Phoenix XXVII: Can we all get along?

[Roughneck]

Listening to those interviews I don't know how anybody could have anything overly good or bad to say about Olsen.

"Hold her own" is probably the best description I heard, even if it might have been used for a different reason. To think she got dismantled in any way is just as ridiculous as thinking she schooled the interviewers and put them in their place.

In the first she went into what was clearly a hostile interview and came out on the other side looking pretty good. Despite the best efforts of the hosts (your typical loudmouth sports guys) she managed to keep her cool and deflect pretty much everything and stuck to the talking points everywhere else. I'd give her the win i that one.

In the second the mood might have been less hostile but it was just as unfriendly an atmosphere. The two hosts didn't come off hat great but I know that they're fans and its hard to remain composed in such circumstances especially when talking with a person I'd imagine you hate (maybe not personally, but certainly what they represent). They again were trying to push her a certain way but she didn't deviate much again.

In the end in two interviews that would be the polar opposite of what she'd face in Canadian radio, she came out alright. Didn't blow anybody away, didn't make herself look like a fool, that's holding your ground if you ask me. In two interviews that had a clear bias and agenda the worst things were stumbling on a Facebook issue and something about the Attorney General's office. Dismantling indeed. It was like Frost/Nixon all over again.

 

[pepty]

If Bettman had done the intelligent thing and had a conversation with Balsillie way back when he wouldn't be tied up in this fiasco with all it's problems and problems yet to come when far more serious issues face the league today.

But he didn't. He had to show the world he was the man and then some.

Give your head a shake Bettman. You have a professional sports league to run.

Bettman and the BOG welcomed Balsilie with open arms when he first made the scene in Pittsburgh.

It was their experiece of the tactics that he and Rodier used in Pittsburgh and Nashville that turned them against him even before his antics in Phoneix.

Bettman wasn't out of step with the BOG by any means.

 

[Brominator]

At this point, it is pretty much inevitable. Goldwater isn't going to back off. Glendale has shown no signs that it will sell the bonds at a higher rate, probably because the rate they'd have to sell them at would be prohibitively (and embarrassingly) high.

There is no deadline because there's no need for one. The deal is dead. End of the road.

But why would you stop buying tickets? This could be the last NHL hockey you see in your city in your lifetime. Might as well enjoy it.

Similar thing happened in Winnipeg when the Jets moved. They played the entire last season with the knowledge it would be the last in Winnipeg, and people stayed away - Although the Jets tried to market it as a good-bye season, dubbing it "A season to remember."

Near the end of the regular season, the Jets made a strong playoff push, and people started to realize that they were near the end of the road, and it would be the last time to see the team that meant so much to us.

Those games are really worth going to. It will probably be a very emotional atmosphere .

Although I won't count out the Coyotes staying in Glendale until their is an announcement. The city and NHL has pulled this deal out of the fire before.

 

[Dalton]

Bettman and the BOG welcomed Balsilie with open arms when he first made the scene in Pittsburgh.

It was their experiece of the tactics that he and Rodier used in Pittsburgh and Nashville that turned them against him even before his antics in Phoneix.

Bettman wasn't out of step with the BOG by any means.

You are just parroting Bettman.

I am saying that Bettman should have sat down with Balsillie instead of coming out with this garbage. I am saying a newb salesman could have handled this better.

 

[metalfoot]

If anyone wants to hear yet another Darcy Olsen interview, Winnipeg's sports radio station is broadcasting an interview in the next few minutes (around 10:15 local time).

http://www.sportsradio1290.com

 

[Brominator]

Are we in court? Is this a court case? A lobster analogy? Really?

Would you say that a lawyer representing a client has bias? When the prosecution raises a piece of relevant evidence to their case does the defence go "yeah, thats a good point!" or does the defence seek to disparage or dismiss the evidence? You have treated this entire CoG/Coyotes saga as a lawyer (oddly enough) and testing each individual piece of information or development against whether it helps your case or not. That is the definition of bias.

