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

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

So everyone should rejoice if Vancouver suddenly loses their team? Because aside from the arena, the same applies.

They got kicked out of an arena for not paying rent?

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

So everyone should rejoice if Vancouver suddenly loses their team? Because aside from the arena, the same applies.

The arena is the main issue - so no. If the Canucks get kicked out of their arena, build a new arena in Chilliwack, get kicked out of that arena and then play at some 4000 seat arena for a few years and then lose a vote on a new arena - then sure.

You can be an inept owner hockey wise, but you can't be inept on the business side.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

I would hope the NHL would focus in on markets that have a history with hockey and a focus on the western region. Start with San Diego, Portland, or Salt Lake. If they can find a landing spot, then look in the central zone. That means Houston, Oklahoma City, Kansas City, or Indianapolis. After that look at possible emerging markets that exploit the southern strategy. San Antonio, Austin, Memphis, Atlanta (strike three?), Jacksonville or Charlotte. Last resort, go north. Quebec City, Mississauga, or Hamilton. Lot's of options, but all of them come with risk. Of course, they would all be better than the current mess in Phoenix.

Houston is central and Austin/San Antonio is south?

But really this is how fans look at the league, not how the NHL would prioritize next steps for expansion or franchise moves.

You need:
1) owner able to pay $1B plus
2) arena
3) market capable of supporting a team

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

They got kicked out of an arena for not paying rent?

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.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

So everyone should rejoice if Vancouver suddenly loses their team? Because aside from the arena, the same applies.

Not really to be honest.

I don't think Vancouver has had 8 owners in the last 25 years.

Colangelo, Burke, Ellman, Moyes, NHL Ownership, IceArizona, Barroway, Meruelo

Really the lack of stable ownership for the team is the biggest reason the team has failed.

Originally Posted by GioforPM

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

They have worse owners than AZ.

Aquilini is a POS but I don't think he's worse than the ownership issues Arizona have had.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by getbak

My understanding is the Suns' arena has been significantly renovated since the Coyotes moved out and they removed the ice plant during one of the renos. It also still has the same basketball configuration issue it had before (and might even be worse now).


The former owner of the Suns had no interest in sharing the building, but the new owner might be more open to it.

The problem is it won't be cheap to make the building NHL-ready, and it would go back to the problems of low capacity and bad sightlines.

I'm curious about how big a deal this is? Fertitta did the same in Houston and put in a fancy lounge area.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Not really to be honest.

I don't think Vancouver has had 8 owners in the last 25 years.

Colangelo, Burke, Ellman, Moyes, NHL Ownership, IceArizona, Barroway, Meruelo

Really the lack of stable ownership for the team is the biggest reason the team has failed.



Aquilini is a POS but I don't think he's worse than the ownership issues Arizona have had.

I think the ownership issues are a symptom, but even if the analogy isn't 100%, the concept is. Whatever problems you might have with the owners of a team, clapping because an area loses a team seems off. There are plenty of crappy owners: Chicago, for example.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I think the ownership issues are a symptom, but even if the analogy isn't 100%, the concept is. Whatever problems you might have with the owners of a team, clapping because an area loses a team seems off. There are plenty of crappy owners: Chicago, for example.

Chicago and Vancouver don't have bad owners...they have owners that may be a bad people.

That's different than a bad owner that actually can't afford to bankroll or manage the team...which has been Arizona's issue.

The only reason people are happy that Arizona might lose the team is because this 15 year fiasco might be finally over.

And really I do think if they ever get a downtown arena suitable for hockey that expansion would work in the area, especially if they get stable ownership and get away from the baggage this iteration of hockey in Phoenix has.

[CalgaryFan1988]

Houston Roughnecks or San Diego Suns. I'm hoping San Diego gets a team.

[dustygoon]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

To buy the team?

No sorry. To rent their facility and pay for upgrades needed. Suns have a new owner (Mat Ishbia) who maybe is more amenable.

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by Poe969

If Balzac ever gets a team, they need to be the Balzac hares.

Teabags just rolls off the tongue.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Houston is central and Austin/San Antonio is south?

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.

But really this is how fans look at the league, not how the NHL would prioritize next steps for expansion or franchise moves.

You need:
1) owner able to pay $1B plus
2) arena
3) market capable of supporting a team

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.

[GioforPM]

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.



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.

I have a lot of doubts about QC supporting a franchise. Southern Ontario IMO is easily doable, except for the Leaf veto.

[sureLoss]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1658875529859039237

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Bluzman

Salt Lake City

https://thehockeynews.com/news/will-...s-move-to-utah

There are several reasons why Salt Lake City would be a great fit in a less-than-ideal situation, the first of which being that the Coyotes could move there right away and start play in a full-sized pro arena for 2023-24. Vivint Arena is the home of the NBA's Utah Jazz and both the building and the basketball team are owned by local billionaire businessman Ryan Smith. As recently as a couple of weeks ago, Smith hinted that plans to bring a hockey team to Utah were "in motion" and he has reportedly met with NHL commissioner Gary Bettman in the past.

[devo22]

no realignment needed either. Decent fit if they can make it happen.

the TLOU fan in me wants them called Fireflies, but that's probably not very intimidating

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by devo22

no realignment needed either. Decent fit if they can make it happen.

the TLOU fan in me wants them called Fireflies, but that's probably not very intimidating

I'm partial to Skinwalkers, both for the local indigenous reference and the local UFO lore

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I have a lot of doubts about QC supporting a franchise. Southern Ontario IMO is easily doable, except for the Leaf veto.

Why would you be concerned about Quebec City? If Winnipeg can support a team Quebec City should be able to handle it fine. During their time in the NHL they were consistently above 95% capacity. Their worst year of attendance was 1991-92 when they hit 90%. My concerns about Quebec City would be attracting and retaining players. But there are only so many NHL jobs paying millions of dollars a year, so I think they would be fine in that regard as well. No worse than any Canadian team.

[Ozy_Flame]

Quebec City is ####ing gorgeous and the surrounding area is just incredible. It would be a shame for people to overlook it as a place to play. I'm sure it would be 100x better than Edmonton or Winnipeg.

[DeluxeMoustache]

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

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

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