Expansion to 36, which city is number 36?

[GreenHornet]

Yes that's accurate. He needed he needed it to prop up his fraud.

Its amazing how many owners the NHL has had go to prison. Off the top of my head you have McNall, Spano, Kumar, Del Biaggio, and Rigas.

Going further back, Nelson Skalbania.

 

[aqib]

Milwaukee - I believe it's far enough away that the 50 mile rule doesn't apply. There's also 5.8 million people in Wisconsin itself, with metro Milwaukee being 1.4 mil. It's northern enough they certainly get snow, for what it's worth.

There is something of an issue that existing hockey fans are generally already Blackhawks fans.

But yet again - the issue is ownership. I'm not certain how great the Bucks arena is for hockey - Wiki lists it as 15k-ish for hockey, but it's held a pre-season game and the one picture looks ok if not ideal. But Bucks ownership is a whole consortium of people - which makes me think they don't have the money to invest a billion-plus on an NHL franchise.

3 of the owners run hedge funds. The 4th is Jimmy Haslam who owns the Cleveland Browns and Columbus Crew and is in the process of building a new stadium where he has already offered to invest $1.2 billion. So ownership isn't an issue.

 

[ponder719]

The problem with Wisconsin is that the only population center large enough to support a team sits within the Blackhawks market and has an NBA team. If a city the size of Milwaukee sat where Madison is, there would definitely be a good spot for an NHL team in the state.

Milwaukee is 92 miles from Chicago on Google Maps (probably closer city limit to city limit), but the territorial rights consider city limits, not anything broader. You could probably finesse things by having a "Milwaukee" team be the "Wisconsin Whatevers" and have the team not be given to Milwaukee, officially, but to Waukesha or Menomonee Falls or w/e, something where the city/town limits are outside the overlap space (Waukesha has the additional advantage of being slightly closer to Madison as well), thereby skirting the problem entirely, if the Blackhawks aren't willing to just let the Milwaukee franchise just sign away the overlap space between their circles (again, assuming overlap being an issue at all; this is all still conjecture.)

 

[TheLegend]

Forbes says he's worth over $10B which is way more than Ryan Smith. Again its a hypothetical.

Hardly enough to build a new arena on his own..... without any tax breaks.

 

[Yukon Joe]

3 of the owners run hedge funds. The 4th is Jimmy Haslam who owns the Cleveland Browns and Columbus Crew and is in the process of building a new stadium where he has already offered to invest $1.2 billion. So ownership isn't an issue.

OK so interesting.

But the thing is - the Bucks and a hypothetical Milwaukee NHL franchise would have to have common ownership - so you'd need to get all the owners (or the large majority of owners) to agree to also buy an NHL franchise.

 

[rojac]

Going further back, Nelson Skalbania.

And Harold Ballard before that.

 

[aqib]

OK so interesting.

But the thing is - the Bucks and a hypothetical Milwaukee NHL franchise would have to have common ownership - so you'd need to get all the owners (or the large majority of owners) to agree to also buy an NHL franchise.

The one potential hang up is the Jimmy Haslam who owns 25% of the Bucks is the brother of Bill Haslam who is in the process of buying the Predators (he is buying in stages and will be majority owner in 2025). I don't know if there is a rule about that. Either way the Bucks owners CAN afford it IF they want to. Now I don't if they want to or think its a good idea.

 

[aqib]

Hardly enough to build a new arena on his own..... without any tax breaks.

I didn't say build a new arena. We know there won't be a new arena for over a decade until Footprint's lease comes up. I was just saying that NHL returning to AZ would require him to be wanting a team and be willing to renovate Footprint to make it hockey suitable.

 

[Tawnos]

Milwaukee is 92 miles from Chicago on Google Maps (probably closer city limit to city limit), but the territorial rights consider city limits, not anything broader. You could probably finesse things by having a "Milwaukee" team be the "Wisconsin Whatevers" and have the team not be given to Milwaukee, officially, but to Waukesha or Menomonee Falls or w/e, something where the city/town limits are outside the overlap space (Waukesha has the additional advantage of being slightly closer to Madison as well), thereby skirting the problem entirely, if the Blackhawks aren't willing to just let the Milwaukee franchise just sign away the overlap space between their circles (again, assuming overlap being an issue at all; this is all still conjecture.)

