Could the NHL be expanding to 34 Franchises with New Teams in Atlanta and Houston?

[Dr. Who]

12 hours ago, ... said:

Knoxville is one of the finalists. I have Southern relatives who are all too happy to go into great detail about adopting a college team! 

It's been years since I visited, but my cousin used to live in Nashville. It's a fun place with a nice music scene if you're interested in that. I like the neo-classical vibe, though I suppose some might find it somewhat pretentious pastiche.

[BillsShredder83]

17 hours ago, Night Train said:

LOL at Atlanta, which has failed twice. It's like the NFL twice trying St. Louis and failing. Yet they still talk about it yet again. 

 

 

 

if  STL gets a 3rd team it has everything to do with some kind of lawsuit, i forget the specs but the story is def out there. nfl is grimey

[GASabresIUFAN]

10 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

The problem with Atlanta is college football is king. You are a stone's throw from Alabama, Georgia, and Clemson. We could toss in Tennessee, South Carolina, and I suppose Auburn too. There is just a concentration of College Football and the NFL plays second fiddle to it. Hockey isn't a cultural thing there and you would need to do a lot of leg work to make it that. Vegas, no sports were there so it was a clean slate. Seattle, had football but that's it and it is close to Canada and hockey culture. Atlanta, you telling me that ppl are going to spend money on Hockey over driving to College Football? I don't see it. 

Do you know about the growth of youth hockey here?  I know you lived in Athens, but Atlanta and hockey are completely different then 10 years ago. The Gladiators draw 5000 a night for ECHL and their fan base is primarily NW Atlanta.  There are at least 4 good junior programs, UGA hockey is the most popular club team on campus and is working toward becoming an NCAA program.  Also how many people attend college football from Atlanta each week 200K? 300K? That leaves about 6.5 million people to attend hockey, baseball, basketball etc… To succeed, the area really just needs about 50K who wish to attend on a regular basis.  That shouldn’t be a problem if the product is good.  

It’s not like returning cities don’t succeed.  Winnipeg is working.  Minn and the Bay area are succeeding with their 2nd teams as well. This is also Denver’s 2nd team.  So while a 3rd team would be unique, the NHL has a better chance of succeeding now then ever before.  

Will it happen? I’m not optimistic, but I know Anson Carter has been trying to build an expansion group for at least a year.  

Also the argument that Atlanta doesn’t deserve a team doesn’t really matter.  It’s about TV markets and a rich investor. 

Would other markets be more natural for hockey?  Probably.  Portland would seem like a natural and a great place to move the Yotes to.  It is strange, but two of the NHL’s top players were raised in Phoenix/Scottsdale in Auston Matthews and Tage Thompson.  

[BillsShredder83]

16 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Sports market in Atlanta: Braves, Georgia, ... occasionally the Falcons.

If the nhl was smart, they'd put a team in Charlotte. 

sign me up! moved here 3 years ago, raleigh is too far for a game. would love this. 'canes franchise has been a major success

[GASabresIUFAN]

14 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

 

It’s wasn’t so much sabotage as disinterest, incompetence and a lack of proper marketing.  One of the principal owners was Ted Turner’s son in law who I know well and he and his partners had little or no knowledge of hockey.  The group also was fractured from Day 1 as none were rich enough to be the primary owner.  You had different pieces of the group running the Thrashers vs the Hawks.  Like the Braves in Buffalo, Hockey was secondary.
 

GM Don Waddell also did a horrendous job.  When you get a chance go look at how the Thrashers drafted.  Not one 2nd rd pick in 11 years made an impact on the team except a goalie briefly.  Many of the 1st picks were busts and the team failed to win, making the playoffs just once.  Hard to build a following that way.

The stadium and the atmosphere in it were awful.  50 % of the lower bowl was sold to and arranged in corporate sections which were rarely utilized making the stadium feel dead.  Add the downtown location when most of the fans lived North of the city and you have a recipe for failure.    Downtown is even worse now than then, although they have fixed the seating issue.  

