Las Vegas NHL Expansion

[The_Admiral]

The issue was never warm-weather markets, it was small warm-weather markets. No one would argue in good faith against Los Angeles, San Francisco, Dallas, or even Atlanta. It's Nashville and Raleigh (and Las Vegas) where the league needed someone to say "no, this is stupid, we're not trifling with these college-sports backwaters."

 

Even Phoenix could have worked if the whole thing had been built properly from the ground up, which it wasn't.

[worcat]

While Phoenix/Arizona has been a disaster, it's unknown what Vegas will become. It's unfair to lump them in with the failed teams. They may thrive and become an immediate success, we don't know yet. That is what is so ridiculous about all these comments. We don't know what the franchise will become, hell we don't even have a team name and people are already calling for the team to be relocated because they are butt hurt traditionalists. Give it time before we start a witch hunt.

[The_Admiral]

What sort of benefit of the doubt should I afford a metropolitan area that's been decimated by foreclosures and is running out of water?

[worcat]

I understand, I get it. There is much doubt but Vegas continues to operate on a daily basis. Same can be said about California and water shortages, yet they continue to operate not only in the NHL but also MLB, NBA and NFL. People may dislike the Vegas expansion and I get that but to call it a failure already is ridiculous.

[chcarlson23]

2 minutes ago, worcat said:

While Phoenix/Arizona has been a disaster, it's unknown what Vegas will become. It's unfair to lump them in with the failed teams. They may thrive and become an immediate success, we don't know yet. That is what is so ridiculous about all these comments. We don't know what the franchise will become, hell we don't even have a team name and people are already calling for the team to be relocated because they are butt hurt traditionalists. Give it time before we start a witch hunt.

But there are some things that we know COULD cause a problem. 

-Low permanent population in Vegas

-Non-traditional market, where main entertainment is NOT sports

-Possible overshadowing by the Raiders

-The team hasn't chosen a name yet, and are making a really big deal out of it. 

 

It has potential to be a great market, but Arizona does too... Hope that puts things into perspective for ya

 

I'm not saying Vegas is a Failure yet... But it hasn't exactly set itself up for success either. 

[worcat]

Just now, chcarlson23 said:

But there are some things that we know COULD cause a problem. (That's an assumption)

-Low permanent population in Vegas (Yes they will rely on visiting fans the first few years to build the fan base but do you blame them?)

-Non-traditional market, where main entertainment is NOT sports (Someone has to start, whether it be the NHL, NBA, MLB etc. We should be proud that the NHL has the balls to do this.)

-Possible overshadowing by the Raiders (Possible)

-The team hasn't chosen a name yet, and are making a really big deal out of it. (54 pages and counting agrees with you)

 

It has potential to be a great market, but Arizona does too... Hope that puts things into perspective for ya

 

I'm not saying Vegas is a Failure yet... But it hasn't exactly set itself up for success either. 

I agree with everything you said but there's my rebuttal. I'm not a Vegas fan, I'm not here to argue with anyone. There's some hope for this franchise and in a new market. It could be really awesome or it could really really suck. Just give it a chance that's all. The NHL is already the red headed step son of the top 4 sports, no need to try to shoot ourselves in the foot and argue that a team yet to take to the ice is a mistake.

[chcarlson23]

1 minute ago, worcat said:

I agree with everything you said but there's my rebuttal. I'm not a Vegas fan, I'm not here to argue with anyone. There's some hope for this franchise and in a new market. It could be really awesome or it could really really suck. Just give it a chance that's all. The NHL is already the red headed step son of the top 4 sports, no need to try to shoot ourselves in the foot and argue that a team yet to take to the ice is a mistake.

I guess all I'm saying, is that it already feels like a giant failure... You know just feels like one. It's definitely not one yet...

[worcat]

Maybe I'm just optimistic and I want to see every NHL team thrive and get the NHL to grow and not be buried by ESPN. That's for another discussion. But if any town has an ability to market and promote itself, it's Vegas. 

