Kansas City still looking for team?
- Thread starter Melrose Munch
- Start date
berklon
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2008
- 1,543
- 360
Who said anything about Toronto?
They're as good as gone once Ralph Wilson dies. The team goes for sale to the highest bidder and no-one will pay 800+ million to keep a team in Buffalo.
Thoughts on Pittsburgh --
1) it's easy to look at population loss/gain but the devil is in the details. To put it bluntly, the difference between Pittsburgh and most other areas is that Pittsburgh is losing truckloads of elderly people with low disposable income (retired steel workers), and gaining a comparatively smaller number of college-educated people working in health care and high tech. So while the area population has declined over the past 30 years (and will likely do so especially in the surrounding counties for at least another 10-15 years IMO), the Pens' base of potential revenue has increased steadily. That and of course the on-ice product now.
2) By all accounts the Pirates are a failed baseball franchise but are making quite a bit of money, mostly because of baseball's revenue sharing model. I don't think their numbers are public but the Pittsburgh area doesn't have as big a share in supporting the Pirates than they do in supporting the Pens.
Again, I wouldn't bet on it. Too many assumptions in this post... that there are owners with ready made relocation plans ready to shell out $800 million for a team (currently there isn't... no potential market has both a stadium and an owner), that NOBODY would step up in Western New York (Golisano, Pegula, even Rogers), that some real estate developer doesn't see a potential fortune in a Lighthouse-esque complex near the border. It's not like there are dozens of potential NFL markets out there ready for the first team to get there. Toronto, LA and San Antonio are the only serious contenders for relocation and they all have very serious flaws... Wilson would have to live close to 5 more years for anything to change on those fronts and I just don't see it.
Last edited:
Golisano does not want to own a sports team
Pegula already has his toy.
Toronto is one of three potential destinations.
Where though? I have heard of that Golisano only bought the team to keep them in Buffalo and Pegula has been lased in on the hockey team as far as I know.
Foppa
Future Norris Winner
As a resident of KC I can't ignore this garbage statement. I think AEG knew damn well what they are doing.
http://www.sprintcenter.com/news/detail/sprint_center_recognized_as_americas_third_busiest_arena
The Sprint Center was the nation's third busiest arena and sixth busiest arena in the world in 2010. AEG keeps the arena absolutely packed with events because they are a huge, international arena manager with tons of clout. They've been making money hand-over-fist with the Sprint Center without having a major tenant. This is a world-class arena and it's located in a thriving new downtown district. So you are completely off-base saying somehow AEG is not a competent arena manager. Del Biaggio was a con-man who swindled a lot of organizations for a long time, not the least of which were the Nashville Predators who actually did sell 27% of their team to him.
The problem now is frankly that they've been TOO competent with the Sprint Center. I'm quite cynical at this point but if they are making a killing without a major sports tenant (I don't count Arena football), where's their incentive to keep trying to get one for us? Other than that, essentially, to the arena built, they 'promised' heavily in their marketing that they'd land an NHL or NBA franchise quickly. That doesn't mean bupkis at this point. Without a major central business consortium or major investor to step forward and grab the bull by the horns, the chance of an NHL franchise relocating here is minimal, I have to believe. There is a very strong grassroots presence but that will only get you so far.
P.S. - The Toto cracks are so 1939. I can live with people arguing that the passionate Canadian fans in Winnipeg and Quebec City deserve their second chances in the NHL over Kansas City. But some of you need to stick with arguing for what you know and not against what you don't. The Kansas City area has an "image" problem?
Last edited:
Foppa
Future Norris Winner
Not much in terms of actually having a realistic chance of landing a franchise anytime soon. The usual talk of maybe the Islanders if their situation doesn't get resolved...basically, when the Pens and Mario flirted, that was the golden goose. It was the "Colorado Avalanche" set-up. I know it depends on what you believe, but I do talk with some people who were close to that situation and they corroborate the story that Mario and Co were in fact very, very close to coming to KC.
Alas that is long in the past and I'm really not quite sure what the future holds. We do have the Mavericks...they play in another brand new arena in the Kansas City area, the Independence Events Center, and despite being a lowly CHL team they draw really, really well. But there's nothing serious out there right now...that's the feeling anyways...for an NHL team.
Foppa
Future Norris Winner
Well you have the Kings and Hornets basically. The Kings of course made flirty eyes with the Anaheim arena recently but are now to stay in Sac-town for at least one more year while they try to get a new arena. AEG was opposed to the Kings moving to Anaheim because it would be direct competition for them as AEG operates Staples Center. But they also have their hands in the pot for a potential new Sacramento arena which makes the chance of them trying to lure the Kings to KC pretty minimal...plus there is about a zero chance the jet-setting Maloofs decide to operate their franchise in that far from their Vegas/California roots.