Fan location is why the Braves moved North.  

So what’s changed since 2010?  Obviously the local population has continued to grow.  The area is about 50% larger than when the Thrashers arrived in 1999.  Another big change is the growth of youth hockey on the North side of Atlanta.  We have tripled the number of rinks and there are very successful youth leagues all the way up to and beyond high school age players.  I actually live within 10 miles of 3 different rinks, two of which were built in the last 5 years.
 

My son-in-law came through these leagues and played some lower tier Jr hockey.  He ended up becoming Captain and President of the U of Tenn club hockey team.  In fact most of the local universities in the ACC and SEC as well as others Southern Universities have successful club hockey teams and some schools, like UGA are beginning the fund raising and push to become D2 or D1 NCAA programs.

All this because of the Thrashers, Canes, Pred, TB, Dallas.  Southern hockey is growing like crazy and has for the last decade.

Another piece of the puzzle is the Gladiators ECHL team.  They are highly successful, have a strong fanbase and would be a great base to re-establish hockey in the ATL. 

So should it happen? Maybe!  I think Houston and Atlanta are the biggest markets without teams.  For a new franchise to succeed, the team needs knowledgeable hockey focused local ownership and a building on the Northside of town. Those are significant hurdles.  

I do agree that 2 failed attempts are a terrible legacy, but the 2nd attempt was set up to fail.  We have seen failed markets like The Bay Area succeed when done properly and unlike 1999, there is a local hockey educated fan base that would adore having their own team.   

 

1 minute ago, BillsShredder83 said:

can you elaborate? have a bunch of friends down (sabs fans) that are dying for a team. bad ownership on the thrashers team?

 

[BillsShredder83]

29 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

 

 

thanks, i deleted my comment as i hadnt finished reading thread. good stuff!

[Taro T]

3 hours ago, pastajoe said:

I went to an Atlanta Thrashers game back in the day. It was a nice arena with easy access, and they had a large crowd. But like any new franchise, they have to be competitive to keep fan interest in the first few years. That’s why the NHL now makes sure expansion teams field a competitive roster from the start; ala Vegas and Seattle.

Nope.  That's not the reason.

The reason is $500MM and $750MM.

Expect the reason the league expands again and also doesn't completely hose the expansion teams will be $1B and $1B.

[Taro T]

13 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said:

If two teams are introduced the same year how do protection lists work for the expansion draft?

In the past, teams ended up losing 2 players but at least 1 had to be an F and a team could only lose either 1 D-man or 1 goalie, not both.  So teamsworked side deals with 1 of the teams coming in to select a G or D-man they didn't really want to protect all their other goalies and D-men.

Doubt the league would do that again because if an owner is dropping $1B to enter the league that new owner is going to want to have access to any players that aren't protected.  Either the league would stagger the entries like the last time or teams will lose 2 guys with no 2ndary protections to keep from losing whatever 2 guys the new teams want that weren't protected.

REALLY hope the league doesn't do this.  Fully expect they will do it and would expect Hank's plan is probably closer to reality than any of us would like to see.

And that MIGHT be a precursor to an eventual inclusion of a European division that primarily plays amongst itself but that every team makes a trip or 2 over the pond to go on an 8 game or so road trip.

[pastajoe]

2 hours ago, Taro T said:

Nope.  That's not the reason.

The reason is $500MM and $750MM.

Expect the reason the league expands again and also doesn't completely hose the expansion teams will be $1B and $1B.

So you don’t think the owner paying that much wants a competitive team to draw and retain fans, and the league wants a stable franchise? 🙄

[SABRES 0311]

4 hours ago, Taro T said:

In the past, teams ended up losing 2 players but at least 1 had to be an F and a team could only lose either 1 D-man or 1 goalie, not both.  So teamsworked side deals with 1 of the teams coming in to select a G or D-man they didn't really want to protect all their other goalies and D-men.

