Melrose Munch
Registered User
- Mar 18, 2007
- 23,664
- 2,114
Who says they're not?
This is their season. Right now. If they don't make the playoffs this season they're toast in two years.who says Arizona is going anywhere?
because of the subsidy and lease. I don't think the will just yet, wanted to know the reason for that question.Most people. Fact is no one cares about the Coyotes situation except for a vocal minority who want them relocated for whatever reason. I mean there's a mega part thread on BOH that's been going on for a freakin' decade now or at least it seems that way, every year is the last year for the Coyotes in Arizona but here they are still.
I think they are stuck there unless Houston wants them.This is their season. Right now. If they don't make the playoffs this season they're toast in two years.
Most people. Fact is no one cares about the Coyotes situation except for a vocal minority who want them relocated for whatever reason. I mean there's a mega part thread on BOH that's been going on for a freakin' decade now or at least it seems that way, every year is the last year for the Coyotes in Arizona but here they are still.
I think Gary Bettman's legacy lives with Arizona. He allowed 2 Canadian franchises move in 2 years, for the growth of the game.
That's a gross misrepresentation of what happened. Bettman didn't say "We need to grow the game! We're moving Winnipeg to Phoenix and Quebec to Denver!" (And even if he did, the same thing happened with Minnesota and Hartford).
Norm Green couldn't own the Stars in the Met and keep up with the rest of the league revenue-wise. Green didn't want to sell, he wanted to move. The NHL had no choice but to allow it.
Marcel Aubut couldn't own the 'Diques in the old Colisee anymore and keep up with the rest of the league revenue-wise. The NHL looked for local ownership, no one was interested. The Denver group wanted to buy the team, the NHL allowed it.
Barry Shenkarow couldn't own the Jets in the old Winnipeg Arena anymore and keep up with the rest of the league revenue-wise. The NHL looked for local ownership, no one was interested. The duo from Phoenix wanted to buy the team, the NHL allowed it.
Peter Karamanos couldn't own the Whalers in Hartford and keep up with the rest of the league revenue-wise. Karamanos didn't want to sell, he wanted to move. The NHL had no choice but to allow it.
The order of this was Minnesota - Quebec - Winnipeg - Hartford.
The order of those cities building new arenas? Minnesota - Winnipeg - Quebec - (Hartford TBD)
The order of NHL teams RETURNING? Minnesota - Winnipeg - (Quebec soon, Hartford TBD)
As you can see, Canada vs USA has zero effect on the order of departure/return. Market size doesn't either.
"Growing the Game" doesn't factor it at all. That's non-sense.
Teams relocating is 100% about Arena construction and ownership demand.
That's being a bit dramatic. Their lease is year-to-year, and Houston just opened up as an available market with a great arena and demographic situation. Any season they have, regardless of on-ice performance, can be their last if their bottom line doesn't get corrected. Of course, the best way to run a profitable NHL franchise is to give the fans a winning product. However, they are in for low attendance, low recognition, and low profits this year regardless. It takes time for fans that have been burned time and time again to come back.This is their season. Right now. If they don't make the playoffs this season they're toast in two years.
I know that. My question was if you add Huston and Seattle by 20-21...why wait 5-6 years to add Quebec, why be at 33 for 5 years ? Add Huston tomorrow because they are ready, have money, have arena, want NHL (right ? right ?).
Then Quebec patiently waits till Seattle decides to move faster than an old snail pace and when they get their arena done, the league expands by 2 more and both of Quebec and Seattle gets in.
What the canucksfan75 posted was staying at 33 for 5 years and then Quebec joining...make negative sense if you ask me.
Well O6 are proven to be money makers, milking cows of the league...like it or not they have been the backbone since the beginning (not saying other teams aren't helping). People listen when they speak.
Houston will gain major Bettman points in being a useful pawn for Ken King's extortion in Calgary; the league will reward him by granting the Texas metropolis an expansion franchise to start in 2019. Seattle will stay in the mix and possible site for Phoenix if that situation finally reaches a conclusion. Quebec will need to wait out the Carolina kids' angst in trying to turn that flailing franchise to cash. If the price gets anywhere to the $350m mark, and Greedy NHL owners accept $100m relocation fee, then we may finally see some long-term sanity and stability (until Miami goes off the rails-paging the 3rd Atlanta resurrection!)...
If the league had to choose between Seattle & Houston for an expansion team, there is no doubt Houston would get the nod hands down...
No offense to Houston but what does Houston provide that Seattle can not in terms of their market. Houston may have a higher TV rank than Seattle but Houston does even com close to provide a lot more to the league than Seattle does.
NHL has been wanting in Seattle for a very very long time.
Heck Huston despite what people think has Stars to draw from. The league more than once expressed its interest to be in the NORTH-WEST region. Seattle only lacks an arena. If they had one two years ago their team would have been playing their 5th or 6th game of the season tonight.
More growth and not a long political process.No offense to Houston but what does Houston provide that Seattle can not in terms of their market. Houston may have a higher TV rank than Seattle but Houston does even com close to provide a lot more to the league than Seattle does.
NHL has been wanting in Seattle for a very very long time.
False. Houstonites HATE Dallas.
Amjad Ismail tweeted an image of the shelves of the Walmart Friday morning. They were bare except for coolers branded with the blue star logo of the Dallas Cowboys. "Even in a hurricane no one is taking the Cowboys coolers," Ismail wrote.
Oh please. The steelers, giants, bears etc have huge sway over the NFL. People forget Jerry Jones isn't liked by everyone.I would love to see your empirical data to back up that assertion. Was Chicago a bellwether for the league 10 years ago? There are teams which are revenue drivers for the league & some of them might even be O6 teams, but the way the league, the media & some fans put them on a pedestal is just nauseating. You don't see the NFL doing this with teams that pre-existed before the AFL merger. The only reason there is an "O6 mafia" is because those clubs basically colluded with themselves to keep competition out & would sand bag the rules on a whim.
No offense to Houston but what does Houston provide that Seattle can not in terms of their market. Houston may have a higher TV rank than Seattle but Houston does even com close to provide a lot more to the league than Seattle does.
NHL has been wanting in Seattle for a very very long time.
Oh please. The steelers, giants, bears etc have huge sway over the NFL. Prole forget Jerry Jones isn't liked by everyone.
False. Houstonites HATE Dallas.
Fair enough but I think there is a big market clique in all of the big 4, just some less defined then others. And they should let both Seattle and Houston in. Portland and Quebec too.Houston is a much larger TV market than Seattle. Plus, it puts another team in Texas. I have nothing against Seattle per se, but a Houston franchise is a far more attractive option for the league.
Individual owners have sway, not the franchises themselves. Dan Rooney had sway, Art Rooney II does not. Jerry Jones may not be liked by everyone, but I guarantee you the league office listens. He's the reason why Goodell's contract isn't currently renewed.
Fair enough but I think there is a big market clique in all of the big 4, just some less defined then others. And they should let both Seattle and Houston in. Portland and Quebec too.
That's what Portland is for .Agree there is a clique, but it deals with owners, not franchises. Under your hypothetical example, an eastern team going west isn't going to be determined by logo crest or when they entered the league, but by the pull of the ownership involved.
I agree on letting Seattle, Houston, Portland & Quebec in. All would be solid additions to the league. But it would also take away a bargaining chip the league has with arena development as they are currently the only serious relocation markets left.