Which teams could you live without

[MississippiWing 14]

I will say that while Atlanta is outstanding, they have brought an interest in hockey albeit still small but there to a section of the south that didn't care about hockey. Southern newspapers didn't have a hockey section before Atlanta and Nashville unless they had a minor league team. While they aren't amazing I have to respect they way their being placed there has given me more people to talk hockey with down here.

[MississippiWing 14]

Regina? Saskatoon?

:lol:

How about Wausau, Wisconsin? DeKalb, Illinois? Ooh! Cedar Rapids! Marquette! Bemidji, Minnesota. And the worst part is, there's some of you who think I'm not joking.

Come on people. Saskatoon is a viable major league market like Peru is a hockey nation. Corporate support my ass.....the problem is NOBODY LIVES THERE!

Even Winnipeg. I can think of about 25 American markets off the top of my head that would make better choices than Winnipeg. Here I go: New Orleans

You can stop right there Chief. New Orleans ECHL team had one of the lowest attendances in the league while getting pushed out of New Orleans because they couldn't afford to renovate New Orleans Arena and the Hornets could.

[betterREDthandead 58]

You can stop right there Chief. New Orleans ECHL team had one of the lowest attendances in the league while getting pushed out of New Orleans because they couldn't afford to renovate New Orleans Arena and the Hornets could.

And yet it would still be a better idea than Winnipeg. Or some of this nonsense like Maine.

[NC WINGS FAN 5]

I like the idea of having some teams in non-traditional markets for purposes of growing the game as our boy Bettman says, however, I feel that there are a few teams that must relocate.

Ducks- That is Kings territory and they actually have a good fanbase

Panthers- One team in Florida is enough. Tampa is a good sports town(Lightning and Buccaneers both have strong fanbases)

while Miami is a joke.

Predators- Small non-traditional market = trainwreck.

Possible Locations:

Milwaukee- in a great hockey state even though Detroit and Chicago might have something to say about.

Portland, Oregon- Have a hockey history with little competition and it is not Seattle who can't even keep the Sonics!!

Southern Ontario- Huge market that loves its game more than any other except maybe the rest of Canada that has far to few

people.

Big No-Goes:

New Orleans- One of the poorest cities in the country in the deep south with a declining population. Why the Hornets moved

there instead of Louisville or St. Louis is beyond me!!

Anywhere in rural Canada(Winnipeg or Regina) or USA(ND) as many have suggested- You all know why!!

Kansas City- Small market with southern culture that is reminiscent of Nashville!! and oh yeah!! St. Louis has the Blues

[Cern 0]

Regina? Saskatoon?

:lol:

How about Wausau, Wisconsin? DeKalb, Illinois? Ooh! Cedar Rapids! Marquette! Bemidji, Minnesota. And the worst part is, there's some of you who think I'm not joking.

Come on people. Saskatoon is a viable major league market like Peru is a hockey nation. Corporate support my ass.....the problem is NOBODY LIVES THERE!

Even Winnipeg. I can think of about 25 American markets off the top of my head that would make better choices than Winnipeg. Here I go: Milwaukee, Seattle, Houston, Las Vegas, Houston, New Orleans, Hartford, Albany, Grand Rapids, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Kansas City, Wichita, Omaha, Portland, Sacramento, Indianapolis, Louisville, Baltimore, Providence, Austin, Orlando, Jacksonville, Salt Lake City. There. 24 markets with literally hundreds of thousands more people than Winnipeg - in some cases over a million more - and far better corporate support than Winnipeg can offer. Winnipeg is NOT a viable NHL market and never was.

