There were. Today I see Seattle (without an arena) and Portland (without an owner willing to even hear about hockey) as front runners.
Well, two-three years ago Quebec city would have welcomed the Coyotes in the old Colisée for two years at most and would have started building their arena (due in September) a year to 18 months earlier if they would've been given a team.
So, today landing posts are not really different than three years ago the way NHL looks at them.
1 - You're assuming that the Colisee is capable of housing an NHL team there full time. An exhibition game or two is one thing but for a season it's different.
Without trying to get this into a relocation thread, Seattle is much closer because back then they hadn't done the various studies they needed to do and figure out funding and where they want to build it. Portland haven't followed much.
2 - There's also the Thrashers issue that came up at the same time. Moving one team is bad enough but to move two (I think within weeks of eachother?)
Not just for you, but a question for anyone...
- You would like the team to stay ( assuming this ) but, you have an AMF agreement that you just can't afford anymore or you would just like better terms. And maybe you just don't think IA is giving you enough bang for the buck because they aren't very good at arena management. And maybe you have convinced yourself that if the team did leave, it's not the end of the world. But you found a tricky way to maybe get out of the lease.
What would you do if you were the CoG?
Assuming the COG follows through with voiding the lease, they've already accepted the fact that the team has a very real chance of not playing there anymore. They are mainly banking on the fact that it will be difficult (not impossible) to move and are hoping to strong arm the league into agreeing to something on better terms.
The problem is we are back to square one in a lot of ways. Even cutting down the AMF in half won't do much because then at best (based on what I remember of the numbers) it will break even. They don't want to break even, they want to make money. And any money they make is taking money away from IA and there's no reason whatsoever to think IA is going to agree (willingly) to something that takes significant money away from them.
For the COG, I think they've started to realize that they are better off not paying the 15 million because any amount they make directly and indirectly (westgate) because of the Coyotes is far outweighed by what they spend.
People said it two years ago and they will say it again. Thinking solely for what is best for the COG, there was a company that came up with a half decent bid three years ago and let the team either leave or negotiate with them.
For the team, they are better off either leaving or negotiating with the other company. They probably won't spend that much more on "rent" and they wouldn't have to deal with all the headaches that come with being "in charge" of the arena.