Doubt the league would do that again because if an owner is dropping $1B to enter the league that new owner is going to want to have access to any players that aren't protected.  Either the league would stagger the entries like the last time or teams will lose 2 guys with no 2ndary protections to keep from losing whatever 2 guys the new teams want that weren't protected.

REALLY hope the league doesn't do this.  Fully expect they will do it and would expect Hank's plan is probably closer to reality than any of us would like to see.

And that MIGHT be a precursor to an eventual inclusion of a European division that primarily plays amongst itself but that every team makes a trip or 2 over the pond to go on an 8 game or so road trip.

Your last paragraph made me pause and think about what adding European teams would look like. Thanks for the explanation.

[steveoath]

Need a hawaiian team imo.

[Taro T]

4 hours ago, pastajoe said:

So you don’t think the owner paying that much wants a competitive team to draw and retain fans, and the league wants a stable franchise? 🙄

Of course the owner shelling out that kind of money wants it.  That's why it happens, because that owner pays out that kind of money.  And that is the ONLY reason it happens.

But your claim was that the league wanted those teams to be good for presumably some magnaminous reason.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  There wasn't a single western conference owner (other than the ex soldier that now owns Vegas) that wanted Vegas in the finals in it's maiden season.

You think the Pegulas were happy reading people complain about how much worse the team they own has been relative to the expansion team?  No flippin' way.  And they would've been much happier with the Knights being trash too.  The only reason the owners let the Knights (and Krakers) have a fighting chance is because they paid boucoup $$$$$'s.

[Brawndo]

Something that Jeff Marek brought up on the 32 Thoughts Podcast, in addition to Hockey Market being completely different in the South, one of the Major US Broadcast Partners TNT is headquartered in Atlanta 

[pastajoe]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

Of course the owner shelling out that kind of money wants it.  That's why it happens, because that owner pays out that kind of money.  And that is the ONLY reason it happens.

But your claim was that the league wanted those teams to be good for presumably some magnaminous reason.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  There wasn't a single western conference owner (other than the ex soldier that now owns Vegas) that wanted Vegas in the finals in it's maiden season.

You think the Pegulas were happy reading people complain about how much worse the team they own has been relative to the expansion team?  No flippin' way.  And they would've been much happier with the Knights being trash too.  The only reason the owners let the Knights (and Krakers) have a fighting chance is because they paid boucoup $$$$$'s.

Factually wrong. The league knows they screwed up with bad expansion teams in the past. The owners want stability and stable markets. No one thought Vegas would be that good, but its quick success has made it a model franchise with great support. 

[apuszczalowski]

And Quebec City will continue to sit around waiting for their chance at another team.

[Taro T]

2 hours ago, pastajoe said:

Factually wrong. The league knows they screwed up with bad expansion teams in the past. The owners want stability and stable markets. No one thought Vegas would be that good, but its quick success has made it a model franchise with great support. 

NONE of the other owners wanted Vegas to be anywhere close to that good.  That you think they did is not surprising.

Edited March 7, 2023 by Taro T

[pastajoe]

7 minutes ago, Taro T said:

NONE of the other owners wanted Vegas to be anywhere close to that good.  That you think they did is not surprising.

That’s not what I said, but nice try to deflect from the facts. Leagues want competitive balance, including expansion teams that do well from the start to generate and maintain interest.

[Two or less]

13 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Do you know about the growth of youth hockey here?  I know you lived in Athens, but Atlanta and hockey are completely different then 10 years ago. The Gladiators draw 5000 a night for ECHL and their fan base is primarily NW Atlanta.  There are at least 4 good junior programs, UGA hockey is the most popular club team on campus and is working toward becoming an NCAA program.  Also how many people attend college football from Atlanta each week 200K? 300K? That leaves about 6.5 million people to attend hockey, baseball, basketball etc… To succeed, the area really just needs about 50K who wish to attend on a regular basis.  That shouldn’t be a problem if the product is good.  

