Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Paul Kelly: Expansion coming


  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

#21 ogreslayer

ogreslayer

    1st Line All-Star

  • HoF Booster
  • 1,994 posts
  • Location:Indianapolis

Posted 30 January 2013 - 12:11 PM

Why not move the Panthers and Coyotes?


Because that would make Bettman look like an idiot for expanding to those markets in the first place?

#22 The Axe

The Axe

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,379 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 12:15 PM

If the NHL did expand to 32 teams then I think it would have to adopt the 8 divisions of 4 approach like the NFL.  Assuming Hamilton and Quebec city are going to be the new franchies, here's how I would align them according to Geography
 
newnhl.png
Eastern Conference
 
Northeast
Quebec City
Montreal
Ottawa
Toronto
 
Atlantic
Boston
Rangers
Islanders
New Jersey
 
Placeholder Name
Buffalo
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Washington
 
Southeast
Carolina
Nashville
Florida
Tampa Bay
 
Western Conference
 
Great Lakes
Detroit
Hamilton
Chicago
Columbus
 
Central
St. Louis
Minnesota
Colorado
Dallas
 
Northwest
Calgary
Edmonton
Vancouver
Winnipeg
 
Pacific
San Jose
Los Angeles
Annehiem
Phoenix
 
Unfortunately that means we will still be stuck in the west and still have to travel a lot.  But our divsion gets noticably easier with losing Nashville and St. Louis for a new expanshion franchise.  And we still get to beat up on the Blue Jackets.



Bravo. Well done.

Now you just need to figure out traveling. I think they should just play their 2 away games against non division conference teams in a row. For example: at Phoenix on Sat and Sun, at Los Angeles on Tues, at Anaheim on Thurs, at Los Angeles on Sat, at Anaheim on Monday, at San Jose on Wed and Thurs, then back home. All 8 games done. For non conference games, do like the NFL does and make a home/away series with 2 divisions per year. So Detroit would have 5 total away trips. 8 games each trip for the 3 divisions in their conference. 4 games each for the 2 non conference divisions.

#23 evilmrt

evilmrt

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,583 posts
  • Location:Winter Freakin Wonderland

Posted 30 January 2013 - 12:22 PM

Southern Ontario eh? Windsor or Hamilton?

 

 

Windsor  :hysterical:

We don't have nearly close enough a population for a nhl team to survive, it would probably do as bad as Phoenix

 

Ok, I hope you guys were joking about Windsor lol. The GTA can handle two teams easily, but Detroit Metro cannot. 

 

 

From Toronto Star:

 

 

 

 

At least one "bag-o-money" has been sniffing around; from Toronto Star:

 

 

 

 

Expansion is not a good idea. Moving teams to markets with a better chance of making money is a much better idea.

 

Agreed, but expansion gives you an immediate bag-o-money, not long-term stable revenue, which Bettman seems to care nothing about  :lol:

 

 

If the NHL did expand to 32 teams then I think it would have to adopt the 8 divisions of 4 approach like the NFL.  Assuming Hamilton and Quebec city are going to be the new franchies, here's how I would align them according to Geography

 

newnhl.png

Eastern Conference

 

Northeast

Quebec City

Montreal

Ottawa

Toronto

 

Atlantic

Boston

Rangers

Islanders

New Jersey

 

Placeholder Name

Buffalo

Pittsburgh

Philadelphia

Washington

 

Southeast

Carolina

Nashville

Florida

Tampa Bay

 

Western Conference

 

Great Lakes

Detroit

Hamilton

Chicago

Columbus

 

Central

St. Louis

Minnesota

Colorado

Dallas

 

Northwest

Calgary

Edmonton

Vancouver

Winnipeg

 

Pacific

San Jose

Los Angeles

Annehiem

Phoenix

 

Unfortunately that means we will still be stuck in the west and still have to travel a lot.  But our divsion gets noticably easier with losing Nashville and St. Louis for a new expanshion franchise.  And we still get to beat up on the Blue Jackets.

 

Wow, look at that Great Lakes division. Perfect! I think that you're overlooking one thing though...the elimination of East/West. You'd have to develop another system so that Toronto 2 could play the Leafs enough to form a rivalry. They wouldn't go for this 1 game a year crap. 



#24 chrisdetroit

chrisdetroit

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,407 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 12:28 PM

This may be slightly off-topic, but with all the talk about putting teams west of us so we are in the east for realignment, it may be relevant.

 

I wouldn't mind, if 2 new teams were added, a system like the NFL or MLB, with conferences that aren't geographically split. I think we would be at an advantage in that system, along with the other central division teams, since our travel situation would probably improve and most other teams would have to travel substantially more.

