NHL Anti-Thread: Bad Business Decision Aggregator

[KittSmith_95]

Can the Moda Center be a viable for a NHL team? Portland rarely gets talked about for a possible NHL team, but with the Winterhawks playing games there & a solid hockey fanbase, it would be a good fit. Plus, Chris McGowan has NBA experience with his time in LA. 

 

 

[Totems!!]

3 hours ago, KittSmith_95 said:

Can the Moda Center be a viable for a NHL team? Portland rarely gets talked about for a possible NHL team, but with the Winterhawks playing games there & a solid hockey fanbase, it would be a good fit. Plus, Chris McGowan has NBA experience with his time in LA. 

 

 

Not without the King Paul's blessing. The Mighty Allen owns the Moda and without his direct involvement there will be no NHL in Portland. Which brings me to thinking there won't be big league hockey in the foreseeable future. Pretty sad because I think Portland and Seattle would be great markets. Been waiting for years and losing

hope on either happening.

[BeerGuyJordan]

As I see it, based on the numbers, there really are only six markets that should even be in the discussion, regarding relocation or expansion: Seattle, Portland, Milwaukee, Houston, Quebec and Hamilton/Toronto SW.

 

Obviously, varying degrees of strength and likelihood. Hamilton is a pipe dream, but the numbers indicate the fans are there, is all I'm saying. TOR/HAM/BUF would still easily put up better numbers than NYR/NYI/NJD.

 

Milwaukee is, essentially, already a three sport city, and Chicago isn't likely to let that part of their "market" go quietly. Still, if Seattle doesn't pan out, someone willing to pony up the cash could grab the League's attention, once the Bucks' new arena is done.

 

I would love to see Houston happen, and the city supported the hell out of the AHL Aeros. The arena situation makes it a non-discussion, for now, and I'd rather see the League a little more stable, first.

 

Others here have covered Quebec, Portland and Seattle pretty well.

[kiwi_canadian]

18 hours ago, the admiral said:

Dreger did an AMA that kinda-sorta hinted that Quebec City isn't off the table for a Coyotes relocation. "But they didn't tour Quebec City!", some argue. Why would they? If that's what it came to, those dopes would have as much to do with owning the team as I would.

 

Would it be out of the realm of possibility that IceArizona sells the team to Quebecor Media who move the team to Quebec City and as part of the deal the NHL gives an expansion team to IceArizona who put the team in Seattle?

[The_Admiral]

The NHL wouldn't let these rubes run a Seattle team either.

[Tanny81]

I think Quebec's best chance of a team is the Hurricanes if their attendance drops even further. However the prospect of a relocation is even further reduced with the Canadian dollar and a upcoming provincial election.

[TBGKon]

On ‎2‎/‎8‎/‎2017 at 5:35 PM, DustDevil61 said:

Coyotes: "We are committed to staying in Arizona."

Glendale Star: "Then why were you looking at arenas in Seattle and Portland?"

Busted!!!

[BeerGuyJordan]

I really don't care about the Coyotes, themselves. As a Roadrunners STH and a Preds fan from Arizona, however, I kind of need the management to pull their heads out of their five-holes and figure out a way to get this team in the black, without leaving Phoenix metro.

[IceCap]

44 minutes ago, Tanny81 said:

I think Quebec's best chance of a team is the Hurricanes if their attendance drops even further. However the prospect of a relocation is even further reduced with the Canadian dollar and a upcoming provincial election.

You mean the election that polls are indicating will probably be won by the pro Federal Government Liberals?

[The_Admiral]

46 minutes ago, Tanny81 said:

I think Quebec's best chance of a team is the Hurricanes if their attendance drops even further. However the prospect of a relocation is even further reduced with the Canadian dollar and a upcoming provincial election.

What could the election have to do with it in ways that state elections elsewhere would not? Quebec sovereignty is all but dead; the province is dominated by Liberals and the NDP now.

[goalieboy82]

1 hour ago, the admiral said:

What could the election have to do with it in ways that state elections elsewhere would not? Quebec sovereignty is all but dead; the province is dominated by Liberals and the NDP now.

could still happen (depending on in the future if Scotland ever becomes independent).  

[Sodboy13]

5 hours ago, BeerGuyJordan said:

Milwaukee is, essentially, already a three sport city, and Chicago isn't likely to let that part of their "market" go quietly. Still, if Seattle doesn't pan out, someone willing to pony up the cash could grab the League's attention, once the Bucks' new arena is done.

 

1. Bill Wirtz already killed Milwaukee to spite Lloyd Pettit 30 years ago.

2. Will the new arena even have a rink? Bradley Center is a hockey-first facility, but the new building is a Bucks-exclusive scam, and the Admirals have already been booted to the Mecca.

