Report: NHL Expanding league, Adding 4 Teams by 2017

[rams80]

If that's your argument, then why would Milwaukee EVER be considered for anything but a state fair. LMAO.

People are still rushing to the casino's every day. I personally see millions of dollars being spent every day sir.

Yeah, but more of its from the comfort of your own home. Look at actual analyses about Vegas' economy right now and see if you can still say its healthy with a straight face.

[illwauk]

I haven't seen any reports by tsn, espn, yahoo or crazy larry about Milwaukee even being considered for an expansion team.

I don't smoke - I'm drug free sir...

Just because you have a great college system doesn't mean you should have pro teams - look at the state of Florida. Yikes.

So you can name 10 cities the NHL would expand or move to before Milwaukee? Even if I were to reach for places like Portland or Halifax, I'm tapped out after 7 or 8. And even then there's arguments to be made that Milwaukee would be a better market than at least half of those cities.

FYI, Florida doesn't have a great college system in hockey... or any college system in hockey. Unless you meant football. And then you'd have to ignore the fact that Milwaukee isn't in SEC country, which means it's not allergic to every sport that isn't college football or doesn't involve turbocharged engines.

And again, the reason you don't hear about Milwaukee is because the Bucks are still around. But until there are shovels in the ground and the Bucks sign a lease for the new building, the possibility of them leaving is very real. Until that happens, Milwaukee is relevant to this discussion.

If that's your argument, then why would Milwaukee EVER be considered for anything but a state fair. LMAO.

Apart from the fact that Milwaukee (unlike St. Louis) is actually a growing city; and (unlike Las Vegas) actually has a centralized population in which 90% of the metro area isn't a suburb?

[FiddySicks]

Hell, a trip from Northern California can take like 9-10 hours to Vegas, so that's not exactly close either. On top of that they is pretty much one highway from the LA area to Vegas, and that can get pretty crowded, so is it really worth it to make the trek for one game, unless it's part of a longer vacation? Also, even taking in OITGDNHL, no way would they allow any slot machines/tables in an arena.

It's 8 hours from Detroit to St. Louis and people make that drive all the time for the rivalry. I am comparing going from STL to DET for a weekend for one game to a possible trip to Las Vegas. lmao... people would gladly plan a vacation to Las Vegas for a weekend trip to see an NHL game, plus gambling and prolly a show or two. Just saying...

I'm not from Vegas...I'm from STL, just saying, think about the revenue this could generate. Would you rather travel from Minnesota to see the Devils for a weekend or go to Vegas. Nuff Said....

OK, that extra 3 hours can really take the trip from doable in a day to actively contemplating flying in. Add to that, you are driving through a ing mountain range in the middle of winter. You know, the the Donner Party got caught in. It's one thing to drive across the well-developed 4 lane flatlands to Detroit, another to cross the sparsely inhabited Rockies.

As for Vegas itself, the market's economy is about as diversified as Detroit, and was absolutely immolated by the 2008 collapse. These investors of which you speak are fictional constructs pulled out of your fevered dreams.

I think you have your geography a bit mixed up there, as the Donner party got caught in the Sierras up near Truckee, but your point still remains.

And trust me. I grew up in a Nevada casino town and have seen many of these "Lets just get people liquored up so they'll toss their hard earned cash at us" business plans absolutely sink entire towns. It's high risk, low reward kinda stuff at best.

[worcat]

Casino life is still very healthy, don't worry about that. Few win and Many Many Many lose. I see it every day!

Vegas will have one owner but would also have every casino have their hands in buying packages for tickets for guests. I like to think of it like an Octopus as the bank and each tentacle as a casino. Everyone wants their hand in on the goods.

It's 4am, I'm not going to try to find 10 teams better deserving, but milwaukee is not one that has been reported as one considered, that's all i said.

