UPDATE 3/31- NEWSDAY - Coliseum gets $6M for renovation to host Isles

Llama19

Registered User
Jan 19, 2013
7,202
1,007
Outside GZ
To quote:

"The long-awaited request for proposals (RFP) to redevelop land next to Belmont Park, an RFP the New York Islanders are supposed to eagerly respond to, is finally imminent.

According to a Newsday report by Randi Marshall, Empire State Development is finalizing the RFP to make it public as soon as Monday. The Islanders ownership has long been expected to submit a proposal, part of what would be a long-term and made-for-hockey home for the franchise, which has had a rocky relationship with the imperfect-for-hockey Barclays Center."

Source: https://www.lighthousehockey.com/20...anders-arena-news-belmont-rfp-expected-monday
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Brodie

the dream of the 90s is alive in Detroit
Mar 19, 2009
15,399
359
Chicago
I really think Belmont is as close to ideal for the Islanders as any non-Queens option could be. I expect there will be a lot of residual development by their ownership in the area, enough to ensure the expansion of LIRR service to the area year round.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thrive

tailgunner

Registered User
Jan 8, 2008
1,302
577
this is all the biggest pile of non sense ever...no one is building any arena for the islanders anywhere in NY...nothing will be built...Belmont is a waste land with absolutely nothing around there for miles, if you think Brooklyn is bad Belmont is a garbage pile compared to Brooklyn...at the end of the day the NYC metro area has become saturated with too many arenas within one another, building yet another arena for a team that can't attract flies is the dumbest plan ever and a huge money pit. keep dreaming that some savior is going to spend 800 million dollars in a dump area for a team that has very few fans with the islanders as the sole tenant. this is crazy talk
 

yukoner88

Registered User
Dec 16, 2009
19,626
23,585
Dawson City, YT
this is all the biggest pile of non sense ever...no one is building any arena for the islanders anywhere in NY...nothing will be built...Belmont is a waste land with absolutely nothing around there for miles, if you think Brooklyn is bad Belmont is a garbage pile compared to Brooklyn...at the end of the day the NYC metro area has become saturated with too many arenas within one another, building yet another arena for a team that can't attract flies is the dumbest plan ever and a huge money pit. keep dreaming that some savior is going to spend 800 million dollars in a dump area for a team that has very few fans with the islanders as the sole tenant. this is crazy talk

soooooo what would be the solution then? :dunno: its easy to sit there and complain, its harder to be actively searching for answers. If it were up to you where would they play?
 

gordie

5x
Jul 9, 2002
5,201
74
hfboards.com
They drew flies in Uniondale. Have poor attendance in Brooklyn. Even in the 80's, they struggled at the gate. What am I missing?

Nothing. New York has never been a hockey market and beyond one team in Manhattan there is almost no interest in the NHL, unless the Rangers are winning. New York wants winning NBA Basketball and considers Hockey a Non-New York sport. If the NHL could ever get over the dream of being important there. The Islanders could be moved to Seattle,Houston or Quebec City, which would be far better for the league then trying to sell New York something most don't want.;)
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
They drew flies in Uniondale. Have poor attendance in Brooklyn. Even in the 80's, they struggled at the gate. What am I missing?

Well, first off, the building sucked since the day it opened.

And they didn't "draw flies" or "struggle" in the 80s. They "only" drew about 15,700 in the 1980s... which was their capacity.

Keep in mind that 15,000 to 16,000 was EXCELLENT for the time period. The Montreal Dynasty and the Islanders Dynasty had about the same attendance numbers.

But sports as entertainment evolved. Times changed. In the 1990s, almost everyone had built newer, bigger arenas with massive revenue streams (Allowing the attendance in BOS, MON, TOR, VAN, PHI to go to 18000 to 23000.

And the Islanders were locked into a terrible lease, that didn't give them any of the new revenue streams (they signed it when ads weren't allowed on the boards or ice, and a couple scoreboards told time and score).

Now they "don't draw" in Brooklyn because all 10000 good seats are full and the remaining 4000 seats in that building are garbage.

