Expansion coming per Allan Walsh

[skilles]

People really struggle with the concept of expansion. The whole point is to create a market where one doesn't currently exist.

I’m fine with expansion, it’s great for the league. A third time in Atlanta though is puzzling.

I hear this "great for the league" comment at times, and I'm wondering what it even means. I think the NHL is just fine as is as far as teams are concerned. Why in the world would you want them to expand more? To make the players and owners more money? I just don't get why an average Joe like yourself or myself would care about that?

Well yeah that is exactly why of course.

[Pierre McGuire]

People really struggle with the concept of expansion. The whole point is to create a market where one doesn't currently exist.

I’m fine with expansion, it’s great for the league. A third time in Atlanta though is puzzling.

I hear this "great for the league" comment at times, and I'm wondering what it even means. I think the NHL is just fine as is as far as teams are concerned. Why in the world would you want them to expand more? To make the players and owners more money? I just don't get why an average Joe like yourself or myself would care about that?

Why would I care about that? Because I want the NHL to be the best league it can be. It's great for the league because it grows the game, the fanbase, two new teams put an influx of cash in Tom Stillman's pocket...thats good for our Blues. It's also good because it will create a lot of new jobs for people...hockey related, office related, possibley construction jobs...etc.

[netboy65]

People really struggle with the concept of expansion. The whole point is to create a market where one doesn't currently exist.

I’m fine with expansion, it’s great for the league. A third time in Atlanta though is puzzling.

I hear this "great for the league" comment at times, and I'm wondering what it even means. I think the NHL is just fine as is as far as teams are concerned. Why in the world would you want them to expand more? To make the players and owners more money? I just don't get why an average Joe like yourself or myself would care about that?

Why would I care about that? Because I want the NHL to be the best league it can be. It's great for the league because it grows the game, the fanbase, two new teams put an influx of cash in Tom Stillman's pocket...thats good for our Blues. It's also good because it will create a lot of new jobs for people...hockey related, office related, possibley construction jobs...etc.

But at the same time it’s diluting the talent pool and putting an inferior product on the ice. Additionally, if a team does fold/move, that’s a black eye for the league.

[ShakeyWalton]

People really struggle with the concept of expansion. The whole point is to create a market where one doesn't currently exist.

I’m fine with expansion, it’s great for the league. A third time in Atlanta though is puzzling.

I hear this "great for the league" comment at times, and I'm wondering what it even means. I think the NHL is just fine as is as far as teams are concerned. Why in the world would you want them to expand more? To make the players and owners more money? I just don't get why an average Joe like yourself or myself would care about that?

Why would I care about that? Because I want the NHL to be the best league it can be. It's great for the league because it grows the game, the fanbase, two new teams put an influx of cash in Tom Stillman's pocket...thats good for our Blues. It's also good because it will create a lot of new jobs for people...hockey related, office related, possibley construction jobs...etc.

The game doesn't need growing. You want to add more teams, more 4th liners, less chances of the Blues winning a Cup? I don't.

How big are you wanting this to be??

[Pierre McGuire]

People really struggle with the concept of expansion. The whole point is to create a market where one doesn't currently exist.

I’m fine with expansion, it’s great for the league. A third time in Atlanta though is puzzling.

I hear this "great for the league" comment at times, and I'm wondering what it even means. I think the NHL is just fine as is as far as teams are concerned. Why in the world would you want them to expand more? To make the players and owners more money? I just don't get why an average Joe like yourself or myself would care about that?

Why would I care about that? Because I want the NHL to be the best league it can be. It's great for the league because it grows the game, the fanbase, two new teams put an influx of cash in Tom Stillman's pocket...thats good for our Blues. It's also good because it will create a lot of new jobs for people...hockey related, office related, possibley construction jobs...etc.

But at the same time it’s diluting the talent pool and putting an inferior product on the ice. Additionally, if a team does fold/move, that’s a black eye for the league.

I think there is more NHL level talent ready right now than anytime. I'm not worried about the talent pool...back during the 90's expansion era, that was a real thing, not so much anymore but again, thats just my opinion.

[Pierre McGuire]

People really struggle with the concept of expansion. The whole point is to create a market where one doesn't currently exist.

I’m fine with expansion, it’s great for the league. A third time in Atlanta though is puzzling.

I hear this "great for the league" comment at times, and I'm wondering what it even means. I think the NHL is just fine as is as far as teams are concerned. Why in the world would you want them to expand more? To make the players and owners more money? I just don't get why an average Joe like yourself or myself would care about that?

Why would I care about that? Because I want the NHL to be the best league it can be. It's great for the league because it grows the game, the fanbase, two new teams put an influx of cash in Tom Stillman's pocket...thats good for our Blues. It's also good because it will create a lot of new jobs for people...hockey related, office related, possibley construction jobs...etc.