Many others here are discussing each development with more of a coffeehouse discussion attitude than a court of law attitude. Not every development in this story is a piece of evidence that needs to be championed or attacked. Nobody on these boards has any direct influence as to the turn of events here. Many of us read this thread to get more information on the subject and many to try and discuss objectively each turn of events. If you have a jets or Coyotes logo in your avatar (or Wpg vs AZ location) there maybe some emotional bias in your posts which are usually readily admitted but if its a discussion instead of a court case, it usually all comes out in the wash.

+1

There have been really good and bad arguments on both side of the debate on these forums (by people who admit to having biases, and by bystanders who are just observing). Naturally, those who have biases (particularly Winnipeggers and Coyotes fans, respectively) will attack the weak arguments that have been presented and discredit them. Occasionally bystanders will attack weak points too.

So, if one was truly bias-free, you'd expect that person to attack weak arguments on both sides of the issue. Conversely, if the arguments one makes are always on one side (in this case, the side supporting the Coyotes staying in Glendale) it comes across as making a case, rather than being some sort of champion for "truth."

Having observed debate, which is sometimes rather repetitive in nature, for literally dozens of threads, the patterns in peoples arguments are hard to ignore.

 

[AllByDesign]

Many others here are discussing each development with more of a coffeehouse discussion attitude than a court of law attitude. Not every development in this story is a piece of evidence that needs to be championed or attacked. Nobody on these boards has any direct influence as to the turn of events here. Many of us read this thread to get more information on the subject and many to try and discuss objectively each turn of events. If you have a jets or Coyotes logo in your avatar (or Wpg vs AZ location) there maybe some emotional bias in your posts which are usually readily admitted but if its a discussion instead of a court case, it usually all comes out in the wash.

On that note... I wouldn't mind a refill... that is if you are picking up the next round?

 

[metalfoot]

Sorry, the interview is at 10:30. I misheard.

 

[AllByDesign]

You are just parroting Bettman.

I am saying that Bettman should have sat down with Balsillie instead of coming out with this garbage. I am saying a newb salesman could have handled this better.

Just sat down with Bettman? After Balsillie started selling "Hamilton Predator's" season tickets? After his lawyer convinces Moyes to plunge his team into bankruptcy in order to end run the NHL's BOG selection and sale proceess?

I would love to see your detailed explaination as to how you arrived at the above statement.

 

[Krautso]

On that note... I wouldn't mind a refill... that is if you are picking up the next round?

I've already volunteered to pick up the refills for round "XXXV: Can we all agree to disagree?"

 

[therealkoho]

Bettman and the BOG welcomed Balsilie with open arms when he first made the scene in Pittsburgh.

It was their experiece of the tactics that he and Rodier used in Pittsburgh and Nashville that turned them against him even before his antics in Phoneix.

Bettman wasn't out of step with the BOG by any means.

yes they did, it things were going quite smoothly in Pittsburgh until Bettman suddenly had a change of heart/mind and made the sale conditional presenting Ballsillie with 45 page document

this is totally unlike what Bettman did in Nashville with "Bootsy" baby, where he was whisked in, deed in hand with no due diligence whatsoever or the two clowns in Tampa also GB's picks, who also suffered from a severe lack of funding and had prevarication skills equal of that I suppose Bettman himself

I'm not really liking what I see with Hulsizer either, Bettman offered the same sweetheart deal in Phoenix to Reinsdorf who after having a good look at it couldn't walk away fast enough. A fellow who is offered something for free doesn't often do that. The Phoenix deal in my opinion is merely to get it the heck off of NHL hands and absolve the other owners of this heavily weighted obligation.

All I can see here is that they want to foist this upon the CoG taxpayer, with Hulsizer assuming little if any risk.

Darcy Olsen on PTS with Bob McCown

http://pmd.fan590.com/podcasts/pts/PTS-2011-03-09-5-pm.mp3

or if it doesn't work

http://www.fan590.com/onair/primetimesports/ 7th segment down

 

[yotesreign]

I predict barely into this thread that by the end of it,the honest to god answer to this thread title will be "not really, no" and at best, when we try really hard, we might do a halfway decent job of faking it.

