[News] Seattle announces $660 mil private arena deal. NHL team to be announced in July?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by OldDutch

If those numbers are accurate the Flames are cornered and they know it. You don't leave a city of a million fans to a quarter of that. Even with USA location and higher salaries.

Those numbers aren't even remotely close to accurate. The method is so flawed that there is nothing to support the reasoning behind these numbers.

[Muta]

Well, Calgary has abundantly proven it will support a hockey team. Should something happen down the line and the Flames leave, the only hurdle in getting a team back will be getting an arena built. Every other demographic remains attractive to any future ownership group. This city is too lucrative to ignore versus most other civic options out there.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Muta

Well, Calgary has abundantly proven it will support a hockey team. Should something happen down the line and the Flames leave, the only hurdle in getting a team back will be getting an arena built. Every other demographic remains attractive to any future ownership group. This city is too lucrative to ignore versus most other civic options out there.

No one is denying that Calgary will not support a hockey team, not in any way. The fan base in Calgary is second to none and would still be a natural for a team. The only b;lip on that radar was in '94 when we lost player after player and had to bring in garbage to play for the team. The problem is the existence of a building that can support NHL hockey. Without that arena we likely don't have the revenue streams to maintain our roster and will begin to lose players like we did in the 90s. That will be the ultimate test of the strength of the market. I honestly hope we never get to that point and we will always have a team that has the revenue streams to spend to the cap and keep our stars happy.

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by Muta

Well, Calgary has abundantly proven it will support a hockey team. Should something happen down the line and the Flames leave, the only hurdle in getting a team back will be getting an arena built. Every other demographic remains attractive to any future ownership group. This city is too lucrative to ignore versus most other civic options out there.

I think everyone can agree on that, the problem keeps circling back to the lack of a modern arena. I daresay if we don't have a modern rink by 2021 we won't have a team, be it the Flames or another franchise.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by New Era

No one is denying that Calgary will not support a hockey team, not in any way. The fan base in Calgary is second to none and would still be a natural for a team. The only b;lip on that radar was in '94 when we lost player after player and had to bring in garbage to play for the team. The problem is the existence of a building that can support NHL hockey. Without that arena we likely don't have the revenue streams to maintain our roster and will begin to lose players like we did in the 90s. That will be the ultimate test of the strength of the market. I honestly hope we never get to that point and we will always have a team that has the revenue streams to spend to the cap and keep our stars happy.

That's why I was in favour of a bold, thinking-outside-the-box project like CalgaryNEXT (despite people's opposition to it). It was something rarely done anywhere else, and addressed all of our sports needs in this city in one go. That type of sports district,, not just a new arena, would go a long way to attracting free agents here and raising the quality of professional sports in our town. We're a world-class city and the idea behind CalgaryNEXT (as a sports district) was world class.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Muta

That's why I was in favour of a bold, thinking-outside-the-box project like CalgaryNEXT (despite people's opposition to it). It was something rarely done anywhere else, and addressed all of our sports needs in this city in one go. That type of sports district,, not just a new arena, would go a long way to attracting free agents here and raising the quality of professional sports in our town. We're a world-class city and the idea behind CalgaryNEXT (as a sports district) was world class.

I don't buy that. In comparing venues, a player is not going to choose to come to Calgary to simply play in an arena/fieldhouse complex over playing in Toronto at the ACC. A hockey player won't care about the fieldhouse since they won't be playing or using the fieldhouse. Calgary building a state of the art stand alone arena gets the same job done.

With the arena in Victoria Park, and the rivers district plan unfolding, it could be argue the Flames will have an even better arena out of this based on the potential surrounding amenities.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Joborule

I don't buy that. In comparing venues, a player is not going to choose to come to Calgary to simply play in an arena/fieldhouse complex over playing in Toronto at the ACC. A hockey player won't care about the fieldhouse since they won't be playing or using the fieldhouse. Calgary building a state of the art stand alone arena gets the same job done.

With the arena in Victoria Park, and the rivers district plan unfolding, it could be argue the Flames will have an even better arena out of this based on the potential surrounding amenities.

Well, I don't buy that. The city itself is definitely the strongest feature, but I'll say that a new arena and high quality professional sports facilities do help to sway people's decisions to play here. We wouldn't know because we haven't had new facilities in over 30 years. If facilities didn't matter, no one would build them. And we wouldn't be where we are today with this impasse.

Also, the functional design of the arena doesn't change whether it's in Victoria Park or the West Village. It will feature best practices in sports design and innovation regardless of its geographical location. A dedicated sports district is much, much more ambitious and world-class. We need more than just an arena (we need a stadium and fieldhouse too), and the Victoria Park location doesn't include either.

