Nino Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Overall, I think Portland OR is a better destination. Seattle doesn't really strike me as a hockey town, despite its closeness to Canada and its WHL franchise. I am sure there are tons of factors at work that will decide what will happen, but I would feel better about a team in Portland for some reason. Doesn't sound like you know a lot about seattle and portland, both support WHL hockey with seattle a larger city and supporting two teams to Portland's one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklax Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Doesn't sound like you know a lot about seattle and portland, both support WHL hockey with seattle a larger city and supporting two teams to Portland's one. And youth hockey bigger in the seattle area than portland. I'd love a team in either city, but Seattle makes the most sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 With the unbalanced conferences, it's pretty obvious that the league planned to either move an eastern team to a western location, or expand to 1-2 Western cities. And it's going to come quick, too. If it was years down the line they would have made it balanced now and worried about another realignment when the time came. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 I don't mind relocation to seattle (panthers, coyotes or Blue Jackets) but the league is too diluted as is. we don't need another team. Also, Seattle could not even keep the Sonics, Despite having a lot of established basketball history... what chances would a new sport like the NHL have? The frachise is owned by a guy from OKC, and the city didn't want to fund a new arena hence relocation. There is substantial talk of Seattle getting a NBA franchise back. Stick to hockey talk, you obviously don't know much about the NBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck or Die Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Even if this is speculation, it kind of sounds like Seattle getting a team is all but confirmed for sometime within the very near future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 I would be curious to know what promises were made to new ownership groups in PHX and FLA if their markets failed to gain traction. It goes beyond those specific groups. NHL has to have a reputation for taking care of their ownership. PHX was/is a real black eye. As revenues climb big time NHL hockey starts to attract bigger investors. Sorry but QUE is not only a potential financial weakling but also less than a secondary market. IMHO SEA, POR, KAN and even Cleveland are more attractive. If USA wins a GOLD then I suspect a SEA team by July. The huge NHL plumb is a 2nd team in S. Ontario which should happen within 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackcanuck Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Bettman will be demanding over $250M expansion fees. Expansion fees are NOT considered HRR so the owners get all of it, players get none of it! As far as Bettman and the owners are concerned Expansion is way better than re-location for obvious financial reasons. Seattle, Las Vegas, Portland, Quebec City, Markham, and not so much, Hamilton and Kansas City( yet they are the only Cities with NHL ready Arenas) Seattle will build an arena for NBA and NHL, they just need some assurances from the leagues They already have the Government and owners and land set aside to get it done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoosh Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 This is really good news. I'm looking forward to how this progresses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Stanley Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 The NHL needs fewer teams, not more. This - is seattle gets a franchise, I sure hope it is a relocation and not an expansion because the game is so diluted right now, I am baffled the NHL brass do not see this - so many games are unentertaining, goals are down again, only a handful of teams have true NHL 3rd and 4th lines, most teams have a 2nd line that is made up of 3rd-2nd line 'tweener' players. How much more watered down can this product get? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisbanks Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 gunna suck if they name the team the mets and hang a stanley cup banner up right away hahah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisbanks Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 hopefully if seattle gets the team/ new building they will get the NBA back and maybe that will give vancouver a push to get a NBA team aswell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Why would they put a team in Seattle over a place such as Hamilton or Quebec City? Four times the population base, and economic activity from the technology industry are good starts... The shameful thing is that Vancouver has said nothing at all about this. yet the Sabres and Leafs have threatened legal action if another team is put in Southern Ontario... That is just shameful leveraging; isn't there some grandfathered territorial agreement in place for the Laff's which would see $3 or $400 mill go directly to them before a franchise fee is paid for a S Ontario based team? I suppose if its there, they have a right to demand it. So then Buffalo goes looking for what it can, any legal claim notwithstanding... It is possibly a hardship on them in a Hamilton circumstance, they don't have a huge population base and do draw S Ontario fans for every game. NHL fans should just cheer for teams like Phoenix to find A legitimate market to play in. I'm not sure its TML fans against a N York (more logical) or Hamilton based team, so much as the ownership who has a legal clause they can cash... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB007 Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Wow Does that mean a potential expansion draft is coming as well? Will they take Booth off our hands? Or imagine if we protect Lack instead of Luongo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Fig Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Doesn't sound like you know a lot about seattle and portland, both support WHL hockey with seattle a larger city and supporting two teams to Portland's one. The Thunderbirds have been treated like garbage by the City Of Seattle since time began; so much so that the team up and left and now plays in out-of-the-way Kent. They don't draw very well there either as only the die-hards from Seattle followed them down there. As for Everett, they get no support from Seattle. They are a stand-alone franchise drawing from Everett, Marysville, Arlington etc. As for Portland, it's a considerably better hockey town than Seattle, but the economy is not good down there. People are really struggling. Paul Allen still owns the Trailblazers and has made it known several times that he is not interested in hockey. He may be willing to have someone else own the