Expansion

I was reading some articles hockeybuzz.com about NHL expansion, and I thought I would post my thoughts here.

Note: All of this is just MY personal opinion. It is is not speculation or rumour, just one persons two cents. So please don’t waste your time flaming me. If your going to go into this with a closed mind, Don’t bother. I will only read worthwhile commentary on the ideas presented here. And remember, at least it’s not another Leafs article.

First off, I don’t think expansions will cause too much of a thinning of talent. USA hockey is finally taking off, and more and more Americans are becoming great NHL stars. Canada will always have lots of young talent to provide, as will Europe(In fact, according to NHL.com, hockey is really catching on in places like Ireland and Israel. Granted it could take quite a few years before we see any Irish or Israeli NHLers, in time it could very well happen.)

There are some who argue that some current NHL franchises should be moved. I disagree. It’s horrible for a city to lose a franchise, look at what happened in Winnipeg and Quebec City. I’ll admit at first the thought of the Predators coming to Hamilton excited me, but not anymore, there’s people in Nashville who love hockey and the Predators, and as long as they have fans, they should have a team.

Now the question is, where to expand to? Well there’s lots of places. First and foremost I think should be Winnipeg and Quebec. For too long they have been ignored by Buttman and the NHL brass. Minnesota (North Stars). Ohio (Cleveland Barons). Colorado (Rockies). California (Golden Seals). Philadelphia (Quakers). Pittsburgh (Pirates). St Louis (Eagles). Atlanta (Flames). New York City (Americans). Ottawa (Senators). All these cities had an NHL franchise at one point, only for them to die off or relocate. But, in time, they got their teams back. It took time, I’ll admit, dozens of years, for some, less for others, but they got their teams back. I think Winnipeg and Quebec should be the number one candidate’s for expansion franchises.

And, despite what I said earlier about not believing expansion would thin talent., I don’t think the NHL should expand more then two teams. At least not for a while yet.

32 teams would work pretty well.
2 Conferences. 16 teams per conference.
4 Divisions 4 teams per Division:

West:

North-West Division:

Vancouver Canucks
Edmonton Oilers
Calgary Flames
Winnipeg _____

Pacific Division:
Los Angeles Kings
Anaheim Ducks
San Jose Sharks
Phoenix Coyotes

Central Division:
Minnesota Wild
Detroit Red Wings
Chicago Blackhawks
Colorado Avalanche

_____ Division:
Columbus Blue Jackets
St Louis Blues
Nashville Predators
Dallas Stars

East:

North-East Divison:
Toronto Maple Leafs
Ottawa Senators
Montreal Canadiens
Quebec City ______

Atlantic Division:
Buffalo Sabres
New York Rangers
New York Islanders
Boston Bruins

______ Division:
Philadelphia Flyers
Pittsburgh Penguins
New Jersey
Washington Capitals

South-East Division:
Carolina Hurricanes
Atlanta Thrashers
Tampa Bay Lightning
Florida Panthers.

Season and play-off structure would remain the same, except the 4th seed in each conference would now go to Division leader.

To all of you who read this all the way through, thank you for your time. God bless you.


45 Responses to Expansion

  1. leaffansareajoke says:

    I agree.  Good read.

  2. JuicemaN says:

    Fair enough…although Bettman will die before another team is set-up in Canada…he's doing everything he can to keep it to 6 teams, don't understand why but he is.

    But good article.

  3. NHLman says:

    Bad idea. Expanding will thin talent. You mention hockey picking up momentum in places where we haven't seen players, but the truth is those places will really only contribute average talent that is already overly abundant in North America. You're not going to pick up Shlomo Kraussberg, the Israeli Wayne Gretzky, or Connor O'Brien, the Irish Mario Lemeiux. These places can give you maybe one star player. Look at the populations–statistically, there aren't enough people to expect great players.

    Your realignment of the divisions is terrible. You can't have all the Canadian teams segregated. And do you have a map of the U.S.? How can St. Louis and Columbus be in the same division and Detroit not? DETROIT IS FRICKIN IN BETWEEN THEM. And your splitting up all the rivals. How can the Devils not be in the same division as the Rangers, they're half an hour away from each other!?!

    3 divisions of 5, 5, and 6. Just add Quebec to the North East and Winnipeg to Northwest or Central. Obviously the schedule will have to be rearranged but look at the NL Central they have an extra team and it works.

