09-18-2017, 02:04 PM
|
#121
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
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.
|
|
|
09-18-2017, 02:08 PM
|
#122
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auckland, NZ
|
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.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Muta For This Useful Post:
|
|
09-18-2017, 02:17 PM
|
#123
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
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.
|
|
|
09-18-2017, 02:21 PM
|
#124
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: BELTLINE
|
Quote:
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.
|
|
|
09-18-2017, 02:37 PM
|
#125
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auckland, NZ
|
Quote:
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.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Muta For This Useful Post:
|
|
09-18-2017, 02:55 PM
|
#126
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
|
Quote:
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.
|
|
|
09-18-2017, 03:04 PM
|
#127
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auckland, NZ
|
Quote:
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.
|
|
|
09-18-2017, 05:09 PM
|
#128
|
Scoring Winger
|
Quote:
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.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to cal_guy For This Useful Post:
|
|
09-18-2017, 06:22 PM
|
#129
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
|
Quote:
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.
|
|
|
12-04-2017, 05:46 PM
|
#130
|
Some kinda newsbreaker!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Learning Phaneufs skating style
|
Bump.
Just approved by Seattle city council 7-1.
|
|
|
12-04-2017, 05:55 PM
|
#131
|
First Line Centre
|
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.
__________________
|
|
|
12-04-2017, 06:25 PM
|
#132
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Nanaimo
|
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.
|
|
|
12-04-2017, 06:44 PM
|
#133
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Vancouver
|
Quote:
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.
__________________
|
|
|
12-04-2017, 08:14 PM
|
#134
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: back in the 403
|
Quote:
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
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sainters7 For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-04-2017, 09:47 PM
|
#135
|
Some kinda newsbreaker!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Learning Phaneufs skating style
|
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
|
|
|
12-04-2017, 10:32 PM
|
#136
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
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.
|
|
|
12-04-2017, 11:15 PM
|
#137
|
wins 10 internets
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: slightly to the left
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sureLoss
|
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
|
|
|
12-05-2017, 12:37 AM
|
#138
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Nanaimo
|
Quote:
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.
|
|
|
12-05-2017, 01:10 AM
|
#139
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
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?
|
|
|
12-05-2017, 01:14 AM
|
#140
|
Franchise Player
|
Anyone else hear the rumour that the Shaw family may be interested in buying the Flames?
|
|
|
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 12:23 PM.
|
|