Viva Las Vegas?

[Goalie]

http://www.tsn.ca/report-nhl-approves-potential-owners-for-las-vegas-expansion-1.133540

 

Interesting little article there. 

 

Sounds like it's only a matter of time. 

[The Unknown Poster]

I'm not convinced Vegas can garner local support. But with the entertainment venues there I would suspect they wouldnt have trouble selling. Whether the arena would be full is another story but the tickets will be paid for.

[The Unknown Poster]

The more I think about this, the more on the fence I am.  I love Vegas so I like the idea of a team there.  I think it would be good for the NHL, at least in the short term.  And once the team is competitive, playing into May and June would be a lot of fun.  But some people have this idea that Vegas is an oasis 12 months per year.  It's not.  It gets cold.

 

Daly is absolutely right when he says a Vegas team must be supported by local fans.  The people that say Vegas would sell out every game based on Canadians buying tickets on vacation doesnt make sense to me.  Snowbirds dont generally make Vegas home.  And the people that go to Vegas for vacation for a week in January are doing so because it's cheap.  I can certainly see some packages being attractive to Canadians.  I could see myself potentially going for a week to catch a couple of games and hang out in Vegas in the winter but Im a hockey fan and it would have to be cheap.

 

The resorts will buy tickets for comps, contests, timeshare presentations etc.  But if a team is to work, it will have to have a local fanbase.  And thats the question.

[Brandon]

I can't speak for other people but when I go to Vegas and the same for most of my friends...  it's usually for a short period of time and we try our best to see and do things that we can't do at home.      I'm not going to waste one of my nights going to see a hockey game when I can go see a tonne of high quality shows.....

[FrostyWinnipeg]

The more I think about this, the more on the fence I am.  I love Vegas so I like the idea of a team there.  I think it would be good for the NHL, at least in the short term.  And once the team is competitive, playing into May and June would be a lot of fun.  But some people have this idea that Vegas is an oasis 12 months per year.  It's not.  It gets cold.

 

Daly is absolutely right when he says a Vegas team must be supported by local fans.  The people that say Vegas would sell out every game based on Canadians buying tickets on vacation doesnt make sense to me.  Snowbirds dont generally make Vegas home.  And the people that go to Vegas for vacation for a week in January are doing so because it's cheap.  I can certainly see some packages being attractive to Canadians.  I could see myself potentially going for a week to catch a couple of games and hang out in Vegas in the winter but Im a hockey fan and it would have to be cheap.

 

The resorts will buy tickets for comps, contests, timeshare presentations etc.  But if a team is to work, it will have to have a local fanbase.  And thats the question.

I think this is totally true. Sellouts every game no prob, casinos would eat up most of the tickets but are they a hockey town? Who knows. LV does not have a pro team so being 1st has its advantages but what about Seattle? The NHL should have jumped in there soon as the NBA's SS left for OKC.

 

Quebec City is a give, new arena opening with 2 years and a decent size at that. I hate the separatist owners but if it means QC gets its Nordiques back I'll live with it.

 

Houston anyone? 3rd/4th largest city in US and no NHL?

[BomberFan]

 

The more I think about this, the more on the fence I am.  I love Vegas so I like the idea of a team there.  I think it would be good for the NHL, at least in the short term.  And once the team is competitive, playing into May and June would be a lot of fun.  But some people have this idea that Vegas is an oasis 12 months per year.  It's not.  It gets cold.

 

Daly is absolutely right when he says a Vegas team must be supported by local fans.  The people that say Vegas would sell out every game based on Canadians buying tickets on vacation doesnt make sense to me.  Snowbirds dont generally make Vegas home.  And the people that go to Vegas for vacation for a week in January are doing so because it's cheap.  I can certainly see some packages being attractive to Canadians.  I could see myself potentially going for a week to catch a couple of games and hang out in Vegas in the winter but Im a hockey fan and it would have to be cheap.

 

The resorts will buy tickets for comps, contests, timeshare presentations etc.  But if a team is to work, it will have to have a local fanbase.  And thats the question.

I think this is totally true. Sellouts every game no prob, casinos would eat up most of the tickets but are they a hockey town? Who knows. LV does not have a pro team so being 1st has its advantages but what about Seattle? The NHL should have jumped in there soon as the NBA's SS left for OKC.

 

Quebec City is a give, new arena opening with 2 years and a decent size at that. I hate the separatist owners but if it means QC gets its Nordiques back I'll live with it.

 

Houston anyone? 3rd/4th largest city in US and no NHL?

 

I don't think Houston, all they talk about is football, college football in particular. You see more Longhorn jerseys than anything else.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

The more I think about this, the more on the fence I am.  I love Vegas so I like the idea of a team there.  I think it would be good for the NHL, at least in the short term.  And once the team is competitive, playing into May and June would be a lot of fun.  But some people have this idea that Vegas is an oasis 12 months per year.  It's not.  It gets cold.