If some crazy rich guy could buy the Mets & Islanders and build an NHL arena like Edmonton's new place in the CitiField parking lot, the Islanders would be a top 10 revenue team. Period.

But when you don't control your arena, you're screwed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thrive

Boris Zubov

No relation to Sergei, Joe
May 6, 2016
17,229
23,142
Back on the east coast
Nothing.New York has never been a hockey market and beyond one team in Manhattan there is almost no interest in the NHL, unless the Rangers are winning. New York wants winning NBA Basketball and considers Hockey a Non-New York sport. If the NHL could ever get over the dream of being important there. The Islanders could be moved to Seattle,Houston or Quebec City, which would be far better for the league then trying to sell New York something most don't want.;)

This coming from a guy whose team had to be rescued by Mario & the league, more than once. Someone certainly needs a history lesson. :shakehead
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,546
2,006
Nothing. New York has never been a hockey market and beyond one team in Manhattan there is almost no interest in the NHL, unless the Rangers are winning. New York wants winning NBA Basketball and considers Hockey a Non-New York sport. If the NHL could ever get over the dream of being important there. The Islanders could be moved to Seattle,Houston or Quebec City, which would be far better for the league then trying to sell New York something most don't want.;)

This coming from a guy whose team had to be rescued by Mario & the league, more than once. Someone certainly needs a history lesson. :shakehead

