NHL Is Done With Expansion For The Forseeable Future

[Phil]

Quote

Is the NHL done with expansion for the foreseeable future?

"I would think so. We're comfortable with 32 [teams]. There are other markets who are interested in having NHL franchises, but the expansion equation has changed over time in every league, but particularly our league. The equation is, 'Is the addition of the franchise good for the League? Does it help grow the League?' As opposed to the short-term financial benefits associated with expansion. That's not what's in our owners' heads at this point in time. I think both in Vegas' case and Seattle's case, they favorably received those franchises as being beneficial to the overall business of the League."

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-to-prioritize-international-growth-of-game-daly-says-in-qa/c-326181980

[Pete]

Typical NHL, they stop expanding after they've already over-expanded.

[Shane Falco]

3 hours ago, Pete said:

Typical NHL, they stop expanding after they've already over-expanded.

They should totally relocate the Yotes though. 

[Albatrosss]

10 hours ago, Phil said:

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-to-prioritize-international-growth-of-game-daly-says-in-qa/c-326181980

Thank goodness 

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

On 9/17/2021 at 7:40 PM, Shane Falco said:

They should totally relocate the Yotes though. 

Seems like it’s on the verge of happening. Hockey can work there. They’ve just completely mismanaged everything there, both on the ice and off it.  Like why are they not in downtown Phoenix? 
 

if they built a decent team I’m sure there are tons of top players who’d love to go there. 

[Sharpshooter]

Yeah, they really should be in Phoenix, if anything because I hate how 'Arizona Coyotes' sounds. 

[Pete]

15 minutes ago, BlairBettsBlocksEverything said:

if they built a decent team I’m sure there are tons of top players who’d love to go there.

Not if they have to wear those wack jerseys haha!

[LindG1000]

Done with expansion is probably the right call. Growing the game internationally - also the right call. 

We're still going to see a team in Houston sooner rather than later - likely at the expense of Phoenix. We're still going to see more international exposure for top tier franchises. 32 is right where they should stop given the current structure and revenue model. 

[Phil]

40 minutes ago, G1000 said:

Done with expansion is probably the right call. Growing the game internationally - also the right call. 

We're still going to see a team in Houston sooner rather than later - likely at the expense of Phoenix. We're still going to see more international exposure for top tier franchises. 32 is right where they should stop given the current structure and revenue model. 

Agreed. I think you see one more relocation (Arizona). Outside of that, things are probably going well for them not to have to uproot/upend anything else. That includes Florida, Columbus, and the Islanders.

[Sharpshooter]

I thought the Coyotes may get moved to Quebec City, but I think that ship has sailed for a team there. So, yeah, Houston is the safe bet now.

[Phil]

Nah, Quebec is a fan-tasy. It pales in every facet — corporate footprint, arena, population, etc — to most American cities, especially Houston.

[Sharpshooter]

Yeah, I think that was from even a few years ago, and it still hasn't happened and it won't. Even though I'd like at least another team in Canada. Houston, and Texas in general is really growing so now it makes more sense than ever.

[Ozzy]

The NHL should try to put a team in Buffa.......Oh wait!! 

[LindG1000]

There are a ton of US markets that would be well ahead of any Canadian market. The Jets are a nice story, but even Winnipeg probably shouldn't have had a team before places like Charlotte, Houston, or Salt Lake City if we're talking about places for the NHL to make long-term inroads.

[Blue Heaven]

1 hour ago, G1000 said:

There are a ton of US markets that would be well ahead of any Canadian market. The Jets are a nice story, but even Winnipeg probably shouldn't have had a team before places like Charlotte, Houston, or Salt Lake City if we're talking about places for the NHL to make long-term inroads.

Cant have a team in Raleigh and Charlotte....Substitute Charlotte with Kansas City.

[Sod16]

I'd move Raleigh and Miami before Phoenix.  The former two have proven that their strong periods do not translate into decent sustained support during weak ones.  Phoenix has never had a really strong period.

You watch the Canes support evaporate after their current strong period ends, just as it did after their cup.

[Ozzy]

I was thinking Wisconsin would be a decent place for a relocated team;  They have a very strong college presence, and even though I know football is their thing out there, I'd think they would have a fairly strong crowd of hockey fans.

I don't know what they would replace the "Lambeau Leap" with though...

[Phil]

22 minutes ago, Sod16 said:

I'd move Raleigh and Miami before Phoenix.  The former two have proven that their strong periods do not translate into decent sustained support during weak ones.  Phoenix has never had a really strong period.

You watch the Canes support evaporate after their current strong period ends, just as it did after their cup.

These decisions go beyond fan support/ticket sales. Corporate footprint also matters. Walmart, Amazon, ExxonMobil, Apple, CVS, Berkshire Hathaway, AT&T, McKesson, Cigna, and more have headquarters in North Carolina.

Miami lacks it entirely, so they're definitely a movable candidate if their fan support dries up.

[Sod16]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

Miami lacks it entirely, so they're definitely a movable candidate if their fan support dries up.

Their fan support consists primarily of transplants from NY, Boston, Philly and Chicago who come root fortheir team.  If Miami just had home dates against those teams, they'd be fine.  Also, they've got what fans they have hooked on cheap ticket specials that they can never get them to pay regular prices.

Corporate presence may be nice, but so are crowds of more than 9,000 during non-playoff years.

[Pete]

8 hours ago, Phil said:

These decisions go beyond fan support/ticket sales. Corporate footprint also matters. Walmart, Amazon, ExxonMobil, Apple, CVS, Berkshire Hathaway, AT&T, McKesson, Cigna, and more have headquarters in North Carolina.

Miami lacks it entirely, so they're definitely a movable candidate if their fan support dries up.

What? Berkshire HQ is Omaha...Think your confusing a corporate office, which doesn't mean a lot, with an HQ.

[Phil]

I had Googled the list. could be old, or I may have misinterpreted. But North Carolina isn't devoid of corporate sponsor dollars, was my point. Raleigh is two hours from Charlotte, which is the country's second-largest banking center (by assets held). Only New York has more.

[Pete]

3 minutes ago, Phil said:

I had Googled the list. could be old, or I may have misinterpreted. But North Carolina isn't devoid of corporate sponsor dollars, was my point. Raleigh is two hours from Charlotte, which is the country's second-largest banking center (by assets held). Only New York has more.

Sorry, I'm losing track here...Are you saying NC can support 2 teams?

[Phil]

Definitely not. They don't even do a great job of supporting one. I was just pushing back on the idea of moving the Hurricanes before Arizona. That's what Sod was suggesting.

[Pete]

5 minutes ago, Phil said:

Definitely not. They don't even do a great job of supporting one. I was just pushing back on the idea of moving the Hurricanes before Arizona. That's what Sod was suggesting.

Oh right, yea that makes no sense. Yotes have to go. Didn't understand the comment about the distance from Raleigh to Charlotte.

[Phil]

Just that there are corporate dollars in the state. One aspect they have working in their factor. Their bigger problem is failing to translate on-ice success into consistent ticket sales the way other southern franchises (like Tampa) have done.