Tacoma to renovate Tacoma Dome for NHL and/or NBA team?

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
185,633
37,428
Just to show everybody, this is what the hockey set-up for the Tacoma Dome is.
sa8zE.jpg

It looks like they couldn't decide what to make it. Looks like those indoor football/basketball hybrids that look like airport hangars you see in Idaho.
 

MoreOrr

B4
Jun 20, 2006
24,420
438
Mexico
The NHL would likely need to see shovels in the ground on a new arena before moving a team into a temporary facility.

That would seem to be a reasonable expectation... Or else have a time limit in place, with which the team might again be relocated. The idea could be... would the city risk losing yet another major league team. I think Seattle might be considered by the NHL as worth the risk.

It's simple... the Canadian city options are going to be there regardless of what the NHL does. Better to take the risk with a place like Seattle-Tacoma, which is a very large market and also fills a northwest void, and then if necessary say, Ok... they don't want to keep us there, so off to another city we go (Quebec City, Hamilton, or wherever else may become an available option between now and then).
The NHL looks back at Seattle and says, 'you get to not spend money on a new arena, and we get to be in this other city... both are happy.'
 
Last edited:

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,227
13,594
Folsom
I don't see what good would come of this. That place would need heavy renovations to house a team for the NHL and from what I know, Tacoma is not the best place to put a team for the appeal of the Seattle area. I'd like to see a team in Seattle as it would be good for the league, I think. Just don't see this as a method towards that end really.
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,545
2,006
I don't see what good would come of this. That place would need heavy renovations to house a team for the NHL and from what I know, Tacoma is not the best place to put a team for the appeal of the Seattle area. I'd like to see a team in Seattle as it would be good for the league, I think. Just don't see this as a method towards that end really.
No one has money for a big arena right now. Frankly,This is 17,000 for hockey and it gets a foot into the market. Beggars can't be choosers and right now the NHL is a beggar.

Just like MoreOrr is saying, if they have to go back to another Canadian city, the NHL will take a beating in the US media. Personally I would rather Quebec get the IMO.
 

MoreOrr

B4
Jun 20, 2006
24,420
438
Mexico
I don't see what good would come of this. That place would need heavy renovations to house a team for the NHL and from what I know, Tacoma is not the best place to put a team for the appeal of the Seattle area. I'd like to see a team in Seattle as it would be good for the league, I think. Just don't see this as a method towards that end really.

And what bad can come of it? This is only a relocation option, certainly not an Expansion option (with no current plans in place for new arena). So what is there is lose? Everything is to gain, or simply the NHL relocates to yet another city. And then who's viewed as being at fault? Seattle... Given two chances to build a new arena in order to keep a major league team, but deciding not to.
 

htpwn

Registered User
Nov 4, 2009
20,530
2,607
Toronto
And what bad can come of it? This is only a relocation option, certainly not an Expansion option (with no current plans in place for new arena). So what is there is lose? Everything is to gain, or simply the NHL relocates to yet another city. And then who's viewed as being at fault? Seattle... Given two chances to build a new arena in order to keep a major league team, but deciding not to.

I think the NHL would take a lot of heat as well, particularly from the Canadian media for snubbing Quebec City for a market that wasn't prepared to take a team.
 

MoreOrr

B4
Jun 20, 2006
24,420
438
Mexico
I think the NHL would take a lot of heat as well, particularly from the Canadian media for snubbing Quebec City for a market that wasn't prepared to take a team.

They didn't snub Winnipeg. The new Quebec City arena isn't finished yet. And if Seattle sticks then Quebec City becomes a potential Expansion site, or at worst a relocation site for another team if necessary. I think many Canadians also realize the negative impression that would be made if the NHL loses two US cities in a row to Canada.
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,545
2,006
I think the NHL would take a lot of heat as well, particularly from the Canadian media for snubbing Quebec City for a market that wasn't prepared to take a team.
You and I both know Bettman and the owners (especially the big markets) could give a damn about that.

They didn't snub Winnipeg. The new Quebec City arena isn't finished yet. And if Seattle sticks then Quebec City becomes a potential Expansion site, or at worst a relocation site for another team if necessary. I think many Canadians also realize the negative impression that would be made if the NHL loses two US cities in a row to Canada.

Bingo.
 

MuzikMachine

Registered User
Nov 14, 2005
800
5
They didn't snub Winnipeg. The new Quebec City arena isn't finished yet. And if Seattle sticks then Quebec City becomes a potential Expansion site, or at worst a relocation site for another team if necessary. I think many Canadians also realize the negative impression that would be made if the NHL loses two US cities in a row to Canada.

