It may have more to do with finding a western conference team location.
Remember that the league is still unbalanced with one more eastern team than western teams after the addition of the Golden Knights.
I don't know why Seattle is not given a franchise. Seems like a viable location to me.
(Yah, I know, the Canucks wouldn't allow it. But money can be a big persuader.)
But then what happens when they finally come to the realization that Arizona doesn't work?
But then what happens when they finally come to the realization that Arizona doesn't work?
All the more reason to have another potential western location.
Seattle and Kansas City as target cities - one for expansion, one for relocation.
Result: balanced conferences.
All the more reason to have another potential western location.
Seattle and Kansas City as target cities - one for expansion, one for relocation.
Result: balanced conferences.
I guess my dream of contraction is not a viable one. 24-26 teams would be awesome.
No, contraction is not going to happen, but if one wanted only 24 teams in the NHL, which teams would you fold?
Yes, Las Vegas would be another candidate IMO.
But a reduction of seven teams would include...?
Vegas, Arizona, Florida, Carolina, Devils, and Dallas would be a good start. They should have just let Atlanta fold rather than move to Winnipeg but too late for that one.
Cameron Dukes + Dan Adeboboye + Kevin Mital + David Ungerer + Damonte Coxie + DaVaris Daniels + Dejon Brissett = Unstoppable Force
Vegas, Arizona, Florida, Carolina, Devils, and Dallas would be a good start. They should have just let Atlanta fold rather than move to Winnipeg but too late for that one.
Islanders, especially in Brooklyn are a disaster too. Probably would have them ahead of Dallas.
Bookmarks