MigMug's Comments

Posted Thursday September 23, 2010, About: NHL Expansion (Kansas City & Seattle)
(Continued from above)


Now come the black sheep: Winnipeg, Quebec City, and Kansas City. Winnipeg has a few limitations in population and financial support. There are around 1 million people in Manitoba, most of them are in and around Winnipeg. That's basically it. They could draw from places like Regina and Saskatoon going west, but it's a long, cold, and snowy drive in the winter months. In the east there's Thunder Bay and Sudbury. Both are small and far away as well. This may not be the largest obstacle to overcome though, of the 1 million in Manitoba, I guess about 999, 999 love hockey.

Winnipeg has limited corporate support with only one large corporation: Manitoba Hydro. As far as TV goes I don't see a large revenue stream there too.

Everything I just said about Winnipeg can be applied to Quebec City, with a few variances. 1 million from the surrounding area including Saguenay, and I only see the most hardened Maritimer's making the trek west. That doesn't leave a lot of fans to draw from, but again they are ALL fans up there. Quebec is a government town, so I don't know who would pay for advertisement and sponsorship. The most the government will do is fund an arena, but they wont be putting their logos on the boards. Somehow I like Quebec's chances more than Winnipeg's. Its just a gut feeling.

I know the least of Kansas City. Hockey has failed there before, which is never a good sign, especially in American cities. Fan support is never an issue in Canada, only economics. Any smart owner would take fan support over economics. Fan support is more stable. They have an arena which is always a good sign. The population numbers look promising. But Atlanta and Phoenix had the same things, and look where they are now. The question of Kansas City is are there enough fans. Is Kansas City a Colorado Avalanche or an Nashville Predators. I don't really know.

Ok. So those are the best bets for relocation. I would like to see a team in all those cities, taking away teams from these cities: Phoenix, because how long is that really going to last. Atlanta, when they get the ownership thing figured out they should go straight to the auction block. Florida, because they're foundering in the swamp and are two teams in a state that doesn't care too much for hockey sustainable for much longer. The state economy isn't something to be desired as well. Nashville too. And maybe, but not hopefully, the Islanders. It would be a sad day when a once storied dynasty bites the dust. Here's hoping for a new arena. Maybe in Brooklyn if the NJ Nets ever actually move. There are enough hockey fans in New York and Long Island to keep the Islanders afloat.

I'm done. Thanks to anyone who actually read all that. I needed to get it out; it's been lingering in my mind for too long.
Posted Thursday September 23, 2010, About: NHL Expansion (Kansas City & Seattle)
(This will take place over two posts due to character limits)


The top cities currently for relocation (and I say relocation because expansion or contraction are both clearly unacceptable to the NHL right now) are:

Hamilton, because of the population, its estimated that there are 10 million people within 150 km. It has an arena that could be renovated without extravagant cost. And is close enough to Toronto to feed of its corporate support. The NHL has even admitted that a franchise in Hamilton would be in the top 5 for profitability were it to exist.

Milwaukee. I like Milwaukee for a few reasons. The most prominent being that it had the second highest rating of US cities for the 2010 Olympic Hockey Final between the US and Canada. So its clear there are hockey fans in that city, and more importantly, they will watch it on TV. Which means broadcast deals, which in turn means money, which in turn means survivability. A lot of US NHLers also come from Wisconsin and there is a loyal college following in the state. It would take a new Arena though. Good news is the Bucks are looking into it.

Seattle is next, again because of the population. Its 3 million citizens are more than either Winnipeg or Quebec City combined. Not to mention Portland to the south and the inevitable Canadians that will travel the short distance to catch the Canucks, Flames, or Oilers when in town. If you ever watch the Blue Jays play the Mariners in Seattle, and I do, you will see many Canadian fans at the ballpark. I would expect even more for hockey. Seattle has a strong and stable economy with potential for good corporate support as well. The arena is up in the air, I guess it could work at KeyArena, but relocation would be far more likely with a new facility.
Posted Thursday September 23, 2010, About: NHL Expansion (Kansas City & Seattle)
(This will take place over two posts due to character limits)


The top cities currently for relocation (and I say relocation because expansion or contraction are both clearly unacceptable to the NHL right now) are:

Hamilton, because of the population, its estimated that there are 10 million people within 150 km. It has an arena that could be renovated without extravagant cost. And is close enough to Toronto to feed of its corporate support. The NHL has even admitted that a franchise in Hamilton would be in the top 5 for profitability were it to exist.

Milwaukee. I like Milwaukee for a few reasons. The most prominent being that it had the second highest rating of US cities for the 2010 Olympic Hockey Final between the US and Canada. So its clear there are hockey fans in that city, and more importantly, they will watch it on TV. Which means broadcast deals, which in turn means money, which in turn means survivability. A lot of US NHLers also come from Wisconsin and there is a loyal college following in the state. It would take a new Arena though. Good news is the Bucks are looking into it.

Seattle is next, again because of the population. Its 3 million citizens are more than either Winnipeg or Quebec City combined. Not to mention Portland to the south and the inevitable Canadians that will travel the short distance to catch the Canucks, Flames, or Oilers when in town. If you ever watch the Blue Jays play the Mariners in Seattle, and I do, you will see many Canadian fans at the ballpark. I would expect even more for hockey. Seattle has a strong and stable economy with potential for good corporate support as well. The arena is up in the air, I guess it could work at KeyArena, but relocation would be far more likely with a new facility.

Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    D'Antoni's newest 'blunder'
    Views
    2709
    Comments
    866
  2. 2
    Bryant headed back to Germany
    Views
    2880
    Comments
    810
  3. 3
    Baseball's top 2015 free agent
    Views
    2380
    Comments
    527
  4. 4
    Shakeup looms for White Sox
    Views
    4911
    Comments
    329
  5. 5
    The NHL's model franchise?
    Views
    2218
    Comments
    139

SI.com

SI Photos