On the Notion of European Expansion

I recently read an article by Huw Wales on the blog Defending Big D which reiterated the now 5-year-old question of whether the NHL should consider expansion into Europe but with the twist of considering this before looking into more North American cities. For those unaware, there are quite a handful of popular destinations for new NHL franchises in the Western Hemisphere. Among the list are Quebec City, Quebec; Markham, Ontario (roughly 30 km/20 miles from the Air Canada Centre in Toronto); Seattle, Washington; Kansas City, Missouri; and Houston, Texas.

Now the article did a fairly good job of outlining the ups and downs of such a proposition but I couldn't help but read this with an "are you serious?" attitude. I mean we just realigned the league, sure because Winnipeg was a couple villages too far from being realistically "Southeast", but also because Detroit has been bitching and moaning about playing games past their bed time when making Pacific Coast road trips in the past. I'm sure the organization would be thrilled about making a visit to Stockholm, Sweden once a year.

Just for reference, the Eastern Time Zone holds a 5-hour difference from the United Kingdom and an 8-hour difference from Moscow, Russia. Tack 3 hours on to those numbers and you folks sitting in Pacific Time can get a sense of how far removed from Europe you are.

Even for this simple fact I have trouble feeling like planting NHL franchises in Europe is a feasible idea. But there is some context as to why this is being discussed, even if only in certain circles of hockey fandom. The Finnish Hockey team Jokerit, of SM-Liiga, will make the move beginning in the 2014-15 season to the Kontinental Hockey League, the professional organization of Russia. This acquisition for the KHL has begun an expansion for the league into Western Europe which we can undoubtedly see increasing in years to come. They also expect to reach their fingers into the Eastern edges of Russia as well. It only makes sense that the NHL should spin the wheels on gaining a similar grasp on formerly untread territories.

The NHL actually has already begun to set a plan in motion as far as gaining interest across the Atlantic. Each year between the 2007-08 and 2011-12 seasons, a small collective of NHL teams have played preseason exhibition games against European teams across various countries and have opened their seasons in front of European crowds. While they have since been scrapped, the league is looking into other options as far as expanding its brand overseas such as a World Cup of Hockey.

While the NHL is taking steps to make an impact on the world-wide stage, North America has not been the most hospitable environment for hockey players from outside the western hemisphere. The Canadian Hockey League, the organization that oversees the Canadian junior hockey clubs, will no longer allow teams to select European goaltenders in its yearly Import Draft. This decision was made with development of Canadian talent in mind due to the notion that spots on CHL team rosters are being taken up by foreign players instead of homegrown prospects. While this makes sense for Canada as far as compete level on the international stage this could serve as a blow for European players' chances to play in the NHL as the NHL scouts heavily in the CHL leagues for their Entry Draft.

The North American media is also a firing range when it comes to how we exhibit foreign players to television and print media audiences. This ranges from Mike Milbury lambasting Alex Ovechkin over his work ethic; to the presentation of Ilya Bryzgalov as the stereotypical, enigmatic Russian; to Jeremy Roenick's diatribe via Twitter over Ilya Kovalchuk's decision to leave the NHL and his ridiculous contract in order to play closer to home in the KHL; to the very existence of Don Cherry. North American media is all too ready to paint Canadian- and US-born players as hard-workers committed to winning while at the same time vilifying Europeans, especially Russian-born players, as being a detriment to "Canada's Game". One has to wonder, with the tendency towards excessive nationalism as things stand now, how a European division will fare with the media.

Lastly, I think it is insane to be thinking along the line of overseas expansion when a significant percentage of our current NHL franchises struggle to make money. Only this month the Phoenix Coyotes (now Arizona Coyotes) agreed to terms between an owner and the city of Glendale, Arizona to keep the team in town after the NHL had owned and operated the team since 2009. A look at Forbes' list of NHL team values (numbers from 2012) shows that of the 30 teams, 13 are in the red as far as operating income goes and among those are the usual culprits: non-traditional market teams and those with eyes bigger than their stomachs as far as player salaries go. Also realize that while the NHL is a $3.3 billion industry, at least since before this past lockout, the top three teams (Toronto Maple Leafs, New York Rangers, and Montreal Canadiens) account for a hair over $2.3 billion, or 70%, of that value.

Any business will have to invest many years before it begins to see a profit, so I think the financial aspect of housing NHL teams over in Europe remains too big of an unknown for the league to pull the trigger on such an expansion even in the next decade. Most hockey-friendly venues in Europe are built for smaller attendances than in North America so popular interest is a factor as is proposed ticket prices. Couple that with the comparative turmoil of the Euro and the feasibility of making these franchises work is greatly diminished. Imagine telling the owners of the big three teams in North America that they will have to dump more money into revenue sharing to assist in the operation of the European side of the map.

If European expansion is a serious proposition, I think there is a large amount of work to be done. First, the NHL needs to at least appear on the surface more accepting of international players. The expectation with overseas players is that there is a chance they will defect and choose to play where they grew up. Having franchises in Europe might add a little incentive but the fact that we give them a hard time due to where they grew up might dissuade them from wanting to compete in our edge of the world all together.

Second, the money side of things needs to be meticulously hashed out before we consider this venture. I think most of that starts with increasing interest where our struggling franchises exist. The fact that we are now seeing professional players come from non-traditional markets such as southern California means that people are starting to grow up as fans of the sport which only helps to place developmental hockey programs in these areas. If the NHL can increase profits there, it strengthens the case that it is a legitimate league capable of reaching a wide range of audiences and can support increased competition.

Finally, the logistics of playing full seasons needs to be addressed. The KHL can entertain the idea of playing across nine time zones because their season consists of 54 games per team to the NHL's 82. Rest and travel become an issue when you play that many games over the course of eight months and it is hard to think that the NHL would be keen on reducing each team's work load to accommodate pan-Atlantic journeys. I know I don't foot the bill for the NHL to operate but I would like to see all these issues well laid out before I can condone reaching into Europe to cultivate more competition.