Raw population means nothing in terms of what defines a good hockey market. Atlanta is a HUGE city, but so long as the Trashers can't give away enough tickets to get anything even close to a sellout, it might as well be a town of 10 000. Fact is, the vast majority of America thinks hockey is a joke, and plopping a franchise into a large population center isn't going to miraculously change people's minds. Sure those 25 American cities are all bigger cities, but virtually all of them have MASSIVE generations-long followings for local franchises in the other major leagues or for college teams. They're NOT going to take a brand-new NHL franchise seriously because they don't take the SPORT seriously. Teams like Phoenix and Atlanta have been in the red since day one, what's so amazingly different about a place like Las Vegas where that trend is miraculously going to reverse? Seriously, Orlando? You think yet another franchise in Florida is the missing piece of the puzzle that's going to save the league? There's barely one club's worth of public interest and revenue spread out between two teams, how is adding a third going to solve anything? Winnipeg is smaller but is bound to have far more people who actually LIKE hockey and ergo more people likely to WATCH hockey, not to mention has zero competition in terms of other sports beyond the CFL which takes place during the NHL's off-season anyway.

Edited July 5, 2008 by Cern

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

You can stop right there Chief. New Orleans ECHL team had one of the lowest attendances in the league while getting pushed out of New Orleans because they couldn't afford to renovate New Orleans Arena and the Hornets could.

New Orleans baby!!!!!!!!! Brind hockey back here!

A local from around the Big Easy can dream.

[glasgowcelticwing 18]

I think the NHL could do with losing the Florida Panthers and maybe move them to Oregon . it's a large area and in a place like say Portland i think it could sustain an NHL team.

ideally though i'd prefer another team in North East America or in Canada but the market is pretty log jambed up there so i'm not sure that be managable.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Wow,

I'm always amazed at the amount of people who throw Columbus under the bus when this topic comes up.

The only reason Columbus would ever be on a list of teams to get rid of is if the list was compiled strictly upon Win-Loss record. As far as fan support, revenue generated, etc....There are plenty of teams, and I mean plenty that could be s*** canned well before the Blue Jackets.

I'm going to chalk up the fact that they make so many people's lists b/c people in general.....are ******* stupid.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Second all this...the Jacks were well supported but just had problems at the top. The Barons were a train wreck from day 1. And now with the Monsters (well-run, knows a couple things about marketing), they had a solid first season at the gate despite a crap team that was killed all year by the Avs' injuries. It'll take a while to undo the Barons' attempts to murder hockey here, but it'll get there.

As for the NHL, probably not right now. It might have worked 10 years ago, it might work 10 years from now, just not at this moment. Cleveland can support 3 major teams, not 4. So basically, an NHL team would have to come in when the Cavs are weak and back to drawing 8K per in the post-LeBron era and would have to be successful early (Cleveland's a good sports city generally, but the lack of championships has made it very bandwagon-ish in a lot of ways).

Hey, more Ohio Wings fans! I love it.

Hockey has been coming along in Nothern Ohio for what seems like decades. Parma, Lakewood, etc.....there's always been hockey up there. As for pro hockey it was pretty much a bust I thought.

As was mentioned OSU has a decent program. BG has always been better than average. Miami of Ohio has been an unbelievably good program for years. To a lesser extent Ohio University has had a solid program although they aren't technically D-1 I think.

Columbus is fantastic, the arena district is fantastic.

I'm from up North originally, live in Cincinnati now. They're doing pretty well I would say. Lots of youth programs and high school going on. Almost all of the big schools also field inline teams as well. The Cyclones just won the ECHL championship.

Ohio has done quite well for itself. Not when compared to Michigan or Boston or NY maybe. But the fact that Ohio gets no credit as a hockey state is completely wrong. We're not pioneers or anything but if you take all 50 states, Ohio would be in the top 1/3 I would imagine. Certainly moreso than the Nashvilles, Atlantas, Phoenix's, etc....

[spyder 0]

Ducks, Kings, Sharks, Coyotes, Predators, Hurricanes, Panthers, Lightning, Thrashers, Blue Jackets

[betterREDthandead 58]

