Potential Atlanta NHL Expansion Team Thread

[RBH]

The Forsyth County Commission on Thursday voted to approve a zoning overlay that’s required to bring 100-acre, mixed-use megaproject The Gathering at South Forsyth to fruition. NHL Hall of Famer Bobby Orr was on hand as a “special guest” to show support for the proposal, which would include an NHL-ready, multipurpose arena as an anchor component, per its supporters.

The Gathering’s developer, Vernon Krause, a car dealership mogul and head of Krause Sports and Entertainment, called the commissioners’ zoning approval a “pivotal decision” and another “major step in realizing our visionary and transformative mixed-use project” in a statement following the vote.

Krause said his team remains committed to bringing an NHL expansion franchise to metro Atlanta as the marquee attraction of the ambitious new district, which is expected to cost in excess of $3 billion, with $1 billion of that funding the cornerstone arena that would also stage concerts and events.

Forsyth County megaproject passes 'pivotal' development hurdle

NHL legend supports The Gathering at South Forsyth as it edges closer to groundbreaking, per leadership

atlanta.urbanize.city

 

[aqib]

Bill Daly has said the CBA won’t effect any expansion process.

I know some posters thought the new CBA might include expansion money going forward but that’s not going to happen.

I can't speak for others. However, I didn't say it WOULD be included. I said that the union would try to put it on the table and getting expansion done before the CBA negotiations begin insure it will stay off the table.

 

[aqib]

For the Krause group, I think zoning approval was the final hurdle that needed to be crossed. If this is true, it means the onus is now on the league to take action.

Was it a "hurdle" or more of a formality. I didn't see anything that indicated that he wasn't going to get the necessary approvals.

Maybe, but not necessarily. I mean, the NHL went, what, four years from when the BoG awarded Vegas a franchise to adding Seattle? I don't think anyone would mind going another four years (if that's how long it takes) to even things up after adding Atlanta. Four years could be enough time to either A) wait for Arizona get its ducks in a row (if, in fact, there are any will ducks to get in a row in the desert), B) send a signal to Fertitta to either shit or get off the pot in Houston, C) find another dance partner to make it 36, both happen and the league wants to make it 36 or D) any combination of the above.

I've said a few times that its probably better for the teams to come in staggered because it increases the chances that they would be at least decent early on.

 

[dj4aces]

Was it a "hurdle" or more of a formality. I didn't see anything that indicated that he wasn't going to get the necessary approvals.

While the final stages of any development planning becomes mere formalities once certain things like funding, land deals, etc are all worked out, it's still a step in that process. Without zoning approval, there's no way it would happen until that approval is gained. So while it might've been a formality, or even a foregone conclusion that it was going to happen no matter what, it was also still a hurdle that needed to be crossed.

The only hurdle that's really left is the NHL BoG.

 

[aqib]

While the final stages of any development planning becomes mere formalities once certain things like funding, land deals, etc are all worked out, it's still a step in that process. Without zoning approval, there's no way it would happen until that approval is gained. So while it might've been a formality, or even a foregone conclusion that it was going to happen no matter what, it was also still a hurdle that needed to be crossed.

The only hurdle that's really left is the NHL BoG.

Yeah that's what I was wondering. Other than the competition from Carter's group was their any opposition to this project? Also, if he doesn't get the team will the rest of the development take place?

 

[LPHabsFan]

Considering what will happen within 8 - 10 years of its inception, I vote for them to be called the Atlanta Relocationists.

 

[dj4aces]

Yeah that's what I was wondering. Other than the competition from Carter's group was their any opposition to this project? Also, if he doesn't get the team will the rest of the development take place?

I honestly can't think of any groups who were opposed, but if there's anyone roaming around these boards who live there, they might better be able to answer that.

 

[nhlfan79]

I honestly can't think of any groups who were opposed, but if there's anyone roaming around these boards who live there, they might better be able to answer that.

I recall that at the big County Commission meeting last year on the night they voted to approve the MOU, there was token opposition from assorted individuals who live in Forsyth County who got up to speak before the vote. Typical NIMBY stuff, and nothing coordinated.