City limits are what matters, and there is fairly significant overlap. 50 miles from Chicago's northern border stretches pretty far north. You're right that we don't know for sure if overlap matters, though I personally think the language of "no territory within another team's home territory without their consent" is pretty clear. It doesn't matter where you "give" the team to... it only really matters what city the arena is in.

The question to me is how much the Blackhawks value the intrusion into their fanbase. We generally think that the Leafs and Sabres would want a lot for someone in their territory. For some reason, I feel like the Blackhawks wouldn't guard it so jealously.

 

[Tawnos]

Milwaukee - I believe it's far enough away that the 50 mile rule doesn't apply. There's also 5.8 million people in Wisconsin itself, with metro Milwaukee being 1.4 mil. It's northern enough they certainly get snow, for what it's worth.

There is something of an issue that existing hockey fans are generally already Blackhawks fans.

Hockey has a deeply embedded history in Wisconsin and that would be its X factor. The Milwaukee TV market is a similar size to Columbus. It's kind of a small market but an NHL team there seems like it'd still do pretty well.

 

[ponder719]

It doesn't matter where you "give" the team to... it only really matters what city the arena is in.

Right, but this is the entire point I was making. If the NHL arena isn't in Milwaukee, the city limits of Milwaukee no longer matter; the limits of that other, smaller (presumably further away) place are what matters. I expect you wouldn't have to go too much further north and west from the city limits of Milwaukee to find somewhere whose 50 mile radius doesn't overlap Chicago's at all, though again I think we're both in agreement that the Blackhawks would see reason more readily (or, rather, more cheaply) than the Leafs and Sabres, if it was beneficial to put the team in Milwaukee proper.

Either way, I think Wisconsin would be more in the discussion for team 37-40 than for team 36, so the league has plenty of time to figure it all out (or for Madison to become a more realistic possibility and take the entire issue off the table.)

 

[Yukon Joe]

And Harold Ballard before that.

I thought Harold Ballard was an asshole, but not a crook?

 

[Golden_Jet]

I thought Harold Ballard was an asshole, but not a crook?

In 1972 Ballard was convicted on charges of theft and fraud related to of Maple Leafs Gardens funds, and was sentenced to 9 years in prison, ultimately serving one year in jail.

 

[TheLegend]

I didn't say build a new arena. We know there won't be a new arena for over a decade until Footprint's lease comes up. I was just saying that NHL returning to AZ would require him to be wanting a team and be willing to renovate Footprint to make it hockey suitable.

Yes…. But your being too simplistic about it.

Footprint can’t be adapted that easily to accommodate hockey. Last thing I read about it would require blowing out the entire west side of the building, (can’t extend the ends due to close proximity to two city streets and going east goes into Chase Field)) which would mean taking out a lot of structures currently next to it. Primarily the arena’s parking garage.

It would be more cost effective to build a new arena and the current appetite for that in Arizona in regards to any public assistance is non-existent.

 

[aqib]

Yes…. But your being too simplistic about it.

Footprint can’t be adapted that easily to accommodate hockey. Last thing I read about it would require blowing out the entire west side of the building, (can’t extend the ends due to close proximity to two city streets and going east goes into Chase Field)) which would mean taking out a lot of structures currently next to it. Primarily the arena’s parking garage.

It would be more cost effective to build a new arena and the current appetite for that in Arizona in regards to any public assistance is non-existent.

Ok so let's say blowing out the West Side will cost $200 million or whatever. My point is simply that if we assume Atlanta is #33 this is the only path for AZ to to #34

 

[GreenHornet]

I thought Harold Ballard was an asshole, but not a crook?

 

[TheLegend]

Ok so let's say blowing out the West Side will cost $200 million or whatever. My point is simply that if we assume Atlanta is #33 this is the only path for AZ to to #34

Try closer to $500 million depending upon whether it’s even structurally feisable or not.

Plus….. There’s going to be no hurry on this.

