[News] Tempe voters reject the Coyotes Arena and Entertainment District

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

May I present the Pittsburgh Penguins.

The most non-intimidating bird known to man, and there are no naturally occuring penguins within 15,000 miles.

No bears in Boston.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

what does "aside from the arena" mean to you?

They have worse owners than AZ.

Anyway, you can say that the owners were terrible, that the team was badly managed, but I don't get the glee that fans lose their team and a hockey market has been scrapped.

It isn't a hockey market, this has been proven time and time again. The glee from fans is that the team might actually move to a hockey market so there is another competitive team where people care instead of a joke of a franchise who consistently takes on bad contracts and doesn't try to compete.

[Yeah_Baby]

It's going to be Pioneers or something if they move to SLC.

Dumb question: do they sell beer at Jazz games?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

It isn't a hockey market, this has been proven time and time again. The glee from fans is that the team might actually move to a hockey market so there is another competitive team where people care instead of a joke of a franchise who consistently takes on bad contracts and doesn't try to compete.

Like the traditional hockey markets of Dallas, Miami, Las Vegas, and Carolina.

Fun fact for you: in the last non covid year they were in Glendale, their attendance was right around the Panthers. 14606 to 14104.

[TheScorpion]

The market isn't the problem. The owners are, and always have been, the problem.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Population, proximity to Montreal, lack of corporate support, previous failure.

Winnipeg is 750K (100K more if you count the surrounding area) and it has a fair number of large corporations headed from there. Cargill, Monsanto, Boeing Canada, Old Dutch, Domo, Princess Auto...

Quebec has 550K. It'd easily be the smallest population centre in the league. And I can't think of a single notable company head officed there.

First, I don't support Quebec City getting a team. What I don't support is dismissing them when discussing a team. They are as viable as many cities.
Examining your numbers I think you're underestimating Quebec City.

Winnipeg urban population: 759K Quebec City urban population: 705K
Winnipeg metro population: 835K Quebec City metro population: 840K
Winnipeg GDP: $41.3B Quebec City GDP: $44.4B

All numbers from wikipedia.

Like I said, I really don't think Quebec City deserves a team, but when it comes to viability of the city it is no worse than many other cities under consideration.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

All three would be central. Anything south of the Mason Dixon would be leveraging the "southern strategy" of tapping non-traditional markets the NHL has employed. All of the teams left standing for this year's Stanley Cup exist because of the southern strategy.

You are so mixing too many terms. Las Vegas could not be much further from the Mason Dixon line. And LV has a franchise because Bill Foley opened his cheque book and the NHL liked the market. The NHL didn't bring hockey to the desert, he did.

I would argue these are the minimum requirements for taking on a team, not the next steps in expansion or relocation. You need to meet these minimum requirements or you are not considered for a franchise. If it were as easy as 1,2, and 3 Quebec City or Hamilton would have a franchise right now. There's a lot more to awarding a franchise than meeting minimum requirements.

Really? The last two expansions, the NHL went with all the applicants who met their minimum criteria but for QC. And part of that was because of 3) and part because their ability to meet 1) was in serious question.

You mentioned a whole bunch of cities in your list and none have yet to come forward and meet the NHL's criteria.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

what does "aside from the arena" mean to you?

They have worse owners than AZ.

Anyway, you can say that the owners were terrible, that the team was badly managed, but I don't get the glee that fans lose their team and a hockey market has been scrapped.

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Like the traditional hockey markets of Dallas, Miami, Las Vegas, and Carolina.

What are the attendance like in those cities? Is there a fanbase in those cities? The Dallas Stars have one of the best long time loyal fan bases in the NHL and you are comparing them to the Arizona Coyotes? Lol.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Utah Polygamist

[Knut]

The Utah Temple Garments

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

What are the attendance like in those cities? Is there a fanbase in those cities? The Dallas Stars have one of the best long time loyal fan bases in the NHL and you are comparing them to the Arizona Coyotes? Lol.

Now do Florida. TB has done very well, but it was not always thus.

I'd like to know how you determine a "hockey market", that's all. IMO Phoenix/Tempe just hasn't been given the right shot. Glendale was a bad choice and like others have said, ownership is the issue.

Now, if they can't support a team after all this time, fine. But it's not a reason to celebrate any more than when Winnipeg or Quebec lost their teams.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

First, I don't support Quebec City getting a team. What I don't support is dismissing them when discussing a team. They are as viable as many cities.
Examining your numbers I think you're underestimating Quebec City.

Winnipeg urban population: 759K Quebec City urban population: 705K
Winnipeg metro population: 835K Quebec City metro population: 840K
Winnipeg GDP: $41.3B Quebec City GDP: $44.4B

All numbers from wikipedia.