 

[LeftCoast]

Personally, I'm not a Winnipeg booster. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the NHL return to Winnipeg, but only if it means a stable, viable franchise. But what is abundantly clear, is that Phoenix is not viable. Two different ownership groups (Gluckstern/Burke and Ellman/Moyes), and two prospective ownership groups (Reinsdorf and Hulsizer) have come to the unmistakable conclusion, that without a massive public subsidy, the team can not survive. However, two different prospective ownership groups (Balsillie and Chipman/Thompson) have determined that the Coyotes would be viable in other markets (Hamilton and Winnipeg). So personally, I appreciate the NHL fighting to prevent a team from relocating, but I have no appetite for the NHL going through any more heroic measures to keep a team in a market where it has to be propped up by taxpayers. That is not a model for sustainability and will surely put us back in the same place within 3 - 5 years.

While I do have some misgivings about the size of the Winnipeg market and the capacity of MTS Centre, I am encouraged that TNSE is entirely privately financed and backed by one of the wealthiest families in the world. But if Winnipeg can consistently put 14,000 - 15,000 butts in seats who are actually paying an average ticket price of around $60/seat, it's far better than 13,000 - 14,000 fans (or less) some of whom are paying an average of $37/ticket and many of whom are enticed with complimentary or promotional tickets. Additionally, the local Winnipeg TV market is likely to far exceed the 9000 households that watch Coyotes broadcasts.

If the NHL had done this sensibly 18 months ago, they would have prioritized ownership proposals that were privately financed and economically viable. If someone came forward with a proposal to do that in Glendale, all the better, but I would rather see a thriving franchise in Kansas City, Los Vegas, Winnipeg or Portland.

 

[aj8000]

1. Not sure what "game" you're talking about.

2. Sorry if you think detailing the facts of Ms. Olsen's qualifications to comment on business transactions (which she has offered herself to the public to do) is "derogatory". The facts are what they are. I am afraid I must decline to just ignore them just because it makes some unhappy.

3. "Elite" positions? You think being the head of an obscure rightwing organization about as far removed from Washington is an "elite" position? Being a junior attorney for said rightwing organization is an "elite" position? Columnist of a newspaper? I guess we will have to add to the list of disagreements what constitutes "elite". Hey, they all have jobs; maybe they will all go on to fantastic things.

4. Probably how this "passes here" is because the offering of statements and opinions is allowed - even encouraged. This would extend to comments on the credibility of the various actors in this transaction. Shane Doan's kids are offlimits (and rightly so), but the credibility of Messrs. Lawless and Shoalts and Ms. Olsen and Ms. Sitren as either commentators or actual involved parties are not, as far as I am aware.

5. You would search in vain for ANY post where I ever suggested that Winnipeggers are mostly morons or any kind of morons. This is utter crap, and I think you should withdraw it. You are making a completely false assertion. The reason why you would never find such a statement is because I have never believed it - so why would I ever make it? I have no reason to believe WPG has any more or less morons than Hamilton, or Glendale, or Kingston (Ontario or Jamaica) or any other place.

Hopefully at some point you can post without making it about me, but you are going to make it about me, at least don't falsely ascribe views to me.

GSC, Do you ever agree with anyone? You must be a darn good lawyer and if ever need one I may look you up; however, I have read your posts and most times I get the impression you disagree for the sake of disagreeing and I can tell you enjoy every minute of it. I have to admit the more you argue more I discount your posts. I bet you could take the same documents and come to the conclusion that the parking rights are already owned by the COG if you were under retainer.

I can tell you are a pro Coyotes supporter (and do not have problem with that); therefore, I think that your judgment is tainted as much as the pro Winnipeg/Glendale crowd. Yes you are in your full right to have an opinion; however, your "opinions" are "biased" and it does not really matter if you admit it or not, everyone here knows your "opinions" are "biased".

I know you think you are giving just the "facts" but they are just your interpretation of the "facts" and they are tainted with your bias towards the yotes not going to Winnipeg.

It would be interesting for to go to court just to see how close your interpretations actually are.

