Rumors I: More On NHL Expansion

  • Howard Bloom (Sports Business News): The NHL will add four expansion teams by 2017, collecting about $1.4 billion in expansion fees: Las Vegas, Quebec City, Seattle and Toronto.
  • Matt Brown: A team executive has said that he wouldn’t use the term “done deal” with regards to what he’s heard about expansion to Las Vegas.
  • Jimmy Murphy: Multiple sources still saying that a team could end up in Markham, Ontario.
  • James Mirtle: One of the bigger reasons that Las Vegas is on the NHLs list is that they want to balance out the conferences and there are not a lot of options in the West. Seattle could be the top pick though according to what Mirtle has heard.
  • David Pagnotta: “I haven’t heard Vegas is a “done deal” but it’s definitely in serious contention. Again, needs sound ownership and proof of local support. And when I say “local support” for Vegas, I’m not talking about the casinos. That’s over and above local season tickets. The Vegas arena being built by AEG & MGM will also be heavily populated with suites, which you’d assume the casinos would scoop up. As for Quebec City… Their new rink is projected to be open for business in Sept 2015. I know NHL would love to get into SEA market & be 1st big league into LV (group is also trying to bring MLS to Vegas). But lots of variables. For those suggesting PHX/FLA should move: with new ownership groups for both, despite struggles/losses, expansion is far ahead of relocation. Expansion also = BIG money expansion fees, which gets split solely among owners (and creating more jobs for players). On SEA: NHL has said no to using KeyArena. That said, if a new rink is being built & new team has to play there for 1yr, I’m sure it’ll fly.


  1. Hankbemis

    August 27, 2014 at 10:22 am

    Oh there it is, 1.4b in “expansion fees”. Lol

  2. I_am_I

    August 27, 2014 at 10:26 am

    Four teams?? I did not see that coming.

  3. hotwings

    August 27, 2014 at 5:39 pm

    whats the talent level gonna look like w/ 4 more teams? yikes…

    also, when is old site coming back

  4. I_am_I

    August 27, 2014 at 6:04 pm

    Well it is removing 3 players per team… Take away three of your 6th or 7th best forward, 4th best defended or backup goalie. Historically that is the top end of the unprotected group. Also some level of protection for young players, let’s say those on ECL.

    The new team will be appalling though!

  5. Nick

    August 28, 2014 at 8:24 am

    What a joke. 4 teams? Quebec is the only city that could support another team. Seattle will fold and Vegas would be a joke – the fans would be more interested in slots than hockey. Having a second team in Toronto would be amazing, great hockey city, but if anything the league should reduce teams. Especially if they want to even out the conferences, get rid of some teams not add more so we have more than the NFL!

    If they want to broaden hockeys reach, do it with AHL/minor teams. Don’t water down the highest level of play.

  6. I_am_I

    August 28, 2014 at 9:26 am

    LOL. Don’t hold back, tell us how you really feel.

    I think for comparison to other major sports it should be remembered that there are 7 Canadian teams and 23 US teams. So the question would be does that saturate the market? I think the answer is “yes.”

    I’d be more concerned about quality of players… Let’s face it there are a lot of players whose job is to play 5 minutes “safely.” Not really top notch competition there…