Raw population means nothing in terms of what defines a good hockey market. Atlanta is a HUGE city, but so long as the Trashers can't give away enough tickets to get anything even close to a sellout, it might as well be a town of 10 000. Fact is, the vast majority of America thinks hockey is a joke, and plopping a franchise into a large population center isn't going to miraculously change people's minds. Sure those 25 American cities are all bigger cities, but virtually all of them have MASSIVE generations-long followings for local franchises in the other major leagues or for college teams. They're NOT going to take a brand-new NHL franchise seriously because they don't take the SPORT seriously. Teams like Phoenix and Atlanta have been in the red since day one, what's so amazingly different about a place like Las Vegas where that trend is miraculously going to reverse? Seriously, Orlando? You think yet another franchise in Florida is the missing piece of the puzzle that's going to save the league? There's barely one club's worth of public interest and revenue spread out between two teams, how is adding a third going to solve anything? Winnipeg is smaller but is bound to have far more people who actually LIKE hockey and ergo more people likely to WATCH hockey, not to mention has zero competition in terms of other sports beyond the CFL which takes place during the NHL's off-season anyway.

No, of course not. I didn't say it was a good idea; I just said it's better than Winnipeg. Just because it's not a good idea doesn't mean Winnipeg is. Winnipeg is a proven failure. Albany is a piss-poor idea too, but I listed it because it's better than Winnipeg. And not like Denver, where the league's first effort there was a joke; the Rockies sucked and were widely considered to be a clown show. The Jets were a respectably well-run organization with good people in charge that made an honest effort. They still failed in Winnipeg. As EUZ repeatedly points out, the attendance there was worse than in Nashville; and they had no corporate support.

Raw population means nothing in terms of what defines a good hockey market.

Bulls***. Raw population is why the Jets failed. Period. It's why the Nordiques left. It's why the Whalers left. It's not the only definition of a good hockey market but it is an absolute requirement. 100% of the people in a certain town could be raving lunatic hockey fans but if that town has only 5 people in it, you wouldn't move a team there, would you? Ergo, population is key.

I'm always amazed at the amount of people who throw Columbus under the bus when this topic comes up.

Given the number of people who think cold weather is the only requirement and any little hamlet north of the Mason-Dixon is a better idea for a team than a massive metropolis that happens to be in the south.....are you honestly surprised?

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

Given the number of people who think cold weather is the only requirement and any little hamlet north of the Mason-Dixon is a better idea for a team than a massive metropolis that happens to be in the south.....are you honestly surprised?

No. It is true. And it is sad.

Not all decent-sized big cities have the wherewithall and corporate support to support one or multiple sports franchises, even if hockey is popular in those areas. Winnipeg has been mentioned plenty in this thread supporting this case. I haven't seen Hartford mentioned in this thread much, if any. Why did they move south to Raleigh, where perceptively people could give two s**ts about hockey then? Why did Winnipeg relocate to Phoenix?

And before people blast me for not knowing anything about how hockey is worshipped up north and very little in southern states because I live in a southern state near the Gulf of Mexico, I get it. I know it might not work in plenty of southern markets, but it has worked in some such as Dallas and Tampa Bay, and Houston could be a decent addition. It is one of the biggest metropolises (spelling?) in this country, even bigger than Dallas, etc. etc. etc.

[BlakChamber 8]

No, of course not. I didn't say it was a good idea; I just said it's better than Winnipeg. Just because it's not a good idea doesn't mean Winnipeg is. Winnipeg is a proven failure. Albany is a piss-poor idea too, but I listed it because it's better than Winnipeg. And not like Denver, where the league's first effort there was a joke; the Rockies sucked and were widely considered to be a clown show. The Jets were a respectably well-run organization with good people in charge that made an honest effort. They still failed in Winnipeg. As EUZ repeatedly points out, the attendance there was worse than in Nashville; and they had no corporate support.

But...but...but...Winnipeg has cold weather. They deserve a team. It's a travashamocky that Dallas (a team with a Cup and great attendance) has a team and the Jets are gone. It's just not fair!

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

I think a big thing of what people are missing, and I apologize if it has already been mentioned here by others, is CORPORATE SUPPORT.

Plenty of average Joe's in places like Winnipeg or Hamilton might like hockey more than people in Houston or Albuquerque or Tampa Bay or other decent sized cities in the South. Places like Houston though have businesses, A LOT of businesses and size who can afford to fork money over to support a professional franchise, or even multiple professional franchises.

A liking and passion for the game is nice, but not every average Joe can afford to go to games every night, or even to just 1/2 a season where you talk about roughly 40 games, at $70 a pop plus spending at least $20 more on food drinks, $10+ to park, etc.