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by Muta

Well, I don't buy that. The city itself is definitely the strongest feature, but I'll say that a new arena and high quality professional sports facilities do help to sway people's decisions to play here. We wouldn't know because we haven't had new facilities in over 30 years. If facilities didn't matter, no one would build them. And we wouldn't be where we are today with this impasse.

Also, the functional design of the arena doesn't change whether it's in Victoria Park or the West Village. It will feature best practices in sports design and innovation regardless of its geographical location. A dedicated sports district is much, much more ambitious and world-class. We need more than just an arena (we need a stadium and fieldhouse too), and the Victoria Park location doesn't include either.

The reason new stadium are so coveted in North America is that they are a politically expedient method of getting governments to give sports clubs money.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Muta

Well, I don't buy that. The city itself is definitely the strongest feature, but I'll say that a new arena and high quality professional sports facilities do help to sway people's decisions to play here. We wouldn't know because we haven't had new facilities in over 30 years. If facilities didn't matter, no one would build them. And we wouldn't be where we are today with this impasse.

Also, the functional design of the arena doesn't change whether it's in Victoria Park or the West Village. It will feature best practices in sports design and innovation regardless of its geographical location. A dedicated sports district is much, much more ambitious and world-class. We need more than just an arena (we need a stadium and fieldhouse too), and the Victoria Park location doesn't include either.

I'm not arguing that a new arena of high standard is a factor in a players interest. That we agree on. I'm arguing that it's irrelevant that if it's part of a sports complex or sports district.

The function, and size of an arena is different from a stadium, and even moreso than a public feildhouse. An arena is an event centre that provides both sporting and entertainment amenities. Whereas a fieldhouse is a recreational facility. Considering the arena should have a fair amount of events in it's nightly calendar, it's fitting for it to be located in a area that's trying to establish a social/cultural district that is already shovel ready.

The city does need a fieldhouse, badly. But I'm of the opinion that it would be better served as it's own entity in the original location across the university. Access, parking, and usage (both with the public and the university) I feel is improved there rather than downtown. I also wasn't keen on the idea of it being a stadium hybird, since I think you wouldn't be getting the best of either worlds with that combination.

[sureLoss]

Bump.

Just approved by Seattle city council 7-1.

[Racki]

By 2020 it's quite possible the western conference has teams in Houston and Seattle. Hopefully that means the end of the Coyotes. If only they could have got an arena downtown or in Scottsdale.

[combustiblefuel]

If I were a tax payer in Calgary I wouldn't want the City to flip the bill.

I think the house the Oilers owner just bought should serve as a reminder these NHL owners can afford the majority of the costs.

If they use relocation as a threat i a few years let them go.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Bump.

Just approved by Seattle city council 7-1.

Funny how smoothly things go when someone pays for the building instead of pressuring/guilting a city into paying for one.

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

If I were a tax payer in Calgary I wouldn't want the City to flip the bill.

I think the house the Oilers owner just bought should serve as a reminder these NHL owners can afford the majority of the costs.

If they use relocation as a threat i a few years let them go.

That was actually the first thing that occurred to me when I saw Katz bought that place, what a P.O.S. He strikes me as the kind of guy who would take legit pride in being called that. God he's greasy

[sureLoss]

Seattle Times says the NHL is expected to announce an expansion team or relocation team for Seattle in July. Hope is that NHL team will be ready for the 20/21 season.

https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/...ed_buffer_tw_m

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

If I were a tax payer in Calgary I wouldn't want the City to flip the bill.

I think the house the Oilers owner just bought should serve as a reminder these NHL owners can afford the majority of the costs.

If they use relocation as a threat i a few years let them go.

And yet, even with that horrible deal that I wouldn't want to see the Flames get, the city is still benefiting from the new arena, it has really revitalized the downtown core.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Seattle Times says the NHL is expected to announce an expansion team or relocation team for Seattle in July. Hope is that NHL team will be ready for the 20/21 season.

https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/...ed_buffer_tw_m

Well looks like Burke and co. Seattle as their empty go-to relocation threat. Hopefully Houston gets a team in the near future as well to drive home that the Flames aren't moving anywhere

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

And yet, even with that horrible deal that I wouldn't want to see the Flames get, the city is still benefiting from the new arena, it has really revitalized the downtown core.

Bankrupting the city for a sports team is idiotic.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Funny how smoothly things go when someone pays for the building instead of pressuring/guilting a city into paying for one.

What did Seattle council approve? A planning concept? A financing package?

[Manhattanboy]

Anyone else hear the rumour that the Shaw family may be interested in buying the Flames?