I also know that you are going to go to great lengths to refute my post; however, the more you deny it the more you will confirm my assertions. As other posters mentioned, you are entitled to your opinions like they are; however, I think it is the fact you are trying to portray yourself as the voice of reason and not pro coyotes that bothers some posters.

Cheers

 

[LeftCoast]

Bettman and the BOG welcomed Balsilie with open arms when he first made the scene in Pittsburgh.

It was their experiece of the tactics that he and Rodier used in Pittsburgh and Nashville that turned them against him even before his antics in Phoneix.

Bettman wasn't out of step with the BOG by any means.

Balsillie maintains that he was used as a stocking horse by the NHL, who inserted a no-relocation clause into the deal to purchase the Penguins at the last moment.

Who's telling the truth? Neither side has proven candid or trustworthy in the past.

 

[Whileee]

If anyone wants to hear yet another Darcy Olsen interview, Winnipeg's sports radio station is broadcasting an interview in the next few minutes (around 10:15 local time).

http://www.sportsradio1290.com

Interviewer: "So, in short, you guys aren't going away any time soon?"
Olsen: "Not a chance."

 

[wpgallday1960]

Personally, I'm not a Winnipeg booster. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the NHL return to Winnipeg, but only if it means a stable, viable franchise. But what is abundantly clear, is that Phoenix is not viable. Two different ownership groups (Gluckstern/Burke and Ellman/Moyes), and two prospective ownership groups (Reinsdorf and Hulsizer) have come to the unmistakable conclusion, that without a massive public subsidy, the team can not survive. However, two different prospective ownership groups (Balsillie and Chipman/Thompson) have determined that the Coyotes would be viable in other markets (Hamilton and Winnipeg). So personally, I appreciate the NHL fighting to prevent a team from relocating, but I have no appetite for the NHL going through any more heroic measures to keep a team in a market where it has to be propped up by taxpayers. That is not a model for sustainability and will surely put us back in the same place within 3 - 5 years.

While I do have some misgivings about the size of the Winnipeg market and the capacity of MTS Centre, I am encouraged that TNSE is entirely privately financed and backed by one of the wealthiest families in the world. But if Winnipeg can consistently put 14,000 - 15,000 butts in seats who are actually paying an average ticket price of around $60/seat, it's far better than 13,000 - 14,000 fans (or less) some of whom are paying an average of $37/ticket and many of whom are enticed with complimentary or promotional tickets. Additionally, the local Winnipeg TV market is likely to far exceed the 9000 households that watch Coyotes broadcasts.

If the NHL had done this sensibly 18 months ago, they would have prioritized ownership proposals that were privately financed and economically viable. If someone came forward with a proposal to do that in Glendale, all the better, but I would rather see a thriving franchise in Kansas City, Los Vegas, Winnipeg or Portland.

+1. You've captured my feelings almost to the letter. The NHL seems bound & determined to stick it out in Glendale because it is key to their next big TV deal. The history in Glendale appears to demonstrate that hockey is not a viable long run venture, IMO.

 

[Brominator]

GSC, Do you ever agree with anyone? You must be a darn good lawyer and if ever need one I may look you up; however, I have read your posts and most times I get the impression you disagree for the sake of disagreeing and I can tell you enjoy every minute of it. I have to admit the more you argue more I discount your posts. I bet you could take the same documents and come to the conclusion that the parking rights are already owned by the COG if you were under retainer.

I can tell you are a pro Coyotes supporter (and do not have problem with that), possibly because the NHL told Hamilton to go jump in a lake; therefore, I think that your judgment is tainted as much as the pro Winnipeg/Glendale crowd. Yes you are in your full right to have an opinion; however, your "opinions" are "biased" and it does not really matter if you admit it or not, everyone here knows your "opinions" are "biased".

I know you think you are giving just the "facts" but they are just your interpretation of the "facts" and they are tainted with your bias towards the yotes not going to Winnipeg.

It would be interesting for to go to court just to see how close your interpretations actually are.

I also know that you are going to go to great lengths to refute my post; however, the more you deny it the more you will confirm my assertions. As other posters mentioned, you are entitled to your opinions like they are; however, I think it is the fact you are trying to portray yourself as the voice of reason and not pro coyotes that bothers some posters.

