The NHL is currently involved in the second round of expansion talks with potential ownership groups in Las Vegas and Quebec City. They've said that "nothing imminent" is going to happen, but I don't think there's a single person that actually buys that. When the NHL realigned into four divisions, with two divisions of eight teams and two of seven, expansion seemed inevitable. So, while it might not be for 2016-17 or even 2017-18, I think we can all agree that the NHL wouldn't be talking expansion with Las Vegas and Quebec City if they weren't planning on putting teams there.
I think it's funny that the NHL is saying that they're not necessarily expanding, and if they do, they're not necessarily adding more than one team. Well, they're either adding two or adding none. They aren't going to have a 31-team league. Is it possible they're just saying that so Seattle has time to get its act together and give them three options? Sure. But I think it's probably more likely the third city in the mix would be a relocation candidate rather than a potential expansion site.
When they first threw the idea of NHL expansion out there, it seemed like they were simply gauging interest to see if there was actually going to be any competition for the openings. Because professional sports leagues don't bring up expansion if they're not seriously considering it. (When's the last time someone talked about NFL or MLB expansion?)
You know the other 30 owners would love to get their hands on their share of that expansion fee, which is reported to be $500 million apiece. I'm sure when it comes time to include two more teams in the revenue sharing pie, they probably wouldn't be as eager to welcome Las Vegas and Quebec, though. However, with the increased revenue that those two cities would bring in, there'll be plenty more money to share.
On the surface, Las Vegas doesn't seem like much of a hockey town. But it's also the biggest city in the U.S. without a major league pro sports team. It's going to be mentioned in every expansion conversation until one of the leagues is bold enough to take the risk of putting a team there. One of the four will eventually. It's really just a matter of who does it first. The NHL has always seemed the most likely to take a chance on Vegas, and I'd be shocked if this didn't lead to a team there. Especially with that new arena being built on the Strip. Boxing and UNLV basketball are nice. But that arena's being built for one reason: the lure the NBA and/or NHL to Sin City.
Personally, I always thought the NBA would be the ones to make the Vegas move first. And they still might. If an NBA team doesn't relocate to Seattle within the next few years, you know the Sonics will return as an expansion team. That would bring the NBA to 31, and Las Vegas seems the likely candidate to join Seattle to be No. 32 and keep it at an even number. But if the NHL can get there first, would that change things?
Quebec City, on the other hand, is thinking about the NHL and the NHL only. They've wanted a new team ever since the Nordiques left and won the Stanley Cup in their first season as the Avalanche. That was 20 years ago! There's a whole generation of fans throughout French Canada who root for the Canadiens because they're the only team to root for. Montreal just played a sold out preseason game at the new arena in Quebec, and there were as many Canadiens jerseys in the stands as Nordiques jerseys, something that never would've been possible during that rivalry's heyday.
Winnipeg got its team back, and the NHL returning to Quebec seems the next logical place. The passion is clearly there. That fan base was able to support a team for a long time, and they'll embrace a new team just as quickly as they embraced the Nordiques. And the reason they left had nothing to do with any of that. They left because they played in a small market (that only speaks French) with a weak Canadian dollar, which made it difficult for them to compete. I'm not saying all of the issues that forced the original Nordiques to leave have been solved, but the NHL has since taken steps to protect these small-market Canadian teams.
Both cities are a risk--for completely different reasons. But they both seem like risks worth taking. Quebec City is chomping at the bit to be back in the NHL. And, while not as obvious as its desire to return to Winnipeg, I think the NHL would love to have Quebec City back, too. An eighth Canadian team, a second team in French Canada, a(nother) natural rival for Montreal. And it's not like they tried and failed in Quebec City. The situation in Quebec City was unique. They deserve a second chance.
As for Las Vegas, it's a matter of you don't know until you try it. Will they embrace the NHL, especially an expansion team that's likely not going to be any good, when there are so many other entertainment options in the city? Are there even hockey fans in Las Vegas to begin with? If the answer to both those questions is "Yes," imagine the potential!
Seattle's the wild card here. I'm pretty sure Seattle's priority is getting back its NBA team that never should've left, but the basketball team would need an arena, and it would be a lot easier to convince the taxpayers to finance an arena for two pro teams to play in. I think it's more likely Seattle will be used as a relocation target, though. If the NHL was thinking about Seattle for expansion, they'd be involved in these talks. They're not. The new teams will be in Las Vegas and Quebec City. That is, of course, if there are new teams at all (wink, wink).
No comments:
Post a Comment