team and play out of the Rose Garden, but then again he may not, as it represents a splitting of the sporting dollar away from his basketball team. He wouldn't even lift a finger to help bail out the Winterhawks 5 years ago when they were in dire shape. He just doesn't seem to care about hockey at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklax Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 The Thunderbirds have been treated like garbage by the City Of Seattle since time began; so much so that the team up and left and now plays in out-of-the-way Kent. They don't draw very well there either as only the die-hards from Seattle followed them down there. As for Everett, they get no support from Seattle. They are a stand-alone franchise drawing from Everett, Marysville, Arlington etc. As for Portland, it's a considerably better hockey town than Seattle, but the economy is not good down there. People are really struggling. Paul Allen still owns the Trailblazers and has made it known several times that he is not interested in hockey. He may be willing to have someone else own the team and play out of the Rose Garden, but then again he may not, as it represents a splitting of the sporting dollar away from his basketball team. He wouldn't even lift a finger to help bail out the Winterhawks 5 years ago when they were in dire shape. He just doesn't seem to care about hockey at all. Seattle is 9th in the WHL if sorted by % of capacity, as they have a smaller barn than many teams, but still do a good job pulling in people now that they are competitive. Everett is 15th by the same standard, but are having a down year. Yes they don't get much pull from people in seattle, but many of them would drive to seattle for an NHL team. Paul Allen has actually been looking for a 2nd main tennant in Portland since the timbers came in and threatened his monopoly on sports here. They brought in an Arena Football League team, but I don't see that as a long term solution. Also, Portland was in the running for Phoenix relocating this summer http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2013/08/01/portland-trail-blazers-chief-confirms-paul-allens-interest-in-nhl/ http://www.csnnw.com/blog/dwight/trail-blazers-were-interested-purchasing-nhl-coyotes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalky Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 My point is making it a conference war is stupid. Both conferences have useless teams because hockey is not a practical sport and it is not a well marketed sport. If you want to go the conference war route though... With those teams they can make the excuse that they have been poorly run teams that suffer in support because they suck.. However how many Western teams are legit but still cant gain support. As mentioned the #1 team in hockey is #21 in support while the #30 team is #18 in support. How embarrassing. The Dallas Stars are a playoff team yet they rank #28 in attendance. Avs another playoff team ranks #22 in attendance. The #2 team in hockey the STL Blues are #19 in attendance. If the point isn't obvious the West is not exactly thriving in attendance. Maybe an Eastern team like the Jackets will get moved by the guy calling the Eastern Market a failure is an idiot who didn't check his numbers. . Hmmm, an idiot that didn't check his numbers. Sounds more like you bud, there are more Eastern teams currently than Western teams. How bout them numbers. It makes far more sense to bring an Eastern team West, especially one of the Florida teams. You seriously wasted your time digging up irrelevant info and you turned it into an East vs West debate. Bravo, nice job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam13371337 Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 The frachise is owned by a guy from OKC, and the city didn't want to fund a new arena hence relocation. There is substantial talk of Seattle getting a NBA franchise back. Stick to hockey talk, you obviously don't know much about the NBA. im actually quite aware of the history of the sonics' relocation... every franchise that moves has some sort of Problem. But if the sonics meant that much to seattle, they would have found a way to keep them. Period. If someone tried to relocate the Bulls, Lakers, Celtics etc... for any reason what so ever. There would be a war/riots If someone tried to touch the laffs, Caucks wings, Habs Etc... same thing would probably happen... If a sports franchise means a lot to a city, It will not get moved.. If the sonics meant a lot to seattle, They would not have been moved under any circumstance. a major city, representing a big region, With history, and a great rivalry with Portland lost their awesome up and coming team to a tiny city with 0 basketball/ major sport history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngould21 Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Until they get a "new" NBA arena in Seattle, they will not get an NBA franchise. The Key Arena was/is a barn, its nothing to do with history at all. Was the team sold out from under the good folks of Seattle??? YES it was, ask the people how much they think of Daddy Starbucks in Seattle. That was the defining circumstance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langdon Algur Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 The limit is a 50 mile radius The Leafs have long been of the opinion that no team can relocate to another’s geographical territory without written consent from the team affected, effectively giving them a veto over any team moving into the 50-mile radius surrounding the Air Canada Centre. According to the league’s constitution, those territorial rights could not be clearer. In fact, Section 4.3 of the league’s constitution states that, “No other member of the League shall be permitted to play games (except regularly scheduled League games with the home club) in the home territory of a member without the latter member’s consent. No franchise shall be granted for a home territory within the home territory of a member, without the written consent of such member.” Preceding that section, the constitution states that, “Any admission of new members with franchises to operate in any additional cities or boroughs shall be subject to the provisions of Section 4.3.” And it goes on to define a home territory as follows: “Home territory with respect to any member, means each member club shall have exclusive territorial rights in the city in which it is located and within 50 miles of that city’s corporate limits.” http://www.thehockey...rn-Ontario.html How old is that clause? Just wondering how the Islanders and Devils got in. Edit- I'm also surprised the Kings let the Ducks in, but I guess they wanted the rivalary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
î мцšт вяздк чфµ Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 ahh so thats where most of the olympic $$$ went to... introducing the... SEATTLE PUTINS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.