The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
It's outside of the U.S. hockey belt. But for what it's worth, the UNO Mavericks ranked 5th in NCAA hockey attendance for 2010-11, at 7,994.
Certainly, there's a counter argument there since the NHL can't boot the NCAA team out of town. However, we're not talking about a place that's completely void of a hockey culture.
If you're going to make a list of cities that wouldn't be the smallest market in the league, with out pro sports competition, and a standing, permanent, NHL-calibre arena, the list is a very short one:
Tulsa
Omaha
Louisville (not NHL viable imo)
The NBA has had a great deal of success with one-horse towns (albeit larger metros) in Portland, Sacramento (historically), San Antonio, and Salt Lake City. I would argue that no such markets exist in the NHL south of the border. Raleigh and Columbus don't fit that bill imo.
I would much rather see Quebec and Hartford get their teams back. However, I don't think it's an absurd notion put forth by the OP. Just highly unlikely. If someone from the Buffett estate came knocking with a $300 M offer, I'm sure they would listen.
Is there even a single Nebraskan on this site that can vouch for the popularity of hockey in Omaha? There are dozens of better cities to consider before Omaha, in both the US and Canada.
I grew up there. There are some hockey fans, and a lower division team (AHL) could thrive....but in the 90s when there were three teams (USHL, NCAA and AHL) the market got diluted. I have a hard time seeing a team consistently draw enough fans....and the TV market has to be pretty poor compared to alternative cities.
On the one hand I do think that the NHL is better servedto look at so-called "second teir" cities where the NHL would be the top team in town, rather than 3rd or 4th whencompeting with other major league sports.
I agree with that concept. The NBA and NHL have both done pretty well when they're able to avoid competition, particularly from football.
That said, even as a true believer in non-traditional markets it's hard for me to imagine a major-league team (in any sport) thriving in a metro area much smaller than Raleigh's. It would require the sort of fanaticism you see in a Green Bay or Winnipeg, where the team is truly part of the city culture, and you just aren't going to get that with a team in Omaha.
Was thinking about this today. Huge Cornhuskers fan and i realized the state of Nebraska does not have a Pro Sports team. They love Husker football and the state basically shuts down every Saturday for Cornhusker football games. 1.8Million people which is larger then Manitoba. Huge College hockey following with the Omaha team.
US markets I'd much rather go 1st, in no order: Seattle, Portland, Milwaukee, Houston, KC
US markets I have absolutely no interest in that are way better options than Omaha: Indy, Louisville, Memphis, Charlotte, Vegas, Sacramento, Atlanta again, Hampton Roads
No, it's not. Can't compare the NFL and it's billions upon billions in shared national TV revenue to a gate driven league.
Sure we can. Let's look at the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s, when TV revenue was basically non-existent and the Packers struggled mightily for large chunks of that time frame.
They used to play a handful of home games in Milwaukee every single year to try to get more people out to the games; the larger capacity and larger population of Milwaukee forced the city of Green Bay to build Lambeau Field so as not to lose the team. That was in 1953.
No, but Lincoln is an hour away and represents another large population center.
Having a nearby city is the only thing that's kept the Green Bay Packers going all these years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan
No, it's not. Can't compare the NFL and it's billions upon billions in shared national TV revenue to a gate driven league.
well, yes, it kind of is what kept green bay around while the nfl was still gate-driven.
but you cant compare a football team to any other sport. One game a week, usually on a sunday. 8-10 home games over the entire season including playoffs. It's quite easy in football to be a season ticket holder and live up to 5 hours away from the stadium, which isnt the case in other sports where you have 41-57 games to go to (or double that in baseball) and most are on weeknights.
it's the reason a CFL team can survive and thrive in saskatchewan, drawing from the entire province's population, but an NHL team is a bad idea right now.
as for lincoln/omaha, yeah, i think omaha could draw from lincoln... people do that type of commute to go to games in many markets right now. I still dont think it's nearly enough. I'd like to see someone try to create a metric of population value for NHL teams (weighting population in different categories of cities vs attendance%). I'd guess (made up numbers) that a canadian person is worth ~2-3 "us-northeast/midwest" people, and that those people are worth about 2 other americans. In other words, hartford would be looked at as a population of ~2.5M whereas omaha+lincoln would still be at around 750k, and quebec city would be over 3M, in "hockey terms".
Sure we can. Let's look at the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s, when TV revenue was basically non-existent and the Packers struggled mightily for large chunks of that time frame.
