I don't know how true this is (my guess is not completely accurate, but not completely inaccurate either), but yesterday a report came out that the NHL is going to grant four expansion franchises by 2017. According to the report, Las Vegas, Seattle, Quebec City and Toronto will get expansion clubs, as the league will increase in size from 30 to 34 teams.
The NHL immediately shot down the rumors, which were evidently started on Twitter by Howard Bloom from Sports Business News and exacerbated by an article written by a man named Tony Gallagher in The Province. From what Bill Daly and those actually in the know about the situation, who were "surprised" by the chatter, said, it sounds like this is nothing but a rumor either started by a journalist or heard by a journalist who decided to run with it. However, we all know NHL expansion is likely in the not-too-distant future, so I wasn't completely surprised by the talk.
When they realigned the divisions last year, creating unbalanced conferences, it looked like the NHL was intentionally leaving themselves open to adding two teams and evening the conferences up at 16-16. That's why I don't think there's that much credence to this report. If they had said the NHL was going to expand by two teams, it would be much more believable. But four? Why would any league go to 34 teams? It's such a strange number. And it doesn't divide evenly into anything. (There's a reason why three of the four settled on 30 teams and the NFL settled on 32.)
As for the cities mentioned, those weren't a complete surprise, either. Now that the NHL is back in Winnipeg, getting a team back in Quebec seems to be the next logical step. The problems that led to the Nordiques' move to Denver 20 years ago no longer exist. After they moved, the NHL created the "Canadian Assistance Plan," which was designed to prevent the smaller-market Canadian teams from moving. The Canadian dollar is also much stronger today than it was then. Paying the players in American money when getting all of your revenue in Canadian funds would be much easier today, with a conversion rate of 91 cents on the dollar, than it was back in the mid-90s, when the conversion rate was something like 69 cents.
There's a reason why the NHL would like to get back to Quebec City. It's no secret that the Canadian fan base is much larger and much more passionate than it is in even some of the American cities that currently have NHL teams (I'm talking to you, Miami). Especially French Canada. Sure, they've got the Canadiens, but they've got more than enough passion for hockey to support a reincarnated Quebec City team. Why do you think that Quebec is the first city mentioned whenever an NHL team says it's thinking about relocating? If not for the league finding owners that actually got an arena built in the Phoenix area, I was convinced the Coyotes were on their way to Quebec City. Quebec City's in the process of building a new arena, too.
However, the most obvious reason that Quebec wouldn't really work as a relocation destination is because you'd have to put them in the same division as Montreal. That would potentially mean moving a team from the West to the Eastern Conference. Or, in other words, potentially making the split 17-13. That doesn't work. In that situation, they'd probably have to convince the Red Wings and Blue Jackets to suck it up and go back to the West.
Likewise, the idea of a second Toronto team doesn't make that much sense. Sure, there are three teams in New York and two in LA. And sure, Toronto is the biggest city in a hockey-mad country. But everyone in Toronto is already a Leafs fan. I'm not sure you're going to get them to abandon one of the most beloved teams in the game that easily. And if you're trying to grow the game, why would you put another team in a market that already has a successful one? You're not adding a TV market. Plus, there's also a team in Buffalo, which is 90 minutes away. I forget who, but somebody was talking about moving to Hamilton (which is between Buffalo and Toronto) a few years ago. The question, "Why do you need a third team in that area?" was asked then, and it would be asked again. I also highly doubt that if they wanted to add a second Toronto team, the Maple Leafs would just sit there and let it happen.
Of the four suggestions, Seattle and Las Vegas seem to make the most sense. For one, they're actually both in the west, so they'd obviously be easy additions to the Western Conference. I think Las Vegas is far from the "done deal" it was reported to be, though. There's eventually going to be a league that takes the risk and puts a franchise in Las Vegas. The clubhouse favorite in that area has always been the NBA. But I'm sure Vegas doesn't care, and they're building an arena that meets both NBA and NHL specifications. While I don't think it's actually going to happen, I wouldn't be completely surprised to see an NHL team in Las Vegas. After all, they did move the annual NHL Awards there from Toronto a couple years ago.
Seattle, on the other hand, wants the NBA back more than anything. I don't think they'd turn an NHL franchise down, especially since they're in a fertile hockey area and would have that built-in natural rivalry with Vancouver, but it's not their focus. Although, from what I've heard, there are plenty of people who'd be willing to step up as the owner of a Seattle team, and getting the NHL team would only increase leverage to build that new arena that's probably needed for the Sonics to be resurrected.
My guess is that this report is untrue. We're not going to see Gary Bettman call a press conference next week and congratulate two of these cities. But they still remain viable expansion and relocation targets, and now that the chatter has started, it's going to be very difficult to quiet it down. Especially with the obvious 16-14 problem and the seemingly equally obvious solution.
Ultimately, I do think the NHL is going to expand by two teams. Probably soon. My guess would be sometime around the next lockout (which I think is currently scheduled for 2020-21 if one side opts out of the CBA). The owners in the Eastern Conference are going to get tired of the imbalance (which gives them inherently worse chances of making the playoffs), so they'll be OK with adding two teams and evening things up. The players won't mind because that creates 50 more NHL jobs. Most importantly, there's money to be had from expansion fees. And both the owners and the players would want a piece of that pie.
No comments:
Post a Comment