What Would The Ideal NHL Look Like?

I've been reading up on the 1967 NHL expansion, in which the size of the league doubled in size, thus ending the era of the original six that had started in 1942. Most of those teams are still around today, except for the Califronia Seals which moved to Cleveland in 1976, and then stopped existing altogether when they merged with the Minnesota North Stars. The North Star themselves would eventually be moved to Dallas, becoming the Dallas Stars in 1993 (Minnesota would see a NHL team return to them in the form of the Wild in 2000).The NHL next expanded when it merged with the WHA, adding four more teams along with it in 1979. Between 1967 and 1979, six additional teams were added in Vancouver,Buffalo, Washington,New York (the Islanders joining the Original Six Rangers), and Atlanta, though the Atlanta team was eventually moved to Calgary. Another team, the Kansas City Scouts, was also added during this time, though it was moved twice, once to Colorado, and then next to New Jersey, where it still resides.

Today, it's clear that the NHL has changed alot in size in the past 45 years. After Wayne Gretzky was traded to the Los Angeles Kings, Hockey expanded widely into the US, so that it now has 30 teams in total. The Post-Gretzky expansion has been a difficult at times.

So that got me thinking, what would be the Ideal NHL look like? How many teams would it have, and where would the bbe located? What would the divisions look like, and how would the Playoffs be structured? Let's say you can't go back any further than the 1967 expansion. What would you do to the NHL?
 
For one, there probably wouldn't be teams in markets like Phoenix and such, that have no history of anything related to hockey.
 
The expanding NHL is by no means a bad thing, especially in big media markets like Los Angeles where there is both sufficient media interest and fan interest to keep the game prospering in an area where hockey isn't a really big deal. But I completely fail to see the point of NHL teams in Nashville, North Carolina, Florida, Dallas or Phoenix. Colorado, some parts of the West Coast and the northeast and midwest, this is possible because hockey has a long history there and is well known. But the reason for 30 teams is to try and get big TV deals, which is not gonna work for anything other than baseball and football, and to a lesser extent basketball and auto racing. Just not big enough nationwide.

As a Canadian, I am always gonna say that there should be more teams in Canada, but on a practical note that point is valid. Ottawa got their NHL team back in 1992, but then Bettman arrived and effectively shoved the Quebec Nordiques and Winnipeg Jets south. It's not coincidence that as the NHL has found itself with trouble in its southern markets that all of a sudden Winnipeg got their team back and Quebec City is dumping four hundred million bucks into a new arena to get theirs back. The point was, again?

If the NHL is expanding, first ground should always be a Canadian market. You don't have the NBA or MLB to worry about outside of the largest cities, and Canadians play more hockey than any other nation on Earth. Eight teams (Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, Winnipeg and Quebec City) is a good start, but realistically Toronto or Montreal could support a second team quite easily and markets like Halifax and Hamilton could do so as well. Assuming no second teams (Maple Leafs and Canadiens management would go bonkers at the prospect), putting teams in Halifax and Hamilton (or Kitchener if one wants to be farther from Toronto) put you at ten Canucks squads.

After that you go to places in the Northeastern and Midwestern United States. In the Northeast, Hartford tried to keep their team and failed because of the owner demanding a new arena and falling ticket sales. IOTL the fans of the team fought hard to keep it, so build that new arena and the Whalers stay in Hartford, no Carolina Hurricanes. Winnipeg and Quebec City staying put butterflies the Phoenix Coyotes and Colorado Avalanche, the latter is probably a place to put a franchise, though. With two teams in New York and one each in Washington, Boston, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Buffalo and Hartford, you've got the market pretty loaded here. Baltimore could be an option, especially if you go in after the Colts move to Indianapolis in 1984. In the Midwest, you have teams in Detroit and Chicago (both Original Six teams), as well as Columbus, St. Louis and Minnesota, the latter having been tried there twice and the second team having very nearly ended up in Saskatchewan. (No, I am not kidding.) I don't think Saskatchewan has the population for an NHL team, so I'm not going there, but I'm surprised Columbus took as long as it did to show up (only came around in 2000) and that Indianapolis and Milwaukee have no NHL teams. One each for those two and an earlier arrival to Columbus and away we go. I'm also willing to give Nashville an in because of the fact that its team's fanbase is as loyal as any in the NHL, a fact that shows in the fact that of the expansion teams in the South, its the only one that has not had any financial issues, Jim Balsillie's ill-advised stunts notwithstanding.