EDIT: Albuquerque is a bad example, but also consider Winnipeg and Hartford had NHL teams, they couldn't even support just ONE professional franchise there to keep them in place.

Edited July 5, 2008 by SouthernWingsFan

[NC WINGS FAN 5]

No, of course not. I didn't say it was a good idea; I just said it's better than Winnipeg. Just because it's not a good idea doesn't mean Winnipeg is. Winnipeg is a proven failure. Albany is a piss-poor idea too, but I listed it because it's better than Winnipeg. And not like Denver, where the league's first effort there was a joke; the Rockies sucked and were widely considered to be a clown show. The Jets were a respectably well-run organization with good people in charge that made an honest effort. They still failed in Winnipeg. As EUZ repeatedly points out, the attendance there was worse than in Nashville; and they had no corporate support.

Bulls***. Raw population is why the Jets failed. Period. It's why the Nordiques left. It's why the Whalers left. It's not the only definition of a good hockey market but it is an absolute requirement. 100% of the people in a certain town could be raving lunatic hockey fans but if that town has only 5 people in it, you wouldn't move a team there, would you? Ergo, population is key.

Given the number of people who think cold weather is the only requirement and any little hamlet north of the Mason-Dixon is a better idea for a team than a massive metropolis that happens to be in the south.....are you honestly surprised?

The Jets were a terrible organization. As of today, the organization has not won a playoff series since I believe 1987. As an organization, they have never even gotten close to the Finals.

[betterREDthandead 58]

The Jets were a terrible organization. As of today, the organization has not won a playoff series since I believe 1987. As an organization, they have never even gotten close to the Finals.

They were generally a bad team; that does not make them a bad franchise. The Rockies were a terrible organization and a bad team.

And they were not even especially bad - they had the misfortune of being in the same division as the Oilers and the Flames, which between them won every Cup save one between '84 and '90. The way the playoffs were structured until the early '90s meant they always had to go through the Oilers and/or Flames to go anywhere. They were easily one of the strongest WHA organizations (which is why they were absorbed into the NHL).

[Majsheppard 203]

I could do without the Ducks...

[eva unit zero 271]

They were generally a bad team; that does not make them a bad franchise. The Rockies were a terrible organization and a bad team.

And they were not even especially bad - they had the misfortune of being in the same division as the Oilers and the Flames, which between them won every Cup save one between '84 and '90. The way the playoffs were structured until the early '90s meant they always had to go through the Oilers and/or Flames to go anywhere. They were easily one of the strongest WHA organizations (which is why they were absorbed into the NHL).

The Rockies didn't come from the WHA. The Avalanche did. The Rockies were the former Kansas City Scouts, and are currently known as a the New Jersey Devils.

[betterREDthandead 58]

The Rockies didn't come from the WHA. The Avalanche did. The Rockies were the former Kansas City Scouts, and are currently known as a the New Jersey Devils.

I know this stuff. I didn't say the Rockies came from the WHA. I was talking about the Jets.

[eva unit zero 271]

I know this stuff. I didn't say the Rockies came from the WHA. I was talking about the Jets.

Sorry, I misread your post; you made a comment about the Rockies being bad, and led into the thing about the division.

[puertoricanWingsfan 5]

I Say take the Avs and the Ducks and re-locate them to the third level of hell. Anyone agree?

[miller76 463]

How about we just leave s*** alone. It works! If they want to add more, then that will just have to be fine.

I say we add teams in:

1. Vancouver

2. LA

3. Edmonton

4. Atlanta

5. Florida

6. Long Island

7. Chicago

8. St. Louis

9. Toronto

10. Colorado

11. Columbus

lol

[b.shanafan14 733]

Great Hockey Markets without teams:

Milwaukee

Seattle

Portland,OR

Winnipeg

Hamilton,ONT

Quebec City

Teams who should move:

Phoenix

Atlanta

Florida Panthers

Anaheim

Agree completely, especially with Milwaukee needing a team and Florida Panthers being a waste of a franchise.