1. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/11/2012 2:30 PM EDT

    http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=405032

    Looks like this is a change - before it was contingent on getting NBA and NHL teams first before the go ahead. This looks like a go now either way. A three way race between Quebec, Markham and Seattle?
     

  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from jpBsSoxFan. Show jpBsSoxFan's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/11/2012 3:19 PM EDT

    These 3 cities can build all the arenas they want. It doesn't mean they will be granted a team anytime soon. We all know where Bettman stands on the topics of relocation and expansion. In his words,  it isn't even on the radar. Besides, hasn't Quebec already lost 2 NHL franchises?
     

  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/11/2012 3:29 PM EDT

    In response to jpBsSoxFan's comment:

    These 3 cities can build all the arenas they want. It doesn't mean they will be granted a team anytime soon. We all know where Bettman stands on the topics of relocation and expansion. In his words,  it isn't even on the radar. Besides, hasn't Quebec already lost 2 NHL franchises?



    Yep, though it's hard to count the Bulldogs since that happened in 1920, 4 years beore Boston even got into the league. They only played 24 games in the NHL. Hard to use them as a comparison given how much has changed in the last 92 years.
     

  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/11/2012 3:32 PM EDT

    This is great news.

    I know it's a long ways away yet, but an NHL version of the Cascadia Cup would be awesome!
     

  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/11/2012 3:43 PM EDT

    Also, jps Bettman was saying relocation wasn't even on the radar as close as two weeks before the Thrashers moved. Because he says one thing, it doesn't necessarily rule out other possibilities.
     

  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from jpBsSoxFan. Show jpBsSoxFan's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/11/2012 4:30 PM EDT

    In response to red75's comment:

    Also, jps Bettman was saying relocation wasn't even on the radar as close as two weeks before the Thrashers moved. Because he says one thing, it doesn't necessarily rule out other possibilities.

       You have a point there Red, bettman has gone back on his word before. That being said, it has to be a complete last resort for Bettman to move a team.
     

  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from WalkTheLine. Show WalkTheLine's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/11/2012 6:13 PM EDT

    In response to red75's comment:

    Also, jps Bettman was saying relocation wasn't even on the radar as close as two weeks before the Thrashers moved. Because he says one thing, it doesn't necessarily rule out other possibilities.


    Bettman is a liar, it's true. Phoenix to Seattle makes a whole bunch of sense as some others stated on one of the previous threads on this topic. It keeps the team in the west, the geography makes sense otherwise, regional demographics, etc.

    Markham won't happen and Quebec has too many issues and repeated failures in their wake.
     

  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/11/2012 7:28 PM EDT

    Is there a hockey market in Seattle?  Doesn't strike me as a hot bed. Personally, I'd rather see a team in Quebec.
     

  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/11/2012 7:31 PM EDT

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/globe-on-hockey/markhams-nhl-ready-arena-could-get-green-light-next-week/article2406527/

    NHL commissioner Gary Bettman has said several times that Roustan and his partners were told not to proceed with the idea a second NHL franchise for the GTA would follow the building of the arena.

    ___________________________________________________________________________

    Would the ownership group of the Leafs and Sabres have a problem though...
     

  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/11/2012 7:42 PM EDT

    In response to kelvana33's comment:
    Is there a hockey market in Seattle?  Doesn't strike me as a hot bed. Personally, I'd rather see a team in Quebec.


    Been to all three WHL arenas in Everett, Seattle and Spokane they draw well in Washington. That doesn't mean the that they are a hot bed though. To me the city that gets an arena done first will have the best shot and honestly they only reason the NHL board of directors haven't left the train wreck of Glendale.
     

  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from WalkTheLine. Show WalkTheLine's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/11/2012 7:50 PM EDT

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    In response to kelvana33's comment:

    Is there a hockey market in Seattle?  Doesn't strike me as a hot bed. Personally, I'd rather see a team in Quebec.



    Been to all three WHL arenas in Everett, Seattle and Spokane they draw well in Washington. That doesn't mean the that they are a hot bed though. To me the city that gets an arena done first will have the best shot and honestly they only reason the NHL board of directors haven't left the train wreck of Glendale.

    I have friends in Seattle proper and they are adamant that an NHL team would do well there.
    I think there is something to your build it and you shall be rewarded with the coyotes (name change will be in order).