Yes gordie, tell what makes Pittsburgh such a better hockey market then New York!



~~~~~

Having said the above, still don't completely support this
 

alkurtz

Registered User
Nov 26, 2006
1,436
993
Charlotte, NC
Let me come at this from the perspective of a long-standing Ranger fan (50+ years). First, I absolutely, positively want the Isles to survive and thrive in the New York area. There is no better rivalry in all of sports than the Rangers and the Isles. What sets the rivalry apart is, not just the close proximity of the teams, but the presence of opposition fans in the other team's building. Losing the Isles to Quebec or elsewhere would be a terrible thing for NY hockey fans no matter what their allegiance.

Second, there is no doubt that hockey is the #4 sport in the NY metropolitan area: just listen to sports radio for a day and you will understand that. But that doesn't mean that there isn't a large population of passionate, dedicated hockey fans. In my long devotion to the sport, I have seen the phenomenal growth of hockey on the youth level, with many high schools (at least in the northern suburbs where I live) icing teams whereas 20+ years ago, just the thought of organized hockey, was an afterthought and scoffed at. So is NY a hockey town? In its own way, absolutely.

Next, the Islanders have always been fascinating to me in a larger-than-on-the-ice way. My internal question has always been: can a suburban team, not an urban team playing in a suburban arena but a truly suburban team, survive supported by a suburban population, suburban business, suburban media, etc.? In my mind, the jury, even after all these years, is still out. Yes, LI has a large, passionate hockey base. To say that LI is not hockey country is just absurd. There is a long tradition of hockey on the Island going back at least to the old LI Ducks of the EHL (Buzzy Deschamps, anyone?). One of the reasons the NHL expanded to LI (aside from the threat of a team in the WHA) was that hockey was established on the Island: the Rangers practiced there and most players lived there. But the question has always been, could a team grow there supported by "casual fans" in non-winning years? I don't know. The situation was not helped by, as the years went by, by an old arena, the lack of public transportation, the loss of manufacturing jobs (Grumman, for example), ownership problems,etc. I still don't know. As an adjunct to that is the question whether a truly suburban franchise be attractive to free-agents or a team's own pending free agents. The Islanders, unfortunately, have often seemed as a hockey backwater to me (but not as bad as the Devils), that was only attractive to players who could not get deals elsewhere. This was what was fascinating to me about the move to Brooklyn: they would now be an "urban" team is a part of NYC that is booming. Unfortunately, the situation at Barclays, has become untenable. So the jury is still out for me about the long term viability of the franchise in a suburban situation. I want to see it do well there (hey, I live in a suburb myself), I think it can, if all the parameters of success are met (including having a team that is consistently good and makes the playoffs yearly), but I still entertain doubts. I do know that losing the team would be a horrible thing for all NY sports fan.

Last: the possibility of an arena in Belmont. It is easy to be optimistic about the possibility except for the reality of NY politics. Nothing gets done without politics in NY, on the local and state level. There are multiple issues, aside from on-ice issues, that could derail this arena: so many power-players with agendas, so many power brokers, etc. I am minimally familiar with the area: generally I am only there once a year (there are some large cemeteries nearby in Elmont, not Belmont, where I have grandparent buried). So, once a year, I pass by Belmont Racetrack. It just seems an out-of-the-way area. I know the LIRR has a stop: but isn't it a spur from a main line? (I don't know, just asking). Would the LIRR run trains on game nights to the station? Would it be easy to get to from other places on the Island using the LIRR? I know most people would drive: but Belmont is right on the NYC/LI border. With the usual problems of traffic congestion on the Island's highways, what would it be like driving there on game nights? The Coliseum seemed more centrally located for Islander fans (an advantage), Barclay's has mass-transit and an urban setting (a perceived advantage): Belmont just seems so out-of-the-way and, even in the context of the urban/suburban sprawl of Queens/Brooklyn/Long Island/the Metropolitan area where nothing is really out-of-the-way.

Anyway: just some random thoughts of a long-time Ranger and hockey fan who livex in the northern suburbs, but wants the Islanders to find some solution that would allow them to survive and thrive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thrive and Supersic

tailgunner

Registered User
Jan 8, 2008
1,302
577
Belmont would be an absolute disaster way worse than Brooklyn, there is nothing around that immediate area and I mean NOTHING, no bars no restaurants no hotels, it is literally a waste land, why on earth would you spend over 800 million on an arena in the most desolate place on Long Island? at least in Uniondale there are some bars/restaurants to go to before a game, the reality is that NYC cannot support 3 NHL franchises.

I have lived here my whole life and have been following hockey since 1979 and no one cares about this sport at all in this area, the Rangers survive based on history, location, generational support and tourism in Manhattan.

In the end the Isles will be in Quebec or Seattle..it's definitely going to happen
 

gordie

5x
Jul 9, 2002
5,201
74
hfboards.com
This coming from a guy whose team had to be rescued by Mario & the league, more than once. Someone certainly needs a history lesson. :shakehead

