HedleyLamarr

Mobile's just a small-scale Jacksonville....stinks year-round.

The bigger embarrassment is not having enough protection netting to span the length of the frame. And I still hate how white netting looks.

Yeah, can't claim a media timeout, but if there was a long stretch of non-stop play, that can somewhat contribute to folks not being in their seats. NHL arenas keep you from heading to your seat while the puck is in play. That said, it's really rare that you get non-stop play from the start of the period through the 14:00 mark in a period. And if this was the first period, the most logical explanation is that folks simply haven't arrived yet. And some of these pictures are a bit misleading...I think the Sharks game in Florida, the picture was taken a second into the 1st period. I'd rather see some pictures from the second and third periods to fully gauge what their attendance looks like.

Yeah, the Panthers generally haven't drawn well before Thanksgiving. All their record-low crowds have taken place before Thanksgiving, if I remember correctly. However, listless is a good term for the crowd. Whenever the Thrashers played at Florida, for some reason...all those games made me sleepy.

Nice Jumbotron, though! When I was last there, they had an even worse Jumbotron than we have at Philips.

Umm...does this guy really know what he got himself into? And who calls owning the Phoenix Arizona Coyotes a "dream?" In fairness, like all the decision making concerning the Coyotes, he probably got a Magic 8-ball and asked it if it was a good investment to buy the coyotes. The ball probably said "yes, definitely" and he went with it. I shouldn't doubt the ability of the NHL to find an idiot owner, but I feel like this guy has to have bought in with the endgame in mind. He's just saying what's expected of him until the Glendale money runs out. He was brought in also to drop a lawsuit against the NHL and the Islanders owner.

I looked it up...apparently it wasn't until after the first lockout when the Thrashers were out-drawing the Blackhawks and Bruins. And that was less than 10 years ago. Fan attendance wasn't the reason why the team moved. Ownership was the reason. They were the successful version of that broad from Major League.

I take it that you haven't been a hockey fan for very long... The Blackhawks and Penguins had horrible attendance numbers before the lockout. ...as did the Bruins. I distinctly remember the Thrashers out-drawing the Blackhawks and Bruins in the few seasons leading up to the first lockout. Possibly the Penguins, too.

But...but...it's disrespectful to the dead guy!!!!!!! Posting that video (or the link to the video) isn't going to piss off the ads folks. Which should be the basis of moderating this site: Whatever doesn't piss off the sponsors and whatever isn't putting a poster's personal information on a public forum. I'd allow some cheap shots and busting of chops (some situations just beg for it), but not going overboard. Like BBTV said, a little consistency is all we ask for. And the moderating is becoming too noticeable. It's just as annoying to scroll past these "MOD EDIT" posts as it was to see all those Cardinals rings.

Calling Glendale's city council a "clown college" is giving them too much credit. Clown Junior College would be more appropriate.

Update!! Looks like some good ol' fashioned New Jersey hand-greasing occurred between Qatar and FIFA. http://sports.yahoo.com/news/qatar-denies-wrongdoing-newspaper-allegation-150406460.html

Your punishment is having to sit through a Panthers-Coyotes game. You can paint a turd, but it's still a turd....

Poor Pierre-Karl Peladeau. Hmm....even if the league doesn't expand, the NHL looks hell-bent on working the numbers to where the Coyotes don't lose $50 million in 5 years....

They haven't even played a quarter of their home games yet. It's a little early to be complaining about their attendance.

Everyone gets free parking for Panthers games if they park at the mall across the street. I don't fault the Panthers for selling season tickets for $7/game. Making $300 off a seat is better than making $0 off a seat if it means getting more fans in. Start off cheap and go from there.

They really should reverse the Rays and Buccaneers stadium locations, if that were such a simple solution. The Rays would do so much better with a stadium just outside downtown Tampa, while the Buccaneers wouldn't really have a drop-off in attendance if their stadium were in St. Petersburg.

It's just over an hour's drive.

What is the solution, then?

