WRT Milwaukee: Bill Wirtz

(12-09-2021 02:28 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Also, why is there not an NHL franchise in Milwaukee?

Market size and saturation.

Milwaukee is only the #35 TV market in the US, 895,700 TV homes per Nielsen. Milwaukee is, by far, the smallest market that has all of NFL, NBA, and MLB teams.

The next-smallest market with all three of those is much larger - #19 Cleveland, with 1.5 million TV homes. The smallest market that has all four of NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL is #17 Denver, with 1.63 million TV homes.

When people speculate about an NHL team in Houston, or another team in Atlanta, it’s because Houston is the #8 TV market at 2.45 million TV homes (almost 3 times the size of Milwaukee) and Atlanta is #10 at 2.41 million TV homes.

(12-09-2021 05:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-09-2021 02:28 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Also, why is there not an NHL franchise in Milwaukee?

Market size and saturation.

Milwaukee is only the #35 TV market in the US, 895,700 TV homes per Nielsen. Milwaukee is, by far, the smallest market that has all of NFL, NBA, and MLB teams.

The next-smallest market with all three of those is much larger - #19 Cleveland, with 1.5 million TV homes. The smallest market that has all four of NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL is #17 Denver, with 1.63 million TV homes.

When people speculate about an NHL team in Houston, or another team in Atlanta, it’s because Houston is the #8 TV market at 2.45 million TV homes (almost 3 times the size of Milwaukee) and Atlanta is #10 at 2.41 million TV homes.

A perfectly reasonable answer for now. Doesn’t explain why they didn’t get a team in previous decades.

Cleveland had a team in the past. The team stated as the WHL's San Francisco Seals, joined the NHL in 1967, and then relocated to Cleveland in 1976. The team ceased operations in 1978.

Milwaukee has had a IHL or AHL team since the mid-1970s. I'm sure the proximity to Minnesota and Chicago did not help, as the North Stars and Blackhawks probably did not want the competition, especially since the NHL has not always been a sure thing in the Twin Cities.

(12-09-2021 05:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-09-2021 02:28 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Also, why is there not an NHL franchise in Milwaukee?

Market size and saturation.

Milwaukee is only the #35 TV market in the US, 895,700 TV homes per Nielsen. Milwaukee is, by far, the smallest market that has all of NFL, NBA, and MLB teams.

The next-smallest market with all three of those is much larger - #19 Cleveland, with 1.5 million TV homes. The smallest market that has all four of NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL is #17 Denver, with 1.63 million TV homes.

When people speculate about an NHL team in Houston, or another team in Atlanta, it’s because Houston is the #8 TV market at 2.45 million TV homes (almost 3 times the size of Milwaukee) and Atlanta is #10 at 2.41 million TV homes.

Even though the logic tracks, this technically isn't the right answer.

Lloyd Pettit was going to put an NHL team in Milwaukee (that's why the Bradley Center was constructed), but Bill Wirtz blocked it.

(12-09-2021 11:51 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(12-09-2021 05:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-09-2021 02:28 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Also, why is there not an NHL franchise in Milwaukee?

Market size and saturation.

Milwaukee is only the #35 TV market in the US, 895,700 TV homes per Nielsen. Milwaukee is, by far, the smallest market that has all of NFL, NBA, and MLB teams.

The next-smallest market with all three of those is much larger - #19 Cleveland, with 1.5 million TV homes. The smallest market that has all four of NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL is #17 Denver, with 1.63 million TV homes.

When people speculate about an NHL team in Houston, or another team in Atlanta, it’s because Houston is the #8 TV market at 2.45 million TV homes (almost 3 times the size of Milwaukee) and Atlanta is #10 at 2.41 million TV homes.

A perfectly reasonable answer for now. Doesn’t explain why they didn’t get a team in previous decades.

Correct. It's the right answer today, but it's the wrong answer for the late 80s/early 90s.

This team needs moved to Houston or Kansas City.

(12-10-2021 07:44 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  Cleveland had a team in the past. The team stated as the WHL's San Francisco Seals, joined the NHL in 1967, and then relocated to Cleveland in 1976. The team ceased operations in 1978.

Milwaukee has had a IHL or AHL team since the mid-1970s. I'm sure the proximity to Minnesota and Chicago did not help, as the North Stars and Blackhawks probably did not want the competition, especially since the NHL has not always been a sure thing in the Twin Cities.

Milwaukee might have a lot of sports fans who root for Chicago teams, like there are a lot of sports fans in San Diego who root for the Dodgers and Lakers.

(12-10-2021 07:48 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  This team needs moved to Houston or Kansas City.

No, it just needs to move to a better spot in the Valley.

(12-13-2021 01:08 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(12-10-2021 07:48 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  This team needs moved to Houston or Kansas City.

No, it just needs to move to a better spot in the Valley.

Correct.

(12-09-2021 05:46 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Send them to Quebec City. There’s an arena and a passionate fan base. The Nordiques should never have been moved.

Moving an NHL team there today would have the same issues we were discussing with Milwaukee — metro area with similar population as Milwaukee, and about two hours away from a much larger market that already has a popular NHL team.

Quebec would be a more attractive location for the NHL than Milwaukee in that the NHL is far more popular there and they obviously don’t have the NBA, NFL, or MLB in town, though the fact that Quebec City is not as bilingual as Montreal might make some hockey players reluctant to play for a team based in Quebec City.

The Canadiens might also throw up roadblocks to a team moving to Quebec City, just as the Maple Leafs did when a billionaire tried to move an NHL team to southern Ontario. The way that the NBA, NHL, and MLB have divided up regional TV rights has made it more difficult to relocate teams because almost any move would affect another team’s “local TV territory”, but that’s a topic that could take up an entire thread by itself.

(12-14-2021 02:07 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-09-2021 05:46 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Send them to Quebec City. There’s an arena and a passionate fan base. The Nordiques should never have been moved.

Moving an NHL team there today would have the same issues we were discussing with Milwaukee — metro area with similar population as Milwaukee, and about two hours away from a much larger market that already has a popular NHL team.

Quebec would be a more attractive location for the NHL than Milwaukee in that the NHL is far more popular there and they obviously don’t have the NBA, NFL, or MLB in town, though the fact that Quebec City is not as bilingual as Montreal might make some hockey players reluctant to play for a team based in Quebec City.

The Canadiens might also throw up roadblocks to a team moving to Quebec City, just as the Maple Leafs did when a billionaire tried to move an NHL team to southern Ontario. The way that the NBA, NHL, and MLB have divided up regional TV rights has made it more difficult to relocate teams because almost any move would affect another team’s “local TV territory”, but that’s a topic that could take up an entire thread by itself.

Quebec won't have a problem finding a fan base. It's 3 hours from Montreal, culturally distinct from Montreal, and linguistically distinct from Montreal being exclusively French (Montreal is bilingual). These two cities hate each other when it comes to hockey.

The real problem is the Bruins owner and potentially the Canadiens owner. It's long been known that Jeremy Jacobs is a vocal opponent of the Nordiques (why, I have no idea, guess he just doesn't want QC taking up a spot in Boston's division). The Canadiens' owner's stance is unknown, but that could be a killer if 2 of the league's most powerful franchises are teaming up against the Nordiques and no one else batting for them.