Cheers

Actually, to be fair, GSC was openly against Hamilton getting a team.

 

[Whileee]

+1. You've captured my feelings almost to the letter. The NHL seems bound & determined to stick it out in Glendale because it is key to their next big TV deal. The history in Glendale appears to demonstrate that hockey is not a viable long run venture, IMO.

I wonder whether the Phoenix and Atlanta situations are linked in relation to the NHL's considerations. I suppose that they might be able to tolerate the loss of either Phoenix or Atlanta, but will move mountains to try to prevent the loss of both markets in short order. So, if Phoenix tumbles and relocates, I think we can expect them to take similarly heroic measures to preserve Atlanta.

 

[berklon]

This mess looks really good on the NHL. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving league.

 

[Larabee]

+1. You've captured my feelings almost to the letter. The NHL seems bound & determined to stick it out in Glendale because it is key to their next big TV deal. The history in Glendale appears to demonstrate that hockey is not a viable long run venture, IMO.

I thought Daly was already on record saying this was not the case

"Daly wrote that the Coyotes’ potential move would not have “any impact on our ongoing television negotiations†and the topic had not even been raised in discussion"

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news?slug=nc-coyotesjets030711

 

[Egil]

GSC, Do you ever agree with anyone? You must be a darn good lawyer and if ever need one I may look you up; however, I have read your posts and most times I get the impression you disagree for the sake of disagreeing and I can tell you enjoy every minute of it. I have to admit the more you argue more I discount your posts. I bet you could take the same documents and come to the conclusion that the parking rights are already owned by the COG if you were under retainer.

I can tell you are a pro Coyotes supporter (and do not have problem with that), possibly because the NHL told Hamilton to go jump in a lake; therefore, I think that your judgment is tainted as much as the pro Winnipeg/Glendale crowd. Yes you are in your full right to have an opinion; however, your "opinions" are "biased" and it does not really matter if you admit it or not, everyone here knows your "opinions" are "biased".

I know you think you are giving just the "facts" but they are just your interpretation of the "facts" and they are tainted with your bias towards the yotes not going to Winnipeg.

It would be interesting for to go to court just to see how close your interpretations actually are.

I also know that you are going to go to great lengths to refute my post; however, the more you deny it the more you will confirm my assertions. As other posters mentioned, you are entitled to your opinions like they are; however, I think it is the fact you are trying to portray yourself as the voice of reason and not pro coyotes that bothers some posters.

Cheers

GS2kC is pro-Coyotes in Phoenix (though he won't admit this either), but it certainly isn't because the NHL told Hamilton to take a hike. He has been pro-Coyote the entire time, even during all of the Balssile non-sense as well. He is a master at ignoring points against him while hammering on trivialities that promote his argument. In short, I think you are correct in suggesting that he is a very good lawyer, but he is certainly very frustrating to discuss things with

 

[wpgallday1960]

I wonder whether the Phoenix and Atlanta situations are linked in relation to the NHL's considerations. I suppose that they might be able to tolerate the loss of either Phoenix or Atlanta, but will move mountains to try to prevent the loss of both markets in short order. So, if Phoenix tumbles and relocates, I think we can expect them to take similarly heroic measures to preserve Atlanta.

Agreed, the NHL seems lukewarm on Atlanta but determined on Glendale. Maybe Glendale is taking up all their time, LOL!

 

[Krautso]

Agreed, the NHL seems lukewarm on Atlanta but determined on Glendale. Maybe Glendale is taking up all their time, LOL!

I think the fact that Glendale is willing to pony up $197 million so shortly after putting $180 million into the arena puts the NHL firmly in their corner. Atlanta will not be so quick to throw money at the Thrashers.

 

[PitbulI]

I'm just tired of the half page lawyer talk posts. It's like the last couple threads have been mostly lawyer talk just trying to twist words into making ones points.

Like Coffee talk on SNL. I'll give you a topic. Durand Durand is neither a Durand nor a Durand, discuss.