Upset that Boise State lack of professional degrees don't get you to the Power 5 table? OK, how does a lack of professional degrees correlate to the fact that Boise State isn't in a 'Power 5' conference? I think you're making up to piss off Lights Out. Well, the 'Power 5' conferences have included academic prowess (albeit, it hasn't been the main reason) in expansion. Think about it.....the Big XII didn't want Boise State when the conference was in dire trouble of staying afloat. What does that say about Boise State in terms of academics and financial worth?

what the what Guess that answers that..... And you guys thought this team was going to Seattle or Quebec...clearly you haven't been paying attention all this time. The Maple Leaves would relocate before the Coyotes......

So thinking about that out clause the new owners have (5 years or $50 million lost, whichever happens first)... Does the money that the NHL dishes out in revenue sharing count towards money 'earned' by the Coyotes? And didn't the NHL 'win' in a sense of maintaining who and how much the league can give towards the lower revenue teams? If so....any reason not to believe the NHL made some off-the-record, backdoor deal with Glendale about giving the Coyotes a hefty chunk of the shared revenue money to soften the blow (or, at least make up the difference between the $6 million Glendale budgeted and the $15 million the new owners wanted)?

Is Seattle the NHL's equivalent to the NFL using Los Angeles, too?

....and they're both likely still taking a couple week-long west coast trips (which they had to begin with), unless they would prefer one 10-13 day trip and get all 7-8 MT- and PT-zone games out of the way. It's a lot like that Astros-to-the-AL talk.....sure, you get 18 games with the Rangers instead of 6 (and only 6 more home games, or 2 more home series), but you also gain three trips to Seattle and California and yearly trips/visits with the Yankees and Red Sox (which helps in selling tickets, though it's kinda a wash since they lose the multiple visits from the Cubs and Cardinals, and annual visits from the Braves and Dodgers and other established rivals) and you have to deal with Customs when going to/from Toronto, which is never quick-n-easy. Was gaining 12 games with the Rangers worth all that, even if they had a contending team?

In a way, yeah. I always found it a bit odd that the NHL said something like "we'll reassess this realignment plan after three seasons" if most were in support of the realignment proposal to begin with. I figured that was mainly to see how the playoff seedings and free agency (in terms of seeing how many players go to the Western Conference to better their chances of making the playoffs) shook themselves out. I would think the NHL would have given a recommendation to Quebec City to build (or not build) an arena if there's intentions (or no intentions) of having a team play there. But instead of moving a team there right away, the NHL gives QC a hushed "get yourselves ready, but be quiet and play nicely with us" memo, kinda like Winnipeg/True North. Arena issues aside, they can use Seattle as a test market (still an American market, but perhaps a more traditional hockey market) while QC's arena gets built and the league lets their soon-to-be-current realignment play itself out some. Quebec City has a new arena and a perceived large fanbase in place. Seattle could prove to be a hockey goldmine and the city starts building their own arena. Other teams (Devils, Blue Jackets, or whomever else) continue (or start) to have money problems, up to the point where a sale of the team is needed. The league re-evaluates their current divisional/playoff setup. ....all these things happening by the summer of 2016. If Seattle thrives, allowing the team to go there would be a "win" for the NHL/Bettman. If Seattle falters (or another team just can't stay in their current locale), Quebec City becomes the hot destination, and the league's financials get a boost, which becomes another "win" for the NHL/Bettman.

I was thinking about something.....could the NHL be using Seattle as a stop-over before moving the team to Quebec City? The NHL is pretty dead-set on realigning the league for next season, apparently. There's nothing definite about Seattle building a new arena (while QC is getting their arena built right now), and the NHL has said they'll re-visit the league's soon-to-be-adopted realignment plan after three seasons. By then, Quebec's arena will be completed (and possibly given a trial run by a minor league team), we'll have a good idea on Seattle being a worthy NHL market, and other teams with money issues (namely the Devils) would have three years to see which financial direction they're going in.....all the while the league's salary cap restraints (if I remember correctly) are set for the next couple seasons. (Did the league and NHLPA agree to a fixed cap limit for the next few years, in the $64-million neighborhood?)