 

[aqib]

Try closer to $500 million depending upon whether it’s even structurally feisable or not.

Plus….. There’s going to be no hurry on this.

Of course there is no hurry on this. At the same time, the NHL has a much different approach to expansion than other leagues do. In the other 3 leagues only the Browns and Hornets replacements were done without an open process where any city or group could apply. The Coyotes were staying until they were going to Utah. The land auction was happening until it wasn't. Similarly we didn't know they were 10 minutes from going to Winnipeg in 2010 until a year later.

Thats a long way of saying that we have no idea what's going on behind the scenes. That's why we've all been wrong.

 

[ponder719]

Thats a long way of saying that we have no idea what's going on behind the scenes. That's why we've all been wrong.

Yep. As with everything with this league, all we see are bread crumbs until they bring out a plate of chicken cutlets.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Of course there is no hurry on this. At the same time, the NHL has a much different approach to expansion than other leagues do. In the other 3 leagues only the Browns and Hornets replacements were done without an open process where any city or group could apply. The Coyotes were staying until they were going to Utah. The land auction was happening until it wasn't. Similarly we didn't know they were 10 minutes from going to Winnipeg in 2010 until a year later.

Thats a long way of saying that we have no idea what's going on behind the scenes. That's why we've all been wrong.

I'd say that a few mitigating factors boiled over simultaneously related to the arena/land situation. First, Marty Walsh as head of the NHLPA raised more of a gripe than his predecessor over what the players viewed as a subpar playing situation (Mullett seemed nice, but it was way too small and the gimmick of it being more cozy or intimate wore off) being dragged out and the lack of revenues hurting overall player share of hockey-related revenue. At the same time, the owners seem to have utterly soured on Meruelo and had lost faith in him being a meaningfully competent part of the league.

Bettman has a long history of being able to soothe ownership resentment and assuaging (or ignoring) player discontent, but them coupled together made for a perfect storm. And for that to continue for even a best-case multi-year period was too much for the league to keep backing Arizona.

Winnipeg was more a matter of the Thrashers owners not wanting in anymore and TNSE being the only willing buyer at the time. To Bettman's credit, he spent the last decade cultivating ownership interest to the point that huge amounts of expansion cash has been paid "three" times and TNSE looks like they got a bargain basement deal while other interested Canadian parties have gone radio silent as the minimum asking price for an NHL franchise reached and soared past half a billion dollars.

 

[voyageur]

I'd say that a few mitigating factors boiled over simultaneously related to the arena/land situation. First, Marty Walsh as head of the NHLPA raised more of a gripe than his predecessor over what the players viewed as a subpar playing situation (Mullett seemed nice, but it was way too small and the gimmick of it being more cozy or intimate wore off) being dragged out and the lack of revenues hurting overall player share of hockey-related revenue. At the same time, the owners seem to have utterly soured on Meruelo and had lost faith in him being a meaningfully competent part of the league.

Bettman has a long history of being able to soothe ownership resentment and assuaging (or ignoring) player discontent, but them coupled together made for a perfect storm. And for that to continue for even a best-case multi-year period was too much for the league to keep backing Arizona.

Winnipeg was more a matter of the Thrashers owners not wanting in anymore and TNSE being the only willing buyer at the time. To Bettman's credit, he spent the last decade cultivating ownership interest to the point that huge amounts of expansion cash has been paid "three" times and TNSE looks like they got a bargain basement deal while other interested Canadian parties have gone radio silent as the minimum asking price for an NHL franchise reached and soared past half a billion dollars.

I think it was a perfect storm that got Winnipeg into the league. The NHL was heading for a recession. The South division that had Washington winning, but the other 4 teams struggling to make money wasn't working. Bettman had promised Illitch a ticket to the East, as he saw his franchise losing its allure with the old guard moving on, and the young crop not being as competitive, and travel being a significant burden on the team and the team's viewership.

Chipman has a model that made the league money in the first years, even with the smallest rink, and to this day the Jets revenues are similar to St. Louis, Nashville, Anaheim, Buffalo, even with fewer sellouts.