Out west, Los Angeles makes a fair bit of sense because of the earlier point of a big media market. Likewise, The San Francisco Bay area is worthy of consideration because of a big market. Denver and Seattle are also good places for NHL teams, the latter especially because of the natural rivalry them and Vancouver would surely develop. I'd also be aiming for a franchise in Salt Lake City, particularly as the area was developing for the Olympics. Portland and Anchorage are potential markets, the latter especially because of a complete lack of any other professional sports anywhere in Alaska and the city's growing wealth and population, but iffy for a variety of reasons.

Going with all of that, my ideal NHL would have the following divisions:

Eastern Conference

Atlantic Division

Halifax Hurricanes
Quebec Nordiques
Boston Bruins
Hartford Whalers
New York Islanders

Northeast Division

New York Rangers
Philadelphia Flyers
Baltimore Ravens
Pittsburgh Penguins
Washington Capitals

Central Division

Toronto Maple Leafs
Montreal Canadiens
Ottawa Senators
Detroit Red Wings
Buffalo Sabres
Columbus Blue Jackets

Western Conference

Midwest Division
Chicago Blackhawks
Nashville Predators
Indianapolis Thrashers
Milwaukee Admirals
Minnesota Wild

Southwest Division
Los Angeles Kings
San Francisco Sharks
Colorado Avalanche
Salt Lake Rockies
St. Louis Blues

Northwest Division
Vancouver Canucks
Edmonton Oilers
Calgary Flames
Winnipeg Jets
Seattle Challengers
Alaska Bears
 

FDW

Banned

I'm inclined to say no to any Alaska team (Alaska isn't big enough), and that there should be a team in Portland instead (Metro area: 2.3 million compared to Alaska's 700,000). The seattle team should be called something along the lines of Thunderbirds or Metropolitans (as they were names for minor-league NHL hockey teams). For San Francisco, the reason why neither the NBA or the NHL play in the city right is because the local arena (known as the Cow Palace) is really old (built in 1941) and has a low capacity (Like 12,000), and if the POD for this "ideal NFL" is before 1972, than the local team would still be the California/Oakland Seals. Further east, you ignore the potential of Cleveland, Kansas City and Cincinnati, and if the team in Colorado is the one that became the New Jersey Devils OTL, then the team there would be called the Rockies, while the Utah team would be called the Stingers.
 
From what I've heard, the Tampa Bay Lightning are supported relatively well so they're one of the southern teams that could stay.


Here are areas I think could get an NHL team:

Canada: Quebec City, Halifax
US: Seattle, Salt Lake City, Milwaukee
 
I'm inclined to say no to any Alaska team (Alaska isn't big enough), and that there should be a team in Portland instead (Metro area: 2.3 million compared to Alaska's 700,000). The seattle team should be called something along the lines of Thunderbirds or Metropolitans (as they were names for minor-league NHL hockey teams). For San Francisco, the reason why neither the NBA or the NHL play in the city right is because the local arena (known as the Cow Palace) is really old (built in 1941) and has a low capacity (Like 12,000), and if the POD for this "ideal NFL" is before 1972, than the local team would still be the California/Oakland Seals. Further east, you ignore the potential of Cleveland, Kansas City and Cincinnati, and if the team in Colorado is the one that became the New Jersey Devils OTL, then the team there would be called the Rockies, while the Utah team would be called the Stingers.

You make a good point about the arena in San Fran. That is why they moved. Mel Swig, the Seal owner in 1975, tried to get an arena built there, but a mayoral race probably delayed an election, so Mel decided to move the team to Cleveland to become the Barons.