 

[archangel2]

Does anyone know the record for a pro league going back to one city and fail? Been to Atlanta a few times on business and I just do not think it is a hockey town

 

[ponder719]

Does anyone know the record for a pro league going back to one city and fail? Been to Atlanta a few times on business and I just do not think it is a hockey town

If you're looking at sports back to the founding, New York technically lost three pro teams before the turn of the 20th century. NL New York Mutuals were kicked out of the league, the New York Metropolitans folded when the American Association did, and the Players League New York Giants folded when the Players League did. Then the Giants and Dodgers evacuated New York, so that's 5, though the Yankees remained through that period.

But if you're looking at teams from the point at which the leagues stabilized, there are a number of cities that have had two teams fold or relocate, and get a third team back. In baseball, Milwaukee lost the Brewers and the Braves before the current Brewers, New York lost the Giants and Dodgers before getting the Mets as a second team, Washington lost two iterations of the Senators before the Nationals came in, there could be others.

In football, Los Angeles lost the Chargers to San Diego, then the Raiders and Rams, before regaining the Chargers and Rams, so there's 3 lost teams, Cleveland lost the Rams and Browns before the Browns "reactivated", Boston lost the Redskins and Yanks before the Patriots came into being, Baltimore lost two different teams named the Colts before they ended up with the Ravens, Dallas lost two different teams named the Texans, one of which became one of the aforementioned Baltimore Colts, the other is now the Kansas City Chiefs, there are others I'm sure.

In the NBA, which I don't know nearly as well, Chicago lost the Stags and the Zephyrs before the Bulls were created. San Diego lost two teams, but never gained back a third. Most other moves were one and done, but there are some franchises, like the Sacramento Kings, that have been itinerant as hell, and played in at least 3 or 4 cities.

NHL, I believe the answer is two, shared across three cities. Montreal lost the Wanderers (after 4 games!) and Maroons, though the Habs continued on, Quebec lost the Bulldogs and the Nordiques, and of course you know about Atlanta. Most other cases, starting from the foundation of the NHL proper, were single team losses later replaced: the Pittsburgh Pirates, Philadelphia Quakers, original Ottawa Senators, St. Louis Eagles, New York Americans, California Seals, Minnesota North Stars, original Winnipeg Jets, and Colorado Rockies were all replaced by new teams after the fact, though not as explicit replacements in most cases.

So, in short, if you take all of baseball history into account, it's probably NYC baseball; if you don't, it's probably Los Angeles football. Otherwise, you get a huge mess of "city lost two teams, now has a third."

 

[nhlfan79]

Does anyone know the record for a pro league going back to one city and fail? Been to Atlanta a few times on business and I just do not think it is a hockey town

The market of Atlanta has never "failed." The Flames owner was literally going bankrupt in the late 1970s for non-hockey-related (commercial real estate) reasons and received a record offer of double fair market value from Canada despite local buyers willing and ready to take the team over. The Thrashers ownership group intentionally and systematically dismantled the franchise because they affirmatively wanted them to relocate from the very moment they acquired the team in a package deal, just to eliminate market competition for the Hawks, the only team they really wanted. In both instances, there was zero that the general public could have done about it. All of this information is fully laid out across several thousand posts here.

Atlanta is (and will be) as good of a hockey market as any other non-traditional major American city. If Atlanta 3.0 is done right, it'll be on par with Dallas or Tampa or Washington, DC. It will blow away Nashville, Raleigh, and south Florida.

 

[aqib]

If you're looking at sports back to the founding, New York technically lost three pro teams before the turn of the 20th century. NL New York Mutuals were kicked out of the league, the New York Metropolitans folded when the American Association did, and the Players League New York Giants folded when the Players League did. Then the Giants and Dodgers evacuated New York, so that's 5, though the Yankees remained through that period.

But if you're looking at teams from the point at which the leagues stabilized, there are a number of cities that have had two teams fold or relocate, and get a third team back. In baseball, Milwaukee lost the Brewers and the Braves before the current Brewers, New York lost the Giants and Dodgers before getting the Mets as a second team, Washington lost two iterations of the Senators before the Nationals came in, there could be others.