 

Daly is absolutely right when he says a Vegas team must be supported by local fans.  The people that say Vegas would sell out every game based on Canadians buying tickets on vacation doesnt make sense to me.  Snowbirds dont generally make Vegas home.  And the people that go to Vegas for vacation for a week in January are doing so because it's cheap.  I can certainly see some packages being attractive to Canadians.  I could see myself potentially going for a week to catch a couple of games and hang out in Vegas in the winter but Im a hockey fan and it would have to be cheap.

 

The resorts will buy tickets for comps, contests, timeshare presentations etc.  But if a team is to work, it will have to have a local fanbase.  And thats the question.

I think this is totally true. Sellouts every game no prob, casinos would eat up most of the tickets but are they a hockey town? Who knows. LV does not have a pro team so being 1st has its advantages but what about Seattle? The NHL should have jumped in there soon as the NBA's SS left for OKC.

 

Quebec City is a give, new arena opening with 2 years and a decent size at that. I hate the separatist owners but if it means QC gets its Nordiques back I'll live with it.

 

Houston anyone? 3rd/4th largest city in US and no NHL?

 

I don't think Houston, all they talk about is football, college football in particular. You see more Longhorn jerseys than anything else.

 

I think people got excited when the Jets returned thinking Bettman and the NHL had softened their stance on a) relocation Canadian "small" markets.  I dont think thats the case.  I think Winnipeg was very, very unique.  Already had a building.  Geographic location was ideal.  Richest ownership group in pro sports.  Ownership group that did exactly what the NHL wanted and needed, essentially did the NHL a favour in regards to PHX and Atlanta.

 

If the Coyotes had been stable all this time, I wonder how that would have impacted Winnipeg.  Winnipeg was the leverage the NHL needed in Arizona and provided a soft landing if they pulled the team.  We all know they were twenty minutes away from announcing the Coyotes' relocation to Winnipeg.  By the time you get to that point, its pretty hard to deny True North "the next available team".  Atlanta was another very very unique situation in that the ownership group absolutely wanted out of the hockey business but they also controlled the only arena in town, they had no lease obligations (like Florida).  There was no one else interested in owning the team there and even if there was the arena owners (the owners of the Thrashers) werent going to provide a deal that would make it work.  The Thrashers' owners played nicely with the NHL to a degree but basically said "we will not be operating this team in this arena next year so find us a buyer or else".

 

The interesting thing is, if Winnipeg had taken the Coyotes, what would have happened to the Thrashers?  Where was the next "soft landing" for a franchise?  It *might* have been Quebec if only because they might have been willing to retrofit their arena for a few years while building a new one.

 

The NHL will do everything other than relocate.  Quebec, to me, is more suited to relocation.  All things being equal, the NHL would look to use expansion to further the growth of the league and that means West.  That means Seattle and Vegas.  I think Quebec is the back up plan for the Panthers.

 

Seattle has had arena and ownership issues.  Thats why Vegas might have jumped to the top of the list.  Ideally the NHL would expand by two.  They realligned and I think part of their strategy was committing to a plan that would see two expansion franchises West.  Quebec will be left out in the cold until an Eastern Team is ready to relocate.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

The interesting thing is, if Winnipeg had taken the Coyotes, what would have happened to the Thrashers?  Where was the next "soft landing" for a franchise?  It *might* have been Quebec if only because they might have been willing to retrofit their arena for a few years while building a new one.

 

We were unbelievably lucky. NHL team(ATL) available and NO ONE wanted it.

[Brandon]

So essentially you guys are saying we got a team because the stars aligned and we had lots of good fortune.

=)

[SPuDS]

So essentially you guys are saying we got a team because the stars aligned and we had lots of good fortune.

=)

Well that and it was well known we wanted a franchise.. How long were we in the hunt for the 'yotes?

[FrostyWinnipeg]

 

So essentially you guys are saying we got a team because the stars aligned and we had lots of good fortune.

=)

Well that and it was well known we wanted a franchise.. How long were we in the hunt for the 'yotes?

 

Yotes really got into financial trouble after we got Atlanta. Course if the stars had aligned we would have got PHX instead.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

So essentially you guys are saying we got a team because the stars aligned and we had lots of good fortune.

=)

Well that and it was well known we wanted a franchise.. How long were we in the hunt for the 'yotes?

 

Yotes really got into financial trouble after we got Atlanta. Course if the stars had aligned we would have got PHX instead.

 

Coyotes were in very bad financial trouble long before True North bought the Trashers.  The only reason we didnt end up with the Yotes was because the NHL successfully leveraged our interest to get Glendale to pony up subsidies to keep the Coyotes there.

 

That team went through several owners, never made a dollar.  Lost tens of millions of dollars.  And went bankrupt.  The NHL fought so hard for it for two reasons: once the fight ended up in court, they had to fight to maintain decision making authority over their franchises and to warn off any other owners from trying to do what the then-Coyotes owner tried to do.  And secondly, because the NHL had lobbied Glendale to build that palace out in the suburbs, they couldnt be seen as running from their partners when the going got tough.

