Why Las Vegas expansion is a mistake

With the NHL formally announcing its decision to expand into Las Vegas, Nevada for the 2017-2018 season, there has rightfully been much discussion of the direction the league is taking. Opinions have varied greatly on the viability or lack thereof of an NHL franchise in Sin City, so I thought I’d weigh in. After doing some research on the matter, I’ve decided that an NHL team in Las Vegas is a bad idea.

Now, to be clear, I’m not saying this is going to be an abject failure. I’m certainly not saying it would be on par with putting a hockey team in Atlanta (twice!). I’m just saying that if we were to re-examine this decision a decade from now, it’s probably one the league wishes they did not make. Here are my reasons Las Vegas expansion is a mistake…

1. Shortsighted profit, long-term headache: Sure, the league is going to get half a billion dollars in expansion fees, right now. There will certainly be a lot of buzz around the inception of a new franchise; team name/uniform unveiling, the expansion draft, those first few games and a new attraction on the Vegas strip. The problem is what happens when the novelty wears off? What you are left with is a franchise in the middle of a non-traditional hockey market with few local fans and no cultural roots in the game.

First, let’s be clear. I feel that developing non-traditional markets is incredibly important to the game. I am also a realist. Some markets just don’t have any interest in hockey. It’s about setting a new team up for success long-term, and this is no indictment of the residents of Nevada. They may surprise us and become another Nashville or San Jose. However, for reason we will discuss shortly, it may not matter. The long-term attendance is very much a concern.

2. Corporate/Casino driven season tickets: Do you really think the Casinos are not going to be a major holder of tickets to these games to give out as comps to high rollers? You think MSG too corporate? Wait until you see a bunch of wheat magnates from Nebraska and energy execs from China taking in their first hockey game because they lost $10k at the craps table. How about a bachelor party? Tom Jones one night, a hockey game the next on a family vacation? Doesn’t seem like a raucous building full of people passionately cheering on their home team.

3. Rotating fan base: To a similar end, looking at the economics of ticket prices, when large corporate interests purchase season tickets, the price of tickets tends to go up. Las Vegas is one of the most popular cities in the world for business meetings and conventions. It is also a city of barely half a million people. This demographic standing does put it in the U.S.’s top 30 most populous cities, but with a large Hispanic population and a median income below the national average, it begins to lose its traction when it comes to developing a grassroots fan base that will sustain the team beyond its flashy inception. I just want to take a minute to note that I don’t believe hockey does not have Hispanic fans. However, very few markets have meaningfully exposed hockey to the Hispanic community and they make up a statistically small sample of identified hockey fandom (their Stanley Cup Final viewership generally makes up 2-6% of viewers).

4. Bad lifestyle for players: Unless this new franchise is going to target bro-tacular party boys like Tyler Seguin and Jamie Benn as the model athlete for this new franchise (which would carry it’s own significant problems in a town like Vegas), it’s not going to be a location that will provide much of a lifestyle for its players. Las Vegas is a city to pass through while taking a wild ride. It is not a place to remain focused for the 6+ month grind of an NHL season. Sure, they are certainly nice communities surrounding Las Vegas, but is it a place that is going to be attractive in free agency for guys with a wife and three kids?

5. Too many better expansion locations: Can someone explain to me how Seattle would not be a better location for expansion than Las Vegas? Let’s table Quebec City for the moment, because we need to better balance the Conferences. Seattle has a significantly larger population than Las Vegas, an economy that isn’t almost entirely reliant on tourism and hospitality and a much more familiar and dedicated demographic for an NHL franchise. Combine that with the fact that they would have an instant, built-in rivalry with the Canucks makes Seattle a virtual no-brainer. I understand you may have arena issues in Washington, but that is the type of location that you need to find a way to make work if expansion is the goal.

6. Relocation would have been better for Las Vegas: In the same vein, if the NHL felt that Las Vegas absolutely had to have a team, wouldn’t it make more sense to re-locate one of its failing non-traditional franchises out there? It’s like when a real estate developer completely ignores the decrepit strip mall from the 70’s with nothing but an e-vape shop in it for demolition and construction of their new 300 unit apartment building, and rips down 10 wooded acres instead. Why not put Arizona out there? Columbus? Carolina? Florida?

The NHL is a niche league. It’s not going to survive with 36 franchises. Locations that have been clamoring for teams can’t just be added on a whim. Seattle, Quebec City, Hamilton, Portland, Hartford, Kansas City and some other possible non-traditional markets aren’t going to be accessed through expansion. If you are going to experiment, try re-location first.

7. Disorganized expansion draft: Ok, so this new franchise needs players, right? I have never seen a cluster**** like the league trying to figure out how this draft is going to work. All of a sudden we can’t figure out the difference between no trade and no movement clauses, and which trumps which? Teams have to expose 15% of the cap, but automatically protect their highest paid players who have these clauses? None of it makes any sense. My prediction is that the NHL will have this process so bastardized by the time the draft rolls around that Vegas will end up this bizarre island of misfit toys with no discernible cap plan and a hodge-podge of players just good enough to make them semi-competitive, but not good enough to keep interest high once the novelty wears off.

So, what do you think, dear readers? Is expansion to Vegas a good thing or a bad thing? Where would you rather have seen the league go, instead? How do you think the expansion draft ultimately affects the Rangers? Sound off in the comments.