In football, Los Angeles lost the Chargers to San Diego, then the Raiders and Rams, before regaining the Chargers and Rams, so there's 3 lost teams, Cleveland lost the Rams and Browns before the Browns "reactivated", Boston lost the Redskins and Yanks before the Patriots came into being, Baltimore lost two different teams named the Colts before they ended up with the Ravens, Dallas lost two different teams named the Texans, one of which became one of the aforementioned Baltimore Colts, the other is now the Kansas City Chiefs, there are others I'm sure.

In the NBA, which I don't know nearly as well, Chicago lost the Stags and the Zephyrs before the Bulls were created. San Diego lost two teams, but never gained back a third. Most other moves were one and done, but there are some franchises, like the Sacramento Kings, that have been itinerant as hell, and played in at least 3 or 4 cities.

NHL, I believe the answer is two, shared across three cities. Montreal lost the Wanderers (after 4 games!) and Maroons, though the Habs continued on, Quebec lost the Bulldogs and the Nordiques, and of course you know about Atlanta. Most other cases, starting from the foundation of the NHL proper, were single team losses later replaced: the Pittsburgh Pirates, Philadelphia Quakers, original Ottawa Senators, St. Louis Eagles, New York Americans, California Seals, Minnesota North Stars, original Winnipeg Jets, and Colorado Rockies were all replaced by new teams after the fact, though not as explicit replacements in most cases.

So, in short, if you take all of baseball history into account, it's probably NYC baseball; if you don't, it's probably Los Angeles football. Otherwise, you get a huge mess of "city lost two teams, now has a third."

Here are the lists and where I draw the line:

MLB: List of defunct and relocated Major League Baseball teams - Wikipedia

I draw the line between the 1902 relocation of the Baltimore Orioles to become the Yankees and the Braves. So its NY and Washington.

NHL: List of defunct and relocated National Hockey League teams - Wikipedia

I draw the line at WWII. In which case its only Atlanta

NBA: Timeline of the National Basketball Association - Wikipedia

I draw the line after the 1955 season which was after the BAA/NBL merger and they did 2 contractions. In which case its San Diego and St Louis (if you count the Spirits of St Louis of the ABA). You could go back to 1951 and add Baltimore.

NFL: NFL franchise moves and mergers - Wikipedia

This one is trickier. I'd say the AFL/NFL merger is where the line should be drawn. That's the point where you have one league as opposed to multiple leagues where you would have 2 teams in the same market thats not NY or LA. Like Cleveland, Dallas, etc were never going to be 2 team cities. So it would be LA (Raiders and Rams), St Louis (Cardinals and Rams), and Oakland (Raiders and Raiders).

Out of all of them its only Washington MLB and now potentially Atlanta NHL got a third chance.

 

[Salsero1]

The market of Atlanta has never "failed." The Flames owner was literally going bankrupt in the late 1970s for non-hockey-related (commercial real estate) reasons and received a record offer of double fair market value from Canada despite local buyers willing and ready to take the team over. The Thrashers ownership group intentionally and systematically dismantled the franchise because they affirmatively wanted them to relocate from the very moment they acquired the team in a package deal, just to eliminate market competition for the Hawks, the only team they really wanted. In both instances, there was zero that the general public could have done about it. All of this information is fully laid out across several thousand posts here.

Atlanta is (and will be) as good of a hockey market as any other non-traditional major American city. If Atlanta 3.0 is done right, it'll be on par with Dallas or Tampa or Washington, DC. It will blow away Nashville, Raleigh, and south Florida.

Have you not yet learned that the difference between a market "failing" and being "screwed over" is the latitude? You're wasting your breath on people who aren't interested in an actual discussion and just want to indulge their prejudice. Honestly just sit back and wait for Atlanta 3.0 to ruin their days.

 

[GreenHornet]

Have you not yet learned that the difference between a market "failing" and being "screwed over" is the latitude? You're wasting your breath on people who aren't interested in an actual discussion and just want to indulge their prejudice. Honestly just sit back and wait for Atlanta 3.0 to ruin their days.

I already have a specific YouTube clip in mind when/if it happens. In the meantime, allow me to respond to your take with another one.