In no order; I'd love Quebec, Hamilton, Hartford, Seattle, Las Vegas, Houston, Kansas City, Portland, Indiana, Toronto (2x) - in no order... and finally...... Milwaukee

[FiddySicks]

Casino life is still very healthy, don't worry about that. Few win and Many Many Many lose. I see it every day!

You're not seriously trying to compare a couple of paddle wheelers on the Mississippi to a full blown casino town in the middle of the mojave desert, are you? You do realize that St. Louis has industry other than taking money from people in dice and card games, right?

[worcat]

I haven't seen any reports by tsn, espn, yahoo or crazy larry about Milwaukee even being considered for an expansion team.

I don't smoke - I'm drug free sir...

Just because you have a great college system doesn't mean you should have pro teams - look at the state of Florida. Yikes.

So you can name 10 cities the NHL would expand or move to before Milwaukee? Even if I were to reach for places like Portland or Halifax, I'm tapped out after 7 or 8. And even then there's arguments to be made that Milwaukee would be a better market than at least half of those cities.

FYI, Florida doesn't have a great college system in hockey... or any college system in hockey. Unless you meant football. And then you'd have to ignore the fact that Milwaukee isn't in SEC country, which means it's not allergic to every sport that isn't college football or doesn't involve turbocharged engines.

And again, the reason you don't hear about Milwaukee is because the Bucks are still around. But until there are shovels in the ground and the Bucks sign a lease for the new building, the possibility of them leaving is very real. Until that happens, Milwaukee is relevant to this discussion.

If that's your argument, then why would Milwaukee EVER be considered for anything but a state fair. LMAO.

Apart from the fact that Milwaukee (unlike St. Louis) is actually a growing city; and (unlike Las Vegas) actually has a centralized population in which 90% of the metro area isn't a suburb?

Sources? And it's still a suffering sports town. May be growing as a suburb... Only care about the Packers.

Casino life is still very healthy, don't worry about that. Few win and Many Many Many lose. I see it every day!

You're not seriously trying to compare a couple of paddle wheelers on the Mississippi to a full blown casino town in the middle of the mojave desert, are you? You do realize that St. Louis has industry other than taking money from people in dice and card games, right?

You do realize this has nothing to do with the Mississippi right?

[illwauk]

Is that why the Brewers have finished in the top 10 for attendance in each of the last 8 years? I'm not talking about the suburbs either, although they're growing too. The actual City of Milwaukee is the only major rust belt city that's experiencing population growth right now.

I'd also love to see all the articles from the sources you named earlier that are touting Houston, Portland, and Indianapolis as realistic expansion/relocation candidates. Just the fact that you even mentioned Indianapolis, which couldn't even keep a USHL team alive, is killing what little credibility you may have had.

[FiddySicks]

I haven't seen any reports by tsn, espn, yahoo or crazy larry about Milwaukee even being considered for an expansion team.

I don't smoke - I'm drug free sir...

Just because you have a great college system doesn't mean you should have pro teams - look at the state of Florida. Yikes.

So you can name 10 cities the NHL would expand or move to before Milwaukee? Even if I were to reach for places like Portland or Halifax, I'm tapped out after 7 or 8. And even then there's arguments to be made that Milwaukee would be a better market than at least half of those cities.

FYI, Florida doesn't have a great college system in hockey... or any college system in hockey. Unless you meant football. And then you'd have to ignore the fact that Milwaukee isn't in SEC country, which means it's not allergic to every sport that isn't college football or doesn't involve turbocharged engines.

And again, the reason you don't hear about Milwaukee is because the Bucks are still around. But until there are shovels in the ground and the Bucks sign a lease for the new building, the possibility of them leaving is very real. Until that happens, Milwaukee is relevant to this discussion.

If that's your argument, then why would Milwaukee EVER be considered for anything but a state fair. LMAO.

Apart from the fact that Milwaukee (unlike St. Louis) is actually a growing city; and (unlike Las Vegas) actually has a centralized population in which 90% of the metro area isn't a suburb?