    By the way when the New York Americans went under the Rangers were already firmly established. They played in the same building, MSG, they even played each other, so that example is rubbish.

  4. NHLman says:

    Bad idea. Expanding will thin talent. You mention hockey picking up momentum in places where we haven't seen players, but the truth is those places will really only contribute average talent that is already overly abundant in North America. You're not going to pick up Shlomo Kraussberg, the Israeli Wayne Gretzky, or Connor O'Brien, the Irish Mario Lemeiux. These places can give you maybe one star player. Look at the populations–statistically, there aren't enough people to expect great players.

    Your realignment of the divisions is terrible. You can't have all the Canadian teams segregated. And do you have a map of the U.S.? How can St. Louis and Columbus be in the same division and Detroit not? DETROIT IS FRICKIN IN BETWEEN THEM. And your splitting up all the rivals. How can the Devils not be in the same division as the Rangers, they're half an hour away from each other!?!

    3 divisions of 5, 5, and 6. Just add Quebec to the North East and Winnipeg to Northwest or Central. Obviously the schedule will have to be rearranged but look at the NL Central they have an extra team and it works.

    By the way when the New York Americans went under the Rangers were already firmly established. They played in the same building, MSG, they even played each other, so that example is rubbish.

  5. NHLman says:

    Bad idea. Expanding will thin talent. You mention hockey picking up momentum in places where we haven't seen players, but the truth is those places will really only contribute average talent that is already overly abundant in North America. You're not going to pick up Shlomo Kraussberg, the Israeli Wayne Gretzky, or Connor O'Brien, the Irish Mario Lemeiux. These places can give you maybe one star player. Look at the populations–statistically, there aren't enough people to expect great players.

    Your realignment of the divisions is terrible. You can't have all the Canadian teams segregated. And do you have a map of the U.S.? How can St. Louis and Columbus be in the same division and Detroit not? DETROIT IS FRICKIN IN BETWEEN THEM. And your splitting up all the rivals. How can the Devils not be in the same division as the Rangers, they're half an hour away from each other!?!

    3 divisions of 5, 5, and 6. Just add Quebec to the North East and Winnipeg to Northwest or Central. Obviously the schedule will have to be rearranged but look at the NL Central they have an extra team and it works.

    By the way when the New York Americans went under the Rangers were already firmly established. They played in the same building, MSG, they even played each other, so that example is rubbish.

  6. TheDonkey says:

    Detroit is between St. Louis and Columbus?  Who drew your map – Lewis & Clark?

  7. kaiser76 says:

    I like the Idea, and would love to see 2 more CDN teams in the NHL.  I agree, that Bettman would rather engage in Prison sex before expanding back to Canada. If it did happen though, I like the new divisions, butI think the Canucks belong in the Pacific Division. They are the only team in the NHL that always travels out of their time zone on every single away game in their own division. granted it is only 1 hour difference with Calgary, and Edmonton but over the season it does take its toll.

    good read, and I would love to see it happen

  8. flamingsenator says:

    good article

    the only problem i have with it is this line

    "there's people in Nashville who love hockey and the Predators, and as long as they have fans, they should have a team."

    that city couldnt support a team that was a stanley cup contender in the new nhl
    every city would have fans if a team was placed there

    if they brought back the jets(i live in winterpeg)….this city would freak out….every person (hockey fan or not) has jets merchandising…..but alas…wont happen

    having a team in hamilton wont do anything for the league except take away sales from the sabres(im pretty sure leaf fans go to sabre games wen they cant get tickets for their own games :p)

  9. hatterson says:

    I'm gonna go ahead and disagree.

    If anything the NHL needs to cut back on its number of markets.  A high number of southern US markets are doing horribly.  You say Nashville has fans, then where are they?  Why could they only muster a half-full building despite having on of the best teams in the league?  Why is the owner wanting to sell so badly after losing 70 million in 10 years? Wouldn't he just want to hang on if there was great support?

    I say the best course of action is moving Nashville to Hamilton or London (Ontario on England) becuase you know you'll have a solid market there.  Take a team like Florida and move them to Winnipeg if you really want and then just can a couple teams that have long records of poor attendance.

    Until the NHL can actually get some attention in the US I think expanding is just setting yourself up for failure.

  10. gambit101 says:

    they should get rid of the whole division winner takes top seads in conference playoffs…. its stupid… but good article… but not all citys can support a team… and i understand if the states doesnt pick up on hockey soon NHL is going to start hurting…

  11. JuicemaN says:

    While your first paragraph is funny, your second is a little unfair…he's using the divisions he proposed as an example and not a geographical FACT.

