Citizens of Quebec City, which used to have what is now the Colorado Avalanche franchise, seem to think it is inevitable the NHL will return -- and that the Feds will chip in $200M or so for a new building. While Quebec would be a viable franchise, NHL is not going to move Phoenix on the promise of a new building, they are going to have to see shovels in the ground at least, if not a finished building, before this happens. Looks like Seattle might beat them to it. I think Vancouver (and likely Calgary and Edmonton) would be highly approving a move to Seattle.
More generally, on the overall "southern strategy" of the NHL, a recent trip by Winnipeg to Miami, published attendance was >16,000 Winnipeg reporters at the game estimated the number of people actually there was about 8,000. So were those other tickets actually sold ? I still maintain that the Panthers are probably the next domino in the franchise relocation ballet. NY Islanders come after that, although not a southern-based team. Many hockey reporters in Canada feel the Isles will wind up in Toronto. There are plans advancing for an 18,000 seat arena in Markham, just slightly north of TO.
FingerLakerAv8r From United States of America, joined May 2011, 259 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1946 times:
I would love to see the NHL back in YQB but there are many more larger markets that would probably do better.
Two teams in YYZ?? Haven't they suffered enough with the one they got??? LOL
seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 8614 posts, RR: 19 Reply 2, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1907 times:
Quoting connies4ever (Thread starter): published attendance was >16,000 Winnipeg reporters at the game estimated the number of people actually there was about 8,000.
In the published attendance, some places count all season ticket holders whether they were in attendance or not.
Quoting connies4ever (Thread starter): I still maintain that the Panthers are probably the next domino in the franchise relocation ballet.
Panthers seems like a logical loss. I don't understand, though, why Seattle would get a team. Phil Knight, IIRC, had Rose Garden built in Portland specifically for an NHL team to share with the Blazers. Plus, the Winter Classic could be played at Jeld-Wen Field (home of Timbers Soccer). The ice would already be there in the winter, with Portland's horrid ice storms!
I think a team should go back to Canada. Yes, Quebec City would be a great choice. Or maybe Hamilton?
Wheel of morality turn, turn, turn. Tell us the lesson that we should learn
mham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2557 posts, RR: 3 Reply 3, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1894 times:
Ice hockey in the desert is just stupid. Even in San Jose, it's ridiculous. Then the season goes on and on and on, the playoffs come and more teams make the playoffs than don't. Winning records not required. They have over saturated their market.
4holer From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2708 posts, RR: 12 Reply 4, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1893 times:
I'm a big hockey fan living in (east) PHX. If the Penguins play here I try to go, but that's the only game I'm willing to drive 50 miles across town to go to. Seriously, the Glendale sports district is closer to Wickenburg than to my place in Gilbert. Just a horrid decision to put the already shaky hockey team that far away from it's primary fan base well living well east of the I-17. So the whole town considers them already gone.
Where to? I'm an American, but i love tradition. Put 'em north of the border.
flymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 5674 posts, RR: 6 Reply 5, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1872 times:
Quoting connies4ever (Thread starter): 16,000 Winnipeg reporters at the game estimated the number of people actually there was about 8,000.
Season tickets, as long as the tickets were purchased that is the most important thing to the team.
The Panthers this year rank 20th in attendance and for the whole season last year rank 22nd out of 30. 81% filled last year with 87% this year with the Panthers doing fairly well this year. PHX is dead last in attendance.
Quoting connies4ever (Thread starter): I still maintain that the Panthers are probably the next domino in the franchise relocation ballet.
Though it has been a little bit of a surprise the Panthers have lasted so long down in the Miami area. They are not really in Miami a good 25miles north of the city, I have not heard much about the team moving. They have a great arena and a decent dedicated following. Islanders, and Coyotes would be first IMO and maybe even some others according to attendance stats.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3140 posts, RR: 12 Reply 6, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1873 times:
Quoting FingerLakerAv8r (Reply 1): Two teams in YYZ?? Haven't they suffered enough with the one they got??? LOL
The Maple Leafs are (this year perhaps being an exception) not really a hockey team, they're a vehicle for MLSE to make a whack of money. If there was another Toronto team maybe they'd actually have to field something decent - again, this year perhaps being an exception. But they still have to make the playoffs, although it is looking better for them.
Quoting seb146 (Reply 2): I think a team should go back to Canada. Yes, Quebec City would be a great choice. Or maybe Hamilton?
I'll go out on a limb and say Hamilton will NEVER get an NHL franchise. YQB first option, Kitchener-Waterloo second.
Quoting mham001 (Reply 3): They have over saturated their market.
No argument. Best thing that could happen would be some type of contraction, at least two teams, perhaps four.
Quoting 4holer (Reply 4): Just a horrid decision to put the already shaky hockey team that far away from it's primary fan base well living well east of the I-17.
I absolutely agree. If an NHL calibre arena had been built in Phoenix proper, the team might be viable. Might. Phoenix for hockey is best placed in the American League. Bring back the Roadrunners !
canoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2265 posts, RR: 11 Reply 7, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1872 times:
Quoting seb146 (Reply 2): I don't understand, though, why Seattle would get a team.
Rumor is that the person pitching this to Seattle wants to bring the Sacramento Kings basketball team with them and play in a new arena somewhere south of downtown. Land has already been bought where they want to build it.
The problem Seattle has always had getting an NHL team is that Key Arena is too small and it's an old building. Personally, I could care less about an NBA team coming back here, but if they are able to bring an NHL team here I'd go. The minor league teams in the area do fairly well and I know a lot of people that make the trip up to Vancouver to watch the Canucks.
That said, Quebec City seems like a more natural fit than Seattle for a team.
texan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4093 posts, RR: 55 Reply 8, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1852 times:
I'm surprised that a few posters have suggested relocating the Isles. The problem with the Isles isn't location, lack of a fan base or lack of success in the past--remember, they won four consecutive Stanley Cups in 1980-1983 seasons and were a force into the early 1990s. Their biggest problems have been incompetent ownership and GMs. If they had any kind of management team in place they'd be doing well out on the Island. But if they moved to Brooklyn and shared the new arena with the Nets, I'd be ok with that.
As for the 'yotes, though, moving them to Quebec could help ease realignment. Kansas City has been hammering for a team for well over a decade. They'll get one eventually. And Seattle should probably have one already. As should Milwaukee.
The problems with those locations: 1) Quebec doesn't have a good arena ready to go and may have trouble drawing fans at stadiums outside Eastern Canada and the Northeast; 2) Kansas City, for all their desire, still sits in the middle of the country and has little connection with hockey--not that that stopped places like Columbus and Nashville from getting teams; 3) Seattle doesn't have an arena ready and could face opposition from Vancouver because of local tv rights issues; 4) ditto for Milwaukee in relation to Chicago.
I think those are the four likliest cities for a franchise to move to, and in that order. Milwaukee, in some ways, brings the most to the table in terms of rivalry considerations--they have natural rivalries with Chicago, Minnesota and Detroit, and it wouldn't take much doing to get one started with St. Louis--outside of the traditional Quebec-Montreal, Quebec-Toronto, Quebec-Boston rivalries. Seattle has the largest market, and that could outweigh any concerns Vancouver may have. Plus it could be a great rivalry. Kansas City has offered the moon to get an NHL team. And they will get one eventually. But I don't think it is their time yet.
Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
canoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2265 posts, RR: 11 Reply 9, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1834 times:
Quoting texan (Reply 8): The problems with those locations: 1) Quebec doesn't have a good arena ready to go and may have trouble drawing fans at stadiums outside Eastern Canada and the Northeast; 2) Kansas City, for all their desire, still sits in the middle of the country and has little connection with hockey--not that that stopped places like Columbus and Nashville from getting teams; 3) Seattle doesn't have an arena ready and could face opposition from Vancouver because of local tv rights issues; 4) ditto for Milwaukee in relation to Chicago.
At least here in Seattle the project won't pencil being solely a NHL arena. I would guess that's probably the same problem other cities will have if they don't have another tenant. From what they're reporting here the Sacramento Kings have until March 1 to come up with a viable proposal to build an arena there and the Maloof's who own the team are in financial trouble leading everyone here to think the NBA might come back as part of a package deal.
In 2006 Seattle voters approved an initiative that says the city must make a profit on any investment it makes in a sports arena. It will be interesting if the city circumvents that initiative to try and get a team here.
connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3140 posts, RR: 12 Reply 10, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1821 times:
Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 7): That said, Quebec City seems like a more natural fit than Seattle for a team.
It all comes down to building the building.. Winnipeg did that well in advance of the NHL coming here as part of the overall strategy to bring the NHL back. In the interim, the AHL team (Manitoba Moose, was almost the name of the NHL franchise) was there and drew 7-8,000 per game. Quebec really has to do the same thing.
Quoting texan (Reply 8): I'm surprised that a few posters have suggested relocating the Isles.
Widely discussed in Canadian media. The Isles are hemoraghing where they are. I'd agree management and coaching have been issues, but the current building is just not up to it anymore.
Quoting texan (Reply 8): 3) Seattle doesn't have an arena ready and could face opposition from Vancouver because of local tv rights issues;
Seattle is outside of Vancouver's "territorial rights" limit, so I don't see a conflict. And, the American teams to my knowledge do not share in Canadian TV revenues.
Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 9): In 2006 Seattle voters approved an initiative that says the city must make a profit on any investment it makes in a sports arena. It will be interesting if the city circumvents that initiative to try and get a team here.
Or, perhaps Chris Hansen will use HIS OWN MONEY. I know this concept is radical for Americans. It never stops amazing me that these kajillionaire NFL/NHL/NBA/MLB team owners in the US, perhaps amongst the most succesful capitalist around, want local and state governments to build a building for them and let them use it essentially free. That's why LA currently does not have an NFL franchise, the city council basically told the Rams owners to piss up a rope.
canoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2265 posts, RR: 11 Reply 11, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1806 times:
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 10): Or, perhaps Chris Hansen will use HIS OWN MONEY. I know this concept is radical for Americans. Wow! It never stops amazing me that these kajillionaire NFL/NHL/NBA/MLB team owners in the US, perhaps amongst the most succesful capitalist around, want local and state governments to build a building for them and let them use it essentially free.
I don't disagree with you. Washington taxpayers have spent hundreds of millions of dollars towards the construction of Quest (aka CenturyLink) field, Safeco field, and remodeling Key Arena as well as retiring the dept of the Kingdome and even built a freeway access to the football stadium.
It seems too easy for legislators to up the hotel, motel and rental car taxes to attempt to pay for these things all that does is force people visiting the city to spend their money elsewhere or not come at all.
In 1995 a vote to build a new baseball stadium failed...the project ended up getting funded by the public anyway through over $400 million in state bonds. This is all about the owners. Which is why any new stadium will have to be paid for by private funds here in Seattle. As I said, I could care less about the NBA but I would love to take my kid to a NHL game that doesn't require me to drive 3 1/2 hours north to Vancouver.
texan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4093 posts, RR: 55 Reply 12, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1791 times:
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 10): Seattle is outside of Vancouver's "territorial rights" limit, so I don't see a conflict. And, the American teams to my knowledge do not share in Canadian TV revenues.
Gotcha, didn't know that!
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 10): Widely discussed in Canadian media. The Isles are hemoraghing where they are. I'd agree management and coaching have been issues, but the current building is just not up to it anymore.
I'm not sure the NHL would let them move with the same ownership group, though. Moving would just allow the same owneres to hemmorhage cash in another locale, but after getting a lump sum payment to increase the franchise value from another city. The exception I can see there is Brooklyn since it is in the same metro area.
Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 9): At least here in Seattle the project won't pencil being solely a NHL arena.
True and a very good point. Quebec and Seattle are probably still the two front runners.
Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3140 posts, RR: 12 Reply 13, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1776 times:
Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 11): . Which is why any new stadium will have to be paid for by private funds here in Seattle. As I said, I could care less about the NBA but I would love to take my kid to a NHL game that doesn't require me to drive 3 1/2 hours north to Vancouver.
Which shows the good sense of the public in Seattle. Always liked the city, an uncle spent 5 years at McChord AFB outside Tacoma, so I have had a few opportunities to spend time in SEA.
Quoting texan (Reply 12): I'm not sure the NHL would let them move with the same ownership group, though. Moving would just allow the same owneres to hemmorhage cash in another locale, but after getting a lump sum payment to increase the franchise value from another city. The exception I can see there is Brooklyn since it is in the same metro area.
Agree it would be new ownership, just as Atlanta-to-Winnipeg (which btw is a huge screaming financial success). But there's a shitload of moneyed people in TO. Not sure about Brooklyn, when the Isles were created, they had to pay a rights fee to the Rangers. If they moved closer to the Rangers would they have to pay it again ?
texan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4093 posts, RR: 55 Reply 14, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1749 times:
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 13): Agree it would be new ownership, just as Atlanta-to-Winnipeg (which btw is a huge screaming financial success). But there's a shitload of moneyed people in TO. Not sure about Brooklyn, when the Isles were created, they had to pay a rights fee to the Rangers. If they moved closer to the Rangers would they have to pay it again ?
I'd think that since the Isles are considered part of the local market already that moving to Brooklyn wouldn't be too difficult. But that's just an opinion based on almost no facts. And the only reason I have Brooklyn in there is if the same ownership group remains. As you said, there would pretty much have to be new ownership to move the team a good distance away. And the Winnipeg move was brilliant.
Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
moose135 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1834 posts, RR: 14 Reply 15, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1750 times:
Quoting texan (Reply 8): I'm surprised that a few posters have suggested relocating the Isles.
The biggest problem with the Isles right now is their building. And unfortunately, it has become a political football (puck?). Charles Wang, the owner, wanted to build a new arena on his own, as part of authority to develop the surrounding area. That was stopped by the local town board, who were concerned about density of the proposed development. Last summer, the county executive tried to push through a publicly financed plan, but managed to alienate enough people that the proposal was voted down. Wang is saying he won't keep the team in the Coliseum after their current lease expires in 2015, and it will be difficult to get anything approved and built before then.
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 10): It never stops amazing me that these kajillionaire NFL/NHL/NBA/MLB team owners in the US, perhaps amongst the most succesful capitalist around, want local and state governments to build a building for them and let them use it essentially free.
That's how they become kajillionaire team owners...
seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 8614 posts, RR: 19 Reply 16, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1746 times:
Quoting mham001 (Reply 3): Ice hockey in the desert is just stupid. Even in San Jose, it's ridiculous.
San Jose actually has a good sized fan base. I live about 100 miles away to the north and I still hear more people here talk about the Sharks than the Golden State Warriors. These days, climate has little, if anything, to do with it. The people of Phoenix are just not into hockey. Like in Portland. There were a few hunderd people that were outraged when the baseball team left. Twice. But, there were a few thousand who really wanted to expand the soccer team.
Quoting mham001 (Reply 3): Then the season goes on and on and on, the playoffs come and more teams make the playoffs than don't.
Sounds like basketball. Or, except the playoffs comment, baseball.
Quoting texan (Reply 8): Seattle doesn't have an arena ready and could face opposition from Vancouver because of local tv rights issues;
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 10): the American teams to my knowledge do not share in Canadian TV revenues.
The only time any Canadian teams are ever shown on American TV is the playoffs or when they are playing in an American city. The Canucks have never been shown on Seattle TV. When I lived in Seattle, I had to listen to games on CKNW.
Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 9): It will be interesting if the city circumvents that initiative to try and get a team here.
They will. They got King County citizens to pay for three stadiums in the past 15 years.
Wheel of morality turn, turn, turn. Tell us the lesson that we should learn
connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3140 posts, RR: 12 Reply 17, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1728 times:
Quoting moose135 (Reply 15): Charles Wang, the owner, wanted to build a new arena on his own, as part of authority to develop the surrounding area. That was stopped by the local town board, who were concerned about density of the proposed development.
I think this is exactly the problem Steve Ellman ran into when he moved the original Jets to Phoenix. The arena they were playing in is the Suns and isn't really good for hockey. Ironically, one of Ellman's companies (name escapes me) gained control of the Portage Place Shopping Centre in Winnipeg......which is right across the street from the MTS Centre......where the current Jets play. Life is strange sometimes. Ellman was once quoted as saying "If I knew how much I was going to lose on hockey in Phoenix, I would have left them in Winnipeg".
Quoting moose135 (Reply 15): Wang is saying he won't keep the team in the Coliseum after their current lease expires in 2015, and it will be difficult to get anything approved and built before then.
Agree, I don't think there is enough time to have a new building in place in Nassau County. The Brooklyn option might work (Barclay Centre ??) but from what I've read it's even smaller than MTS Centre (cap 15,004).
I would have been OK with keeping the franchise name, but the fan base wanted old name back. Also, with new logo, colours, etc., they get to sell a whack of new swag. Further, the AHL affiliate is in St John's Nfld, where moose are a real problem, so Newfoundland Moose would have been a natural. Instead they're stuck with St John's IceCaps, whatever that stands for.
Quoting seb146 (Reply 16): The people of Phoenix are just not into hockey.
If Ellman's proposal had gone ahead, fighting chance they could have kept their head above water.
moose135 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1834 posts, RR: 14 Reply 18, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1725 times:
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 17): Also, with new logo, colours, etc., they get to sell a whack of new swag.
srbmod From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 16221 posts, RR: 57 Reply 19, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1706 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD MODERATOR
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 13): Agree it would be new ownership, just as Atlanta-to-Winnipeg (which btw is a huge screaming financial success). But there's a shitload of moneyed people in TO. Not sure about Brooklyn, when the Isles were created, they had to pay a rights fee to the Rangers. If they moved closer to the Rangers would they have to pay it again ?
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 17):
Agree, I don't think there is enough time to have a new building in place in Nassau County. The Brooklyn option might work (Barclay Centre ??) but from what I've read it's even smaller than MTS Centre (cap 15,004).
Brooklyn is not a viable option, as the design of Barclays Center doesn't suit NHL hockey, as the capacity is 14,500. Had the original Frank Gehry design not been shelved for the cheaper design, then we could seriously talk about it as a venue for the Isles. Now if they could manage to get a deal in place to build a new arena for the Isles, perhaps Barclays could be a temporary venue for the team.
The Isles would not be forced to pay a territory fee to the Rangers since NYC is considered the territory for both clubs (When the Devils came to NJ, they had to pay a territory fee to the Rangers, the Isles and the Flyers.).
The problem is that the area cannot support three NHL teams. Haven't the Devils been having issues with attendance as well?
As someone who was affected by the relocation of the Thrashers to Winnipeg, I'm beginning to see that move as getting rid of a bad ownership group that had no real interest in operating an NHL franchise. The fact that the Board Of Governors approved the sale and relocation unanimously also seems to in retrospect support that as well. They knew that nobody was interesting in buying the Thrashers and keeping them in Atlanta unless the entire operation was sold to them (Hawks, Thrashers, and Phillips Arena operating rights) and Atlanta Spirit wasn't actively accepting bids on the entire operation (Several months after selling the Thrashers, they did have an agreement to sell the Hawks and the arena rights, but the deal fell apart due to financial concerns of the potential new owner.).
The Coyotes are pretty much done in desert after this season. There's no way the City Of Glendale covers any losses for next season. The Coyotes came within 10 minutes of being sold to True North and returned to Winnipeg, as the City Of Glendale nearly missed the deadline to agree to cover losses for the upcoming season and the NHL already had TNSE waiting in the wings to buy them. Since the City of Glendale came through, the NHL gave the green light for Atlanta Spirit and True North to open negotiations and the deal was made rather swiftly.
I don't think they're be relocated north of the border, as the Winnipeg matter was Gary Bettman throwing a bone to the fans in Canada. Quebec City isn't getting a team until they get a new arena built, simple as that. Quebecor is the company that is interested in putting a team back in Quebec City.. They're a big company, they can pay for an arena if they want a team that badly.
Here's my picks for where the Coyotes end up:
Houston (Even though they would likely have to compensate the Wild since they would have to relocate the Aeros.)
Oklahoma City (They were among the candidates for an expansion franchise during the last series of expansion. They lost to Columbus.).
Kansas City (Although the lackluster attendance at the preseason games played there may work against them.)
Atlanta (Yes, I said Atlanta. But I don't think they're an option as long as Atlanta Spirit controls Philips Arena, and the only other venue in town is too small for NHL games [The Arena @ Gwinnett Center seats 11,355 for hockey.]. Atlanta is a major media market and the decline in attendance was not due to the on-ice performance, rather it was due to the owners.).
Seattle is not an option until they have an arena that is suitable for the NHL (KeyArena seats 15,177 for hockey and the sight lines for hockey are not ideal due to the renovation in the 90s.). The Pacific Northwest could use another team in either Seattle or Portland.
Hello Airplanes? Yeah, it's Blimps. You win, bye....
canoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2265 posts, RR: 11 Reply 21, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1664 times:
Quoting srbmod (Reply 19): Oklahoma City (They were among the candidates for an expansion franchise during the last series of expansion. They lost to Columbus.).
I'm pretty sure if an NHL team relocates to Oklahoma City over a bid to get a NHL/NBA arena built here in Seattle after the Sonic left for OKC....this town will run out of pitchforks.
seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 8614 posts, RR: 19 Reply 22, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1632 times:
Quoting czbbflier (Reply 20): slightly off-colour joke comes to mind....
One along the same lines, but not off-color:
The Devil is doing his devil stuff in Hades. All of a sudden, a blizzard slams in. He runs around screaming and trying to figure out what is going on. One of his minions stops him and says "Oh, that. The Leafs won The Cup."
Wheel of morality turn, turn, turn. Tell us the lesson that we should learn
scrubbsywg From Canada, joined Mar 2007, 1468 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1623 times:
Quoting moose135 (Reply 18): Quoting connies4ever (Reply 17):
Also, with new logo, colours, etc., they get to sell a whack of new swag.
With a CF-18, no less!
The sheer amount of Jets gear people have is amazing. I've been out and about on game days and what not and it is just insane how much stuff they have sold.
connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3140 posts, RR: 12 Reply 24, posted (3 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1597 times:
Quoting srbmod (Reply 19): As someone who was affected by the relocation of the Thrashers to Winnipeg, I'm beginning to see that move as getting rid of a bad ownership group that had no real interest in operating an NHL franchise. The fact that the Board Of Governors approved the sale and relocation unanimously also seems to in retrospect support that as well. They knew that nobody was interesting in buying the Thrashers and keeping them in Atlanta unless the entire operation was sold to them (Hawks, Thrashers, and Phillips Arena operating rights) and Atlanta Spirit wasn't actively accepting bids on the entire operation (Several months after selling the Thrashers, they did have an agreement to sell the Hawks and the arena rights, but the deal fell apart due to financial concerns of the potential new owner.).
I agree that if Atlanta had had a strong ownership group then the Thrashers would still be playing.
Quoting czbbflier (Reply 20): How are the Toronto Maple Leafs like a plain, non-protective jock-strap?
Lots of support... but no Cup.
ROTFLMAO !!!
Quoting scrubbsywg (Reply 23): The sheer amount of Jets gear people have is amazing. I've been out and about on game days and what not and it is just insane how much stuff they have sold.
I'm not even in Winnipeg (yet...this spring) but I have a Tee and a hat. I'm actually not crazy about the logo, but it is a reminder to those in Montreal that we haven't forgotten (or forgiven) about the CF-18 maintenance contract...
Now, if they could only figure out how to put the puck in the net !
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
25 StarAC17: It's the case of smart fans being punished discussed by ESPN radio host Colin Cowherd. At the end of last NFL season this came up regarding the Vikin
26 connies4ever: Quite. Particularly for football stadia. Football, whether Aussie rules, or Canadian/American, has only a small number of dates per year, so the stad
27 jfk69: You beat me to it and explained it very well. I am a Nassau County Resident and season ticket holder since 2001 (Remember the Maple leaf series?) The
28 apodino: The Barclays Center should have been looked at from the start for the reasons the above posters have said. While it would be a small arena for Hockey,
29 connies4ever: Well, MTS Centre in Winnipeg is currently the smallest venue, but the smallness in part drives fan appetite -- I'd better get tickets now as they won
30 srbmod: The original design for the building (designed by famed architect Frank Gehry) would have seated closer to what the average NHL building seats, but w
31 bjorn14: That was Paul Allen (cofounder Microsoft, Blazers and Seahawks owner) Named it after his Mom.
