• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
FireCaptain

Canada can support 3 more teams in 20yrs

Rate this topic

88 posts in this topic

At least that's what a study says...

"The board suggested Monday that in addition to Canada's seven existing NHL teams, Quebec City and Hamilton, Ont., appear to meet minimum requirements to become home to franchises in the near future.

In the longer term, another franchise could eventually find its way to the Toronto area, but a lot of money and population growth would be required for the region to support two teams."

http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/56552-Conference-Board-economists-predict-Canada-could-support-three-more-NHL-teams.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't wait until the Saskatoon Panthers and the Halifax Predators are actual teams in the NHL.

:nhl2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't wait until the Saskatoon Panthers and the Halifax Predators are actual teams in the NHL.

:nhl2:

Excuse me,Halifax will have to find a new name for their team,because the Predators will still be in Nashville,I have already been through a sale of the Nashville Predators and that took a toll on me,i ain't gonna go through another one

thegerkin likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure Nashville's not going anywhere.

The article is about expansion, not relocation..

I can't wait until the Saskatoon Panthers and the Halifax Predators are actual teams in the NHL.

:nhl2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

s-GARY-BETTMAN-HARPER-large.jpg?6

"You lost me after I heard "expansion into Canada".

Sadly, our dollar is currently undervalued about ten cents, being used as an incentive for investment dollars to flow into our glorious country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada should have at least nine and the us around 15 30 is way too much.

But with a new York lawyer running the show I've given up on good decisions for the game till he is fired

Edited by frankgrimes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada should have at least nine and the us around 15 30 is way too much.But with a new York lawyer running the show I've given up on good decisions for the game till he is fired

I'd say 8 and 16, but that's just me nitpicking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHL will go to 32 at some point. Not sure if Canada will get the teams though. Salt Lake, Seattle, Milwaukee, Grand Rapids, Portland, Las Vegas are all bigger cities/markets than any city in Canada which doesn't have a team.

As for bettmen, the owners love him, get over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHL will go to 32 at some point. Not sure if Canada will get the teams though. Salt Lake, Seattle, Milwaukee, Grand Rapids, Portland, Las Vegas are all bigger cities/markets than any city in Canada which doesn't have a team.

As for bettmen, the owners love him, get over it.

Toronto (Hamilton / Markham) could have two teams quite easily. Leafs will fight for it not to happen which is why it probably won't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Expansion is a terrible idea.

30 teams is already a lot and there are too many "non traditional hockey markets" still somehow holding on to teams.

i hate the term non traditional hockey markets,it's kind of a snobbish term that the nothern/canadian hockey teams use

FireCaptain likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i hate the term non traditional hockey markets,it's kind of a snobbish term that the nothern/canadian hockey teams use

The term means what it is meant to say. Florida, Carolina, Phoenix, Columbus and Dallas were the five teams with the worst attendance this season, based on percentage of tickets sold. All non-traditional markets.

The league needs to cut base with these places, and try moving the teams elsewhere; or contract these teams altogether. Instead, the league wants to expand, this time to Canadian cities that probably can't handle an NHL team.

frankgrimes likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The term means what it is meant to say. Florida, Carolina, Phoenix, Columbus and Dallas were the five teams with the worst attendance this season, based on percentage of tickets sold. All non-traditional markets.

The league needs to cut base with these places, and try moving the teams elsewhere; or contract these teams altogether. Instead, the league wants to expand, this time to Canadian cities that probably can't handle an NHL team.

if the league thinks that those team need to be moved then they will be moved,but until then they are staying right where they are.

i googled the term non traditional hockey market and this is what i found:

Any place that polar bears and/or eskimos don't need a parka to survive. (Usually a term used by northern/canadian hockey snobs to try and deter southern fans)
Dallas is a non-traditional hockey market

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always supported a team in the pacific northwest. They're so bored that soccer is huge there. I think they'd rally around a hockey team pretty easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toronto (Hamilton / Markham) could have two teams quite easily. Leafs will fight for it not to happen which is why it probably won't.

Yeah there was talk about Markham getting a team, which is weird cause it's basically just a different district of Toronto. But whoever said Toronto needs to grow, i'm not sure they've been here. This place is too big for it's own good, and is actually quite annoying. The issue that came up with Hamilton is that it also fit in the whole geographical boundaries or whatever for the Leafs and the Sabres. The Sabres also get a lot of Canadian business as it's closer for many and much cheaper and easier to get to games than Toronto, where you can't get tickets unless you deal with scalpers half the time. Personally, I believe that the next place that gets a team will be Seattle and then QC. After that, maybe Hamilton will get a team, but I really think that relocation should be back on the table for a team like Florida. Nashville isn't going anywhere. They have a strong fanbase from what i've seen/heard and their fans have really seem to have taken to the game.

DatsyukianDekes likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always supported a team in the pacific northwest. They're so bored that soccer is huge there. I think they'd rally around a hockey team pretty easy.