They used to play a handful of home games in Milwaukee every single year to try to get more people out to the games; the larger capacity and larger population of Milwaukee forced the city of Green Bay to build Lambeau Field so as not to lose the team. That was in 1953.
I agree with all this. And I know I'm arguing semantics, but you said ALL these years, when it really hasn't been the case in 30 years or so.
Was thinking about this today. Huge Cornhuskers fan and i realized the state of Nebraska does not have a Pro Sports team. They love Husker football and the state basically shuts down every Saturday for Cornhusker football games. 1.8Million people which is larger then Manitoba. Huge College hockey following with the Omaha team.
thoughts?
I'd rather see a Cornhuskers NCAA hockey team. Their soon to be built basketball arena will have ice making capabilities. Plus the university has plans to build a small ice rink nearby tha could make for a decent practice facility. I'd say Big 10 hockey is much more likely there than NHL.
I'd rather see a Cornhuskers NCAA hockey team. Their soon to be built basketball arena will have ice making capabilities. Plus the university has plans to build a small ice rink nearby tha could make for a decent practice facility. I'd say Big 10 hockey is much more likely there than NHL.
I like that idea. It'd be nice if every school in the Big Ten had a D1 hockey team. It could grow the game even more in the Midwest. But starting up a D1 hockey program isn't exactly cheap.
Whenever I hear about these smaller market suggestions I think "no way" right off the bat BUT there are places like Green Bay(Packers) who have shown that being the only ticket in town, with a metro area of 300,000, can support a team. Problem being, it's a lot easier to sell out 8 or 9 games a year as opposed to 41+.
I've thought about this before and came to the conclusion that it could not work until atleast Columbus size. I will say that in a hypothetical situation where Omaha was 1.8ish million, I would give a team there before Columbus, KC, and Tulsa.
Someone else mentioned it, but I still think Hartford could work as a one-team city.
And guys, let's stop using AHL support as a gauge for NHL potential, some people cannot stand lower division sports where the teams don't get promoted/relegated.
In ten years time I don't doubt it could be a possibility.
The Florida Panthers recent success is very intriguing but if they go back down the toilet, them and the BlueJackets could be on the move so Omaham wouldn't be the worst place to give it a try.
Like has been said, no competition right?
I mean, even if you're working with 50% less people than on average, you're also looking at probably 70% less competition.
Think Florida have a lease for 30 years or something like that. They won't be moving.
I've thought about this before and came to the conclusion that it could not work until atleast Columbus size. I will say that in a hypothetical situation where Omaha was 1.8ish million, I would give a team there before Columbus, KC, and Tulsa.
Someone else mentioned it, but I still think Hartford could work as a one-team city.
And guys, let's stop using AHL support as a gauge for NHL potential, some people cannot stand lower division sports where the teams don't get promoted/relegated.
Have to disagree...
Just those cities you mentioned...
1. Columbus
2. Tulsa
3. KC
4. Hartford/Omaha
Columbus is a fine location for an NHL team; just look at how the fans have endured this interminable stretch of Blue Jacket futility. Sure, things have begun to slump in the Columbus market, but I can't hold that against the fans.
It's perhaps unfortunate that the NHL didn't find a way to grasp onto OKC before the NBA did, because Oklahoma in general has had strong minor league hockey support. Tulsa could well surprise many as a market for the NHL; and Tulsa I believe might be happy to compete with its brother city and show that it too can support a major league franchise.
KC is risky; if I were the NHL, I'd only go there if we're talking relocating an already fairly competitive team. Putting an expansion team there would be a risky choice. There's no direct seasonal competition for the NHL, but KC already has the NFL and MLB; I'm not sure fans would grasp onto another virgin franchise.
Hartford, well of course there's a fanbase, but the area is surrounded by competing hockey franchises. If the Islanders had needed to relocate, then fine, Hartford could've been an option. Otherwise, there's really nothing for the NHL to gain by putting another team in that general area. And I'm not 100% certain that it wouldn't just be another small market just getting by like Buffalo in many Seasons. (Sure, Tulsa is also a small market, but with Tulsa you'd be putting another fairly distinct place on the NHL map.)
As for Omaha, the problem is that even at the minor league level there has been some problems. I don't think that says exactly what would be the case with a major league team, because of the "major league" status people might be more likely to take an interest, but those minor issues do at least cause one to question the viability of Omaha. Certainly in the next 10 to 20 years, Omaha will become an NHL option; but then if KC gets a team and it sticks, Omaha then might not be considered as an option... Could be that eventually one of those two cities, Omaha or KC do get a team (whichever one doesn't get the NBA, or whoever acts first, the NBA or the NHL).
