THN: Coyotes to Seattle this Summer? UPD: Healy - Jul2 for COG, or it's Seattle

[Stonewall]

Call them the Metros.

Metropolitans would be shortened anyway, so it's better they get their own identitlty (from the MLB Mets).

 

[rojac]

Seattle Metropolitans. Can't imagine it would be any other name.

Sigh. Why not something new that hasn't been used before?

 

[seattletotems]

SD you have been on top of things all day!

 

[Brodie]

Sigh. Why not something new that hasn't been used before?

because everyone besides you likes tradition and history

 

[Seedling]

Call them the Metros.

Metropolitans would be shortened anyway, so it's better they get their own identitlty (from the MLB Mets).

The Mets might not like this. Just a thought. Not really sure if it matters or not.

 

[seattletotems]

The Mets might not like this. Just a thought. Not really sure if it matters or not.

And I am sure the New York Jets were not pleased when the Winnipeg Jets started, and the New York Rangers were not pleased when Texas Rangers started and oh The Los Angeles Kings were not happy when Sacramento Kings Started and oh one more, were the Carolina Panthers angry when The Florida Panthers could not come up with a unique name?

 

[danishh]

Call them the Metros.

Metropolitans would be shortened anyway, so it's better they get their own identitlty (from the MLB Mets).

on the other hand, Bartoszek and Lanza almost bought 49% of the Mets last time, why not buy 100% of the Mets this time?

 

[superdeluxe]

because everyone besides you likes tradition and history

I like tradition and history, but Metros just does not do it for me. Why can't we have Totems or T-birds?

 

[seattletotems]

See my avatar.lol

 

[Seattle Totems]

This whole QC vs Seattle thing is pretty silly. It's not about which market is better short or long term. The NHL could very well want to go to QC and Seattle but right now its about opportunity. The league could move any kind of team to Quebec whether it's expansion or not and never think twice about it. With Seattle it's a whole other game.

Right now is likely the best opportunity that the league will ever have to move a non expansion team into Seattle without an NBA team to compete against. There is also a chance that the NBA will not want to move back to Seattle if an NHL team gets established. The last piece of the puzzle is the political situation in Seattle that is currently pro-arena - that could change quickly. When you think about it in those terms it makes perfect sense for the league to go in now.

 

[Mayor Bee]

because everyone besides you likes tradition and history

Not a single person on these boards were even alive when the Seattle Metropolitans played their last game.

There's "honoring history", and then there's being a slave to it. Too many hockey fans embrace the latter after confusing it with the former.

I like tradition and history, but Metros just does not do it for me. Why can't we have Totems or T-birds?

Totems is still a live trademark, held by someone who has shown a willingness and ability to sue.

 

[superdeluxe]

Not a single person on these boards were even alive when the Seattle Metropolitans played their last game.

There's "honoring history", and then there's being a slave to it. Too many hockey fans embrace the latter after confusing it with the former.



Totems is still a live trademark, held by someone who has shown a willingness and ability to sue.

What team?

 

[Seattle Totems]

Not a single person on these boards were even alive when the Seattle Metropolitans played their last game.

There's "honoring history", and then there's being a slave to it. Too many hockey fans embrace the latter after confusing it with the former.



Totems is still a live trademark, held by someone who has shown a willingness and ability to sue.

I agree with you on the Metropolitans name but not otherwise. The Totems were one of the most popular teams in Seattle throughout the 60's. It's not too far gone that people fail to remember. The name is completely unique for a sports team and fits perfectly for the region.

Some guy in Texas that sells T-shirts online registered a dead trademark in his name. The same thing happened with the Vancouver Millionaires. They sold the brand to the Vancouver Canucks for a small sum. The same type of deal could happen with the Totems name or they could just use the name and come up with a different logo than the "eagle" he owns.

 

[RandR]

Pretty sure you're wrong about that. I've been closely following the return of a franchise in Quebec and I remember reading/hearing
Montreal, Edmonton, Winnipeg and Ottawa supporting a Quebec franchise.

Ill give you the benefit of the doubt. But their actions now, say otherwise, since Bettman works for them.

Bettman also works for the owners of the 22 other American teams, who understandably would prefer not seeing another American team move to Canada. Amongst other reasons, Quebec likely won't be much of a road draw for the vast majority of them.

 

[Brodie]

on the other hand, Bartoszek and Lanza almost bought 49% of the Mets last time, why not buy 100% of the Mets this time?

Bartoszek was supposedly like a big Mets fan as a kid, too. Might be meaningful, probably isn't.

I prefer a name that's more evocative of the PNW. Cascades or Rapids or something... even T-Birds works

What team?

http://www.seattlejrtotems.com/

 

[gstommylee]

The Mets might not like this. Just a thought. Not really sure if it matters or not.

I don't think it matters.