 

 

My cousin moved to Atlanta years ago and to my surprise they were pumped to take me to a hockey game when i visited. I thought it was gonna be like beer league stuff, but it was a team in Gwinnett in the ECHL. Arena packed, everyone in jerseys, great atmosphere. Better game experience then going to a Rochester Americans game. I was like wtf, and the locals said the youth hockey scene is insane. I said how come Atlanta failed if this is such a hotbed and they said something like nobody goes to downtown Atlanta unless they have to or something like that. And this was like 10 years ago. 

[Taro T]

9 hours ago, pastajoe said:

That’s not what I said, but nice try to deflect from the facts. Leagues want competitive balance, including expansion teams that do well from the start to generate and maintain interest.

No, you said the NHL has botched all their previous expansions because the teams were too weak and that the league is happy that these last 2 expansion teams are good.

The only problem is, they DIDN'T botch the last expansions from the '90's &  '00's.  Of 9 expansion teams brought in, only 1 of those ended up moving.  And that one team had a horribly structured ownership group.  It didn't fail because it was too weak, it failed because it was disfunctional.  The league does a VERY bad job of vetting ownership groups (McNall, Spanos, the Sabres Criminals, Melnyk in Ottawa, the Atlanta group and that's just ottomh).  The only one they got right was Balsillie.

2 of those expansion teams eventually ended up winning the Stanley Cup.  The other owners are OK with that.  They aren't ok with putting an expansion team into the Stanley Cup Finals in their 1st season.

And btw, during that same time frame that 1 of 9 expansion teams moved you had the Jets move, you had the Nordiques move, you had the Whalers move, and you had the North Stars move.  All teams that had been established well over a decade earlier.  

But nice try to deflect from the facts.  The '90's expansions weren't the expansions of the '60's and '70's when they really did leave the expansion teams alone to fend for themselves.

And, as stated in the original post you took such exception to, there are $500MM and $750MM reasons that the league didn't use the same rules for expansion that they used in the '90's.  The driving force was the cash way more than the stability. 

[bob_sauve28]

I'm not in favor of expansion so much, but to all those kids out there that would be exposed to NHL hockey in cities and areas that do not have it now, it would be a great thing. Hockey is great, hockey culture is awesome and if this exposes more young people to this great sport, so be it. More rinks, more people skating and enjoying the game is overall a good thing 

[Brawndo]

 

[Buffalonill]

Why the nhl keeps trying to bring hockey to Atlanta just blows my mind.

It wont work and they don't care about hockey 

[French Collection]

Just now, Buffalonill said:

Why the nhl keeps trying to bring hockey to Atlanta just blows my mind.

It wont work and they don't care about hockey 

Someone from Quebec should take a minority stake now so they have a say in where it relocates.

[Brawndo]

3 minutes ago, Buffalonill said:

Why the nhl keeps trying to bring hockey to Atlanta just blows my mind.

It wont work and they don't care about hockey 

10th largest TV Market in the US, Home to TNT one of its broadcast partners and quite a few Northern Transplants.

The key will be building an arena in the right area and finding the right ownership group.

[PerreaultForever]

idk, things have changed a lot since Atlanta last had a team. Atlanta is a big city and there are rich pockets of it that might support a sport like hockey. There's a heck of a lot of tv and film production in and around there now which creates a lot of possibilities for celebrities and other endorsements and involvements. 

Marvel Studios is down there. A LOT of big money in the area. A LOT of possibilities. 

Quebec should definitely have a team but the league always prefers big American cities over small (but rabid) contained fan bases. Heck, southern Ontario could easily handle another 2 teams in around Toronto and Hamilton but Leafs (and maybe Sabres) will never let that happen. 

Why not Atlanta? Has to do better than Phoenix.