Iron Chef
Registered User
- Sep 24, 2011
- 2,199
- 0
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawaka...versation-former-sharks-analyst-drew-remenda/
Interesting listen. Really miss Drew.
Interesting listen. Really miss Drew.
Whoa, 30 minute audio clip and no transcript. Can someone summarize? Lazy Kawakami.
So does that mean that Drew thinks that DW and TMac will be back next year?
Listening to that podcast, I guess Drew is in my camp of believing the ownership's goal is to move the Sharks. He has brought up other points on why it might make sense for them to move.
Those, in addition to my point of why in the heck would the Sharks located their minor league team in the same city.
It's beginning to add up.
Listening to that podcast, I guess Drew is in my camp of believing the ownership's goal is to move the Sharks. He has brought up other points on why it might make sense for them to move.
Those, in addition to my point of why in the heck would the Sharks located their minor league team in the same city.
It's beginning to add up.
Listening to that podcast, I guess Drew is in my camp of believing the ownership's goal is to move the Sharks. He has brought up other points on why it might make sense for them to move.
Those, in addition to my point of why in the heck would the Sharks located their minor league team in the same city.
It's beginning to add up.
I hear there's a stadium in Vegas looking for a team.
"Ladies and Gentleman, Yoooouuuuuuuur LAS VEGAS SHAAARKS!!"
Would moving be as simple as moving to SF?
Listening to that podcast, I guess Drew is in my camp of believing the ownership's goal is to move the Sharks. He has brought up other points on why it might make sense for them to move.
Those, in addition to my point of why in the heck would the Sharks located their minor league team in the same city.
It's beginning to add up.
Listening to that podcast, I guess Drew is in my camp of believing the ownership's goal is to move the Sharks. He has brought up other points on why it might make sense for them to move.
Those, in addition to my point of why in the heck would the Sharks located their minor league team in the same city.
It's beginning to add up.
I still don't get why the TV contract is ironcladNo because the TV contract would still be in effect. To break that deal, the Sharks would have to move out of the market. Then that pretty much opens the door for someone to come in if they go that route. And you can bet your bottom dollar someone, maybe in Arizona, would take that opportunity if it presented itself to move into SJ and get its own TV contract.
If the arena lease isn't re-upped, I could see them in S.F. The Warriors are open to sharing their new arena with the Sharks, I've heard.
If the arena lease isn't re-upped, I could see them in S.F. The Warriors are open to sharing their new arena with the Sharks, I've heard.
I still don't get why the TV contract is ironclad
if it's so bad that the Sharks get serious about moving, wouldn't Comcast much rather re-negotiate a deal rather than go through a period where they have NO NHL team until someone replaces the sharks in the bay area?