Has construction even started in Quebec? I've read about a lot of talks but no shovels have actually hit the ground. The Tacoma Dome probably isn't ideal but it could be a decent temporary home, there have been worse. Remember when the Lightning played in the Thunderdome in Tampa, the Hurricanes when they first were in Greensboro, or when the Senators played at the Ottawa Civic Centre?
 

danishh

Registered User
Dec 9, 2006
33,018
53
YOW
in order to fix that for hockey, you'd have to gut all the seats and try to create a proper hockey/basketball bowl structure within the dome.
 

worstfaceoffmanever

These Snacks Are Odd
Jun 2, 2007
12,948
4
Fargo, ND
The NHL would likely need to see shovels in the ground on a new arena before moving a team into a temporary facility.

I don't disagree, I'm just saying there's a precedent for this sort of thing in the event that a franchise needs to move immediately. I don't think anyone would buy an NHL or NBA team intending to use the Tacoma Dome as a permanent home for said team, but for 2-3 years, it wouldn't be too bad.
 

MoreOrr

B4
Jun 20, 2006
24,420
438
Mexico
I don't disagree, I'm just saying there's a precedent for this sort of thing in the event that a franchise needs to move immediately. I don't think anyone would buy an NHL or NBA team intending to use the Tacoma Dome as a permanent home for said team, but for 2-3 years, it wouldn't be too bad.

I'm actually thinking that the NHL would give the area 3-4 years, 2-3 years perhaps to get the "shovels in the ground. But that's 2-3 or 3-4 from the time a relocated team arrived there. So if we're talking a team for the 2012-13 Season, then at least the shovels in the ground by 2015... or else the team is off to Quebec City (likely), where the new arena is supposed to be ready by 2015, I think.
 

Pajicz

Registered User
Mar 22, 2011
4,012
0
I don't care if they play in the Space Needle if Seattle just gets a team... :sarcasm:

To be honest, Tacoma Dome isn't a proper home for a pro sports team. Not even a temporary one.
 

blues10

Registered User
Dec 10, 2010
7,221
3,120
Canada
Has construction even started in Quebec? I've read about a lot of talks but no shovels have actually hit the ground. The Tacoma Dome probably isn't ideal but it could be a decent temporary home, there have been worse. Remember when the Lightning played in the Thunderdome in Tampa, the Hurricanes when they first were in Greensboro, or when the Senators played at the Ottawa Civic Centre?

Sharks played 2 or 3 years at the 11 000 seat Cow Palace and the Calgary Flames played at the 10 000 seat Calgary Corral for 2 or 3 seasons until their arena was built.
 

htpwn

Registered User
Nov 4, 2009
20,530
2,607
Toronto
They didn't snub Winnipeg. The new Quebec City arena isn't finished yet. And if Seattle sticks then Quebec City becomes a potential Expansion site, or at worst a relocation site for another team if necessary. I think many Canadians also realize the negative impression that would be made if the NHL loses two US cities in a row to Canada.

Has construction even started in Quebec? I've read about a lot of talks but no shovels have actually hit the ground. The Tacoma Dome probably isn't ideal but it could be a decent temporary home, there have been worse. Remember when the Lightning played in the Thunderdome in Tampa, the Hurricanes when they first were in Greensboro, or when the Senators played at the Ottawa Civic Centre?

Funding is in place and it is expected to be started soon. Has Tacoma/Seattle's City Council publicly brought up building a new arena? Let alone find and secure funding for it? Will shovels be in the ground by the time next June comes around?

The answer in Quebec to all those questions is yes. The answers in Seattle are no, no, and probably no.

I don't know what the relevance of Winnipeg is or the fact that Quebec hasn't put shovels in the ground. The city is miles ahead of Seattle is at this point in time and until they at least make an effort to catch up, Quebec should be considered the frontrunner for a team.
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,545
2,006
Funding is in place and it is expected to be started soon. Has Tacoma/Seattle's City Council publicly brought up building a new arena? Let alone find and secure funding for it? Will shovels be in the ground by the time next June comes around?

The answer in Quebec to all those questions is yes. The answers in Seattle are no, no, and probably no.

I don't know what the relevance of Winnipeg is or the fact that Quebec hasn't put shovels in the ground. The city is miles ahead of Seattle is at this point in time and until they at least make an effort to catch up, Quebec should be considered the frontrunner for a team.
The idea was brought up at Tacoma city council. I have not heard of a building date for the new colisee at all.

You know about NHL politics by now, you know about how Bettman operates. So you should now the NHL cares more about the US media than the Canadian media. And that if the US media is reporting that the NHL is starting to move teams back to Canada, the league will take a major black eye.
 