Sources? And it's still a suffering sports town. May be growing as a suburb... Only care about the Packers.

Casino life is still very healthy, don't worry about that. Few win and Many Many Many lose. I see it every day!

You're not seriously trying to compare a couple of paddle wheelers on the Mississippi to a full blown casino town in the middle of the mojave desert, are you? You do realize that St. Louis has industry other than taking money from people in dice and card games, right?

You do realize this has nothing to do with the Mississippi right?

Again, you're missing the greater overall point here. You're trying to compare a town smack dab in the middle of the hottest desert IN THE WORLD that relies on nothing else other than gaming to the, what, 10 casinos in the state of Missouri? That's like trying to compare the ecological effects of the hose runoff in your gutter from washing your car to the Nile. It's not only completely wrong, it's downright asinine.

[IceCap]

In no order; I'd love Quebec, Hamilton, Hartford, Seattle, Las Vegas, Houston, Kansas City, Portland, Indiana, Toronto (2x) - in no order... and finally...... Milwaukee

Hartford: Not until they get a new arena. Which doesn't appear to be happening.

Houston: Les Alexander, the owner of the Rockets, has made it clear he doesn't want pro hockey in the Toyota Centre.

Indianapolis: No chance in hell. The city barely manages to support the Pacers. A NHL team competing with them would either die a quick death or cannibalize the market for both teams.

Kansas City: The Scouts aren't coming back. The Devils seem attached to their pre-New Jersey history. Also, the owners of the Sprint Centre have gone on record stating that they make more then enough money without a pro sports tenant. There's no drive in KC to land either a NHL or NBA team.

Los Vegas: The dumbest idea short of keeping the Coyotes in Glendale. I love hockey, but I promise you if I'm in Vegas I'm not wasting a night to watch Los Vegas' NHL team play the trap against the Nashville Predators. Yes, I'm likely to blow my money in Vegas. By gambling. Or going to see a live show. I'm not spending it at a sporting event. No one goes to Vegas to see pro sports. They go to do other things.

The biggest reason it wouldn't work though? I'm likely not going to Vegas any time soon because money's still tight and Vegas is almost a literal money pit. Your cheerleading for Los Vegas wouldn't be so bad if you didn't blindly ignore every valid point raised as to why it wouldn't work.

So of your list the only cities left are Quebec, Hamilton, Seattle, Portland, and Toronto 2.0. Five. I'd say Milwaukee makes the top ten.

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

I think Milwaukee is a viable option- obviously with the arena situation settled first. Wisconsin's a big winter sport state. Hockey's thriving in Minnesota, despite the Wild not really accomplishing much in 15 years. And it's always thrived in nearby Illinois and Michigan.

Hartford- as much as I'd love to see it, I don't see it. Their attendance was piss poor before. Why would it change now? I'm sure most former Whaler fans have converted to Bruins or Rangers fans by now.

Houston- Aside from the Les Alexander thing, it just doesn't strike me as a hockey town. I see Atlanta all over again.

Indy- What he said^

KC- It's always been the topic of discussion with franchises threatening relocation (Pittsburgh, NY Islanders), but there seems to be no real interest. However, I do see the NBA there within 10 years. But still better than Vegas.

IMO, as far as cities that are viable options at the moment, I'd go:

1. Quebec City- All the factors are there. Brand new, hockey ready arena? Check. Hungry fan-base? Check. Potential owners waiting in the wings? Check.

2. Seattle- Arena seems to be put in motion. Key Arena would suffice as a temporary. Fans support the other major sports very well, as well as Thunderbirds hockey. Potential owners seem to be plentiful.

3. Portland. Over 2 million and growing. Not sure how the Rose Garden (or whatever they're calling it these days) is set up for hockey though. Fans support the Blazers and Winterhawks through thick and thin.