[goalieboy82]

5 minutes ago, Sodboy13 said:

 

1. Bill Wirtz already killed Milwaukee to spite Lloyd Pettit 30 years ago.

2. Will the new arena even have a rink? Bradley Center is a hockey-first facility, but the new building is a Bucks-exclusive scam, and the Admirals have already been booted to the Mecca.

yes it is:

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2016/04/25/milwaukeebucks-arena-will-include-ice-rink-to-host.html

[BeerGuyJordan]

1 hour ago, Sodboy13 said:

 

1. Bill Wirtz already killed Milwaukee to spite Lloyd Pettit 30 years ago.

I'm well aware. Hence why I said the 'Hawks won't let it go, if they can avoid it. Still, Vegas proves that money talks. The rest of the owners can make it happen, without Chicago's ok. Milwaukee is far enough away that they can't actually claim territorial encroachment.

[IceCap]

6 hours ago, BeerGuyJordan said:

As I see it, based on the numbers, there really are only six markets that should even be in the discussion, regarding relocation or expansion: Seattle, Portland, Milwaukee, Houston, Quebec and Hamilton/Toronto SW.

Seattle doesn't have any long-term area prospects.

Houston's arena is controlled by a NBA team that kicked the AHL out. What hope does the NHL have?

Hamilton/Toronto SW would have to pony up $1 billion just for the rights fees alone. Not happening.

[BeerGuyJordan]

13 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Seattle doesn't have any long-term area prospects.

Houston's arena is controlled by a NBA team that kicked the AHL out. What hope does the NHL have?

Hamilton/Toronto SW would have to pony up $1 billion just for the rights fees alone. Not happening.

A few notes from the rest of my post, that, essentially, cover your points.

 

First, I'm not referring to all of these being "move-in ready." I'm saying that these are the only six cities the NHL should even be willing to consider proposals from. 

 

"Obviously, varying degrees of strength and likelihood. Hamilton is a pipe dream..."

 

As in, "no way Toronto and Buffalo let it happen." I thought that was implied.

 

Regarding Houston:

 

"The arena situation makes it a non-discussion, for now..."

 

I'm not spelling out every detail, since most of us here are relatively versed in the ups and downs of hockey business. I figured anyone worth having this conversation with is already aware of the Houston arena specifics. 

 

And as for Seattle:

 

"Others here have covered Quebec, Portland and Seattle pretty well."

 

Seattle needing a new arena has been referenced at least a few dozen times, in this thread. Again, didn't think I had to spell that one out for you. I've been here long enough that I would hope to have a decent idea of what I'm talking about.

 

Tl;dr version: I'm saying that no matter who comes forward, or what city they're pushing for; no matter how deep their pockets, or nice their arena, the NHL should give an automatic no to anyone not from one of those six cities.

[The_Admiral]

I'd rule out Portland because without even getting into the ramifications of splitting the market with the Trail Blazers, Paul Allen only seems to be interested in owning the team if the league practically donates it to him. I'm not convinced there's a serious demand for the NHL in Portland so much as a "we wouldn't be averse to it." Seattle is something the league should have made happen decades ago in lieu of Anaheim or Miami, Barry Ackerley be damned, but Portland isn't worth trifling with, in my opinion.

 

6 hours ago, goalieboy82 said:

could still happen (depending on in the future if Scotland ever becomes independent).  

An independent Scotland is stupid and an independent Quebec is stupider still. At least Scotland could theoretically rejoin the EU and get back in on that; Quebec "sovereignty" has always been a kid pretending to leave home by moving into the attic: they'd still "partner" with Canada on all the important stuff (money, defense, etc), only the French would be free to be more irritating about crap no one cares about. I'd call the whole movement a joke, but I don't think it was a joke when the referendum failed and the separatists immediately blamed it on the Jews.

[Wings]

14 hours ago, the admiral said:

I'm not convinced there's a serious demand for the NHL in Portland so much as a "we wouldn't be averse to it." 

You're right there isn't. I can attest to that. 

[Marcos Flamengo]

We don't know if the NHL goes south to the border, in this case, Mexico City?. This would be a good or a bad idea?.

[BeerGuyJordan]

2 minutes ago, Marcos Flamengo said:

We don't know if the NHL goes south to the border, in this case, Mexico City?. This would be a good or a bad idea?.

At the risk of coming across as rude: I can't tell if you're being inflammatory and ridiculous on purpose or not.

 

If not: No, the NHL south of the US border is not a good idea. The MLB is the only league that should even consider Mexico City, and even that scenario would be a convoluted mess.