Like I said, I really don't think Quebec City deserves a team, but when it comes to viability of the city it is no worse than many other cities under consideration.

People keep forgetting the importance of TV markets. Quebec City does absolutely nothing for the NHL in terms of TV market and it's a Habs market on RDS so there will be minimal gains for the next Canadian TV deal. Conversely they lose a large US TV market which likely affects the US deals. I see zero chance they move another US TV market to Canada as they will move to another US TV market.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

It isn't a hockey market, this has been proven time and time again. The glee from fans is that the team might actually move to a hockey market so there is another competitive team where people care instead of a joke of a franchise who consistently takes on bad contracts and doesn't try to compete.

Doesn't matter what the market it...bad ownership can and will crater it. Look at Ottawa as a good example.

Arizona had I think 8 different ownership groups in like a 20 year period, with some of that being run by the NHL.

Nobody was investing money into the market, they weren't having success on the ice, and there was constantly a dark cloud the team could move at any moment. You're not going to be a strong market with that going on.

I still think if they would have just worked together on the Suns on a new multi-purpose downtown arena, and would have had stable ownership that would actually invest in the team then you would have had success.

As it stands though it makes sense to move them now...but I think in 5-10 years, with a new arena, and with solid ownership it absolutely could work.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

https://www.deseret.com/sports/2023/...h-is-in-motion

https://twitter.com/user/status/1649909270878760960

https://twitter.com/user/status/1649912388249059328

Well, I guess that pretty much does it.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

You mentioned a whole bunch of cities in your list and none have yet to come forward and meet the NHL's criteria.

Oh, so you have a list of cities with owners that are willing to buy or bring a team in do you? Please share that list. Also, please share the list of criteria the NHL is holding applicants to. Seems you have some real inside baseball here and can summarily discount locations at your whim, so please share these tidbits with us.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by getbak

It's uncommon for NBA teams to change their name when relocating (or at least it was until the Thunder and Pelicans). L.A. isn't renowned for its lakes, nor Memphis for its grizzly bears.

Dodgers
Flames
Braves
Rams
Cardinals

Lots of teams across pro sports didn't change their names when moving. But now there is so much money in rebranded merchandise.

[the-rasta-masta]

You can buy beer until the end of the second period. I believe the alcohol curfew for pubs and bars etc… also expired a few years back so you can drink later in Utah now. Could be wrong.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Now do Florida. TB has done very well, but it was not always thus.

I'd like to know how you determine a "hockey market", that's all. IMO Phoenix/Tempe just hasn't been given the right shot. Glendale was a bad choice and like others have said, ownership is the issue.

Now, if they can't support a team after all this time, fine. But it's not a reason to celebrate any more than when Winnipeg or Quebec lost their teams.

Not given the right shot? The team has been failing since 1996, how many decades of trying and failing to draw a fan base is appropriate before we can decide if an area is a hockey market or not? Seems like 27 years should be a significant amount of time to tell the Coyotes are not going to work in Arizona. Do Florida? Florida has an NHL arena. Florida has never defaulted on rent. Florida's average attendance in the past 10 years has been between 14-16 thousand people. Last year Florida averaged over 16,000. Arizona averaged 4000. Before that in Glendale they averaged 11-12 thousand.

[SuperMatt18]

People hate on Bettman but he for sure had a contingency plan here.

And I have a feeling he has a couple of these things mapped out.

I feel like Salt Lake or Portland was potentially always the contingency plan for Arizona. I've always felt like Quebec City is the contingency plan for if things ever go poorly in Florida/Sunrise.

They've always wanted to keep the higher profile markets (Vegas, Seattle, Houston, Atlanta, etc) available for the big expansion fees.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

People keep forgetting the importance of TV markets. Quebec City does absolutely nothing for the NHL in terms of TV market and it's a Habs market on RDS so there will be minimal gains for the next Canadian TV deal. Conversely they lose a large US TV market which likely affects the US deals. I see zero chance they move another US TV market to Canada as they will move to another US TV market.

That is true and probably why they will never get considered for an expansion team. If they get a team back, it will have to a Winnipeg situation when a team is packing up and needs a new home by the start of the next season.

I will say this though. You might be surprised at how many people in Quebec City do not follow the Habs, other than to watch them lose. I've been to bars in Quebec that prefer to show Bruins games surrounded by people wearing Bruins jerseys due to their historical rivalry with the Habs, and also part of Quebec City's identity isn't just "French", but as an Atlantic/Maritime old colonial culture which Boston is kind of a cultural center for in North America. In some ways, Quebec City felt more similar to a large Halifax than a small Montreal, despite the language differences.

That Habs-Nordiques rivalry was fierce and many people in QC refused to latch on to the Habs just because the Nordiques left. It would be like a Flames fan latching on to the Oilers if the Flames left.