NHL Expansion back on agenda?

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
28,683
11,070
Maybe someday.

Not sure if any team coming back to Arizona would carry the Coyotes name. Think the mood here seems to be to go in a different direction even with the Kachina logo being as popular as it was.
Of the trio of large markets I think Houston most likely of all to go with the established historical name of Aeros. Coyotes just no success to the name and countless bad owners. Might want to start fresh. Atlanta, kind of the same though not as bad off ice or having it drag out as long as in AZ.

But, getting a trademark is hard for anything that is a generic type name like Knights. I mean look at the name options Utah and Seattle put out.
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
192,420
43,141
My guess is that Houston doesn’t go to the Aeros. They will want something fresh appealing to new fans.
 

GreenHornet

Registered User
Mar 3, 2011
614
462
Norcross, GA
I'll accept Phoenix or Firebird, nothing else.
hqdefault.jpg
 

TheLegend

"Just say it 3 times..."
Aug 30, 2009
38,222
31,370
Buzzing BoH
Of the trio of large markets I think Houston most likely of all to go with the established historical name of Aeros. Coyotes just no success to the name and countless bad owners. Might want to start fresh. Atlanta, kind of the same though not as bad off ice or having it drag out as long as in AZ.

But, getting a trademark is hard for anything that is a generic type name like Knights. I mean look at the name options Utah and Seattle put out.

I'm under the impression Utah has theirs worked out..... but it's taken a lot of negotiating ($$$$$$$$$)
 

ponder719

M-M-M-Matvei and the Jett
Jul 2, 2013
7,513
10,442
Philadelphia, PA
Ironically..... Firebirds has been suggested as a replacement in Phoenix..

NHL could have a best of five series and make the cities play for it.

One should be the Firebirds, the other should be the Flame Birds.

(Mostly joking, but I absolutely favor teams not worrying about rivals encroaching on their nominative territory, like the Red Sox and White Sox. I will go to my grave insisting that the Stars should have been forced to leave the North Stars name in Minnesota, and take the name Lone Stars in Dallas.)
 

dj4aces

An Intricate Piece of Infinity
Dec 17, 2007
6,525
1,613
Duluth, GA
I think the idea that they're expanding again so quickly is insane. Bush league behavior
Well, think about it like this.

First, as others have pointed out before, the NHL has only 25 US teams. They wanna bring that number up. MLB has 29, NBA has 29, and NFL has 32. I imagine the NHL wantjs to bring that number up to at least 28 (assuming QC gets team #36).

Second, look at the other three leagues, and you'll see one thing they all have in common: At least one franchise in each. Meanwhile, the NHL is missing in three of them. One could easily argue that is "bush league" type stuff.

I'm not saying you're wrong, because your opinion isn't necessarily invalid. But if the league doesn't expand to markets where there's interest, with at least one of these markets having interested owners willing to spend what it takes to get one, why wouldn't you consider expanding? Especially to these vacant markets...
 

jetsmooseice

Up Yours Robison
Feb 20, 2020
1,910
2,433
100% agree with this.

5. Houston - 7.5 million
6. Atlanta - 6.3 million
10. Phoenix - 5.1 million

That's 18.9 million people in three markets without a local team.

At least an effort was made in Atlanta and Phoenix. But in some respects it's wild that the NHL has never tried Houston even in spite of the relative success that the Stars have enjoyed in that region.
 

voyageur

Hockey fanatic
Jul 10, 2011
10,235
9,234
100% agree with this.

5. Houston - 7.5 million
6. Atlanta - 6.3 million
10. Phoenix - 5.1 million

That's 18.9 million people in three markets without a local team.
Or 3 sports teams, plus MLS, WNBA?, college sports. PGA and NASCAR events. Harder sells, that need some wins to succeed financially.
 
  • Like
Reactions: varsaku

varsaku

Registered User
Feb 14, 2014
2,662
897
United States
Being the only major sport missing 3 of the top 10 American markets is also insane.

100% agree with this.

