Quote:
Originally Posted by TheScorpion
The Donald Sterling situation was also a cut-and-dried case where the NBA was able to cite a clear violation of its charter to force a guy out of the league. As strange as it may seem, the NHL does not have the basis to do the same with the Coyotes because playing in a small arena does not actually violate any part of the league charter, particularly with the NHL-standard facilities the team built as an add-on to Mullett in place.
It's not the same. Now, if they lose the auction? That's when you'll see things demonstrably change. But it is worth noting that the proposed timeline to open the new building has not changed from the Tempe proposal, because that plan required one full year to remediate the land. This one does not.
|
That's my point - Sterling was a relatively simple situation (though he still huffed and puffed and threatened to sue) and it took 5 weeks to resolve (which is actually pretty darn fast). The complications of forcing the Coyotes sale answers your 'why not last year' question...
But now the league has had a year to lay the groundwork, strategize, and build consensus among the other owners (who would be understandably cautious about how they evict a fellow owner). The Mullet was tenable for 3 years with an option for a 4th.
Rogers in Edmonton took 30 months from breaking ground to open. Little Caesars took 35 months. Chase Centre was 33 months. Clippers new arena will be 35-36 months. (all from date of breaking ground)
The Coyotes are not going from winning an auction* to opening doors in 27 months, which is what would be necessary to maintain the worst case scenario from the original timeline.