Before another team in the GTA, Hamilton is the way to go. Vaughn, Markham, Mississauga, etc., although completely different cities, are for all intents and purposes, part of the GTA. You can travel from one end (Oshawa to Oakville lets say) and feel that you're in Toronto. Hamilton is the closest major city that is, and feels, separate.

Hell, I'd say a second team in Montreal would be better than Vegas.

As far as outside the box- what about Salt Lake City? Over a million, support the Jazz no matter how terrible they are.

[buzzcut]

In all seriousness, I'll name all cities that should have any credibility in being an NHL expansion town.

There are none.

[waltere]

In the sense that for the NHL to be expanding at all is a terrible idea then yes; but in the sense of markets they should be in but aren't then there's Quebec City for definite and maybe, if outside factors (cough, NBA, cough) work out then Seattle and Milwaukee are viable ideas.

Portland and Salt Lake City both wouldn't work precisely because they support their NBA teams so well, they're both fairly small markets and you'd be directly attempting to compete with the one major pro game in town for an inherently limited amount of support and money.

[Gothamite]

Casino life is still very healthy, don't worry about that. Few win and Many Many Many lose. I see it every day!

You have been presented with data showing that casino profitability is way down, casino jobs are being cut and as a result Nevada has a sky-high unemployment rate.

If you have conflicting facts to rebut these conclusions, I'm sure we'd all love to hear it. You sound like an industry insider, so let's see the industry data. Because ignoring all the available data in favor of some anecdotal sunshine doesn't leave you with a very credible argument.

[Cosmic]

Casino life is still very healthy, don't worry about that. Few win and Many Many Many lose. I see it every day!

You have been presented with data showing that casino profitability is way down, casino jobs are being cut and as a result Nevada has a sky-high unemployment rate.

If you have conflicting facts to rebut these conclusions, I'm sure we'd all love to hear it. You sound like an industry insider, so let's see the industry data. Because ignoring all the available data in favor of some anecdotal sunshine doesn't leave you with a very credible argument.

Gambling is EVERYWHERE now. Vegas has done better weathering the storm than Atlantic City, because it's Vegas... but there's probably still some reckoning coming. It's just not as special to go gamble in Vegas as it once was. I wouldn't be surprised if Vegas were closing casinos like Atlantic City in 15 years. I certainly wouldn't want to make a huge investment there, counting on out-of-towners to watch a hockey game. Like the gambling, most of the population of the US and Canada can find a similar product close to home.

[DarkJourney]

I think Houston could definitely support an NHL team. Don't underestimate them. Houston's had a decent hockey history going way back. Les Alexander is just the ultimate road block to anything remotely happening.

[BBTV]

There's a lot t do in LV besides gambling to lure people in. That being said, other than the biggest sports dorks in the world, who would spend 4 valuable hours of a limited-time trip indoors watching NHL hockey between crummy teams? The NHL just can't compete with the other options, and frankly doesn't have the "destination road trip" culture that NFL and MLB does. Sure people take road trips, but it's not nearly the same thing.

[The_Admiral]

Milwaukee should have gotten an NHL team before Nashville, Columbus, or Anaheim did, but oops, my team's old owner was a peen. Sorry about that, Wisconsin, but it was worse for us than it was for you.

To me, the cloud that's looming over this whole discussion is that no matter where the NHL puts its teams, it does a really crappy job of marketing those teams. The talk of "growing the game" never extends beyond "we put a team here, so give them your money." The investments that teams have made in grassroots hockey have been woeful. You need to make the game as visible and accessible as you can; you need to make it so that hockey is a part of life in [insert place]. That kind of investment can pay off. Or you can just take expansion fees from Las Vegas, that too.

[Lee.]

Casino life is still very healthy, don't worry about that. Few win and Many Many Many lose. I see it every day!

You have been presented with data showing that casino profitability is way down, casino jobs are being cut and as a result Nevada has a sky-high unemployment rate.