 

[Fugu]

Seattle today also suffers from one of the big issues Phoenix had, which was the large number of imports from other NHL cities. Converting fans is going to be a key challenge long-term, but not in the first few difficult years at Key Arena.

This is very true. Now that I'm out here in the PNW, I kinda wish the Wings had stayed in the Western Conference. Could catch them in Seattle and Vancouver.

I think the diehard 'hockey' fans would/will adopt a new team, but yes, most fans are tribal fans and not necessarily fans of the sport. They only go to their home team games. I like it to mix it up with junior, collegiate and pro games personally.

 

[Brodie]

Seattle is a more "established" area than Phoenix. Phoenix had like 100,000 people in 1950 and hadn't posted growth below 24% at any census between it's founding and 2010. Seattle was already at < 450,000 people in 1950 and growth has been more steady (suburbs are booming, though).

 

[superdeluxe]

Bartoszek was supposedly like a big Mets fan as a kid, too. Might be meaningful, probably isn't.

I prefer a name that's more evocative of the PNW. Cascades or Rapids or something... even T-Birds works



http://www.seattlejrtotems.com/

Would they really prevent that name being used at the professional level?

 

[RandR]

What change of direction? Bettman has never said QC is getting a team.

Yeah. He's never even hinted at it, which is why I don't understand all the hurt feelings from QC supporters. The NHL's natural progression wasn't always Winnipeg followed by Quebec. Bettman has a league to run and a sport to grow.

I don't blame the league for apparently having the following order of preferences:

1. keep the Coyotes in Phoenix, because then both QC and Seattle could bid for expansion franchises along with potentially 1 or more other cities where a bid could come from in a couple more years.

2. if that fails, move the Coyotes to Seattle, because putting a team in the American Pacific Northwest makes sense strategically over the long run because it opens a large untapped market region.

3. and if that fails, fall back on Quebec

However, given that there is virtually no doubt that QC would be a success from day one I don't think anyone should be surprised that Quebecers would be pissed about being no better than a 3rd choice in the league's eyes. I'd be pissed too if I lived in or near to Quebec City.

 

[gstommylee]

I don't blame the league for apparently having the following order of preferences:

1. keep the Coyotes in Phoenix, because then both QC and Seattle could bid for expansion franchises along with potentially 1 or more other cities where a bid could come from in a couple more years.

2. if that fails, move the Coyotes to Seattle, because putting a team in the American Pacific Northwest makes sense strategically over the long run because it opens a large untapped market region.

3. and if that fails, fall back on Quebec

However, given that there is virtually no doubt that QC would be a success from day one I don't think anyone should be surprised that Quebecers would be pissed about being no better than a 3rd choice in the league's eyes. I'd be pissed too if I lived in or near to Quebec City.

How would #2 fail.

 

[danishh]

I don't blame the league for apparently having the following order of preferences:

1. keep the Coyotes in Phoenix, because then both QC and Seattle could bid for expansion franchises along with potentially 1 or more other cities where a bid could come from in a couple more years.

2. if that fails, move the Coyotes to Seattle, because putting a team in the American Pacific Northwest makes sense strategically over the long run because it opens a large untapped market region.

3. and if that fails, fall back on Quebec

However, given that there is virtually no doubt that QC would be a success from day one I don't think anyone should be surprised that Quebecers would be pissed about being no better than a 3rd choice in the league's eyes. I'd be pissed too if I lived in or near to Quebec City.

define success.

just because quebec is guaranteed to be a profitable franchise, doesnt mean that it is what's best for the 29 other owners.

People who look at the situation and say: "phoenix is losing a ton of money, seattle is going to struggle for a few years and after that may or may not make money, and quebec is practically guaranteed to make money" are 100% correct. That doesnt mean quebec is best for the league. As I continue to trumpet, and most people continue to ignore, the greater revenue a place phoenix is moved to, the more it hurts everyone else, immediately. Moreover, long-term having a team in quebec does absolutely nothing for the league, whereas a team in seattle can do a lot. Call it naivete, call it ignorance, call it simply following their heart over their mind, but it seems most people dont understand how the finances of this league work. This is the BoH people, inform yourselves.

 

[danishh]

How would #2 fail.

seattle could fail for a multitude of reasons. The obvious would be the arena deal falling through. Beyond that, there remain questions on whether it can support 2 winter sports, and it is clear that the NBA is their first love. Also as i mentioned, import citizens in seattle may not embrace the team.

Let's be realistic here. Seattle isnt a slam dunk, but it's a first round pick. Quebec is that safe mid-2nd you take when you want to make sure you end up with at least a 3rd liner. Quebec will do very well for itself, but nothing for the team. Seattle can win you a cup.

 

[Revo]

@danishh

Mind to explain how bringing more money to a private entity is not in the best interest of said entity?

 

[DryIslandBartender]

Seattle's jerseys?