That doesn't really work with hockey.  In the NFL the teams only play once a week so travel is irrelevant.  MLB is just the opposite.  They can play 6 or 7 days a week so when the teams have to travel a long distance, they stay for 3 or 4 days at a time and play games each day.  In hockey, they really can't play more than 2 days in a row and they can't take 6 days off between games so long distance travel is a big issue.  That is why the conferences in hockey as well as the divisions are split geographically.


Do or do not. There is no try

#25 Euro_Twins

Euro_Twins

    Healthy Scratch

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,576 posts
  • Location:Windsor, Ontario

Posted 30 January 2013 - 12:34 PM

Ok, I hope you guys were joking about Windsor lol. The GTA can handle two teams easily, but Detroit Metro cannot. 

 

 

 

Agreed, but expansion gives you an immediate bag-o-money, not long-term stable revenue, which Bettman seems to care nothing about  :lol:

 

 

 

Wow, look at that Great Lakes division. Perfect! I think that you're overlooking one thing though...the elimination of East/West. You'd have to develop another system so that Toronto 2 could play the Leafs enough to form a rivalry. They wouldn't go for this 1 game a year crap. 

 

I was laughing at someone else mentioning windsor...



#26 CrimsonFlame

CrimsonFlame

    1st Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 862 posts
  • Location:Troy, Michigan

Posted 30 January 2013 - 12:39 PM


 

Wow, look at that Great Lakes division. Perfect! I think that you're overlooking one thing though...the elimination of East/West. You'd have to develop another system so that Toronto 2 could play the Leafs enough to form a rivalry. They wouldn't go for this 1 game a year crap. 

Alright here's an alternate scenario then

 

newnhlalternate.png

 

Awesome for us in the Central because we get some great rivalry games.  Not so awesome for some other rivalries like Philly and Pittsburgh and Boston and NYR. 

 

Also Toronto probably won't be happy joining the west and having to travel like we do. 

Second Alternate Scenario

 

 

Probably geographically better but Nashville gets the hose.  Also the caps get a nice watered down division.


Edited by CrimsonFlame, 30 January 2013 - 12:52 PM.


#27 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,615 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 30 January 2013 - 01:03 PM

A vote result of 7-6 is far from a  "rousing endorsement".


"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#28 Hiei

Hiei

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,290 posts
  • Location:Centerton, AR via Mt. Carroll, IL

Posted 30 January 2013 - 01:10 PM

Let's step back and look at cities with a realistic shot in the next 4 years of having a team:

Seattle: Arena deal completed, construction soon to be underway, AND they're getting the sonics back (Sacramento gets to eat it in this deal).  Unknown of the ambition toward having an NHL franchise in Seattle, but we'll see that soon enough, now won't we?

 

Quebec City:  Construction is underway on the currently titled New Quebec City Amphitheatre.  Quebecor has openly stated they want a team.

Cities with a shot in the next 5-7 years if planning works out

Markham, ON

Much longer shots due to needing an owner not named Balsillie

Hamilton, ON


"Hit em with your purse, ya *****!" - Random Wings fans shouting at Franziska


#29 evilmrt

evilmrt

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,583 posts
  • Location:Winter Freakin Wonderland

Posted 30 January 2013 - 02:39 PM

Let's step back and look at cities with a realistic shot in the next 4 years of having a team:

Seattle: Arena deal completed, construction soon to be underway, AND they're getting the sonics back (Sacramento gets to eat it in this deal).  Unknown of the ambition toward having an NHL franchise in Seattle, but we'll see that soon enough, now won't we?

 

Quebec City:  Construction is underway on the currently titled New Quebec City Amphitheatre.  Quebecor has openly stated they want a team.

Cities with a shot in the next 5-7 years if planning works out

Markham, ON

Much longer shots due to needing an owner not named Balsillie

Hamilton, ON

 

Yes, good analysis. QC is basically a lock to get a team, the league just doesn't want to show their cards at the moment. I see them getting an expansion team since relocation will be uncertain and turn into a mess, potentially delaying plans. 

 

Seattle, on the other hand, seems poised to get a relocated Coyotes or Panthers. Vancouver wants a team in Seattle, and they will get their way. The eternal saga of the Phoenix Coyotes sale makes it look like they will go. 

 

So then, that leaves us with an unbalanced league. Either Markham gets Toronto 2 as an expansion, or we see one team fold. League won't forego the nice fat expansion fee, so it looks like Markham gets a team. 



#30 MabusIncarnate

MabusIncarnate

    The Truth Is Out There

  • Silver Booster Mod
  • 2,232 posts
  • Location:Monteagle, Tennessee

Posted 30 January 2013 - 02:42 PM

Surprised they aren't putting teams in Nevada and New Mexico.