As for a more ideal NHL, would the league be better today without the Great Depression? There were teams that were affected by that, weren't there?
 

FDW

Banned
You make a good point about the arena in San Fran. That is why they moved. Mel Swig, the Seal owner in 1975, tried to get an arena built there, but a mayoral race probably delayed an election, so Mel decided to move the team to Cleveland to become the Barons.

As for a more ideal NHL, would the league be better today without the Great Depression? There were teams that were affected by that, weren't there?

Generally, if you're not going back to a POD before 1915, the Great Depression is impossible to get rid of, though it might be possible to see a couple more teams survive the depression and WWII (like the Brooklyn Americans and maybe one of Ottawa-St Louis, Pittsburgh-Philadelphia, and Montreal) if you play you're cards right.
 
Hamilton would have a team. (I care nothing about Hockey except to see an NHL team in Hamilton.)
 
Now I know teams like Toronto, Buffalo and Detroit wouldn't like it, but there can easily be more teams in Ontario.

Another team in Toronto or Hamilton. You could even have one in Southwestern Ontario, say Waterloo or London (I know they are only about 400,000 each, but the area has over a million people, which is more than Winnipeg, plus you could steal fans from Windsor, Niagara and even Toronto.

Wouldn't mind a team back in Hartford either...
 
It would stop the current trend of much more suspension. Get rid of Bettman too, he's been there way too long...
 
roadrunners

Phoenix may not be a good market for hockey, but but I think Albuquerque would be better. Albuquerque is the only city with a commuter rail system that does not have a major league sports team. There is good skiing within a hundred miles, and there is not any other game witin hundreds of miles. They could take one of the Florida teams. And if Phoenix stays as well, there will be the acme of rivalries.
 

FDW

Banned
Phoenix may not be a good market for hockey, but but I think Albuquerque would be better. Albuquerque is the only city with a commuter rail system that does not have a major league sports team. There is good skiing within a hundred miles, and there is not any other game witin hundreds of miles. They could take one of the Florida teams. And if Phoenix stays as well, there will be the acme of rivalries.

I think New Mexico is still too small for a NHL team at this point, and that the priority for expansion should be either (besides Quebec City, and maybe Hamilton in Canada) where the market has gaps in coverage AND interest in the sport (Thus Seattle, Portland, Sacramento and Salt Lake City in the west and Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Kansas City, and Cleveland in the Mid-West).
 
Let's say you can't go back any further than the 1967 expansion. What would you do to the NHL?

Since most things I'd change are back before the Original Six era, not much. One thing would be to not have the head offices leave Montreal, keeping the league Canadian.

Oh, I forgot to mention this report here, which is relevant to the thread.

http://www.mowatcentre.ca/pdfs/mowatResearch/31.pdf

It should be noted, for whoever reads that report, that Markham has greenlit the construction of a new 20,000 seat NHL-calibre arena in their city limits, so for that bit on the GTA having no other arenas is no longer true.
 

FDW

Banned
Since most things I'd change are back before the Original Six era, not much. One thing would be to not have the head offices leave Montreal, keeping the league Canadian.

Better merger with the WHA (Getting the Houston Aeros and Cincinnati Stingers into the league as well), keeping The Seals/Barons intact and a franchise in Seattle and Ottawa assuming a 1967 POD.
 
For the sake of argument, let's divide the NHL into tiers. The top tier (Tier A) are teams that have large fan bases and a strong history. These are the top franchises in the NHL. The second tier (Tier B) are teams with strong fan bases and high revenue, but don't have a particularly great history. The third tier teams are those that have strong historical success, but don't pull in big revenue. The lowest tier are those teams that don't make much money and haven't done much of historical note.