[IceCap]

1 hour ago, worcat said:

I understand, I get it.

You obviously do not.

 

You also obviously do not understand how to properly argue a point, considering that you referred to the other side as "butt hurt."

 

57 minutes ago, worcat said:

I agree with everything you said but there's my rebuttal. I'm not a Vegas fan, I'm not here to argue with anyone.

Again, I don't think you're being truthful. You've been pretty argumentative as of late.

[worcat]

Just now, Ice_Cap said:

You obviously do not.

 

You also obviously do not understand how to properly argue a point, considering that you referred to the other side as "butt hurt."

No, you have people that doubt Vegas because of it's location in a non traditional market for sports and then you have butt hurt "fans" that think every expansion team deserves to be in Canada or northern traditional hockey markets. You don't get it. There's rational ways to look at this with people debating about Vegas and the people calling for relocation (already) to Quebec are those in which I referred to as Butt Hurt. Get over it.

[IceCap]

10 minutes ago, worcat said:

No, you have people that doubt Vegas because of it's location in a non traditional market for sports and then you have butt hurt "fans" that think every expansion team deserves to be in Canada or northern traditional hockey markets. You don't get it. There's rational ways to look at this with people debating about Vegas and the people calling for relocation (already) to Quebec are those in which I referred to as Butt Hurt. Get over it.

Look. You don't get to call people who disagree with you "butt hurt" and then claim you're not here to argue with anyone.

 

As for getting over it? Kindly get over yourself. No, I won't get over the fact that the NHL continues to piss on the loyal fanbases that have traditionally supported this league so they can piss millions upon millions of dollars away in unproven markets. It's insulting to the people of Quebec City, to Hartford, to Winnipeg even. To get passed over for as long as they have so we can see teams fail in Arizona and Carolina. It's insulting as a Canadian that the league seems to want nothing to do with our cities unless they're forced into it, when it's our teams that do the financial heavy hitting for this slapjack organisation.

 

1 hour ago, worcat said:

Maybe I'm just optimistic and I want to see every NHL team thrive and get the NHL to grow and not be buried by ESPN. That's for another discussion. But if any town has an ability to market and promote itself, it's Vegas. 

Again no...

You want NHL to go into markets where it's an unproven commodity. You don't seem to give a crap about fanbases and cities that have proven over and over that they can be great NHL markets if given a chance.

 

The fact that the Winnipeg Jets make more money in Winnipeg then they did in Atlanta should be enough for you to realise that "growth" does not mean "sunbelt cities over northern cities." The financial turnaround from Atlanta to Winnipeg showed that the best path to financial growth is through neglected fanbases in traditional hotbeds.

 

[daniel75]

Way outta line Ice.

[worcat]

2 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Look sparky. You don't get to call people who disagree with you "butt hurt" and then claim you're not here to argue with anyone.

 

As for getting over it? Kindly get over yourself. No, I won't get over the fact that the NHL continues to piss on the loyal fanbases that have traditionally supported this league so they can piss millions upon millions of dollars away in unproven markets. It's insulting to the people of Quebec City, to Hartford, to Winnipeg even. To get passed over for as long as they have so we can see teams fail in Arizona and Carolina. It's insulting as a Canadian that the league seems to want nothing to do with our cities unless they're forced into it, when it's our teams that do the financial heavy hitting for this slapjack organisation.

 

Again no...

You want NHL to grow...in markets where it's an unproven commodity. You don't seem to give a crap about fanbases and cities that have proven over and over that they can be great NHL markets if given a chance.

 

The fact that the Winnipeg Jets make more money in Winnipeg then they did in Atlanta should be enough for you to realise that "growth" does not mean "sunbelt cities over northern cities." The financial turnaround from Atlanta to Winnipeg showed that the best path to financial growth is through neglected fanbases in traditional hotbeds.

