Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Last summer, I worked in New York with a handful of Canadiens. Not to be stereotypical, if anyone knew more about hockey than I ever could, it's them.
Anyway, I was talking to one of my Canadien co-workers and we started talking about the number of teams in the League. He said it would be better if there were less than 30.
Now Canadien, or northerner... even here in Texas, I hear more people say that the NHL should have LESS teams than it does now instead of expanding to two more like the other Big Four.
If that's the case, which franchises should get the boot? And for that matter, who should move where?
Last summer, I worked in New York with a handful of Canadiens. Not to be stereotypical, if anyone knew more about hockey than I ever could, it's them.
Anyway, I was talking to one of my Canadien co-workers and we started talking about the number of teams in the League. He said it would be better if there were less than 30.
Now Canadien, or northerner... even here in Texas, I hear more people say that the NHL should have LESS teams than it does now instead of expanding to two more like the other Big Four.
If that's the case, which franchises should get the boot? And for that matter, who should move where?
See its not fun when people pick on the popular teams. Contraction would be the worst thing the NHL could do because it makes it look like some minor league that can't keep its house in order. It was a bad idea when MLB considered it, and it is a bad idea for the NHL.
See its not fun when people pick on the popular teams. Contraction would be the worst thing the NHL could do because it makes it look like some minor league that can't keep its house in order. It was a bad idea when MLB considered it, and it is a bad idea for the NHL.
...wow, that's actually a first. Every convo I've had about this subject came down to either keeping the number as is or reducing... never expansion.
Quebec, Winnipeg and Hamilton could all likely support teams. Stateside, Hartford certainly could have one again. There's probably several other hockey friendly cities I haven't thought of.
But - I don't see the need to expand the league further. I'd really rather see struggling teams moved to viable markets. I don't think they need to contract, there's enough skilled players to make 30 teams work, and enough hockey friendly cities to make it work. I just don't think the league's in 30 hockey friendly cities at the moment.
You know, if more people in sunbelt markets (esp. transplants) would convert partially to their home team or just buy season tickets to get their hockey fix all these teams that people keep saying relocate or contract would probably sell out every game every year.
That said I think it would be cool to see Houston get a team, instant rivalry with Dallas.
You know, if more people in sunbelt markets (esp. transplants) would convert partially to their home team or just buy season tickets to get their hockey fix all these teams that people keep saying relocate or contract would probably sell out every game every year.
That said I think it would be cool to see Houston get a team, instant rivalry with Dallas.
I think Houston will stay an AHL city....
It's hard getting an area or region to love a certain sport that's not really "native" to their area. There's been BIG success with some Sunbelt cities, and for others, not so much. Like Atlanta, where there's talk of the Thrashers moving to Winnepeg.
It's just funny seeing one team move to a place with less fans then having some team that's not very old move up to that same city. But that's business for ya.
I'll tell you whats going to happen. At least 2 of the unprofitable teams in the USA are going to be moved. One to Winnipeg and one to Qubec city for sure. Another might be moved to Hamilton On. I don't think you will see any contraction but a shifting around like they have always done in the past.
It's hard getting an area or region to love a certain sport that's not really "native" to their area. There's been BIG success with some Sunbelt cities, and for others, not so much. Like Atlanta, where there's talk of the Thrashers moving to Winnepeg.
It's just funny seeing one team move to a place with less fans then having some team that's not very old move up to that same city. But that's business for ya.
Yep. This is not a huge sports town unless someone is tearing up the headlines.
The Astros have stunk for some time, the Texans have ALWAYs been pretenders, the Rockets have as bad a recent postseason string this side of the T'Wolves and Clippers...and nevermind that there's just a ton of other things to do while not stuck in traffic.
Yep. This is not a huge sports town unless someone is tearing up the headlines.
The Astros have stunk for some time, the Texans have ALWAYs been pretenders, the Rockets have as bad a recent postseason string this side of the T'Wolves and Clippers...and nevermind that there's just a ton of other things to do while not stuck in traffic.
You at least have the Dynamo. And please don't give me that "oh, but it's just soccer" reply. There are enough pissed off hardcore soccer fans here....
I'll say Houston's a much, MUCH better sports town than several Sunbelt cities. It's not NY, Chicago, or Boston, but at least the town still cares about its teams.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.