Tier A
Boston Bruins
Chicago Blackhawks
Detroit Red Wings
Montreal Canadiens
New York Rangers
Philadelphia Flyers
Pittsburgh Penguins
Toronto Maple Leafs

Tier B
Anaheim Ducks
Calgary Flames
Colorado Avalanche
Dallas Stars
Los Angeles Kings
Minnesota Wild
Ottawa Senators
San Jose Sharks
Vancouver Canucks
Washington Capitals

Tier C
Edmonton Oilers
New Jersey Devils
New York Islanders

Tier D
Buffalo Sabres
Carolina Hurricanes
Columbus Blue Jackets
Florida Panthers
Nashville Predators
Phoenix Coyotes
St. Louis Blues
Tampa Bay Lightning
Winnipeg Jets

Based on this list, it's much easier to see who should stay and who should go within the NHL. Assuming that the league needs to be approximately 30 teams (to keep it inline with the other major American sports leagues), then there needs to be some significant changes. First off, all of the teams in Tier A stay. They've done enough to remain in the NHL as long as it exists. Let's also keep Tier B around. They offer diverse markets and strong fan bases that will expand the popularity of the game. That means a league of 18 teams.

Now let's use a fine-toothed comb to pick through the final 12. Some of these teams may be worth keeping, others may not be. Let's start with the Tier C teams. First off, Edmonton stays. It's the team most identified with Wayne Gretzky, and as such should not be wiped out. It's also in Canada, which is reason enough. The New Jersey Devils should also remain. They're doing well enough financially to warrant their remained existence. That leaves the New York Islanders. Yes, they've won their fare share of Cups and were a dynasty in the 1980s. But New York has proven that it can't maintain two hockey franchises. They are the second least valuable team in the NHL and are not competitive. That means they're the first team on the chopping block.

On to Tier D. The Buffalo Sabres should stay. They're losing money, but have a relatively low percentage of debt. Also Buffalo is as good a location as any for a "small town" franchise. It's near Canada and is in a heavily populated state. The Winnipeg Jets also stick around. They're Canadian and haven't been around long enough for their franchise value to mean much. That leaves the Carolina Hurricanes, Columbus Blue Jackets, Florida Panthers, Nashville Predators, Phoenix Coyotes, St. Louis Blues, and Tampa Bay Lightning. Each team needs to go. They don't make enough money, nor do they have a past worth maintaining. Also, they are the legacy of a terrible error on the part of Garry Bettman and the NHL.

With that, we have eight franchises that need to be relocated. Here they are:

-Carolina Hurricanes
-Columbus Blue Jackets
-Florida Panthers
-Nashville Predators
-New York Islanders
-Phoenix Coyotes
-St. Louis Blues
-Tampa Bay Lightning

The first thing to do is take Carolina Hurricanes and move them back to Hartford. It may be a small market, but the team will draw crowds from the New York and Boston regions as well as appealing to the affluent residents of Connecticut. The next step is to look at a list of potential cities for NHL teams. The following is a list of cities that have made serious appeals for a franchise according to Wikipedia:

-Hamilton
-Greater Toronto Area
-Quebec City
-Saskatoon
-Kansas City
-Seattle
-Las Vegas
-Houston

Of these sites, let's eliminate Kansas City, Las Vegas, and Houston. They all face the same problems as other Sunbelt or Midwestern teams. Those cities lack hockey history and will not draw the crowds necessary to maintain a team (2/3 of revenue is ticket sales). Going off of that, the three obvious choices for teams are Hamilton, Quebec City, and Seattle. All are large markets that are either in Canada or in cold climates. That leaves four more teams that need to be relocated. For the four other cities, here are my proposals: move one team to Portland. Even though it is nearby Seattle, it is still a solid location and one which already has an NHL quality stadium. Put another team in Salt Lake City. It has a young population that spends a lot of money on outdoor sporting activities and would likely support an NHL team. At this point, there are two more franchises that need to be moved. There is also a deficit of cities that fit the needs of NHL franchises. Thus, there needs to be a compromise of sorts. The Islanders will move from Nassau County to New York City, either Queens or Brooklyn. Another team will move to the Toronto Suburbs, despite the criticism of the Leafs. This is an imperfect solution, but it addresses the concerns of population and gate draws.