The game doesn't need growing. You want to add more teams, more 4th liners, less chances of the Blues winning a Cup? I don't.

How big are you wanting this to be??

You don't have to want it but it sounds like you are probably going to get it. I'm ok with 34 teams...but i wouldn't shocked if they are shooting for 36 before all is said and done....maybe within 20 years

[iowa blues fan]

Too many teams already.
Talent is just getting further watered down.
It’s already hard enough to win a cup, there’s gonna be many franchises who never win one which is detrimental to the teams in general.

[Spyro Gyra]

Excuse me, but who the hell is Allan Walsh and why should we believe a word he says? Am I the only one who has never heard of the guy? If so, excuse my ignorance.

Ah, I see he's an agent. So, again, why should we believe a word he says?

[Pierre McGuire]

Excuse me, but who the hell is Allan Walsh and why should we believe a word he says? Am I the only one who has never heard of the guy? If so, excuse my ignorance.

He's a player agent and director at Octagon. He's well connected

[Spyro Gyra]

Excuse me, but who the hell is Allan Walsh and why should we believe a word he says? Am I the only one who has never heard of the guy? If so, excuse my ignorance.

He's a player agent and director at Octagon. He's well connected

Ah, ok. Thanks.

[rezero]

What no expansion in Saskatoon?

[TheJackBurton]

Excuse me, but who the hell is Allan Walsh and why should we believe a word he says? Am I the only one who has never heard of the guy? If so, excuse my ignorance.

Ah, I see he's an agent. So, again, why should we believe a word he says?

He is the agent of Marc Andre Fluery who famously tweeted this picture when Vegas stopped playing Fluery and was trying to get him to waive his no trade:

[Frank Barone]

People really struggle with the concept of expansion. The whole point is to create a market where one doesn't currently exist.

I’m fine with expansion, it’s great for the league. A third time in Atlanta though is puzzling.

I hear this "great for the league" comment at times, and I'm wondering what it even means. I think the NHL is just fine as is as far as teams are concerned. Why in the world would you want them to expand more? To make the players and owners more money? I just don't get why an average Joe like yourself or myself would care about that?

Why would I care about that? Because I want the NHL to be the best league it can be. It's great for the league because it grows the game, the fanbase, two new teams put an influx of cash in Tom Stillman's pocket...thats good for our Blues. It's also good because it will create a lot of new jobs for people...hockey related, office related, possibley construction jobs...etc.

The game doesn't need growing. You want to add more teams, more 4th liners, less chances of the Blues winning a Cup? I don't.

How big are you wanting this to be??

You don't have to want it but it sounds like you are probably going to get it. I'm ok with 34 teams...but i wouldn't shocked if they are shooting for 36 before all is said and done....maybe within 20 years

I think it will be 36 but a lot sooner than 20 years. This will be locked down before Bettman retires.

I agree with your prior comment that the hockey talent pool can handle it.

There will be a new arena in ATL in the northern communities like the new Braves stadium. The owner of the Houston Rockets has wanted an NHL team to share the Toyota Center for a while, but it seems they are negotiating with a different billionaire, so maybe there will be a new building in Houston as well.

[LGB73]

If expansion is so good for a league than why hasn't the NFL done it in 23 years?

Stick at 32 for at least 10-15 years. Let the talent level rise and create a deeper league, and the on ice product will be better for it.

[Frank Barone]

If expansion is so good for a league than why hasn't the NFL done it in 23 years?

Stick at 32 for at least 10-15 years. Let the talent level rise and create a deeper league, and the on ice product will be better for it.

Your question about the NFL is a good one. I think the answer is multifaceted. One, a lot of their owners are very old and conservative. Also, they have been trying to figure out their international strategy as it could relate to expansion.

It seems their international strategy has become to play as many as 12-16 games per year out of the US in the UK, France, Spain, Germany, Brazil, and maybe in the future Australia, Japan, etc. NFL teams have purchased marketing rights in many of these countries and more. The Covid pandemic was a big wake-up call regarding the complications of placing NFL franchises outside of North America, so hence this strategy.

JMO, I think the NFL will expand to 36, but it will take longer than the NHL (back to the old conservative owners). Part of the motivation will be the eventual move to an 18 game schedule. STL would be the best market and would be plug and play with the dome, although a major refurbishment of the dome would be in order. I think Toronto would be an ideal city for the NFL, and with the Bills getting a new stadium their owner would eventually go along with it. They will need to determine if a city in Mexico would work. As I said, JMO.

[Russdv14]

This is terrible. It is hard enough to make the playoffs and to actually win the Cup. And why spread the talent thinner as another poster stated