    "And your splitting up all the rivals." or "And do you have a map of the U.S.?" what is this geography class? How about I point out the fact that you started the sentence with "and" which is a grammatical "no no" as is your double-dash in "look at the populations–statistically, there aren't enough people to expect great players." Not to forget your constant 7 word sentences…grammatically incorrect as well…Do you have an English grammar text book?

    Like I said, he's just using examples and not saying "this is exactly how the divisions would turn out".

    Seriously…what's with people always dying to point out flaws in peoples post…it's a damn hockey rumors board not a spelling, grammar and geography contest.

    Sorry to harp on you but seriously…does it really matter whether he has a US map with him or not?

  12. JuicemaN says:

    Not to mention you hit submit 3 times…once is fine.

  13. JuicemaN says:

    Not to mention you hit submit 3 times…once is fine.

  14. JuicemaN says:

    Not to mention you hit submit 3 times…once is fine.

  15. Mr_Canuck says:

    Good read on the article.

    what kills me for it, although it'll be really tough to fix, is if you have a 4 teat division in each conference that are all canadian, then you're all but eliminating 4 canadian teams each season from the playoffs.

    i'd want max 2-3 canadian teams in a division so we can try and get all 8 in.

  16. Inmate4 says:

    Interesting. Will never happen, but interesting.
    I have a different take on things. I DO think the talent pool is over-saturated. I think we'll see more European players staying home as the RSL, the Finnish first division etc. start to grow and are able to pay comparable salaries.

    You read a lot of ignorant comments on sites like this one how 'Americans don't deserve hockey…'. That's really paraphrasing, but I just want to comment that while I disagree, there is merit in the sense that hockey belongs in the north. So onto my radical plan which I call:
    TEN DEGREES OF SEPARATION – not something that will EVER happen – just something I believe would be great for the game. It goes like this:

    I call it this for a couple of reasons. It isn't perfect, and will never come to fruition, but it's something drastic like this which I believe is the ONLY thing to make hockey better. I'm not saying it's going to make more American fans or increase it's popularity to a Big 4 sport in USA. Just better for the game. Now back to my '10 degrees of separation'.

    The 49th parallel separates Canada's western provinces and American states. Let's face it. Hockey is a winter sport. It has no place in the south. So we keep northern teams from the U.S.A. Anything above the 39th parallel. (Roughly near the Mason-Dixon line and just extend it across the country) Or 10 degrees south of the border. This, not so coincidentally eliminates 10 southern teams. St. Louis and Washington are on the cusp so will remain.

    And I know (at least based on attendance) that all of these teams aren't the "10 worst teams". It's simple geography based on a winter sport… We add 4 teams north of here: Seattle, Winnipeg, Hamilton, Quebec City. Now we have a perfectly sized 24 team league with 4 divisions of 6 teams each.

    Some people will have different ideas about division layout.
    Here's what I have:
    WEST
    PACIFIC: Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Colorado, Seattle, Winnipeg
    CENTRAL: Minnesota, St Lou, Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Columbus
    EAST
    ATLANTIC: Buffalo, NYR, NYI, NJ, PHilly, Washington
    NORTHEAST: Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Boston, Hamilton, Quebec.

    A couple of things:
    1) Columbus: Do they deserve to stay? They're 'in the zone' so yes. Maybe there's a better location for them?
    2) Boston: Is it right to have 5 Canadian teams and Boston? Not that the quality would be better, but Beantown might prefer some American rivals.

    Schedule:
    Within division: 4 games x 5 = 20 games
    other conference division: 4 games x 6 = 24 games
    other conference: 2 games x 12 teams – 24 games
    Total: 68 games
    That's about a month less so hockey is potentially done in early to mid-May. Again, not that this plan is about creating more fans, but I know (even in Canada) diehard hockey fans who have trouble with the playoffs ending in mid-June. I, myself…well I manage 🙂

    I had just been thinking about this for awhile and this seemed like a good a place as any to throw it out there. Again, just me dreaming…I just want hockey to start up again…. Inmate4

  17. wayne2 says:

    My NHL:
    eastern conference:
    Ottawa
    Toronto
    Montréal
    Québec

    Buffalo
    Boston
    NYrangers
    NYislanders
    Hartford

    Philadelphia
    Pittsburgh
    Washington
    Columbus

    western conference:
    Vancouver
    Edmonton
    Calgary
    Winnipeg
    Portland

    St-Louis
    Chicago
    Detroit
    Minesota

    Colorado
    Dallas
    Los Angeles
    San Jose

    All teams that have a significant hockey following or real potential.