If you have conflicting facts to rebut these conclusions, I'm sure we'd all love to hear it. You sound like an industry insider, so let's see the industry data. Because ignoring all the available data in favor of some anecdotal sunshine doesn't leave you with a very credible argument.

I actually work in a casino in a city of 25,000 so believe me when I tell you that based on what I see, we could support an NHL franchise.

If Ottawa and San.Jose could make it work in their 6,000 seat arenas for a few years, so can we.

[dfwabel]

Denver is not a reasonable driving distance from Las Vegas even by western standards, bar crowds don't help Nielsen ratings, and you can't rely on out-of-towners and gambling addicts.

That was a lot of work to make a post that wasn't any good.

EDIT: Oh also,

As for Toronto, I strongly disagree with the idea of adding a second team. Not only can Toronto not field a successful team for the last 50 years, why award them with a second franchise?

This isn't true, and I see you couldn't even deign to mention the Canadian city that's building an NHL-ready arena right now. It's obvious what you're really about. Take your Canada concern trolling to HFboards where you belong.

That's all you have to say about what I posted, show you how much I was correct.

Denver is only 11 Hours away. That is completely possible for fans to drive for a weekend getaway for a hockey game and time at Las Vegas. Can't rely on Out of Towners? Are you kidding me? Either way the tickets are purchased by the casinos. Whether the guests show up are their own choice. My point is every week there are going to be, as you put it "gambling addicts" showing up. Ask anyone who has gone to Vegas, if they get a free buffet, they go. If they get free hockey tickets, guess what, they will go. Unlike a buffet, they will spend money on merchandise, food and beverage.

I'm not trolling by any means, just stating the facts. Canada could have a decent expansion franchise in Quebec but def not in Toronto.

It is not Denver which is driveble for a weekend, it is Salt Lake City and the LDSers who constantly visit Las Vegas.

One major problem may turn out to be how many weekends which a Las Vegas NHL team would play at home on Saturday. The new MGM/AEG arena will have at least six UFC weekends booked, the major boxing events, the Pac 12 basketball tourney, and come December, that team will have their version of the Kings "Grammy" trip as it will most likely host the National Finals Rodeo on top of major concerts.

[dfwabel]

Casino life is still very healthy, don't worry about that. Few win and Many Many Many lose. I see it every day!

Vegas will have one owner but would also have every casino have their hands in buying packages for tickets for guests. I like to think of it like an Octopus as the bank and each tentacle as a casino. Everyone wants their hand in on the goods.

It is not that healthy, it is flat. Most strip casinos generate enough income to take care of their operating expenses, but not enough to pay off the debt service taken on to build them. Caesars Entertainment is worse off than both Sands (The Venetian) and MGM because the other two have interest in Macau, where they make a $hitload of revenue. In 2006, Macau overtook Las Vegas as the #1 gambling destination. This year or next, Singapore will pass Las Vegas for #2.

Caesars has $25B of debt. The convention business is still good, air traffic is up over last year. Overall, they get a lot of people in rooms, but they are not gambling. Pools and nightclubs are what they are investing in because of the liquor markup. Only 30% of MGM's total Las Vegas revenue come from gambling!

At MGM, the largest operator on the Strip, gambling generates about 30 percent of revenue. The rest comes from clubs, restaurants, shows, shops, spas, and hotel rooms. That’s the reverse of what CEO James Murren found when he joined the company in 1998 as chief financial officer. Vegas is attracting younger people, who spend less on slot machines and poker than on other entertainment, Murren says. The visitor’s average age fell to 46 last year, from 51 in 2008, according to the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority. “I don’t know if there’s any city or tourist destination that has seen such a seismic change in demographics from an age perspective,” Murren says.

The busiest two months for Las Vegas are March and October.

If, as a whole, they want to "reinvent" themselves again as a destination, great. However, a pro sports destination probably is just as unwise as was the "family destination" gimmick they tried with The Excalibur and MGM Grand amusement park circa 1990-95.