STL FANATIC

You always have to factor in that while owners collect expansion fees, all other future league-wide revenue then gets split in one (or two potentially) more slices. So expansion doesn't automatically become a windfall.

If there's a ("major") league it would happen in, though, it'd be the NHL. But even in that rinky dink league, there's probably always going to be enough interested private parties (whether it's in their preferred market or not) to avoid such a situation.

That series last year was the ultimate in fake images. Bunch of dirty players who pretend they're angels. And probably the two dirtiest and most annoying goalies in the league. Wish they'd have fought.

Don't 100% remember if they're doing it still this year, but the Blues have done similarly with Ameren UE power company sponsoring their power play, I believe. Yes they do. I still don't get why a monopoly needs to advertise. The craziest sponsorship I've seen was at a Blues game during intermission. They bring the house lights, scoreboard, LED screens, and sound down to make it seem like a power outage. Then they start playing "I've got the power" by Snap and then everything comes back up and there is a commercial for Peabody Energy (a coal company). Scared the crap out of me first time I was there for it. Sometimes I am convinced the Scottrade Center only has music from the day it opened in 1994. (90s Jock Jams songs). Busch stadium has done this too, as have others probably. It's a smart if overdone advertisement. Good point about the monopoly, though. Maybe it's a good will thing.

Don't 100% remember if they're doing it still this year, but the Blues have done similarly with Ameren UE power company sponsoring their power play, I believe.

A hockey thread that's gone on a tangent about fast food? Don't mind if I do... Hardee's is really good, quality food for fast food. If you want a burger (and you're not specifically in the mood for a White Castle slider or a McDonald's patty) or chicken strips, I'd suggest Hardee's. I don't go that often, but it's good when I do. Now, their Red Burrito menu is just whatever. It's not awful, but it's not really a big draw for me. I'm not particularly picky, though. I enjoy all of Jack In The Box, McDonalds, Hardee's, Burger King, Taco Bell, KFC, and Wendy's. Should put Culver's in the mix too. Arby's has some okay stuff, but now that I live back in St. Louis, I'll rarely if ever eat there again. Not with Lion's Choice being an option. Someday they'll expand beyond St. Louis and the world will be forever grateful. And I specifically don't understand the BK hate. They're not amazing. Seems like all their new ideas are copies of someone else's, and sometimes they're not as good, but when I ate fast food more frequently and needed a change of pace, I was never against going there. I'll mention Chick-fil-a and say the food is good, but I'm one of those that has stopped eating there since the anti-gay equality views were expressed by their owners. And hey, I don't eat Little Caesar's because Illitch owns them and the Red Wings (and the Tigers—not that I care), so I'm consistent on discontinuing my patronage once I discover I'm unhappy with the parent company/owner. (Not that I'm remotely comparing the two issues.) When I lived down in Alabama, I enjoyed Zaxby's chicken on occasion. For sandwich shop, I'm not a big fan in general. Subway is ok. Jimmy John's is ok. Now that I've discovered the more gourmet style sandwiches from JJ's, I give them a little more business. Plus they deliver and have drive thru's sometimes. And if you're putting that build-your-own sandwich style place in fast food, do Chipotle, Moe's and Qdoba make the conversation too? If so, I like them all but in reverse order. Love Qdoba, Moe's is good, and Chipotle is better than I give them credit for (I think I'm just being a rebel—everyone goes nuts over them). And I think I'll cut off my fast food analysis there.

The Jackets may finally be trending upwards. I really think John Davidson is going to get that franchise going in the right direction.

I actually think 8 divisions of 4 isn't so bad. It works for the almighty NFL. The playoff system then ought to be the 4 division winners and 4 wild cards. That may or may not be the same as the top 8.

I'm pretty sure he was talking about the new Glendale city council group, not the new ownership group. EDIT: And it looks like he edited his post to clarify that.

Is anybody else having trouble setting their photo? Rejecting every file I give it.

How is there a real website that still looks like that?

There's markets that are starved for hockey, and there's markets that would probably support hockey. It's the former that would fill the arena for a neutral exhibition, and the latter that wouldn't rush out to buy tickets. If you goal is to get a team guaranteed to turn a profit, you go with the former. If you're still interested in taking at least some level of risk in order to grow the sport and the fan base, you don't worry about attendance at an exhibition game and give a shot to the latter. I think Kansas City probably would support a team. But I don't think they'll ever flock to a neutral exhibition.

Well the ballot measure has been rejected and will not appear on the ballot. That doesn't preclude a court case bringing it back into question, though.

I just saw a tweet that the citizens working on getting the issue to ballot believe they have a deadline that has yet to come while many are saying their deadline has past. I'm too lazy to dig for the whole story, so make of that what you will...

Really that ends up being irrelevant. When teams go bankrupt, the owner usually remains a wealthy millionaire. Unfortunately many NHL teams lose money and the owner simply has to be passionate enough to absorb the losses. That said, the goal is to turn a profit or at least to limit the deficit. So saying that it's okay if the Sabres income falls dramatically just because the owner is super wealthy doesn't work.