With that, here is what the new NHL would look like. I still think the two conference, three division set up works best as it is consistent with the other leagues:

Eastern Conference
Atlantic Division
Northeast Division
Coastal Division
New Jersey Devils​
Buffalo Sabres​
Boston Bruins​
New York Rangers​
Hamilton Tigers​
Hartford Whalers​
New York Islanders (Brooklyn/Queens)​
Ottawa Senators​
Montreal Canadiens​
Philadelphia Flyers​
Toronto Legacy (Markham)​
Quebec Nordiques (Quebec City)​
Pittsburgh Penguins​
Toronto Mapple Leafs​
Washington Capitals​

Western Conference
Central Division
Northwest Division
Chicago Blackhawks​
Calgary Flames​
Anaheim Ducks​
Detroit Red Wings​
Colorado Avalanche​
Los Angeles Kings​
Minnesota Wild​
Edmonton Oilers​
Seattle Seals​
Winnipeg Jets​
Utah Ice (Salt Lake City)​
Portland Storm​
Dallas Stars​
Vancouver Canucks​
 
My ideal NHL...well, it would definitely be free of GARY BETTMANN, that team stealing fool...

It would stop the current trend of much more suspension. Get rid of Bettman too, he's been there way too long...

That makes me wonder, who else could replace Bettman in this TL?

Since most things I'd change are back before the Original Six era, not much. One thing would be to not have the head offices leave Montreal, keeping the league Canadian.

If you want, feel free to say what you would change before the Original Six era.
 

FDW

Banned

Okay, you've earned the eternal hatred of Nothingnow, for daring to propose that his beloved Tampa Bay Lightning be moved. Now onto more serious commentary.

Of the eight you proposed to move:

-Phoenix Coyotes: I'm think that the insanity behind could only be happening because God is Coyotes fan. I'm starting to think that they're not going to move, ever.

-St Louis Blues: Why are they even on this list? They're one of the most Successful teams, even if they've never won it all.

-Carolina Hurricanes: While to some I degree I can agree on them being moved, I'm not a fan of bringing them back to Hartford, as that was a tough market to hold down.

-Tampa Bay Lightning: Nothingnow will give a 20-page essay on why it's good idea to not fuck with this team.

-Columbus Blue Jackets: I'm going to say that this is perfectly viable Hockey market, it's just that this team can't win anything.

-Florida Panthers: No problem here, the team won't be missed.

-New York Islanders: They really should be moved away from New York, as they're going through the same issues that Whalers went through in the 90's.

-Nashville Predators: I'm inclined to disagree here, as this team has put some extreme effort into building a fan base there, and it's started to reap dividends.
 
Okay, you've earned the eternal hatred of Nothingnow, for daring to propose that his beloved Tampa Bay Lightning be moved. Now onto more serious commentary.

Of the eight you proposed to move:

-Phoenix Coyotes: I'm think that the insanity behind could only be happening because God is Coyotes fan. I'm starting to think that they're not going to move, ever.

-St Louis Blues: Why are they even on this list? They're one of the most Successful teams, even if they've never won it all.

-Carolina Hurricanes: While to some I degree I can agree on them being moved, I'm not a fan of bringing them back to Hartford, as that was a tough market to hold down.

-Tampa Bay Lightning: Nothingnow will give a 20-page essay on why it's good idea to not fuck with this team.

-Columbus Blue Jackets: I'm going to say that this is perfectly viable Hockey market, it's just that this team can't win anything.

-Florida Panthers: No problem here, the team won't be missed.

-New York Islanders: They really should be moved away from New York, as they're going through the same issues that Whalers went through in the 90's.

-Nashville Predators: I'm inclined to disagree here, as this team has put some extreme effort into building a fan base there, and it's started to reap dividends.


Most of the teams on your list are financially unsound. They have high levels of debt, don't sell tickets, and don't sell merchandise. I think the argument that they have small but rabid fanbases is irrelevant. The NHL is principally a business. These teams aren't making money, and don't have a great history, so move them.
 
Top