  18. NHLman says:

                                      Detroit
                                                                                           
                                                                             Columbus
    St. Louis

    It's something like this.

  19. NHLman says:

    7 word sentences? Starting a sentence with and? I don't know where you learned English, but a sentence could have one word (Go.) in it or 27 words, so obviously 7 is sufficient. Anyone that abides by the "don't start a sentence with and," is still following rules they learned in first grade. And what's with this double dash nonsense? Are you referring to Mario Kart: Double Dash?

    Nowhere did he say he was only using his divisions as an example. Thus, without such a modifier I have to assume that he has put thought into it and is actually proposing such an alignment.

  20. NHLman says:

    That was an accident, the page froze.

  21. beckfan05 says:

    What happened to the Devils?

  22. slootermac says:

    good article… The eastern conference would provide some very good inter-divisional rivalries. I think the philadelphia division should just be called the "Flyers Division"… Give it to them every year….

  23. wayne2 says:

    They`re gone,apparentely this is a franchise that struggles if they dont win so if thats true they should lose their franchise.In that area the fans have
    both NY teams and Buffalo so maybe thats why.

  24. rangers11 says:

    If youre going to expand the leauge i think the only place to do it is in Canada. I'm an American but i dont think that hockey is doing well enough in the states to add another team. I live in New York too and although the Rangers and hockey are popular here, hockey still takes a major back seat to all other sports. There is also the chance that it may dilute the talent a little bit. In the USA there is no real recognition of "popular" "star" hockey players. All adding more teams would do would show Americans more nobodys who play hockey. Thats why this could only (possibly) work in Canada.

    About your divisions, theres no way the Rangers could be in a separate division than the devils, waay to close to each other. Although i didnt like the concept of the Canadian division in the east, it might not be a bad thing. It may force Americans to compete with other American cities for hockey supremacy, while Canadians do the same. That might help hockey gain some popularity in those American cities.

  25. wingsfan13 says:

    its hard to find someone in the states who likes and is knowledgeable about hockey in general still and is interested.  football and basketball are still oogled over, why i dont know.  you can't even find many decent hockey stores in places where hockey is popular in the US, (e.g. detroit)

  26. JuicemaN says:

    Well, if you can't see the grammical errors that you made but yet point out his flaws then there's clearly no arguing with you.

    As for starting a sentance with "and" that's not grade 1, that's common sense.

    Also "without such a modifier I have to assume" If you assume on something that obvious then you must run into a lot of problems in your life.

    He was simply trying to get a conversation going and talking about something simple and you edited his article as if you were his geography teacher.   Why not let people post topics without editing every last word they say…or does pointing out errors make yhou feel superior to them? Do you really think when he posted his article he should've thought "geeze, I hope I'm not inaccurate in my geographic mentions…this is a hockey board and I might be criticized based on my geography skills"

    Oh yeah… the double dash, nope I'm not talking about video games but simply pointing out the double dash you typed….allow me to re-copy and paste it for you:

    "populations–statistically"  if you actually take a look at the two words you typed, in between the "s" on populations and the "s" on statistically you had typed "–" that myfriend is a "double dash" not a video game like you default to but a "double dash", a dash being "-" x2.

    So if you're going to pick at peoples articles and bash it based on "assumptions" then perhaps you should watch what you type or say because your article is full of errors.

    I for one preffer to stick to hockey talk and not point out peoples errors, however I'm doing it to you and yet you're defending yourself….annoying isn't it.

