who deserves the next expansion team (olympics, MLS, Champion, Hawks)

[pbergen]

seattle should be at the top of any nba expansion/relocation list. it's a proven, viable nba market that lost the sonics due to an arena issue and shady out-of-town ownership that never had any intention of keeping the team in town, rather than a lack of fan interest. but the city won't get a replacement team until a new arena is built.

as much as david stern badmouthed the city over the past year or two, i highly doubt that he's really closed the book on seattle as an nba market. it's a metro area of 4 million people with a major corporate presence and a lot of disposable income, not to mention a strong tradition of supporting the franchise (even as recently as 2006-2007, the key arena was filled to an average of 93% capacity per game). the nba should definitely be there; it's just up to the city of seattle and/or state of washington to work with the potential owner of a new seattle franchise (steve ballmer of microsoft) on building an nba-ready arena.

the next city on the list should be las vegas. some pro sport is eventually going to put a team there, and IMO the nba is the best fit due to the city's flashy, high-rolling image. plus, a sport as fast-paced and acrobatic as basketball would seem to be a perfect complement to the various entertainment options in vegas, such as cirque du soleil, that aim to "wow" the audience with dazzling/high-flying theatrics. i could easily see plenty of tourists, even the ones who are casual sports fans at best, shelling out their money for an nba game. i don't know if i could say the same about the nhl, which is the other sport that is rumored to be looking into vegas as a possible destination. for what it's worth, the nfl and mlb don't seem to have the city on their radar at all right now, so an nba team in vegas looks to be a fairly good possibility within the next 5-10 years.

the darkhorse in all of this is kansas city. although david stern has expressed little to no interest in placing a team there, the fact is that kc has a beautiful, brand new arena called the sprint center in its downtown area that has no major league sports tenants. while kc seems to be pushing harder for the nhl right now, it's not out of the realm of possibility that a faltering nba team could end up there, since the arena is state-of-the-art and can immediately house a relocated franchise.

[happynoodleboycey]

Originally Posted by maestro

As a Knicks fan, I'd love to see NBA-caliber basketball return to Madison Square Garden one day. (ha ha)

Haha, amen to that. I feel your pain brother.

[MILWCITY]

The largest metro area without a pro sports team is Las Vegas, then falls Columbus Oh. I give it to Las Vegas.

[pbergen]

Originally Posted by MILWCITY

The largest metro area without a pro sports team is Las Vegas, then falls Columbus Oh. I give it to Las Vegas.

you're right about vegas, but columbus has the nhl and major league soccer.

[MILWCITY]

nobody really cares about soccer or hockey both sports are barely on tv.

[pbergen]

while soccer and hockey aren't nearly as popular as the nfl, mlb, and nba, they're still legitimate top-level professional sports leagues and certainly have a passionate (if smaller) following of their own. believe me, there are plenty of nhl fans here in nyc. same in detroit, philly, boston, dallas, san jose, minnesota, and of course all the canadian cities. in fact, you could argue that the nhl teams in detroit, minnesota, and philly are more popular than the local nba teams.

and hockey is "barely on tv"? sorry, that's not true at all.
every single ny rangers, nj devils, and ny islanders game is broadcast on the local cable tv and radio here in ny. in fact, i just watched the rangers beat the florida panthers in an overtime shootout.

any nhl market would presumably broadcast each and every game of the local team on tv and radio. maybe you don't see any games because you're from a city that doesn't have an nhl team? i would've expected that you'd get either minnesota wild or chicago blackhawks games by default.

meanwhile, it isn't quite as easy to catch every single major league soccer game compared with the "big 4" sports leagues because in many markets, games are split up amongst several channels. still, every game is broadcast - just not necessarily in a non-mls market like where you live.

bottom line is that no matter what you want to believe, the nhl and mls are legit top-level pro sports leagues. and as long as columbus has the blue jackets (nhl) and the crew (mls), it is a major league town with major league sports. compare that with las vegas, which doesn't have anything other than minor league sports.

[scootertrash61]

seattle, for three big reasons.

1. around 4 million people in the seattle metro area

2. an affluent area, which is important considering the ticket and concession prices for the nba

3. that scumbag stern owes the seattle area big time

[Toxic Toast]

Originally Posted by pbergen

while soccer and hockey aren't nearly as popular as the nfl, mlb, and nba, they're still legitimate top-level professional sports leagues and certainly have a passionate (if smaller) following of their own. believe me, there are plenty of nhl fans here in nyc. same in detroit, philly, boston, dallas, san jose, minnesota, and of course all the canadian cities. in fact, you could argue that the nhl teams in detroit, minnesota, and philly are more popular than the local nba teams.

and hockey is "barely on tv"? sorry, that's not true at all.
every single ny rangers, nj devils, and ny islanders game is broadcast on the local cable tv and radio here in ny. in fact, i just watched the rangers beat the florida panthers in an overtime shootout.

any nhl market would presumably broadcast each and every game of the local team on tv and radio. maybe you don't see any games because you're from a city that doesn't have an nhl team? i would've expected that you'd get either minnesota wild or chicago blackhawks games by default.

meanwhile, it isn't quite as easy to catch every single major league soccer game compared with the "big 4" sports leagues because in many markets, games are split up amongst several channels. still, every game is broadcast - just not necessarily in a non-mls market like where you live.

bottom line is that no matter what you want to believe, the nhl and mls are legit top-level pro sports leagues. and as long as columbus has the blue jackets (nhl) and the crew (mls), it is a major league town with major league sports. compare that with las vegas, which doesn't have anything other than minor league sports.

Hockey might as well never be on; I only get the Blues and Blackhawks on "local" tv; and I have zero interest in watching those teams. Hockey is barely on national tv is a more accurate statement. No one watches versus. Hockey is a regional sport and nothing more.

I am not trying to hate on hockey; I grew up a hockey fan and love watching it live. But lets be real about where it stands on the national landscape. In a few cities it is very popular, in most, it is an afterthought.

[Finger Laker]

you should give the blackhawks a viewing ...... they have a very good skating, young and dynamic team

entertaining as about any team out there right now

[Toxic Toast]

Originally Posted by Finger Laker

you should give the blackhawks a viewing ...... they have a very good skating, young and dynamic team

entertaining as about any team out there right now

I have been trying to get into the Blackhawks, if for no other reason than the games would give me an excuse to visit Chicago more often. It is a work in progress so far.

I guess anything is better than the Blues.