     

     

  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/11/2012 11:05 PM EDT

    In response to jpBsSoxFan's comment:

    These 3 cities can build all the arenas they want. It doesn't mean they will be granted a team anytime soon. We all know where Bettman stands on the topics of relocation and expansion. In his words,  it isn't even on the radar. Besides, hasn't Quebec already lost 2 NHL franchises?



    You're right about that.  We don't have to look any further than the city of Hamilton, Ontario when they built Copps Coliseum in 1985.  One of the hopes was to gain an NHL franchise with its capacity of 19,000 seats but after all these years it still hasn't happened.
     

  13. This post has been removed.

     

  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/12/2012 8:22 AM EDT

    I can't imagine the NHL going to Seattle before Quebec. 
     

  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/12/2012 11:10 AM EDT

    On the subject of comparables, it's hard to blame the Canadian franchises that moved for a 60cent Canadian dollar.  Quebec and Winnipeg were doing fine until Canada's dollar tanked at the same time as player salaries shot through the roof.  I remember the foofoorah when Gretzky, at the height of his scoring exploits, signed for a million bucks.  So - roughly 25 years ago, the hands-down best player in the game was making less than what Shawn Thornton will bank this year.

    The NHL knows the score re: why those teams moved.  They will go back to strong markets in Canada as long as those teams are not at a ridiculous disadvantage.  They went back to Winnipeg, and all of the current Canadian teams are "haves" in terms of revenue sharing.
     

  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from seobrien. Show seobrien's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/12/2012 1:07 PM EDT

    I just got back from my first trip to Seattle and found it to be (outside the Seahawks) not a very fervent sports town at all.  Could they support an NHL franchise? yeah, probably...but Quebec seems the better place. Let Seattle get the Sonics back.
     

  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/12/2012 5:49 PM EDT

    In response to seobrien's comment:

    I just got back from my first trip to Seattle and found it to be (outside the Seahawks) not a very fervent sports town at all.  Could they support an NHL franchise? yeah, probably...but Quebec seems the better place. Let Seattle get the Sonics back.




    never been there, so I'd really have no idea, but I'd rather see Canada or Even North Dakota get one if they have to go in the states.

     

  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ROWDYRODRUST. Show ROWDYRODRUST's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/13/2012 8:19 AM EDT

    In response to kelvana33's comment:

    Is there a hockey market in Seattle?  Doesn't strike me as a hot bed. Personally, I'd rather see a team in Quebec.



    Agreed.
     

  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/13/2012 1:14 PM EDT

    In response to seobrien's comment:

    I just got back from my first trip to Seattle and found it to be (outside the Seahawks) not a very fervent sports town at all.  Could they support an NHL franchise? yeah, probably...but Quebec seems the better place. Let Seattle get the Sonics back.




    I think some Sounders fans would beg to differ.

     

  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/13/2012 1:20 PM EDT

    49, soccer ?

     

     

  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mutant211. Show Mutant211's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/13/2012 3:31 PM EDT

    One could easily think that Bettman got a kickback from new arena construction projects with the way he's always stating that any city that wants an NHL team needs a new arena.

     

  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/13/2012 5:48 PM EDT

    In response to BsLegion's comment:

     

    49, soccer ?

     

     




    Average MLS attendance: 18,529

    Average Sounders home attendance: 42,610

     

    Yeah, I think that there's more to "sports fans" in Seattle than football.

     

  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/13/2012 8:25 PM EDT

    That's an amazing attendance but the rest of the U.S. hardly recognizes soccer or the MLS as one of the major sports league.

    I saw a game against L.A. in the playoffs last season in Seattle and the atmosphere was as good as any in the Premiership.

    With this being said I still see hockey better served in Quebec city .  I'm sure you would prefer a Seattle team and build a rivalry with your Canucks.  It wouldn't be bad for hockey out west that's for sure.

     

     

  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from OrrandPapiRGods. Show OrrandPapiRGods's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/14/2012 8:06 AM EDT

    bump

     

  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from seobrien. Show seobrien's posts

    Re: Seattle gets their arena

    posted at 9/14/2012 9:44 AM EDT

    "49, soccer ?"

    Yeah, 49 is right, they do love the Sounders up there, certainly more than the Mariners.

    But it kind of exemplifies my point. They have an MLS team that outdraws the baseball team and would probably outdraw the Sonics or an NHL team. Weird city like that. With the Canadian dollar virtually 1 to 1 with the American Dollar, QC seems like the right place to put a team. That way the Country of Quebec can have 2 teams. <insert separatist joke here>