5. Houston - 7.5 million
6. Atlanta - 6.3 million
10. Phoenix - 5.1 million

That's 18.9 million people in three markets without a local team.
While putting a team there makes sense considering their size of those cities but the major thing always being looked over in this thread is the amount of competition in those markets. As @voyageur mentioned, there is a ton of other sports and college sports higher in the specking order than hockey. You basically have to be winning to draw interest otherwise people will just go to another sport to spend their money on. The panthers are probably the best recent example. They struggled to fill games but the moment they started winning, all their problems went away.
 

No Fun Shogun

34-38-61-10-13-15
May 1, 2011
57,458
15,228
Illinois
The thing is that Atlanta Phoenix is inherently confusing and is an awful seach optimization name. If you google that, you're going to get Hawks vs Suns stats, flight info, city comparisons, etc., etc. clogging the space with a potential team name.

Just go with Atlanta Firebirds, imho. Start fresh while still harkening back to your hockey legacy.

Oh, and I just searched, Atlanta Pheonix is also already a women's football team apparently.
 

dj4aces

An Intricate Piece of Infinity
Dec 17, 2007
6,525
1,613
Duluth, GA
At least an effort was made in Atlanta and Phoenix. But in some respects it's wild that the NHL has never tried Houston even in spite of the relative success that the Stars have enjoyed in that region.
Don't get me wrong... definitely crazy that Houston hasn't had a shot at the NHL yet. But as for Atlanta and Phoenix... can one really say an effort was made? Perhaps easier to argue that with the Flames than with the Thrashers, at the very least.
 
  • Love
Reactions: AtlantaWhaler

jetsmooseice

Up Yours Robison
Feb 20, 2020
1,910
2,433
Don't get me wrong... definitely crazy that Houston hasn't had a shot at the NHL yet. But as for Atlanta and Phoenix... can one really say an effort was made? Perhaps easier to argue that with the Flames than with the Thrashers, at the very least.

Well, I don't think anyone can say that an effort wasn't made. I mean, Atlanta has had two kicks at the can and Phoenix had nearly 30 years to get it off the ground.

All I'm saying is that maybe Houston deserves its first opportunity before Phoenix gets its second or Atlanta its third chance.
 

tucker3434

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 7, 2007
20,269
11,316
Atlanta, GA
While putting a team there makes sense considering their size of those cities but the major thing always being looked over in this thread is the amount of competition in those markets. As @voyageur mentioned, there is a ton of other sports and college sports higher in the specking order than hockey. You basically have to be winning to draw interest otherwise people will just go to another sport to spend their money on. The panthers are probably the best recent example. They struggled to fill games but the moment they started winning, all their problems went away.

When you have a 5m+ market and only an ~18k arena to fill, there should be enough diversity to support all of it. Plenty of us are big CFB fans here but many of us also find it difficult to be season ticket holders because our teams aren’t here. I gave up my season tickets years ago.

Obviously, the teams will still struggle if they spend an extended period of time as a lottery team. But that’s also true of most markets. You compare last years standings to last years attendance figures and it tells a pretty predictable story. I wouldn’t expect these markets to be any different from anywhere else (aside from the TOR, NYR, MTL, etc.’s)
 
  • Like
Reactions: IceKitties

ponder719

M-M-M-Matvei and the Jett
Jul 2, 2013
7,513
10,442
Philadelphia, PA
All I'm saying is that maybe Houston deserves its first opportunity before Phoenix gets its second or Atlanta its third chance.

What a market does or does not deserve is entirely irrelevant. What is relevant is a) does an ownership group exist, willing to pay the going rate for an expansion team; b) do they have an NHL-worthy arena, or a concrete plan that will result in an NHL-worthy arena by puck drop, and c) does the market have enough people and corporations in it to sustain the team in good times and bad. Houston, Atlanta, and Phoenix all have c, so that doesn't matter in terms of who goes first. What matters is which of those cities gets a and b sorted first. Atlanta looks to have solid leads on a and b, Phoenix and Houston both have problems with a, so Atlanta will very likely go first, when the NHL decides to expand.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad