cowboy82nd
Registered User
Atlanta will get another expansion team in 2027, move to Quebec in 2035
So, that means that Atlanta would be responsible for three Canadian franchises'?
Atlanta will get another expansion team in 2027, move to Quebec in 2035
Not sure they are SO craving. They want a team and did what was asked of them. They built the place. They found ownership. Sometimes the excuse is they are too vocal, not enough vocal. They did a few invasions to empty arenas. They host preseason games with 10 000 fans paying to see B teams, exactly like Mtl without a proper stadium and no fan support for baseball is doing.
The Boston owner sure seems to hate Quebec.
Heck even the Quebec pee-wee tournament is world famous; 120 teams 200 000 + paying attendance.
Adult ticket is 8$, same as Panthers ticket on Stub Hub...
What I meant by "SO craving", as you stated, Nordiques fans did invade a few empty arenas (I remember in Long Island). They seem a bit desperate to have a team no matter what it takes. I think it gives leverage to the NHL instead of Québec. I remember when on the show l'Antichambre, they stated that Québec might some day get an expansion team, (which was before Las Vegas got theirs) and Bergie almost crying when he heard the word "expansion", which is starting from the bottom and taking years to grow a competent team..... but the new expansion rules changed that drastically. We'll see how... I was gonna say Houston... lol ... Seattle will do. - I'm a Habs fan first, but I love the sport. Québec would be a nice addition. I only started watching hockey in 96-97, Habs on Francophone television, so I never got to see much of the Nordiques. Anyway. my 2 cents.
Lame .right. When 16 of 21 teams made playoffs. You could be under .500 and make playoffs.You don't think teams in the west before Vegas joined had an easier time to make the playoffs. The league is highly competitive you can't have 14 teams with greater odds to make the playoffs then the other 16 teams. Won't even get into would Quebec even want to pay over a billion canadian for a team instead of waiting for a team to relocate.Sounds like lame excuse.
Older folks will remember late 80s Patrick division had 1 more team for quite a few years.
Really older folks will remmber 1974 where California was with Toronto and LA with Mtl!
Nhl played with 2 more teams in a conference for many years. Quickly checked 94-95, 2013-2017. If having even 2 more teams on 1 side was such a problem they would have fixed it faster.
Thing is Florida needs to play Mtl in the East for $$$ reasons.
Quebec is given opportunities to show they want a team every year during the preseason and they draw under 10k most of the time.
Lame .right. When 16 of 21 teams made playoffs. You could be under .500 and make playoffs.You don't think teams in the west before Vegas joined had an easier time to make the playoffs. The league is highly competitive you can't have 14 teams with greater odds to make the playoffs then the other 16 teams. Won't even get into would Quebec even want to pay over a billion canadian for a team instead of waiting for a team to relocate.
Exactly, this league is carried on the back of the Canadian TV market (Roger's deal) already.Expansion is not about ticket sales.
Expansion is about improving the TV contract, which is where the real money is. Adding a Canadian city does absolutely nothing to improve the NHL's TV contract. Continuing to expand hockey's popularity in the US does.
Molson will do anything he can to prevent Quebec of having a NHL club. I don’t believe a word of what he says when he is saying that he would welcome them back.
And I am not buying the “the rivalry with MTL would be great for business therefore Molson would be for a club in QC”. No business wants to loose at least 20% of its market. Ever.
QC has been tried and failed.Seattle may have the numbers but from what I've heard and read the collective market simply cannot stack up to Quebec when it comes to passion for the game, knowledge of the sport, willingness to invest in the team, etc. Any businessperson worth their salt would do the math and choose Quebec City.
This is an honest question. And I'm not a super angry Canadian who thinks the NHL hates us. I'm just honestly confused because I thought they had an NHL ready arena and some super rich dude that was willing to pony up. Was it simply the East vs West thing needing to be worked out? Or were there other reasons. The NHL has shown it's willingness to go back to former Canadian markets so I have to believe that isn't it. As a Habs fan I kinda hoped it would happen because that was a damn good rivalry back in the day.
The market that is probably, what, 75% tapped out already compared to a brand new virgin opportunity?Seattle has the larger population but how many of them are actually going to spend money on hockey? How many of them are actually going to learn the sport and develop a fanbase? And how would this spending compare with QC? As far as I'm concerned I'd chose the market that knows and loves hockey any day of the week.
The majority of Americans don't know what Winnipeg is.
QC failed using an older financial system. Given new realities like the cap things may be different this time.QC has been tried and failed.
seattle could be a huge untapped market just waiting for the right opportunity. More population=bigger market potentially, therefore it's a good decision for any business person.
What guarantee would you give that it won't fail again?A WHL team is fine but does it come anywhere near what an NHL franchise can do? Quebec City also has a rich hockey history with teams at almost every level (CHL, AHL, NHL, etc) Given a choice between the two markets I'd place an NHL team in QC any day of the week.
As opposed to a market of people who know and love hockey and seem willing to spend a lot of money on it? As I've said before, I'd prefer a market that's good to go any day of the week.QC has been tried and failed.
seattle could be a huge untapped market just waiting for the right opportunity. More population=bigger market potentially, therefore it's a good decision for any business person.
No. If I were running a business I'd go where the money, knowledge, passion and vision is. I'd also go where the arena is already built to standards.What guarantee would you give that it won't fail again?
Your Canadian bias aside, can you not see why such a rich, untapped market would be preferable?
It's a big part of the NHL's marketThe majority wouldn’t know ottawa is the capital.
Is that really the standard we are looking for?
The corporate money is in Seattle.No. If I were running a business I'd go where the money, knowledge, passion and vision is. I'd also go where the arena is already built to standards.
BTW - A couple of people have used the word "fail" when describing QC's previous NHL incarnation. Any effective business person has to learn the value of failure in order to be successful. Learning from mistakes is how we grow and mature and giving a market a second chance is a sign of intelligence and maturity. From what I have learned and read QC is ready for their second chance and it's too bad the league is too obsessed with unproven markets to live that out.
Good luck to Seattle but QC is the real money maker. It will be interesting to watch and see how the Totems (The name I hope will win out) do.The corporate money is in Seattle.
The bigger chance to expand the NHL is seattle.
Seattle = bigger opportunity. Simple as.