I found the new coach and GM.

portlandia_07-11-11_sg_00428-84e0e7d70bd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i hate the term non traditional hockey markets,it's kind of a snobbish term that the nothern/canadian hockey teams use

i don't think it's snobbish at all. I think it's as polite as you can get in describing a place where you wouldn't normally expect hockey or where the game doesn't already have a solid foothold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NHL needs to invest heavily in youth programs to grow the game. Kids play, they will watch. They need to get rid of the "it's a white sport" attitude a lot of minorities have. I can almost guarantee there will be 2 more teams to balance the conferences, either in the west or moving teams from the east. Florida should move. Phoenix will move eventually. They gave up on Atlanta too fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the league thinks that those team need to be moved then they will be moved,but until then they are staying right where they are.

i googled the term non traditional hockey market and this is what i found:

Any place that polar bears and/or eskimos don't need a parka to survive. (Usually a term used by northern/canadian hockey snobs to try and deter southern fans)
Dallas is a non-traditional hockey market

The game is called ICEhockey for a reason, so if you put icehockey into places where you have almost no winters, not a lot of funding AND a non winning enviroment it's a setup for a team to fail. Personally speaking I don't want the game to grow. Less teams would be a good thing for a lot of the Original 6 teams:

- less revenue sharing

- less competiton for playoffs, stanley cups

- more talent for less teams = higher talent pool

- players: stars/superstars can finally get their huge paydays without GMs having to worry about the cap

This stupid "more scoring, oh no we can't have a white sport, grow the game" and other mantras are really pissing me off. If people want to see double or triple digits = watch NFL, NBA ...if people don't want to watch a white sport watch NBA, NFL, soccer where countries even have to take foreigners into the national teams because the real natives have given up on the sport (as did fans). Constantly tweaking and bitching things about the game will only lead to the following: fans who are happy will give up and it's harder to gain new fans than to keep the old ones.

The best analogy would be the Simpsons: look at this great series during the early episodes and compare them to now ? It's almost like two complete different series, they've completely lost their charme because some smartguy thought it would be a good idea to go even more mainstream and change from hand drawn to computer animated episodes and add more "pop references" ...changing for the sake of change is not always the way to go.

If the Stars, Jackets, Coyotes and Panthers aren't cutting it then move them to Canada, the league didn't have a problem moving the Jets, Nordiques and other teams from Canada...so fair is fair.

Also as a disclaimer:

I have absolutely nothing against their fanbases but if not enough people are showing up, what can you do ? Expecting other teams to pay for their failures ? That's just stupid because it would mean teams like the Wings are helping the competition out and the reward would be losinga gainst them ? Sorry, but no.

btw. the league can't support 30 teams so going to 32 would not only be overkill but absolutely idiotic. My personall view is, even support 24 - 28 is a hard thing at some point sports become too big for their own good - i.e soccer - hope that doesn't happen to hockey in my lifetime.

Edited by frankgrimes
Z Winged Dangler likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game is called ICEhockey for a reason, so if you put icehockey into places where you have almost no winters, not a lot of funding AND a non winning enviroment it's a setup for a team to fail. Personally speaking I don't want the game to grow. Less teams would be a good thing for a lot of the Original 6 teams:

- less revenue sharing

- less competiton for playoffs, stanley cups

- more talent for less teams = higher talent pool

- players: stars/superstars can finally get their huge paydays without GMs having to worry about the cap

This stupid "more scoring, oh no we can't have a white sport, grow the game" and other mantras are really pissing me off. If people want to see double or triple digits = watch NFL, NBA ...if people don't want to watch a white sport watch NBA, NFL, soccer where countries even have to take foreigners into the national teams because the real natives have given up on the sport (as did fans). Constantly tweaking and bitching things about the game will only lead to the following: fans who are happy will give up and it's harder to gain new fans than to keep the old ones.

The best analogy would be the Simpsons: look at this great series during the early episodes and compare them to now ? It's almost like two complete different series, they've completely lost their charme because some smartguy thought it would be a good idea to go even more mainstream and change from hand drawn to computer animated episodes and add more "pop references" ...changing for the sake of change is not always the way to go.

If the Stars, Jackets, Coyotes and Panthers aren't cutting it then move them to Canada, the league didn't have a problem moving the Jets, Nordiques and other teams from Canada...so fair is fair.

Also as a disclaimer:

I have absolutely nothing against their fanbases but if not enough people are showing up, what can you do ? Expecting other teams to pay for their failures ? That's just stupid because it would mean teams like the Wings are helping the competition out and the reward would be losinga gainst them ? Sorry, but no.

btw. the league can't support 30 teams so going to 32 would not only be overkill but absolutely idiotic. My personall view is, even support 24 - 28 is a hard thing at some point sports become too big for their own good - i.e soccer - hope that doesn't happen to hockey in my lifetime.

I love white sports. I hate teams that have a little dark spot roaming around. Wait, am I from Boston?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love white sports. I hate teams that have a little dark spot roaming around. Wait, am I from Boston?

I don't get that reference at all so anyway:

Back in the early 90s I did watch the "dream team" known as the Bulls and never ever did I think "oh boy grow Baskettball because there aren't enough white people on that team" I just watched the sport, because I did like some things after the league turned into the thug league I've stopped but I didn't complain on and on to change this or that.

That's the great thing with the freedom of choice we all can choose the things we like to watch and ignore the ones we don't like.

I honestly believe some people are more concerned about fixing something that's not broken instead of being happy and appreciative of the status quo.

Edited by frankgrimes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get that reference at all so anyway:

Back in the early 90s I did watch the "dream team" known as the Bulls and never ever did I think "oh boy grow Baskettball because there aren't enough white people on that team" I just watched the sport, because I did like some things after the league turned into the thug league I've stopped but I didn't complain on and on to change this or that.

That's the great thing with the freedom of choice we all can choose the things we like to watch and ignore the ones we don't like.

I honestly believe some people are more concerned about fixing something that's not broken instead of being happy and appreciative of the status quo.

I agree that what's always been appealing to me about hockey is the low scoring. It's so exciting everytime someone scores. Can you imagine 2 pages of GOOSE! GUSTAV! NIKE! GUS! etc., on this forum if they scored 50 times a game?

I was ok with opening the game up but no need to increase goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0