 

A year before the Thrashers relocated, the Coyotes' future came down to the wire with a hastily arranged press conference being set up at MTSC late one night.  We were 15 minutes away from announcing the purchase of the Coyotes and Glendale, which was endlessly debating and trying to call the NHL's bluff, finally relented.  It worked out a lot better for True North to have more lead time with the Thrashers, but make no mistake, the Coyotes were in financial fire straights.

 

The Thrashers were a unique situation where the team owners also controlled the arena and no longer wanted hockey.  The community didnt support the team so there was no out cry and local government didnt care.  There was no one who wanted to own the team and no where for a team to play if someone did want to own it. 

 

[The Unknown Poster]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/bettman-quashes-expansion-rumours-as-talk-of-vegas-deal-swirls/article21633363/

 

Good article.

 

One thing that shocks me: I just did a quick look for off-season Las Vegas tourism and their visitor numbers are very consistent all year round.  I always thought tourism would drop off when Vegas cooled off in the winter, but that doesnt seem to be true.  They average around 3 million visitors per months all year.  Those are significant numbers.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

Las Vegas short of 10k season ticket pledges, with only 7,000 according to H&L.

 

Quebec City...you're up next!

[The Unknown Poster]

I don't put a lot of stock into these gimmick ticket drives. It's a lot of ifs and maybes. It's not real. On one hand the league says we have no plans to expand or relocate and on another they say hey buy tickets. Come on....

If they have 7000 locals willing to buy season tickets then its a win for Vegas and bodes well I think

[johnzo]

I don't want another expansion team. The NHL talent pie is already cut thin enough, let's not cut another slice out of it.

[Mr Dee]

I don't want another expansion team. The NHL talent pie is already cut thin enough, let's not cut another slice out of it.

 

Can you imagine the quality of the play in the league if Bettman and his group didn't push the expansion envelope?

We'd have guys who get paid a million dollars actually deserve to earn a million dollars.

And the games, with a sensible schedule would be awesome. Alas, greedy hockey owners prevail over our game…again.

[johnzo]

Just imagine contracting the NHL back to 24 teams from 30. You'd cut the bottom 20% of the league -- roughly four active players off every team. That'd push the average talent level up nicely.

Of course, I'd also like to see a 60-game regular season with the Stanley Cup decided in March/April before the weather gets nice, but that isn't going to happen either.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

Of course, I'd also like to see a 60-game regular season with the Stanley Cup decided in March/April before the weather gets nice, but that isn't going to happen either.

Season is too long. Should be over in May.

[Goalie]

Technically if no expansion that means no Atlanta Thrashers which means no Jets

[iso_55]

 

Of course, I'd also like to see a 60-game regular season with the Stanley Cup decided in March/April before the weather gets nice, but that isn't going to happen either.

Season is too long. Should be over in May.

 

They played a 68 game season back in the day & the SC playoffs were over before Victoria Day weekend. I like that. But that was in a 12 team NHL.

[Noeller]

 

 

Of course, I'd also like to see a 60-game regular season with the Stanley Cup decided in March/April before the weather gets nice, but that isn't going to happen either.

Season is too long. Should be over in May.

 

They played a 68 game season back in the day & the SC playoffs were over before Victoria Day weekend. I like that. But that was in a 12 team NHL.

 

Would give anything to go back to about a 21 or 24 team league, with no more than 70 games each. Less teams means we need less players, which means the talent pool wouldn't be so thinned out. You'd see quality of play increase, and less crappy players out there who can't keep up, so they hack and slash the stars. 

 

Overall, the NHL would be a WAY better league with less teams and less games...

[17to85]

The talent pool is deeper than it's ever been. There are a lot less absolute plugs in the NHL than their used to be. Teams don't even bother dressing a pure face puncher anymore because those guys can't play hockey. The continued development of the game around the world and especially in the United States has greatly expanded the pool of players coming to the NHL. This idea that teams were more talented when there were only 24 is just ludicrous thinking. 

[Mark F]

The talent pool is deeper than it's ever been.

 

 

notwithstanding some stupid thinking from the past, the Europeans and American players made this happen. along with the really advanced training that players now get starting when they are young.

 

I stopped watching NHL years ago because of the lack of talent after the expansion. guys who couldn't really skate were starters on stanley cup winners.

 

From what I can see, the skill / conditioning level now is miles better than those days, and also better than the six team league days, when players smoked cigarettes in the locker room.

 

 The  players from the past would die after two weeks of skating the way these teams play now. 

 

The hockey can be a bit raggedy sometimes, cause the checking is so relentless, but it is very exciting to watch.

[iso_55]

Look at the NHL in 78/79 when the NHL merged with the WHA & the quality of the play in the NHL for almost a decade after that. Most NHL goalies back then would be AHL goaltenders today. The goaltending is head & shoulders better than it was 30 years ago. So many 40, 50 & 60 goal scorers back then. Defense is much, much better. And now a 50 goal scorer is a special player. Like it was before the first round of expansion back in 67/68.