, just a hop, skip, and a jump away from Vancouver and I could see a good rivalry developing there as well. Nothing brings in the fans like a good rivalry:)

[TheMatrix31]

I'm not crazy about adding teams, considering it'd be a great idea to get rid of some teams.

 

Buuuuuuut.....what about OKC, considering the support success of the NBA's Thunder? Salt Lake City maybe? I dunno.

[X. Benedict]

I'm not crazy about adding teams, considering it'd be a great idea to get rid of some teams.

 

Buuuuuuut.....what about OKC, considering the support success of the NBA's Thunder? Salt Lake City maybe? I dunno.

 

that's the probably the problem....how many mid-sized markets can support the NBA and the NHL?

 

Cleveland-Milwaukee-Salt Lake-OKC all have one thing in common.

 

Kansas City on the other hand.

[PromoTheRobot]

I'm not crazy about adding teams, considering it'd be a great idea to get rid of some teams.

 

Buuuuuuut.....what about OKC, considering the support success of the NBA's Thunder? Salt Lake City maybe? I dunno.

Before the AHL Barons came into existence, the OKC Blazers of the CHL were one of the best-supported minor league teams in the country, averaging over 10K a game. OKC would be a great NHL market IF the Thunder weren't there first. The city is too small to support two pro teams that play in the same season.

 

PTR

[Eleven]

I guess you can say the same about 'cold weather and basketball' but it works in Northern cities.

 

Poorest analogy I've seen in a long time. The "cold weather" hockey thing originates because people play it on frozen ponds. Basketball can be played outdoors in cold, warm, hot, cool, whatever; and it can be played in gyms without a lot of expensive facility equipment. Hockey? No.

 

Anyway, onto the greater debate. I would not put another US NHL team in a state that's obsessed with college sports, nor would I put one in a Southern state. So, for me, no KC, NO, Houston, Milwaukee, anywhere in Ohio (Columbus was a mistake and it will prove to be so), Indianapolis, etc.

 

Two cities I'd consider are Seattle and Portland. With the departure of the formerly Supersonics, then the Sonics, now the Thunder, to browner pastures, I'd think that Seattle is ripe for a winter sport. Plus, it's got a hockey history. But, OTOH, it's reportedly (I've not been) filled with jerkoffs with messenger bags and stuff. I'd hate to see a hockey logo messenger bag. I mean, maybe Ink would like it or something, he seems like a displaced westerner. Then it might be ok.

 

Anyway, messenger bags aside, I'd really rather see a team in Canada than in another American city. Outside of a few traditional markets, of which Buffalo is one, hockey does poorly unless the playoffs are around. (Cf Florida's attendance in 1996, or the TV ratings in Columbus for any regular season game--wait, do they even play the other kind there?)

[Braedon]

 

But, OTOH, it's reportedly (I've not been) filled with jerkoffs with messenger bags and stuff. I'd hate to see a hockey logo messenger bag. I mean, maybe Ink would like it or something, he seems like a displaced westerner. Then it might be ok.

 

Anyway, messenger bags aside, I'd really rather see a team in Canada than in another American city.

 

 

Messenger Bags

 

 

I'd love Winnipeg to get their team back. Seattle is a good option too, IMO. Or maybe Hartford?

[OverPowerYou]

I have an idea! Let's start a team in the mid-west that is not named after a city or a state. aka (Golden State & New England)

[SDS]

Contract, contract, contract...

[Knightrider]

Poorest analogy I've seen in a long time. The "cold weather" hockey thing originates because people play it on frozen ponds. Basketball can be played outdoors in cold, warm, hot, cool, whatever; and it can be played in gyms without a lot of expensive facility equipment. Hockey? No.

 

Anyway, onto the greater debate. I would not put another US NHL team in a state that's obsessed with college sports, nor would I put one in a Southern state. So, for me, no KC, NO, Houston, Milwaukee, anywhere in Ohio (Columbus was a mistake and it will prove to be so), Indianapolis, etc.

 

Two cities I'd consider are Seattle and Portland. With the departure of the formerly Supersonics, then the Sonics, now the Thunder, to browner pastures, I'd think that Seattle is ripe for a winter sport. Plus, it's got a hockey history. But, OTOH, it's reportedly (I've not been) filled with jerkoffs with messenger bags and stuff. I'd hate to see a hockey logo messenger bag. I mean, maybe Ink would like it or something, he seems like a displaced westerner. Then it might be ok.

 

Anyway, messenger bags aside, I'd really rather see a team in Canada than in another American city. Outside of a few traditional markets, of which Buffalo is one, hockey does poorly unless the playoffs are around. (Cf Florida's attendance in 1996, or the TV ratings in Columbus for any regular season game--wait, do they even play the other kind there?)

 

I agree that it is a bad analogy, but this is not the best way to prove it. Ever played street hockey? Ever played hockey in gym class? I remember playing a lot in the newly built beer pavilion (yup, they replaced the tent with something permanent) next to the fire department.

 

WRT college obsessions, that it a great point that really hits it on the head. The south has traditional sports like basketball, and car racing, that have a stranglehold on the limited entertainment dollar. Can it be changed? I think so, but at what cost? FWIW I have a coworker with a thick southern drawl who is a rabid Thrashers fan. Yup, I found him! :P Too bad he lives in Boston, now.

 

If hockey really wants to expand south, then they really ought to adopt the revenue sharing approach of the NFL, so that a Phoenix doesn't have to bankrupt itself to generate interest. Otherwise you go where existing AHL teams prosper.

 

Heck, would Dallas be a successful franchise had 1999 not happened? Perhaps you place a team in perennial NBA loser cities, like Cleveland and steal the NBA piece of the pie.

 

In lieu of that, it seems like Canada is the best bet.

[DR HOLLIDAY]

WinterPeg............. :beer:

[shrader]

To everyone suggesting Winnipeg: you may want to read the thread title again

[OverPowerYou]

WINNIPEGULA!!!

 

Ok, I couldn't hold it in any longer.

[nobody]

WINNIPEGULA!!!

 

Ok, I couldn't hold it in any longer.

 

 

Is the league going to let him own two teams? :)

[DR HOLLIDAY]

To everyone suggesting Winnipeg: you may want to read the thread title again

 

WinterPeg.............. :beer: