Jump to content


Photo

Coyotes Mess


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1 YzerFan19

YzerFan19

    Legend

  • Admin
  • 11,157 posts
  • Location: Michigan

Posted August 26, 2009 - 02:51 PM

I've been trying to blog about this for the last several hours but I seriously cannot understand the Board of Governors right now. I wanted to write some big, all-insightful piece on what's happening in Phoenix but I've got nothing.

The league voted, supposedly on the same 26-0-3 lines that they voted to not accept Jim Balsillie as an owner, to put in a bid to buy the Phoenix Coyotes themselves. How is it that 26 owners have decided that the best way to make money is to buy a team that loses tens of millions of dollars every season?

The thing that gets me is the number. Twenty-six! Nearly the entire Board of Governors thinks this is a good idea! This group that used to bicker with each other all the time has made nearly-unanimous decisions ever since the lockout. How did that happen?

This isn't about whether or not the Coyotes should be moved, as Balsillie wants to do. It's about a group of supposed businessmen making what looks like an awful business decision.

The one reason I see for this move is that the NHL will be awarded the team in court and then turn around and sell the Coyotes to their hand-picked owner, Jerry Reinsdorf. Reinsdorf withdrew his bid at the same time that the NHL made theirs. He had previously voiced concerns when Balsillie attempted to make the full details of his bid - as well as any breaks given to Reinsdorf by the city of Glendale - public in court.

If the NHL buys the team out of bankruptcy, they can sell to Reinsdorf in complete privacy. He would be able to come to whatever secret agreements with the city that he wanted without Balsillie countering that he was being given an inside track.

At this point, that's what I expect to see happen.

I also don't expect the Coyotes to last five more years in Glendale.

#2 SYfanSD

SYfanSD

    Legend

  • Members
  • 2,343 posts
  • Location: San Diego, Ca

Posted August 27, 2009 - 09:05 PM

I know there was a lot of talk about the Buffalo Sabres filing an infringement lawsuit against Balsillie if he did bring the team to Hamilton, but most of that died in the last two days.
Posted Image

#3 YzerFan19

YzerFan19

    Legend

  • Admin
  • 11,157 posts
  • Location: Michigan

Posted August 27, 2009 - 09:54 PM

Oh there's no doubt there'd be endless litigation if Balsillie won. The league would not go down without a fight. But I covered that a few weeks ago.

No matter what happens, I don't see this really being over before the start of the season.

#4 bigred4478

bigred4478

    All-Star

  • Members
  • 214 posts
  • Location: Jackson,Michigan

Posted August 27, 2009 - 10:56 PM

yeah the no more than 5 yr's in Glendale is extremely spot on i don't know what the league is trying to prove here Glendale is obviously not the most marketable place for an NHL team so your gonna have to move them eventually anyway or just fold it all together..... I can understand Buffalo's grudge with them moving to Hamilton as well.. It doesn't seem the league has much of a commitment to Canada in the Bettman era anyway but then again that is probably the board more than him as was discussed here before he is the puppet my question is when they do have to move them or whatever where do they put them? send em back to Winnipeg?
Posted Image Posted Image

#5 YzerFan19

YzerFan19

    Legend

  • Admin
  • 11,157 posts
  • Location: Michigan

Posted August 28, 2009 - 06:35 AM

As much as so many Canadians would like you to think the Jets could return, Winnipeg doesn't fit in the NHL as it is right now. Their new arena is too small and they don't have the corporate support.

IMO, the only place that could support another team without damaging an existing team is Toronto. Hamilton hurts Buffalo but Toronto proper has enough people and enough business to support two teams. With a new arena Quebec might be able to but I'm not sure about that. Same for Montreal but I don't think anyone there is clamoring for an alternative to the Habs. Winnipeg, Halifax, Saskatoon... All pipe dreams.

There are only three cities the NHL is looking at right now. Kansas City, Toronto, and Las Vegas. They probably should be looking at Houston as well but that name never comes up anymore, not since the last round of expansion. OKC has the NBA now and is expected to get Edmonton's dormant AHL franchise next year so they're probably out. Seattle doesn't have an arena. Portland doesn't have an owner (Paul Allen controls the Rose Garden and the NHL p*ssed him off in the last round of expansion). There go all of the places that usually come up in these discussions.

#6 SYfanSD

SYfanSD

    Legend

  • Members
  • 2,343 posts
  • Location: San Diego, Ca

Posted August 29, 2009 - 09:04 PM

Top 10 reasons why San Diego is out:

10. Bad market
9. The Gulls (ECHL Team) folded three years ago and no one has been able to explain why. (I'm sure low revenue was not a factor LOL)
8. The city can't seem to build a new arena for the sorry ass Chargers without some kind of ridiculous politics. Petco Park was no better
7. The fan base is band wagon and never shows up unless a championship game is on the line
6. (This one is a fact) Most people in San Diego think the Chargers win against the Colts a few years ago to get to the finals was more significant than the 1980 miracle on ice (No really... they actually believe that here)
5. Most people think icing is a term for road conditions
4. It would further bankrupt the city (Not that they have been in the red for five years now)
3. There is something wrong with wearing shorts and flip-flops to games, even in December
2. Not enough gang activity to support jersey sales

And the number one reason...

The concept of a self contained sheet of ice would create a traffic jam from San Diego to Temecula on the 15 because there would be a fear of running off the road. (A distance of 65 miles)
Posted Image

#7 klaitinen

klaitinen

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • 944 posts
  • Location: Sault Ste Marie, ON

Posted September 01, 2009 - 07:26 AM

I've been to the Key arena in Seattle to watch the WHL Thunderbirds. Very nice place and I'm sure capacity was around 15k or so.
Supersonics used to play there. I'm sure it would be ok for an NHL club.

jerseys.png


#8 YzerFan19

YzerFan19

    Legend

  • Admin
  • 11,157 posts
  • Location: Michigan

Posted September 01, 2009 - 08:51 AM

Everyone expects Seattle to be an option because they have an NBA-calibre arena. The problem is that Key Arena was redesigned specifically for basketball in the 1990s so a Seattle hockey team would have the same problems that they had in Phoenix when the Coyotes played at America West Arena. Because of the sections of seating that have to be closed for hockey, the arena would only seat 15,177.

From the Wikipedia article on the Seattle Thunderbirds, who no longer play in the arena...

Unfortunately, the Key Arena was ill-suited for hockey, as the sight lines were designed for basketball and the ice surface was so far off center that the scoreboard hung over the Thunderbirds' offensive zone instead of center ice.


It might work for a temporary arena but having just been rebuilt 15 years ago I doubt Seattle is looking to build another new arena for an NHL team now.

#9 klaitinen

klaitinen

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • 944 posts
  • Location: Sault Ste Marie, ON

Posted September 02, 2009 - 02:00 PM

Everyone expects Seattle to be an option because they have an NBA-calibre arena. The problem is that Key Arena was redesigned specifically for basketball in the 1990s so a Seattle hockey team would have the same problems that they had in Phoenix when the Coyotes played at America West Arena. Because of the sections of seating that have to be closed for hockey, the arena would only seat 15,177.

From the Wikipedia article on the Seattle Thunderbirds, who no longer play in the arena...

Unfortunately, the Key Arena was ill-suited for hockey, as the sight lines were designed for basketball and the ice surface was so far off center that the scoreboard hung over the Thunderbirds' offensive zone instead of center ice.


It might work for a temporary arena but having just been rebuilt 15 years ago I doubt Seattle is looking to build another new arena for an NHL team now.


Having been there I didnt notice the seating that had to be closed. I assume they mean the courtside seating. I can see how 15k would be cutting it close but seeing as the Isles only avg 12,600 a game it still could be semi viable as long as the interest is there.

I always wondered why Bill Gates being in Seattle never cleaned out his couch cushions and built it so they would come :)

jerseys.png


#10 YzerFan19

YzerFan19

    Legend

  • Admin
  • 11,157 posts
  • Location: Michigan

Posted September 02, 2009 - 03:45 PM

Watching the TSN live blog of today's court proceedings it feels like the judge is trying very hard not to rule on anything he doesn't have to. Seems like he wants the NHL and Balsillie to work it out so he doesn't have to reject Balsillie's bid. Not gonna happen.

#11 YzerFan19

YzerFan19

    Legend

  • Admin
  • 11,157 posts
  • Location: Michigan

Posted September 02, 2009 - 04:06 PM

Having been there I didnt notice the seating that had to be closed. I assume they mean the courtside seating. I can see how 15k would be cutting it close but seeing as the Isles only avg 12,600 a game it still could be semi viable as long as the interest is there.


When were you there? You never noticed any of this?

If you're basing your attendance estimates off of the friggin' Islanders you're setting yourself up for failure. With a max capacity of 15,177 you'd have had to have sold out ever game just to finish 27th in league attendance last season.

It's the same problem the MTS Centre in Winnipeg has. Yeah, you can seat more than the worst teams in the league are drawing but that assumes a sellout every night.

#12 klaitinen

klaitinen

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • 944 posts
  • Location: Sault Ste Marie, ON

Posted September 03, 2009 - 06:47 AM

Having been there I didnt notice the seating that had to be closed. I assume they mean the courtside seating. I can see how 15k would be cutting it close but seeing as the Isles only avg 12,600 a game it still could be semi viable as long as the interest is there.


When were you there? You never noticed any of this?

If you're basing your attendance estimates off of the friggin' Islanders you're setting yourself up for failure. With a max capacity of 15,177 you'd have had to have sold out ever game just to finish 27th in league attendance last season.

It's the same problem the MTS Centre in Winnipeg has. Yeah, you can seat more than the worst teams in the league are drawing but that assumes a sellout every night.


Wow.. the beer must have been strong enough to not remember that! I went to Seattle for a Seahawk/Cowboys Monday night game and took in a Thunderbird game during the day. The arena was nice, seats were great and the bar was a mere 25 ft walk behind me. Maybe I had tunnel vision :)

jerseys.png


#13 klaitinen

klaitinen

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • 944 posts
  • Location: Sault Ste Marie, ON

Posted September 04, 2009 - 09:29 AM

Speaking with the guy I went to the game with he remembers the one end unseatable, so it was just me :)

jerseys.png


#14 -Al-

-Al-

    All-Star

  • Members
  • 294 posts
  • Location: Sudbury, ON

Posted September 05, 2009 - 05:56 AM

I think that Sudbury would also be a viable option. We don't have an NHL sized arena at the moment, but with the city looking to build an arena, there's already a good deal of money there. It would just require an extra investment on the part of any potential owner to have the arena built to the larger NHL size. I'm sure we could draw plenty of fans from the Sault, North Bay, even as far south as Barrie. This wouldn't even infringe on the territorial rights of any existing teams.

[color=rgb(139,0,0);]Al Sylvestre
GM, Montreal Maroons (Y11-present)
Career record: 169-359-88, 426 Pts, No Titles


Y21: 17-27-12, 46 Pts (5th Div, 8th Conf, DNQ)
Y20: 14-34-8, 36 Pts (5th Div, 10th Conf, DNQ)
Y19: 15-30-11, 41 Pts (4th Div, 9th Conf, DNQ)
Y18: 14-32-10, 38 Pts (5th Div, 10th Conf, DNQ)
Y17: 10-33-13, 33 Pts (5th Div, 10th Conf, DNQ)
Y16: 14-38-4, 32 Pts (5th Div, 10th Conf, DNQ)
Y15: 15-36-5, 35 Pts (5th Div, 10th Conf, DNQ)
Y14: 10-36-10, 30 Pts (5th Div, 10th Conf, DNQ)
Y13: 15-34-7, 37 Pts (5th Div, 10th Conf, DNQ)
Y12: 25-28-3, 53 Pts (3rd Div, 5th Conf, DNQ)
Y11: 20-31-5, 45 Pts (4th Div, 9th Conf, DNQ)

Sudbury Wolves - farm team (202-322-92, 496 Pts)
Y21: 25-24-7, 57 Pts, 9th
Y20: 24-20-12, 60 Pts, 9th
Y19: 17-31-8, 42 Pts, 17th
Y18: 18-28-10, 46 Pts, 18th
Y17: 14-37-5, 33 Pts, 19th
Y16: 19-25-12, 50 Pts, 15th
Y15: 12-33-11, 35 Pts, 19th
Y14: 18-29-9, 45 Pts, 17th
Y13: 13-39-4, 30 Pts, 20th
Y12: 14-35-7, 35 Pts, 19th
Y11: 28-21-7, 63 Pts, 7th[/color]


#15 Creamer

Creamer

    Rookie

  • Members
  • 18 posts
  • Location: Oshawa, ON

Posted September 05, 2009 - 09:23 AM

I think that Sudbury would also be a viable option. We don't have an NHL sized arena at the moment


Which eliminates it instantly as a viable option, unless you're proposing they play in that 60-year-old arena that seats 5,000 for a few years until the new arena is built... and what am I forgetting, right - the fact that Greater Sudbury has a population of only 152,000 people.


I'm sure we could draw plenty of fans from the Sault, North Bay, even as far south as Barrie.


Yeah, fans from the Sault (pop 74,000) and Barrie (pop 128,000) would love to make that 3-4 hour drive to see a game in Sudbury regularly. You know why Hamilton or Toronto or London or Kitchener/Waterloo or ANYTHING in the Toronto area is a better option than Sudbury?

Toronto: 2,500,000 <-- 2 NHL sized arenas (3 if you count Ricoh) built
Mississauga: 680,000
Hamilton: 504,000 <-- NHL sized arena built
Brampton: 433,000
London: 352,000
Markham: 261,000
Vaughan: 238,000
Kitchener: 204,000
Oshawa: 160,000

The combined populations of your 4 areas spread out over 6-7 hours worth of driving would place slightly higher than London on this list while these 9 cities I listed above are all within a 2 hour drive of each other.



This wouldn't even infringe on the territorial rights of any existing teams.


Or people for that matter... the only thing this idea infringes on is basic logic and common sense.

#16 Stormo

Stormo

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • 954 posts
  • Location: LaSalle, ON

Posted September 05, 2009 - 10:22 PM

I think that Sudbury would also be a viable option. We don't have an NHL sized arena at the moment, but with the city looking to build an arena, there's already a good deal of money there. It would just require an extra investment on the part of any potential owner to have the arena built to the larger NHL size. I'm sure we could draw plenty of fans from the Sault, North Bay, even as far south as Barrie. This wouldn't even infringe on the territorial rights of any existing teams.


So...tomorrow the Wolves decide to move to...let's say Vaughn...Would anyone be shocked? We would all say small market team (small market OHL mind you) decides the GTA needs another team.

Wow...just wow Sudbury are you kidding me? Sudbury? I wouldn't start a street hockey league team there.

Don't forget the Thunder Bay fans that would drive to the rock for a game...no wait...that's just crazy talk.

I will give you one point and one point only. Sudbury would outdraw Glendale. Sudbury? Wow.

champs.png

 

Memorial Trophy Champions - Season 22

Soelberg Trophy Champions - Seasons 14 and 22 

Inauguration Cup Champions- Season 21


#17 Stormo

Stormo

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • 954 posts
  • Location: LaSalle, ON

Posted September 05, 2009 - 10:26 PM

Wow.. the beer must have been strong enough to not remember that! I went to Seattle for a Seahawk/Cowboys Monday night game and took in a Thunderbird game during the day. The arena was nice, seats were great and the bar was a mere 25 ft walk behind me. Maybe I had tunnel vision :)


Best part is you went there for a Backstreet Boys concert, not a hockey game...either way all you saw was the bar.

champs.png

 

Memorial Trophy Champions - Season 22

Soelberg Trophy Champions - Seasons 14 and 22 

Inauguration Cup Champions- Season 21


#18 Stormo

Stormo

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • 954 posts
  • Location: LaSalle, ON

Posted September 05, 2009 - 10:28 PM

Sudbury? Wow. That's the highlight of the week right there. NHL in Sudbury. Outstanding.

champs.png

 

Memorial Trophy Champions - Season 22

Soelberg Trophy Champions - Seasons 14 and 22 

Inauguration Cup Champions- Season 21


#19 klaitinen

klaitinen

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • 944 posts
  • Location: Sault Ste Marie, ON

Posted September 06, 2009 - 07:57 PM

Dude...

Sudbury would not be able to afford an NHL team. Not even close.

jerseys.png


#20 LesGlorieux

LesGlorieux

    All-Star

  • Members
  • 295 posts
  • Location: Richmond Hill

Posted September 06, 2009 - 08:17 PM

No sense of adventure I tell ya... Picture it:

"Tonight, playing at The Nickle Arena in Sudbury, we're preparing for a historic event as the Sudbury Beavers knaw at the blades of the Montreal Canadiens in a home-n-home series." Tonight's game is proudly sponsored locally by La farge and Inco, both responsible for this beautifully built 12 sided arena. The ice is in perfect condition even after this afternoon's game between the Sault Ste. Marie Greyhounds and the Vaughn Wolves...as you know, both of those teams now share this arena and split their home and away games...."

Sorry.... this was a good thread....made my day and enjoyed it...

Season 18 All-Star Host To You From Failing Hands We Throw The Torch

Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

 

Advanced Forum Search

Current Forum Discussions

Forgot Your Password?