Sports cities needing teams

[winghaz]

I'd say most sports fans in the U.S. would say there are four major pro sports. Yes, the NHL does count.

But back to the issue at hand. Los Angeles needs an NFL team, but it needs to build a proper facility first. The NBA could expand, with one team definitely in Vegas. MLB is at its peak -- no more new teams. The NHL could expand into some Canadian cities, but it all depends on ownership.

[canucksforever131313]

Vancouver deserves an MLS team...

The culture is diverse, and there are loads of people who come from countries big on soccer. The renovations to BC Place will bring fans out and support the Whitecaps

[FiddySicks]

A better barometer if a city is super-major league or not is access to NASCAR tracks. That gets higher TV viewership than NHL, does it not? It's a little bit more difficult to plop a racetrack somewhere and the markets that support NASCAR are traditionally different than those that support the other major sports, but I think it can certainly be part of the conversation.

And as far as I know, places like New York, San Francisco and Seattle were trying to get NASCAR tracks built in their general regions. I think that speaks volumes about the major leagueness of the sport.

I would say with Infineon raceway just north in Sonoma, San Francisco already has a local NASCAR quality track.

[tp49]

A better barometer if a city is super-major league or not is access to NASCAR tracks. That gets higher TV viewership than NHL, does it not? It's a little bit more difficult to plop a racetrack somewhere and the markets that support NASCAR are traditionally different than those that support the other major sports, but I think it can certainly be part of the conversation.

And as far as I know, places like New York, San Francisco and Seattle were trying to get NASCAR tracks built in their general regions. I think that speaks volumes about the major leagueness of the sport.

I would say with Infineon raceway just north in Sonoma, San Francisco already has a local NASCAR quality track.

Agreed. Sears Point is San Francisco's NASCAR track.

[Lee.]

theres no hocky fans in california and the hee-haw states they should put those teams in Quebec, winnypeg, kamloops, halifax, and another one in toronto so that they can finally have a good team.

The only way Toronto would get another NHL team is if Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment owns it.

*forehead meet desk*

Wherever there is a joke, there will be one who refuses to get it.

Also, Toronto already has a good hockey team, the Buffalo Sabres.

[jkrdevil]

how bout newark lol

Well Newark does have the Devils and if MLS is included the Red Bulls are building a stadium across the river in Harrison.

That said MLS should not be included. Despite it's name it is not a major league. Major league to me would imply that it is the top league(s) in the particular sport. MLS is not the top league in Soccer/ Football, that would go to the different leagues in Europe. MLS is AAA soccer at best.

[Magnus]

All Canadian cities with metro populations larger than 500k (in the case of the prairies, Saskatchewan and Manitoba should have one team each) deserve an NHL team.

Portland would also be a good hockey market, along with Seattle.

[rams80]

All Canadian cities with metro populations larger than 500k (in the case of the prairies, Saskatchewan and Manitoba should have one team each) deserve an NHL team.

Why? The point behind expansion, at least theoretically, is to bring your league to new markets and EXPAND its popularity. Canadian expansion won't accomplish that.

[DG_YouKnowWhatThatMeans]

All Canadian cities with metro populations larger than 500k (in the case of the prairies, Saskatchewan and Manitoba should have one team each) deserve an NHL team.

Why? The point behind expansion, at least theoretically, is to bring your league to new markets and EXPAND its popularity. Canadian expansion won't accomplish that.

Well, *I* think more NHL teams in Canada would be the greatest thing since sliced phones or cellular bread. But that's me.

Actually, I think there's a common ground between your two views, and it's up to the NHL to figure out what it wants to be. It continue to act as a token member of the big four North American sports, or it can accept what it actually is: a niche sport that should be happy to break even. The NHL had a shot at the sports big-time back in 1994, but they cannibalized themselves by striking the very next season, and by striking again after their last feel-good season in 2004.

The NHL can become a league with teams in smaller markets that makes a lot of money for its owners and players. Token television deals with NBC (doesn't the NHL pay the network, or something ludicrous like that? I know it's not the standard deal that, say, NBA gets from ABC/ESPN) wouldn't matter as much. Is there any proof that network television is expanding the NHL's bottom line anyway?

The NHL is a good league with a lot of history, but the idea that there's going to be another hockey boom seems a bit pie-in-the-sky to me. Granted, they don't want to over-expand so much as to water down the product (which is what DVDGuy seems to want), but hoping for expansion in more hee-haw markets and having that magically translate into television revenue doesn't seem to be that good an idea either.

[Don]

the nhl doesnt need television revenues to be successful. it is a purely gate driven league, always has been, always will be. nhl fans get their fill from alternate media forms. as long as they can put butts in the seats in the cities where they already have teams, they should be happy. expansion would only water down the on ice product which would drive people away, and thats never a good idea.