Since then expansion has been a one market at a time process. Carefully chosen markets with stable ownership, who had corporate powerhouses to add to the league brand. Utah was just a question of making money in a market vs. losing, to increase the league revenues and start to grow the league financially post Covid. NHLPA definitely had a say there.

I think Atlanta is guaranteed to get in. As 33. In the next few years.

34 might not come until the end of the decade. I don't think the NHL is all that interested in doing business with Fertitta, but still bullish on Houston, so unless he finds a partner who is interested in the NHL, they will wait until the franchise is a sure thing, because he could turn Houston into another Atlanta without a good front office and investment to make the team viable. 35 and 36 I don't see until the next decade. And who knows what the landscape looks like then. Bettman won't be commissioner that's a good bet.

As the value of franchises go up and revenues keep pouring in, I think all markets are safe and stable for the foreseeable future. I do think San Jose, Anaheim, Winnipeg and Buffalo could all have some troubles. Columbus having a publicly owned rink could face some difficulties too, but I think there's enough tradition to keep all these franchise afloat.

 

[voyageur]

Kind of depends on alignment. Is it 4 divisions of 9 or 6 divisions of 6?

PST
Van, Sea, SJ, LA, Ana, LV
MST
Edm, Cal, AZ, Col, Uta
CST
Dal, Nas, Chi, Win, Min, StL, Hou

So, unless the NHL does a North/South alignment where one of STL/Win play with the MST teams, it becomes a pain to do one with Van, Edm, Cal, Sea, Uta, Col and then SJ, Ana, LA, LV, AZ and likely STL if they don't add another team in the PST/MST time zone, which is pretty much limited to SD, Portland, Sacramento most likely.

I think if you get to 34 it's

NW (two sets of built in rivalries, Portland here would work for future expansion)
Sea
Van
Cgy
Edm

PAC (I think the NHL wants Vegas & L.A together)
S.J
L.A.
Anaheim
Vegas

MIDWEST
Colorado
UT
Dallas
Hou/KC/AZ

CENTRAL
Chicago
Minny
Wpg
St. Louis
Nashville

In the East

NORTHEAST
Detroit
Toronto
Montreal
Ottawa
Buffalo

METRO
Boston
Rangers
Isles
Devils

AMERICAN
Philly
Pitt
Columbus
Washington

SOUTH
Carolina
Atlanta
Tampa
Florida

I think everybody hates the current playoff format, so I could see the move to division winners with home ice, and wild cards being wide open. NFL style.

 

[rojac]

I think if you get to 34 it's

NW (two sets of built in rivalries, Portland here would work for future expansion)
Sea
Van
Cgy
Edm

PAC (I think the NHL wants Vegas & L.A together)
S.J
L.A.
Anaheim
Vegas

MIDWEST
Colorado
UT
Dallas
Hou/KC/AZ

CENTRAL
Chicago
Minny
Wpg
St. Louis
Nashville

In the East

NORTHEAST
Detroit
Toronto
Montreal
Ottawa
Buffalo

METRO
Boston
Rangers
Isles
Devils

AMERICAN
Philly
Pitt
Columbus
Washington

SOUTH
Carolina
Atlanta
Tampa
Florida

I think everybody hates the current playoff format, so I could see the move to division winners with home ice, and wild cards being wide open. NFL style.

Don't small divisions just increase the likelihood of mediocre teams making the playoffs over better ones?

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

I know this about a 36 team NHL but I want to see a 40-44 team NHL with Quebec city,Houston,San Diego, Milwaukee,Atlanta,Cleveland and/or Cincinnati,Portland and KC amongst others Halifax,Hamilton,Hartford and...

 

[Sgt Schultz]

Don't small divisions just increase the likelihood of mediocre teams making the playoffs over better ones?

I'd say so.

Given how we got to 8 team divisions today, I think the odds of 4 team divisions are about nil. If they wind up with 34 teams, I think it would be more like 5 and 6 team divisions (2 x 6, 1 x 5 in each conference).

Even then, there would probably be some support for just adding a team to two of the existing divisions. I think that alignment would dilute the schedule (take away from divisional games), but the NHL has never asked me what they should do.