11-30-2013, 12:15 PM
|
#121
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: whereever my feet take me
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vulcan
With Bell and Rogers both owning the Leafs, I could see one of them moving over to own the new expansion team and selling their Leafs share. This would solve the territorial rights and no Buffalo has no claim to territorial rights, they are outside the Toronto limits.
|
Yep, that's all true. The only time the Sabres org raised the issue about territorial rights in southern Ontario was when there was a lot of noise being made about plopping a franchise in Hamilton, when Copps Coliseum (state of the art arena, for the time) was being constructed. Copps hosted some '91 Canada Cup games, then was just a nice AHL palace and place for Rush to perform when in town.
Quite a few Toronto fans purchase packages to Sabres home games, because it's their only opportunity to see the Leafs in person.
As far as the Leafs with their monopoly, they should take the high road and abstain, like Montreal did with approval for reolocation of the Nordiques. That is, if this situation ever happens with Markham. It's hard to see another NHL franchise harming the value of the Leafs, and the GTA and surrounding region could certainly support another team. This makes more sense than the aggressive expansion to "non-traditional" hockey markets that the league pursued.
|
|
|
11-30-2013, 12:21 PM
|
#122
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: whereever my feet take me
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joborule
The City of Markham and GTA Sports & Entertainmnent have called a news conference for Saturday to make a 'major announcement' regarding the proposed GTA Centre project.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=437758
|
Someone wrote this in the comments:
Quote:
The perfect place to put a 2nd Southern Ontario team is Woodstock ON. Build the arena right at the 401-403 interchange. From that place you are an hour from Hamilton, 45 mins to London and 45 mins to K-W.
|
He neglected to consider rush hour traffic, plus with the added congestion of 18,000 fans trying to reach that destination for a 7:05 pm faceoff. Good luck with that idea.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Badger Bob For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-30-2013, 12:36 PM
|
#123
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger Bob
Someone wrote this in the comments:
He neglected to consider rush hour traffic, plus with the added congestion of 18,000 fans trying to reach that destination for a 7:05 pm faceoff. Good luck with that idea.
|
100% agree.
The team has to be where the majority of the population is, that's why Markham is a good idea and Hamilton is, and always was, a bad idea. You can't assume that your fanbase will drive that much (in traffic) multiple times per week. That's what hurt Ottawa, Phoenix, etc.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Sidney Crosby's Hat For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-30-2013, 02:47 PM
|
#124
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Oshawa
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat
100% agree.
The team has to be where the majority of the population is, that's why Markham is a good idea and Hamilton is, and always was, a bad idea. You can't assume that your fanbase will drive that much (in traffic) multiple times per week. That's what hurt Ottawa, Phoenix, etc.
|
I don't think Hamilton would be that bad. It has a fairly big stand-alone population (about the same as Winnipeg) and would draw from the Peel region cities like Mississauga, Brampton, Oakville etc.
I think Woodstock would be terrible though.
__________________
Quote:
Somewhere Leon Trotsky is an Oilers fan, because who better demonstrates his philosophy of the permanent revolution?
|
|
|
|
11-30-2013, 03:01 PM
|
#125
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: whereever my feet take me
|
Hamiton's a non-starter. The Sabres draw heavily from Niagara Peninsula. The Leafs helped squelch whatever hopes Hamilton, too. Copps Coliseum is now already obsolete by today's standards.
|
|
|
11-30-2013, 05:45 PM
|
#126
|
Scoring Winger
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: YYC-ish
|
I worked in "downtown" Markham where this arena is supposed to go, and it's literally a field. Give them credit, they're trying to build a downtown in the area, but it almost feels like building in the middle of the 'burbs. It'd almost be like building a rink in McKenzie Towne. Just an odd place for an NHL arena.
|
|
|
12-01-2013, 05:31 PM
|
#127
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by HOWITZER
I worked in "downtown" Markham where this arena is supposed to go, and it's literally a field. Give them credit, they're trying to build a downtown in the area, but it almost feels like building in the middle of the 'burbs. It'd almost be like building a rink in McKenzie Towne. Just an odd place for an NHL arena.
|
I live in Markham myself (about 10 mins from the location), and don't find it a weird place at all - just that there isn't the infrastructure to support all the crazy traffic going through - even now. I've had a bunch of concerns (check this thread), but mostly the management group isn't trustworthy (ie, criminal behaviour) and also the terribly outdated design. Good that it won't be on the taxpayers now, but it's still a discount looking arena, where if it becomes the second coming of Copps, will kill the interesting downtown concept of Markham. It's not remote though, it's just not your conventional downtown.
|
|
|
12-01-2013, 07:37 PM
|
#128
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SW Ontario
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger Bob
Someone wrote this in the comments:
He neglected to consider rush hour traffic, plus with the added congestion of 18,000 fans trying to reach that destination for a 7:05 pm faceoff. Good luck with that idea.
|
Woodstock?? They aren't even big enough to have an OHL team.
|
|
|
12-01-2013, 11:02 PM
|
#129
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleury
I live in Markham myself (about 10 mins from the location), and don't find it a weird place at all - just that there isn't the infrastructure to support all the crazy traffic going through - even now. I've had a bunch of concerns (check this thread), but mostly the management group isn't trustworthy (ie, criminal behaviour) and also the terribly outdated design. Good that it won't be on the taxpayers now, but it's still a discount looking arena, where if it becomes the second coming of Copps, will kill the interesting downtown concept of Markham. It's not remote though, it's just not your conventional downtown.
|
I have to agree that $325 million seems like a terribly low price when you look at how much most facilities are being built for nowadays. It could be that it's being built for that cost with the hope that whoever does end up owning an NHL team (if there is one) would pay for upgrades. Similar to how Oklahoma City did it.
If there is no NHL team, it probably makes sense to have it at a lower price point.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Sidney Crosby's Hat For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-03-2013, 03:19 PM
|
#130
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunshine Coast
|
Bruce Arthur pans the Markham arena plans and comes close to calling the promoter a liar and a crook
Quote:
“We have never been encouraging of this project,” said NHL commissioner Gary Bettman, reached by phone on Saturday. “And we have repeatedly said that if this building is built, it should be built with the expectation that they will not get a team.”
|
while saying the
Quebec City arena has a good chance of getting a team.
Quote:
The NHL knows Quebec is a slam dunk, and the only question left is how best to extort the maximum return. If there was a list, Quebec would be on it.
|
http://sports.nationalpost.com/2013/...tright-insane/
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:21 PM.
|
|