  27. habsrock99 says:

    logically, you can't put a team in Europe unless you are going to do a whole North America vs Europe thing like Major League Baseball does with the NL vs the AL. Not to mention, the Stanley Cup should go nowhere else but North America. Much like the World Series and the Superbowl (Grey Cup in Canada's case). I guarantee that the first time a European team won the Stanley Cup, hockey would hurt incredibly. Also, how do you know that London England has a great hockey market? Unless you live there and you go and see the little hockey that they have to offer and every single building is sold out, then yes, it's a great market. When thinking of Expansion, the NHL MUST and i can't emphasize MUST anymore than that, but they MUST look at the geographical location of the planned expansion city. The City must first meet a certain criteria that has been laid out by professional sports and that is a population of over 500 000 or 750 000 (Honesty, I cannot remember which one it is). I know Boston has been reported as to having a population of less than 600 000, do i know if that is true, no i do not but also, you can't and i mean CAN'T move an Original 6 team, it would be sacriligious. Also, the NHL MUST examine the geographical location based on the Division it can play in. Look at the North East Division, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Buffalo and Boston are incredibly close to one another. The thing about London, Ontario is that they have over 500 000 people living there although the signs say different (350 000) they would have to expand the John Labatt Centre so as to meet the criteria of holding at least 17 500 people and currently, it seats roughly 9500 people. They would also have to expand the ice surface to meet the NHL requirements. That costs money and a lot of it. And to top the whole cake off, the Philadelphia Flyers owner owns the JLC and would he be willing to sell it, I really doubt it.

  28. leaffansareajoke says:

    I lived in South Jersey for 20 years, hockey was everywhere.

    Had dozens of hockey stores and the like.

    Now don't take this as a racist comment, but i believe if there are a lot of blacks around, the hockey stores kinda go under.  White people don't wander near black zones, especially in Detroit.

    Its like putting a Hockey Store in Camden, NJ.  If you're white and in Camden you get pulled over and asked questions. 

  29. JuicemaN says:

    I'm just teasing you.

  30. ferron says:

       I agree , IMO Quebec' s one of the best place if not the best place in the WORLD as for fan base,  nowhere on this earth is hockey as popular than in Quebec and i'm not even from Quebec(N-B.) but these Guys(Quebecois) eat, sleep and talk Hockey non-stopped! When they had a team they where sold out every night even though they where collecting 23 pts a SEASON. If Bettman doesn't think that Quebec can't support a team than WHO can? I'm an HABS fan, i hated the Nordiques but now I realy miss hating them, If some of you out there never saw a Quebec vs Montreal game, well you haven't seen true Hockey!

  31. ferron says:

     What happened to Anaheim? last year Stanley Cup Champions!

  32. mooresy44 says:

    detroit is not in between columbus and st louis.  detroit is northwest of columbus while st louis is south west of columbus therefore columbus is pretty much in between detroit and st louis.  the conference should be st louis, columbus, detroit, chicago

  33. mooresy44 says:

    just kidding i dont know, i forgot about minnesota, nashville is on other side of st louis so maybe nashville, columbus, detroit, chicago.. or minnesota whatver u guys get the point the 4 closest cities should be together thats all

  34. hatterson says:

    I meant to say "London (Ontario not England)"  I just was doing two things and once and didn't read over it.

    I don't think for a second that England would support a hockey team right now.

    As for the ability of London Ontario to be a site I'm not concerned about an arena.  They wouldn't renovate their existing one they would they'd build a new one through new owner money and, of course, taxpayer pockets.

    But either way, it was more an off the cuff idea rather than a true suggestion to move there.

  35. PointMeAtTheSky says:

    At the beginning of the article I put a disclaimer saying that everything was just my personal opinion. Including divisional alignments.

    As for the New York Americans, yes, the Rangers were alive and well. However 30 years after the Americans folded, New York as granted an expansion team…the Islanders.

    As for those saying the Predators don't deserve a franchise, I once thought the same thing. But after hearing about the people in Nashville who are trying to save their team, I felt bad for them, and it reminded me of those in Winnipeg who tried to save their team.

    I think the NHL should have expanded all over the northern US and Canada before going to places like Nashville and Florida and California. However, now that they have their teams, It would be sad for their fans if they relocated. I'm actually of two minds on the subject, as I would love to see at least one team in every Canadian province(I can imagine they would be able to support teams, but I'm not even close to sure, just a little whimsical dreaming on my part) and in other northern US states. Ontario could definitely support 4 teams or more, but why not give other provinces a chance?

    I like Inmates idea though. :p

  36. kamullia says:

    Unless there is a Detroit in Indiana that I do not know about, Detroit is not between Columbus and St. Louis. It is in fact, almost dead north of Columbus.

    And to take the debate out of this one, here is a link to prove it on GOOGLE MAPS

  37. kamullia says:

    Unless there is a Detroit in Indiana that I do not know about, Detroit is not between Columbus and St. Louis. It is in fact, almost dead north of Columbus.

