Stadium shouldn't be a problem if they want it bad enough.

What would the Leafs want in terms of compensation?

It appears some National Hockey League officials think the Toronto market is big enough to have two teams.

According to The Globe and Mail, a few NHL governors are keen on the idea of putting a second team in Toronto.

''Why shouldn't we put another team in the best and biggest market in the world?'' one governor told the newspaper anonymously, adding one scenario involves Research in Motion CEO Jim Balsillie being awarded an expansion franchise after coming to the aid of the financially-strapped Nashville Predators.

Any suggestion of relocation or expansion into Canada's largest city is news to other league executives. "This has never been discussed in the governors meetings I've been involved in," Caroliona Hurricanes governor and general manager Jim Rutherford told TSN on Tuesday.

''I've heard bits and pieces of this scenario, although not in that kind of detail,'' Calgary Flames co-owner Harley Hotchkiss told The Globe and Mail. ''Our priority is to have the existing franchises solid.''

Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment President Richard Peddie said his organization would listen to any expansion suggestions and downplayed any negative effect it could have on the Maple Leafs. "Any talk about expansion or relocation of another NHL team to southern Ontario is purely speculative," he told TSN. "If or when the National Hockey League comes to the Board of Governors with a recommendation on relocation or expansion of an NHL franchise, Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment will analyze the recommendation and provide its input at that time."

Another governor told the newspaper the league would be better served by moving an exisiting team as opposed to granting an expansion franchise.

“I don't think it can be an expansion team,” the unnamed executive told The Globe and Mail. “We can't expand because we would be the laughingstock of professional sports. We've got too many troubled franchises."

In recent years, Balsillie has made attempts to buy the Predators and Pittsburgh Penguins amid speculation he would move the team to the southern Ontario region.

TORONTO (Oct. 21) -- The report in this morning's Globe & Mail about NHL governors "informally" discussing a second team for this city makes almost too much sense. What it doesn't make is cents for the Toronto Maple Leafs and it therefore has almost no chance of happening while the current ownership group is in place.

Richard Peddie, CEO of Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment, understands it costs nothing to speak diplomatically about the issue, as he did while telling the Globe that his company would "not automatically reject" the notion of a second team infringing on its territory. Okay, so it wouldn't be automatic. But, using a car analogy, MLSE would "manually" assure that it remains the sole proprietor of big-league hockey in this city. There is simply not enough to gain, and too much to lose, by deciding to share the wealth in a region where an NHL monopoly has long guaranteed unconditional fan support.

The Leafs own the entire southern Ontario market and are obsessive about squeezing every dime from that foothold. MLSE has used the "brand" to promote a multi-million-dollar residential and commercial development on the west plaza of the Air Canada Centre; to coax the city and province into financing a stadium at Exhibition Place for its Major League Soccer team [Toronto FC], and to peddle untold millions of dollars in licensing products each year. Why would the company even dream of risking this lavish copyright?

Would the infusion of indemnification rights and/or rental fees at the ACC ultimately be worth relinquishing its exclusive hold on the city and surrounding areas? In a circumstance whereby fans will sustain a losing product – partly because they have no alternative – why would MLSE sanction a choice? How would it look on the company if a new club quickly surpassed the Leafs’ ability to ice a winning product, as just about every expansion team since 1967 has done? What effect might that have on the unlimited reverence accorded the Blue & White?

And, most importantly, at a time when MLSE contends it is losing a younger demographic, why would it offer an alternative to a supposedly dwindling fan base? There is no distinguishable evidence of such a decline, as the Leafs rake in profits that are the envy of other teams in the league. But, if MLSE claims it is no longer matching its own standard of consumer awareness – as it did during a meeting with reporters prior to the season – there is little reason to believe it would welcome direct competition.

A second team in southern Ontario, or a second tenant at the Air Canada Centre, would probably thrive in this hockey-crazed region. NHL owners that have any perception will acknowledge this, as several did to the Globe & Mail. But, there is absolutely no evidence – direct or circumstantial – that the Maple Leafs would yield a millimeter of their territory. MLSE owns one of the most influential and lucrative franchises in the NHL and it has no desire to weaken its power-base.