The Hornets situation I know little about other than I'm not hopeful.
So yeah, the NBA is likely a no-go as well for now. Plus, I really do see KC being more of a pro hockey town than pro basketball town. This is a college basketball town through-and-through. It's also a town that loves its blue-collar roots and hockey is much more appealing in that aspect than the NBA.
Garbage statement? Sure AEG has done a good job attracting concerts. Good for them. But do you really think that KC built an arena to have it sit there without a major tenant still 4 years after it was completed? Let's face it, AEG failed to deliver. Part of the problem might have been relying on Bootsy to bring them a hockey team. Now KC is actually further away from getting an NBA or NHL team than they were when the place opened. And that's on AEG.
I realize that I may be getting a bit off-topic with this...
The NBA is pretty much on record they'd like to contract. Or should I say certain factions, as I read an article ages ago quoting Lakers owner Jerry Buss' daughter as stating she was for contraction. Then again, KC did miss out on the Grizzlies and the Hornets as their arena wasn't built.
However, the NHL is a bit more of a different beast. I believe the NHL doesn't want to relocate a franchise at all, if they don't have to. It's hard to obtain a franchise when the league doesn't want to move any.
With this new TV deal and a CBA about to expire, it is almost in the NHL's best interest to surpress "good revenues" by keeping some of the weaker revenue teams where they are currently. This way the CBA can be negotiated with some more advanced cost-containment measures.
That leads me to...
Expansion, once the CBA is settled and the "problems" in Arizona and Georgia are settled. I remember reading somewhere that when Boots Del Biaggio owned the Predators for that very short amount of time, he had put out a prospectus to potential investors. One of the items about how the team was going to receive revenues was for expansion by 2010.
I am wondering if expansion may still be on the horizon once some of the more pressing problems are put to bed by the end of the year.
The NBA is pretty much on record they'd like to contract. Or should I say certain factions, as I read an article ages ago quoting Lakers owner Jerry Buss' daughter as stating she was for contraction. Then again, KC did miss out on the Grizzlies and the Hornets as their arena wasn't built.
However, the NHL is a bit more of a different beast. I believe the NHL doesn't want to relocate a franchise at all, if they don't have to. It's hard to obtain a franchise when the league doesn't want to move any.
With this new TV deal and a CBA about to expire, it is almost in the NHL's best interest to surpress "good revenues" by keeping some of the weaker revenue teams where they are currently. This way the CBA can be negotiated with some more advanced cost-containment measures.
That leads me to...
Expansion, once the CBA is settled and the "problems" in Arizona and Georgia are settled. I remember reading somewhere that when Boots Del Biaggio owned the Predators for that very short amount of time, he had put out a prospectus to potential investors. One of the items about how the team was going to receive revenues was for expansion by 2010.
I am wondering if expansion may still be on the horizon once some of the more pressing problems are put to bed by the end of the year.
Foppa
Future Norris Winner
I think we are arguing semantics. AEG is very good at what they do. They failed to deliver a team the city, but the fact that they no doubt knew all along they could make money without a major tenant simply makes all their promises ring hollow. They aren't hurt in any way by not having a major sport tenant except from a PR standpoint in this town. I 100% agree with your last statement. I'm not saying they've been good managers for KC in terms of looking out for, I'm saying they are smart arena managers and nothing that has happened has come as a surprise to them...unlike everybody else who bought into their public comments.
Say what? Must of been stoned when you wrote that.
I guess you're asking if KC could support both the NBA and the NHL in addition to the NFL and MLB... and MLS as well. My guess would be a strong, No!
Yes could all 4 work because it is pretty far from all the other major population centers.
LadyStanley
Registered User
Grudy - as it stands now, relocation, territory indemnification and expansion fees are NOT included as HRR. And the NHLPA/members see not a penny of that $$ (directly).
If the new CBA is changed to include them, it may be the league and/or union are more or less interested in change depending on whether they're trying to grow the game, etc.
If the new CBA is changed to include them, it may be the league and/or union are more or less interested in change depending on whether they're trying to grow the game, etc.
OthmarAmmann
Omnishambles
I guess I should expand....
Relocating the Thrashers and Coyotes to Quebec and Winnipeg will probably generate more "revenues" to the league, in the form of better supported franchises. Considering that Phoenix's revenues are horrible and Atlanta's aren't too muh better, one must be able to believe that Winnipeg and Quebec can draw better revenues than those others.
Any other money from relo fees, expansion fees and indemnification would be gravy on top of those fries: none goes to the HRR.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
Game 3 Florida Panthers @ Tampa Bay Lightning - Florida Panthers leads series 2-0Wagers: 8Staked: $5,115.00Event closes- Updated:
-