Proving more people live in New York and thus more wealth exists there does not make New York a Hockey Market. They had more success with Devils, Islanders and Rangers since 1980 with 8 Stanley Cups and yet the pathetic Knicks and Nets get far more coverage & interest speaks volumes about NYC Metro Area. Islanders could move and very few would care.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,232
4,218
Auburn, Maine
Belmont would be an absolute disaster way worse than Brooklyn, there is nothing around that immediate area and I mean NOTHING, no bars no restaurants no hotels, it is literally a waste land, why on earth would you spend over 800 million on an arena in the most desolate place on Long Island? at least in Uniondale there are some bars/restaurants to go to before a game, the reality is that NYC cannot support 3 NHL franchises.

I have lived here my whole life and have been following hockey since 1979 and no one cares about this sport at all in this area, the Rangers survive based on history, location, generational support and tourism in Manhattan.

In the end the Isles will be in Quebec or Seattle..it's definitely going to happen

uh, there will not be a relocation by the Islanders, who's going to relocate them, to Seattle, will be a Western team, not the Islanders, tailgunner, you're basing this on Belmont being what, gone the way Hollywood Park was redeveloped for the Chargers/Rams, it definitely won't be Quebec, either.... ownership is committed to staying in New York, if the Island isn't an option.
 

madhi19

Just the tip!
Jun 2, 2012
4,357
204
Cold and Dark place!
twitter.com
They drew flies in Uniondale. Have poor attendance in Brooklyn. Even in the 80's, they struggled at the gate. What am I missing?
They got a pretty good cable deal. I believe it around $20 Million USD a year. In order to lose money the Islanders got to lose a crapload more money than say the Glendale Coyotes. The Barclay deal is a bit of a weird animal it's not really the Islanders renting a arena, but the arena renting the Islanders. The team is getting a fix return no matter how they do at the gate. Obviously it's not going all that well for Barclay, this is why they want to kick them out ASAP.

Now the Islanders are in a bit of a pickle because the cable deal I mentioned, well it's not getting renewed for more that for sure. With the cords cutters revolution going on right now, cable won't have this kind of cash to toss around by the time they have to negotiate a new deal.
The Islanders need to fix their arena situation ASAP, and they need to start drawing more people in.
 

Boris Zubov

No relation to Sergei, Joe
May 6, 2016
17,229
23,142
Back on the east coast
Proving more people live in New York and thus more wealth exists there does not make New York a Hockey Market. They had more success with Devils, Islanders and Rangers since 1980 with 8 Stanley Cups and yet the pathetic Knicks and Nets get far more coverage & interest speaks volumes about NYC Metro Area. Islanders could move and very few would care.

On relative scale it is. Pittsburgh would never put the NBA over the NHL which is the case in New York.;)

I've got news for you, if Pitt had an NBA team, yes they would. The NHL is a distant 4th in every city with all 4 major sports leagues. Do you think the Kings winning 2 cups in 3 seasons magically catapulted them ahead of the Dodgers & Lakers in terms of popularity or TV ratings?

Just because the masses in NYC follow the other 3 in higher numbers than the NHL, doesn't mean it's not a hockey market. When you take into account how little success the team had historically, Ranger fans are the most passionate & loyal in the city. The only ones that compare are Jet fans. Met fans disappear for years until the team is a contender. Yes the Knicks continue to sell out, but IMO, the majority of people attending Knicks games are there to be seen & play on their phones. They couldn't care less about the outcome.
 

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
28,816
10,389
Charlotte, NC
I've got news for you, if Pitt had an NBA team, yes they would. The NHL is a distant 4th in every city with all 4 major sports leagues. Do you think the Kings winning 2 cups in 3 seasons magically catapulted them ahead of the Dodgers & Lakers in terms of popularity or TV ratings?

Just because the masses in NYC follow the other 3 in higher numbers than the NHL, doesn't mean it's not a hockey market. When you take into account how little success the team had historically, Ranger fans are the most passionate & loyal in the city. The only ones that compare are Jet fans. Met fans disappear for years until the team is a contender. Yes the Knicks continue to sell out, but IMO, the majority of people attending Knicks games are there to be seen & play on their phones. They couldn't care less about the outcome.

This isn't exactly accurate. They might still be 4th, but I don't think they're a distant 4th in any of Detroit, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, Minneapolis-St Paul, and perhaps D.C. I'm not sure you can introduce NBA into a city that has a long history of an NHL team, like Pittsburgh or St Louis, and suddenly have them vault ahead.
 

Fenway

HF Bookie and Bruins Historian
Sponsor
Sep 26, 2007
68,589
98,267
Cambridge, MA
I've got news for you, if Pitt had an NBA team, yes they would. The NHL is a distant 4th in every city with all 4 major sports leagues. Do you think the Kings winning 2 cups in 3 seasons magically catapulted them ahead of the Dodgers & Lakers in terms of popularity or TV ratings?

Just because the masses in NYC follow the other 3 in higher numbers than the NHL, doesn't mean it's not a hockey market. When you take into account how little success the team had historically, Ranger fans are the most passionate & loyal in the city. The only ones that compare are Jet fans. Met fans disappear for years until the team is a contender. Yes the Knicks continue to sell out, but IMO, the majority of people attending Knicks games are there to be seen & play on their phones. They couldn't care less about the outcome.