32 FighterPilot: I just moved here from Northwestern Ontario. I couldn't believe how many people I've seen wearing Jets gear. Not going to lie though, I'm one of them
33 connies4ever: I used to think the possibility of the Kings moving was MUCH larger than the Hornets. In fact it now looks like Sac will move to Anaheim for next yea
34 scrubbsywg: replying to connies forever Well I am in Winnipeg and I only have a hat. I figure the 800some dollars for a share of a pair of season tickets is all I
35 connies4ever: Yeah, the upcoming home stand (6 games ?) will make or break them for the playoffs. Even if they do make it, likely they come in as the 8th place tea
36 canoecarrier: Well....the City of Seattle and King County just announced they'll help build a half-billion dollar NBA and NHL arena in SODO just south of downtown.
37 AirframeAS: I would LOVE it if the Sonics were to make a comeback. I would rather it be an expansion team than a team moving to Seattle. I think that is the best
38 canoecarrier: Why should the state pitch in any more money? Right now no public funds would be committed to the arena until NBA and NHL franchises have been secure
39 AirframeAS: How much money did the State of Washington pitch in for Safeco and Seahawks Stadium (Qwest now CenturyLink)?
40 canoecarrier: It wasn't right then and it isn't right now. Over a billion public dollars have been spent already on sports stadiums in Seattle. Hence the Initiativ
41 AirframeAS: Not related to the topic, you are right.... but they are having the same problem with financing the Alaskan Way Viaduct tunnel project with the Easte
42 StuckInCA: That news is really too old to be useful (11 months). They may move to Anaheim, but it's hard to say. There's a decent chance the Kings end up stayin
43 jamincan: When the NHL expanded to Ottawa, they didn't have an NHL-ready arena and the Sens played at the Civic Centre (capacity ~10000) for four years until Sc
44 seb146: They just built a stadium in Kent on the south side for the T-Birds. I think it holds 5000 or so. As I recall, to get the football stadium built, the
45 L-188: Wheren't the Roadrunners ECHL? I seem to remember the Alaska Aces playing them Dude, that is an F-16 Abso-freaking-loootly I do wonder that, It was m
46 jamincan: This looks a lot more like this than this. It looks nothing like an F-16.
47 seb146: Thunderbirds are minor league Western Hockey League. OHL, QMJHL and WHL send their best teams to play for Memorial Cup. The Portland Winterhawks have
48 canoecarrier: Silvertips. They play in a pretty nice facility up in downtown Everett. I haven't had a chance to see the Thunderbirds yet I've been to several 'Tips
49 moose135: Agreed - and since Winnipeg is a Canadian team, and you know, they fly F-18s in Canada, and not F-16s, I wouldn't expect an F-16 on the logo.
50 seb146: Yes, same league and same conference. Kelowna is BC Division. http://www.whl.ca/standings/show/ls_season/238/subtype/0
52 vapar8: But Steve Ellman did NOT move the Jets. He bought them after they moved. Richard Burke and Steven Gluckstern bought and moved the team. Richard Burke
53 connies4ever: Also, when the Atlanta Flames moved to Calgary, they played for I believe 2 years in the old Calgary Corral, cap about 6,300. The thing I recall most
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3140 posts, 
From United States of America, joined May 2011, 259 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4093 posts, 
I know this concept is radical for Americans. 
It never stops amazing me that these kajillionaire NFL/NHL/NBA/MLB team owners in the US, perhaps amongst the most succesful capitalist around, want local and state governments to build a building for them and let them use it essentially free. That's why LA currently does not have an NFL franchise, the city council basically told the Rams owners to piss up a rope.
Printer friendly format 