Habs05

Registered User
Mar 5, 2011
228
0
Brossard, Qc
They didn't snub Winnipeg. The new Quebec City arena isn't finished yet. And if Seattle sticks then Quebec City becomes a potential Expansion site, or at worst a relocation site for another team if necessary. I think many Canadians also realize the negative impression that would be made if the NHL loses two US cities in a row to Canada.

NHL lost 2 canadian cities in a row in 95-96 to the USA (and Canada had far less teams than USA). I don't think the opposite should make such a negative impact.

Has construction even started in Quebec? I've read about a lot of talks but no shovels have actually hit the ground. The Tacoma Dome probably isn't ideal but it could be a decent temporary home, there have been worse. Remember when the Lightning played in the Thunderdome in Tampa, the Hurricanes when they first were in Greensboro, or when the Senators played at the Ottawa Civic Centre?

We'll see the showel at the end of 2012 or beginning of 2013 and the arena will be ready in 2015. They draw plans at the moment and they still wait for the bill 204 that should pass around september 22nd (it's required for Quebecor's agreement).
 
Last edited:

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,545
2,006
NHL lost 2 canadian cities in a row in 95-96 to the USA (and Canada had far less teams than USA). I don't think the opposite should make such a negative impact.



We'll see the showel at the end of 2012 or beginning of 2013 and the arena will be ready in 2015. They draw plans at the moment and they still wait for the bill 204 that should pass around september 22nd (it's required for Quebecor's agreement).
US media like to sensationalize everything.
 

Ruslan Zainullin

Registered User
Aug 2, 2011
299
0
They didn't snub Winnipeg. The new Quebec City arena isn't finished yet. And if Seattle sticks then Quebec City becomes a potential Expansion site, or at worst a relocation site for another team if necessary. I think many Canadians also realize the negative impression that would be made if the NHL loses two US cities in a row to Canada.

the impression made would be that the nhl is not viable in non traditional southern US hockey markets. i understand the negative impression that would leave, its saying that the NHL is not a "major" sports league in the united states. i, however, am not so sure this would be so bad. i wonder if the NHL would be better off to have 9 teams in canada, 13 teams in the viable US markets, making a 22 team league rather than a 30 team league. would it not be better to have a 22 team league that thrives in areas that care about hockey than to have the rest of the league effectively subsidizing failing franchises (tv revenues etc)?

dont get me wrong moreorr, i totally understand and respect your point. im just saying that maybe the nhl needs to shake up their whole business model at this point rather than continue to seek out more non traditional markets for teams to struggle in.
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,545
2,006
the impression made would be that the nhl is not viable in non traditional southern US hockey markets. i understand the negative impression that would leave, its saying that the NHL is not a "major" sports league in the united states. i, however, am not so sure this would be so bad. i wonder if the NHL would be better off to have 9 teams in canada, 13 teams in the viable US markets, making a 22 team league rather than a 30 team league. would it not be better to have a 22 team league that thrives in areas that care about hockey than to have the rest of the league effectively subsidizing failing franchises (tv revenues etc)?

dont get me wrong moreorr, i totally understand and respect your point. im just saying that maybe the nhl needs to shake up their whole business model at this point rather than continue to seek out more non traditional markets for teams to struggle in.

But if we have a 22 team league, like you said, we cease to be major and we lose playing jobs.
 

Ruslan Zainullin

Registered User
Aug 2, 2011
299
0
But if we have a 22 team league, like you said, we cease to be major and we lose playing jobs.

my suggestion is that currently the NHL may not be a "major" sports league, so perhaps it does not make sense for the league to market itself as such. that perhaps it would make sense for the NHL to market itself as more of a specialty product. not saying im right, i just think its worth talking about, and i totally recognize your point about losing paying jobs, although i wonder if we may get to the point where the revenue does not support 700 jobs.
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,545
2,006
my suggestion is that currently the NHL may not be a "major" sports league, so perhaps it does not make sense for the league to market itself as such. that perhaps it would make sense for the NHL to market itself as more of a specialty product. not saying im right, i just think its worth talking about, and i totally recognize your point about losing paying jobs, although i wonder if we may get to the point where the revenue does not support 700 jobs.
Oh I don't mean to discourage you at all. In fact maybe the NHL should market itself like that. But the ramifications media wise are my issue.
 

Jumptheshark

Rebooting myself
Oct 12, 2003
99,856
13,840
Somewhere on Uranus
I saw one concert in there and can not picture hockey in there

here is something to think about the seatle and tacoma area--look at the sonics-I know there was a lot of stuff involved in the reasons why they moved--their fans are "interesting" and the question--could they support an nhl team long term and as someone who lived in the general area--I would say the answer is no
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->