NHL 14: Does the NHL Really Need to Think About Expansion? - Wiggy's Blog

Arena Blog Dynasty Scores Sign Up ☰

Wiggy's Blog

NHL 14: Does the NHL Really Need to Think About Expansion? Stuck

Posted on December 12, 2013 at 08:30 AM.

(4)

NHL commissioner Gary Bettman made some waves the other day when he mentioned that the NHL "is listening" to cities when it comes to possible expansion. While there are no formal plans, there certainly was a boastful tone to Bettman's bluster when he was cooing about how the NHL has the hammer, so to speak, and is enjoying some level of financial solvency.

Quote:


	"My my, how far we've come since the summer, when all the articles and speculation were about all these franchises that were supposedly in trouble, which we never believed were," Bettman said. "The franchises have never been stronger. So we went from relocation in your view and distress to now we should be expanding. Everybody needs to slow down. We don't operate like that. Everything in due course. If, in fact, there's a due course to pursue."

On the one hand, there is some merit in at least considering possible expansion, as the current conference alignment is imbalanced, resulting in 14 teams in the west and 16 in the east. I've written about this before, but it still remains problematic when you have one conference that's actually easier to qualify for the playoffs than the other. Then again, this is the same league that arbitrarily awards three points for games that go into overtime. Of course, a lot of teams would be out of the race sooner if wins were worth three points (as is the case in soccer), but that's another tangent altogether.

Where would potential expansion sites be? The likely candidates according to the mainstream media are Ontario (a possible second Toronto team), Quebec City (to pair with Montreal) or Seattle (which has been a probable expansion site for a decade now). There's always been a loose idea of a city like Las Vegas, but it's hard to see that as anything more than a novelty. It would probably get some kind of reasonable support through tourists and some regulars, but it's likely not a city that will see hockey anytime soon.

As for the others, the most likely choices are probably Ontario and Seattle. Both markets are totally viable for a team (with Ontario easily able to support another team, ala New York), and Seattle being a solid sports town -- even with some questionable franchise ownership -- and doing pretty well with minor league hockey already.

The problem with all of this is that the NHL has invented this problem with its current conference alignment, as they chose to have the imbalance of two teams. In their defense, the current conference alignment does best suit the geography, but you think they could've roped in one team to make it even (the most likely candidates being Detroit or Columbus).

The biggest reason that the NHL is crowing about their new-found financial stability is because of the ginormous TV deal they just signed with Rogers up here in Canada. The deal is good for $5.2 billion over 12 years, which has to be giving the NHL board of governors major wood and dreams of huge money pits for everyone. This is normally the type of money you'd see on a deal down in the States, so the NHL is certainly contemplating what that much money means for all of the teams, players, owners and executives. The league is also generating reasonably good revenues across the board, and the revenue sharing across teams allows them to claim that organizations like Phoenix, Florida, Columbus and the New York Islanders are financial viable, even when their attendance figures are well below 14,000 per game on average.

Still, when expansion fees and massive TV deals are on the table, the league is going to contemplate expanding for short-term gains at the expense of long-term pains. When a league can pass off a lot of stadium costs onto taxpayers and bend over major media outlets to make your cheddar, you're going to do so. This goes doubly so for the NHL, which is desperate to grab a bigger share of the American TV pie and mindshare, which has eluded them for years.

What would more teams mean for NHL 15 and beyond? It would certainly bring some fresh match-ups for online play as well as season mode, and it would be interesting to see how the new team alignment affected some of the longstanding rivalries in the NHL as well as the playoff picture. In some ways, it would be nice to see 16 teams make the playoffs and 16 not, as that would add a bit more exclusivity to the postseason, but just the same, I'd rather not see more teams if that's going to take away from development time on existing teams' arenas, player faces and other details. Selfishly, gamers wouldn't have to worry about real-world consequences as much when playing, as it would just mean more teams and more options.

Either way, nothing will likely happen in the next couple of years, but with some eager cities in the hopper -- and some that we probably don't know about -- it'll be interesting to see how the NHL plays its hand with regards to adding new teams as well as possibly discarding weaker existing ones.

Comments

# 1 willyfantastic @ Dec 12

I'd love to see Seattle get a team

# 2 drewst18 @ Dec 12

I think expansion would be great, but contraction is needed at the same time. Seattle has shown to be a great sports town who care a lot about their city but part of that is when theyre winning. When the Sonics struggled and people stopped going is when they left, I think hockey would do really well there.

Placement is everything for the NHL. At the Wings - Panthers game you could hear a "Lets go Red Wings chant" at a Florida Panthers game, it is clear that a franchise like that needs to either move or be contracted. There are a few others, its not every southern city. I think the NHL does pretty well in Dallas and Nashville.

# 3 The Senator @ Dec 12

Expansion would only lead to watered down competition. Personally, I'm for contraction in every major North American sports league. Give me better, stacked teams any day.

# 4 hf199 @ Dec 13

First of all. We just got Phoenix approved by a thin margin. If you are going to expand then make it Quebec City (already building an arena), Seattle has no arena in place and Key Arena is too small for hockey,maybe Hartford again?