    And to take the debate out of this one, here is a link to prove it on GOOGLE MAPS

  38. kamullia says:

    Unless there is a Detroit in Indiana that I do not know about, Detroit is not between Columbus and St. Louis. It is in fact, almost dead north of Columbus.

    And to take the debate out of this one, here is a link to prove it on GOOGLE MAPS

  39. kamullia says:
      A high number of southern US markets are doing horribly.

    This is a common misconception, and it always comes up when people talk relocation. Yes, Nashville has done badly and it is probably not a good hockey market. But to put this in perspective, all of New Jersey (average of 14,230 in 2006, 14,176 – 2007), St. Louis (14,213 – 2006, 12,520 – 2007), Washington (13,905 -2006, 13,929 – 2007), Chicago (13,318 – 2006, 12,727 -2007), and the NY Islanders (12,609 – 2006, 12,886 – 2007) have had worse attendance than Nashville or any other team for that matter. The difference here is that all the teams above are not complaining about their loses, but they are certainly not making money.

    Therefore, if we are going strictly by attendance, or money making, we need to relocate all of those teams first, before we start talking Nashville. Otherwise moving Nashville is a hypocrite proposal if we are going to use money making and attendance as the reasons.

    Winnipeg Islanders anyone? Nah. I say we move the original-six teams first. The Hamilton Blackhawks here we come!

  40. nordiques100 says:

    I would love to see someone to do this test:

    move a team OUT of canada.

    i would love to see what type of fight bettman would put up. he has certainly fought tooth and nail to keep a team in a bad market in nashville. so lets see if his feelings are the same for a team in canada.

    honestly if someone came in today and said i want to move this team out of canada to say kansas city, i think the agreement papers would be drafted up on the spot.

    thats what makes bettman a complete joke. he is so pro american its not funny. he's the biggest hypocrite ever.

    while your expansion plan seems nice on paper, its just not going to happen….at least not with any additions of teams in canada.

    kansas city, oklahoma city, houston, las vegas, portland, seattle, fargo north dakota….any of these US cities will get a team before one goes to canada.

  41. TheCanadianHozer says:

    I don't think there should be another Ontario team. I think that there are other markets in Canada where hockey could flourish, spread the wealth :)!

  42. TheCanadianHozer says:

    If they were ever to rearrange the divisions I'd want to see more Original 6 match ups : Chicago, New York, Montreal, Toronto, Detroit and Boston. I believe (sorry if I am wrong) but Toronto fans only get to see Detroit playing in Toronto once every THREE years?! That's insane! They should really push some of the new teams to have rivalries so that fans start to grow more interested.

    …… Or they can try the Florida Panthers method of putting attractive girls in the first three to five rows of the rink to attract more clientele 🙂

  43. Inmate4 says:

    quote:  I like Inmates idea 😛

    Thanks PMATS.

    I got long winded in my response.  My 24 team league looks like this:

    WEST
    PACIFIC: Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Colorado, Seattle, Winnipeg
    CENTRAL: Minnesota, St Lou, Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Columbus
    EAST
    ATLANTIC: Buffalo, NYR, NYI, NJ, PHilly, Washington
    NORTHEAST: Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Boston, Hamilton, Quebec.

    PMATS you mention it would be nice to see a team in every province, well
    I live in Halifax, NS and would love to add a team into the NorthEast, move Boston to the Atlantic, Philly to Central and Columbus to the BSHL (Bettman's Stupid Hockey League).

    In reality, Halifax has a population of 375,000 with about 1/2 million within 2 hours.  Not big enough to support an NHL team.  Hell, we can't even get a lowly CFL team (because we have no stadium among other things.)
    Therefore that eliminates the rest of the Atlantic provinces which have smaller populations.

  44. PointMeAtTheSky says:

    Yeah, I had a feeling that people would feel that the Atlantic provinces couldn't handle a team.

    And they may be right. To be completely honest, I have no idea whatsoever. So I will take your word for it, as you actually live there :p.

    But in a perfect world, wouldn't it be nice to have a team in each province?

  45. PointMeAtTheSky says:

    Unfortuatley, I think you may be right.

    Bettman let the Jets and Nordiques walk. 

    However, don't forget that the Ottawa Senators were in deep financial trouble in 2003, and there was much talk of relocation, but the NHL helped them out. How much of that was Bettman, who knows? But it would be out of character for him to actually care about a Canadian franchise.

Leave a Reply