The NHL is not a distant 4th in those markets at all and in few they are easily #3. Philadelphia, Washington, Boston and Chicago all have TV ratings data that shows over the course of the regular season hockey does better.

St Louis has an odd distinction as the city was home to teams that won both the NBA and NFL championships and then left.

Uniondale had and continues to have one fatal flaw and that is lack of good transit to the arena. Belmont Park at least has LIRR tracks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thrive

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,546
2,006
On relative scale it is. Pittsburgh would never put the NBA over the NHL which is the case in New York.;)

I've got news for you, if Pitt had an NBA team, yes they would. The NHL is a distant 4th in every city with all 4 major sports leagues. Do you think the Kings winning 2 cups in 3 seasons magically catapulted them ahead of the Dodgers & Lakers in terms of popularity or TV ratings?

Just because the masses in NYC follow the other 3 in higher numbers than the NHL, doesn't mean it's not a hockey market. When you take into account how little success the team had historically, Ranger fans are the most passionate & loyal in the city. The only ones that compare are Jet fans. Met fans disappear for years until the team is a contender. Yes the Knicks continue to sell out, but IMO, the majority of people attending Knicks games are there to be seen & play on their phones. They couldn't care less about the outcome.
Pitt Basketball was more popular than the Penguins from 1998-2005. That's college.

This isn't exactly accurate. They might still be 4th, but I don't think they're a distant 4th in any of Detroit, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, Minneapolis-St Paul, and perhaps D.C. I'm not sure you can introduce NBA into a city that has a long history of an NHL team, like Pittsburgh or St Louis, and suddenly have them vault ahead.

It depends. All of these cities save Philadelphia have had a lack of interest and rumors or the reality of moving.
 

AustonsNostrils

Registered User
Apr 5, 2016
7,409
2,533
I'll never understand the need for NHL fans to apologize for themselves and the sport. IT IS, ALWAYS BE A NICHE SPORT! IT'S PLAYED ON ICE!

Nothing wrong with being the 4th or 5th favorite team in a huge market. The NHL is the 5th largest pro sports league on the entire planet.

When/if they ever invent great synthetic ice they can put rinks down with in public parks and schoolyards then you'll see growth.

The Islander fanbase on Twitter seems to be young and rabid. Small I'm sure by Jets/Knicks standards but again it's no surprise and not a disappointment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thrive

aqib

Registered User
Feb 13, 2012
5,133
1,148
Let me come at this from the perspective of a long-standing Ranger fan (50+ years). First, I absolutely, positively want the Isles to survive and thrive in the New York area. There is no better rivalry in all of sports than the Rangers and the Isles.

Second, there is no doubt that hockey is the #4 sport in the NY metropolitan area: just listen to sports radio for a day and you will understand that. But that doesn't mean that there isn't a large population of passionate, dedicated hockey fans. In my long devotion to the sport, I have seen the phenomenal growth of hockey on the youth level, with many high schools (at least in the northern suburbs where I live) icing teams whereas 20+ years ago, just the thought of organized hockey, was an afterthought and scoffed at. So is NY a hockey town? In its own way, absolutely.

Next, the Islanders have always been fascinating to me in a larger-than-on-the-ice way. My internal question has always been: can a suburban team, not an urban team playing in a suburban arena but a truly suburban team, survive supported by a suburban population, suburban business, suburban media, etc.? In my mind, the jury, even after all these years, is still out. Yes, LI has a large, passionate hockey base. To say that LI is not hockey country is just absurd.

I grew up in the tri-state area and lived in LI my last year and a half there. One problem with LI is that there aren't a lot of corporations based there. New Jersey has 21 Fortune 500 companies including 4 of the top 75). Long Island has Cablevision and Arrow. So if you live in LI and want the type of jobs that allow you to afford NHL tickets odds are you have to work in the city and if you work in the city you can't get to Nassau by 7 for the start of the game. I thought Barclays would solve that problem but as we know the arena wasn't constructed for hockey. For Belmont to work, you'll need transportation from the city and then the ability to get to the assorted LIRR lines after the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thrive

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,546
2,006
I grew up in the tri-state area and lived in LI my last year and a half there. One problem with LI is that there aren't a lot of corporations based there. New Jersey has 21 Fortune 500 companies including 4 of the top 75). Long Island has Cablevision and Arrow. So if you live in LI and want the type of jobs that allow you to afford NHL tickets odds are you have to work in the city and if you work in the city you can't get to Nassau by 7 for the start of the game. I thought Barclays would solve that problem but as we know the arena wasn't constructed for hockey. For Belmont to work, you'll need transportation from the city and then the ability to get to the assorted LIRR lines after the game.

Be honest, what do you think here? Can this work? How do we know it's not a trojan horse for when the Rangers/Knicks/Liberty get kicked out of MSG in 10 years?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->