[DarkJourney]

If it up to me there would be less teams

[tp49]

the nhl doesnt need television revenues to be successful. it is a purely gate driven league, always has been, always will be. nhl fans get their fill from alternate media forms. as long as they can put butts in the seats in the cities where they already have teams, they should be happy. expansion would only water down the on ice product which would drive people away, and thats never a good idea.

It's thinking like that (and Gary Bettman) that has prevented the NHL from being properly marketed and becoming a niche league. The NHL needs some visionaries to elevate it back into the major league it once was and should be.

[DG_YouKnowWhatThatMeans]

the nhl doesnt need television revenues to be successful. it is a purely gate driven league, always has been, always will be. nhl fans get their fill from alternate media forms. as long as they can put butts in the seats in the cities where they already have teams, they should be happy. expansion would only water down the on ice product which would drive people away, and thats never a good idea.

It's thinking like that (and Gary Bettman) that has prevented the NHL from being properly marketed and becoming a niche league. The NHL needs some visionaries to elevate it back into the major league it once was and should be.

Sez you. Sez everyone else, the NHL is a second-tier sports league. It's been that way most years out of the past 50. That doesn't mean the NHL is bad or hockey is a bad sport, just that the NHL probably won't be the premier sports league in the United States anytime soon. Marketing it and having expansion policies as if it will is thus a bad idea.

I think a cost-control and bettering-the-product vision would be smart, and to the NHL's credit, that's where they are. There's a salary cap, rules that improve the quality of play, and a seeming moratorium on expansion. And in a stunning success, two teams that declared bankruptcy earlier in the decade collectively won a President's Cup and an appearance in the Stanley Cup Finals. I'd say the game is being better taken care of than it has been in a long while. However, I'm a way casual fan, so you can take my opinion with a grain of salt.

[mania]

A big problem with Hockey is the lack of any real "stars", at least, people that have any genuine mainstream appeal. The closest they have is Sidney Crosby, and I don't think he's been truly marketed worth a damn, and, truthfully, he's not that interesting or charismatic off the rink. For example, can you see him hosting SNL? Gretzky pulled it off, but he's no Gretzky. In addition, alot of the better players are international, where there are language barriers when it comes to promotion.

[oz615]

I think Pittsburgh can use an NBA,i don't see why not.

[PeytonManningRocks]

theres no hocky fans in california and the hee-haw states they should put those teams in Quebec, winnypeg, kamloops, halifax, and another one in toronto so that they can finally have a good team.

there's no "hocky" fans, but there are hockey fans....

Though I agree with you that a few of those cities should have teams.

[Mac the Knife]

First, are we all in agreement that we're adding the MLS to "the big four?"

We only seem to have great attendance when it's an international friendly these days.

No. In fact, if you look at its attendance, revenue, television coverage, and general awareness of the league, it is nowhere near the other four. It doesn't even come close to the NHL, which is lagging behind the other three. So, no, it is not suddenly a major league. If you walked up to the VAST majority of the people in this country, they would tell you it isn't.

No, in fact, I question whether or not the "Big Four" isn't in reality a "Big Three," as the NHL, comparatively speaking (with respect to television exposure in particular), is a really weak sister to the NBA, NFL and MLB.

[Mac the Knife]

I think Pittsburgh can use an NBA,i don't see why not.

How about because Pittsburgh's nowhere nearly a pro basketball market? Go there sometime. See how often pro hoops gets mentioned compared to football or hockey.

How about because Pittsburgh's population is in decline, as opposed to other, more suitable markets, which have growing populations?

How about because Pittsburgh barely supports one losing franchise (the Pirates) and drove another (the Penguins, pre-Lemeiux, pre-Crosby) into bankruptcy... twice?

I'm not knocking Pittsburgh; far from it. I lived in the region for 13 years. It's just not a basketball market, and frankly it never will be.

[BBTV]

theres no hocky fans in california and the hee-haw states they should put those teams in Quebec, winnypeg, kamloops, halifax, and another one in toronto so that they can finally have a good team.

there's no "hocky" fans, but there are hockey fans....

Though I agree with you that a few of those cities should have teams.

Ugh. Seriously?

[NJTank]

I think Pittsburgh can use an NBA,i don't see why not.

How about because Pittsburgh's nowhere nearly a pro basketball market? Go there sometime. See how often pro hoops gets mentioned compared to football or hockey.

How about because Pittsburgh's population is in decline, as opposed to other, more suitable markets, which have growing populations?

How about because Pittsburgh barely supports one losing franchise (the Pirates) and drove another (the Penguins, pre-Lemeiux, pre-Crosby) into bankruptcy... twice?

I'm not knocking Pittsburgh; far from it. I lived in the region for 13 years. It's just not a basketball market, and frankly it never will be.

There is always the Pittsburgh Pisces