 

You don't get to call people who disagree with you "Sparky" either. The NHL isn't Canada's baby anymore. Quebec would have had an expansion team if the Canadian dollar was able to support another team. If canada had it's way, you'd move both teams out of Florida, Arizona, Carolina, Dallas, all of California and place teams in Halifax, another team in Toronto, Saskatchewan, Quebec and Seattle so they can be rivals with the Canucks. That is NOT growing the game and would be league suicide. You can debate the sun belt teams all you want, some have been good and others bad, I will agree with that but flooding the market with Canadian teams would kill the NHL. Vegas might be successful and you are too scared to admit that it could work. Alteast I'm able to admit it could fail. 

[worcat]

Also comparing the Atlanta ownership against ANY major league sport is in poor taste. Atlanta had good ticket sales and a healthy fan base, the ownership failed to promote the team and wanted them to fail. I think you should go back and look at the numbers before making false claims that all Canadian teams are the gods gift to the NHL.

[SFGiants58]

 

When reveal threads have nothing to reveal (at least until next month), slapfighting ensues. It is the way of things. 

 

I still wish they were the Las Vegas Scorpions. Me gusto los arácnidos.

[worcat]

I don't want to get off the issue of the expansion and I apologize if that's what has happened. Just saying give it a chance. Love it or not, the NHL is going to do what they want.

 

DONE.

[IceCap]

16 minutes ago, daniel75 said:

Way outta line Ice.

Let's just say we agree to disagree there.

 

15 minutes ago, worcat said:

You don't get to call people who disagree with you "Sparky" either.

Well I deleted that, seeing it in poor taste, but if you want to cling to it to be mad, go for it.

 

Quote

The NHL isn't Canada's baby anymore.

And yet Canada's teams, by and large, tend to be on stronger economic footing than the likes of Carolina, Arizona, and Florida.

 

Quote

Quebec would have had an expansion team if the Canadian dollar was able to support another team.

The Canadian teams that exist now all seem to be weathering the Canadian dollar well enough.

 

Quote

If canada had it's way, you'd move both teams out of Florida, Arizona, Carolina, Dallas, all of California and place teams in Halifax, another team in Toronto, Saskatchewan, Quebec and Seattle so they can be rivals with the Canucks. That is NOT growing the game and would be league suicide.

Oh my G-d. This is great.

No, I don't want to do that. Nice strawman though.

 

Quote

You can debate the sun belt teams all you want, some have been good and others bad, I will agree with that but flooding the market with Canadian teams would kill the NHL.

Um...there are seven Canadian teams in the NHL right now. I'm asking for one more. So eight in total. That's not "flooding" by any definition. Again you're arguing a point I've never made.

 

Quote

Vegas might be successful and you are too scared to admit that it could work. Alteast I'm able to admit it could fail. 

No, you're not. Considering that you called everyone who said it could fail "butt hurt." Doesn't seem like you're admitting to anything.

 

12 minutes ago, worcat said:

I think you should go back and look at the numbers before making false claims that all Canadian teams are the gods gift to the NHL.

I think you should actually read what I'm arguing before you try to counter-argue it.

[worcat]

2 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

No, you're not. Considering that you called everyone who said it could fail "butt hurt." Doesn't seem like you're admitting to anything.

I did not call anyone "butt hurt" directly. Only the vague reference to those that have no faith in the NHL and those that still cling to the hope of a team moving to Quebec. I understand Quebec and many in Canada have a strong love of the sport and want the Nordiques back, but there is a reason they were not chosen for the expansion bid. They want their team back, I admire that. But only time will tell. This is a pissing match that could go on and on and on. I'm done. No need to argue. Vegas is happening and there seems to be a pause on Quebec. It will happen, be patient. I'm not being argumentative, i'm just giving food for thought. Don't flex your moderator powers and imply that I am trying to do otherwise, I'm simply discussing sports on a sports message board about hockey.

[daniel75]

All this because of a "butt hurt" comment? Stop talking down to people, your supposed to be a moderator.

[The_Admiral]

It's funny how no one argues for Quebec (, province of) as a worthy place to grow the game. It's really hurting there, but could come back strong. I'd say it's worth the investment.