CJR

This keeps getting repeated and isn't entirely true. At one point, Bill Foley said that his team couldn't be the Knights because of London and everyone ran with that. Foley said a lot of things at that time that weren't entirely true. The London Knights explicitly said that no one from Vegas even asked them about using the name and Foley later said it was always going to be the something Knights. We only have to look at the next expansion to see how it can work out. Seattle's ownership filed a trademark application for Palm Springs Firebirds as their AHL team. The OHL Flint Firebirds opposed it. The two sides worked out a deal and Flint dropped their opposition (and then the Firebirds switched to "Coachella Valley" as their place name). The Memphis Grizzlies (or any other trademark holder) might choose to fight harder than the Flint Firebirds did but it's not the automatic rejection that it's sometimes made out to be.

Different name but I'm still here and still an admin. I just don't do anything.

Seattle Mad Oxen?

Strickland says the Coyotes are staying put no matter the result of the vote tomorrow. https://twitter.com/andystrickland/status/351686847086342144 Not sure I believe it. If the league lets its bluff get called, they'll never get to bully a municipality into an arena deal again.

http://www.azcentral...yotes-deal.html And then there's the fact that the deal completely fell apart and got put back together in a matter of hours. http://www.foxsportsarizona.com/nhl/phoenix-coyotes/story/Glendale-city-council-to-force-July-2-vo?blockID=915399&feedID=3545

Sounds familiar.

Seattle's mayor says Kypreos is wrong, Key Arena will be ready. http://www.twitter.com/mayormcginn/status/348111881749266433 "Will" be ready?

So Kypreos says that Glendale will not be giving RSE the money they want... But also that Key Arena won't be ready this season so the team is staying put anyway. http://kuklaskorner.com/hockey/comments/early-morning-tweets-bode-poorly-for-the-coyotes I'd thought that second part had already been debunked but even if it's true, I find it hard to believe that the NHL would say "Okay, fine, you called our bluff, we'll stick around." They'll find an even worse place to put the team for next year.

Via @NHLhistorygirl...

I'm just going to directly quote @seangentille here...

Is that because she should have called this Jamieson guy? http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/westsideinsider/152205

Do it to Atlanta! Do it to Atlanta! Not me! Atlanta!

The Prince of Wales Trophy was for the regular season champions of the Wales Conference from 1974-75 to 1980-81.

This is still kind of in beta but I figured I'd post it here... http://www.detroithockey.net/team/arena/rafters.php A diagram of the placement of the Red Wings' banners at Joe Louis Arena. Something I've been playing around with for awhile.

Because, like starting new threads, you have to have a couple posts under your belt to do it.

Not that the Cup banners were right to begin with. They all had the current version of the logo on them rather than the version used in that year. Small difference but still... The retired number banners are always going to be wrong if you want to have a name on them but still have them look like the back of a sweater, since most of the players didn't have a name on their backs. I'm not against redesigning banners to be consistant, as long as you don't try to rewrite history too. You can have the same design and use different logos.

Joe Louis Arena... http://www.detroithockey.net/multimedia/se...keyword=banners If it were up to me, the Cup banners and the retired number banners would be on opposite ends of the ice and all of the other banners would be smaller. Maybe when someone gives me billions of dollars to buy the team.

I see you and raise with CuJo in Grand Rapids And for a little more, Chris Osgood in GR http://www.detroithockey.net/multimedia/770.php

I was specifically thinking of page headings and navigation. Most of the time they come first in the page's source code and your content comes somewhere later. Maybe you don't want to make the search engines look so hard for your content (not that they have to look hard on a CSS-based page, anyway), you can list your content first and relatively position it to where you want, then add the other elements at the end of the X/HTML and absolutely position them back to where you want them to appear on the page. Maybe that's a bad example, I don't know, I'll readily admit that I don't know nearly as much CSS as I'd like.

Just wanted to briefly touch on this. Absolute positioning can cause problems, that's for sure, but it's also a very powerful tool to know how to use. If you're worried about source order, you almost have to use absolute positioning.