 

Smart decision to put a couple teams in Canada, not entirely sure if expanding is the best decision but if it helps the NHL recover from it's losses during the lockout then why not?


13585921555_24551f5658.jpg


#31 Euro_Twins

Euro_Twins

    Healthy Scratch

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,576 posts
  • Location:Windsor, Ontario

Posted 30 January 2013 - 02:45 PM

Surprised they aren't putting teams in Nevada and New Mexico.

 

Smart decision to put a couple teams in Canada, not entirely sure if expanding is the best decision but if it helps the NHL recover from it's losses during the lockout then why not?

 

The Los Vegas Gamblers

I can see the head lines

The gamblers go broke in a 6-0 loss to the "card" sharks



#32 evilmrt

evilmrt

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,583 posts
  • Location:Winter Freakin Wonderland

Posted 30 January 2013 - 02:49 PM

Surprised they aren't putting teams in Nevada and New Mexico.

 

Smart decision to put a couple teams in Canada, not entirely sure if expanding is the best decision but if it helps the NHL recover from it's losses during the lockout then why not?

 

You haven't been out here lately, have you? Those are among the most economically depressed areas in the nation, and will be for the foreseeable future. 



#33 Euro_Twins

Euro_Twins

    Healthy Scratch

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,576 posts
  • Location:Windsor, Ontario

Posted 30 January 2013 - 03:17 PM

You haven't been out here lately, have you? Those are among the most economically depressed areas in the nation, and will be for the foreseeable future. 

 

I think he was more going on the fact of Florida, Phoenix, Atlanta all getting teams, it has been Bettmans MO to put teams in ridiculous areas



#34 GMRwings1983

GMRwings1983

    The Killer is Me

  • Silver Booster
  • 20,852 posts
  • Location:Jerkwater, USA

Posted 30 January 2013 - 04:01 PM

I was laughing at someone else mentioning windsor...

 

Would you laugh if I mentioned Saskatoon?


According to my profile, my reputation is excellent. LOL.

#35 Euro_Twins

Euro_Twins

    Healthy Scratch

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,576 posts
  • Location:Windsor, Ontario

Posted 30 January 2013 - 04:38 PM

Would you laugh if I mentioned Saskatoon?

Let's just go with P.E.I



#36 GMRwings1983

GMRwings1983

    The Killer is Me

  • Silver Booster
  • 20,852 posts
  • Location:Jerkwater, USA

Posted 30 January 2013 - 04:58 PM

Let's just go with P.E.I

 

I was going to suggest Regina, but I think its strange pronunciation would create too many jokes here in the US.  


According to my profile, my reputation is excellent. LOL.

#37 MabusIncarnate

MabusIncarnate

    The Truth Is Out There

  • Silver Booster Mod
  • 2,232 posts
  • Location:Monteagle, Tennessee

Posted 30 January 2013 - 06:11 PM

I think he was more going on the fact of Florida, Phoenix, Atlanta all getting teams, it has been Bettmans MO to put teams in ridiculous areas

Yeah this, it was a bit of sarcasm. Nashville wasn't exactly the smartest move either but a fan base surprisingly caught on. But yeah, more a stab at them putting a team in Phoenix, Florida, and Atlanta (That failed once already). 


13585921555_24551f5658.jpg


#38 Euro_Twins

Euro_Twins

    Healthy Scratch

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,576 posts
  • Location:Windsor, Ontario

Posted 30 January 2013 - 07:32 PM

Yeah this, it was a bit of sarcasm. Nashville wasn't exactly the smartest move either but a fan base surprisingly caught on. But yeah, more a stab at them putting a team in Phoenix, Florida, and Atlanta (That failed once already). 


Ya well if you throw out enough seeds one will grow, too bad all the other seeds cost the farmer way too much money to keep watering

#39 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,615 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 30 January 2013 - 07:57 PM

The League needs to set up new franchises in the Guam and Puerto Rico.

 

From TSN:

 

"There's never been a plan to expand to 32 teams," Daly told TSN Hockey Insider Pierre LeBrun of ESPN.com. "Whether we talked conceptually at some point if things are going well whether we could expand to 32, I'm sure we suggested we could, but we certainly never reached the point where that was appropriate when Paul Kelly was executive director of the NHLPA and I'd say we haven't got there at this point. 
 
"I'd say any sports league aspires to be in a position where expansion is a good idea," added Daly. "But again, it's got to be the right circumstances."

 

And there you have it, straight from the opposite end of the horse's mouth.


"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#40 Johnz96

Johnz96

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 09:55 PM

I was going to suggest Regina, but I think its strange pronunciation would create too many jokes here in the US.  

If I was rich I would purchase some sort of team for Regina just so I could call them the Regina Vaginas







Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users