RedSox44

They most likely will.

And Winnipeg is? Americans by and large don't care much either way, but generally, it's better if English is the primary language. Doesn't seem to hurt the Montreal Canadiens or Ottawa Senators. Some would argue that Ottawa is an English-primary market. And Montreal has a significant English-speaking population. Quebec City really doesn't.

Alright then. So now, not even the TV deal can be a hold up. Let this happen, Gary.

And Winnipeg is? Americans by and large don't care much either way, but generally, it's better if English is the primary language. Il ne fait aucune différence pour moi. But, have the Jets been broadcast in the States on NBCSN or NBC? Should it matter? Quebecois will go to le Colisee and watch the games on French TV. Winnipeggers have gone to the MTS Centre and watched the games on TV. I don't think it'll be any different, really. They'll certainly make more money in Quebec City than they did in Glendale.

And Winnipeg is?

*breaks out Nordiques jersey, pops finest French champagne* WOOOO! Winnipeg in 2011-12, Quebec City in 2012-13. The NHL is back to normal. I think I speak for most Bruins fans when I say that I'm elated to have Quebec City return to the NHL.

I knew he was on the Mavs, but I actually forgot he played for Orlando and Phoenix. I think of him as a Raptor and Net.

The Nordiques just need this: and this

I vaguely remember before the last Coyotes game at America West Arena, they said that you could only see about 70% of the rink from the upper deck on that side. Yeah, just looking at the 3rd pic in that post, you can probably tell that if you're sitting up high in the west end's upper deck (not on the front row or anything like that), the only way you're gonna see anything past the bottom of the faceoff circles in that zone is if you see it on the jumbotron. It's amazing that they stayed in that arena as long as they did. Well, it's the Coyotes.

wrong thread

Winnipeg returns one year, Quebec City the next. The NHL is just about back to normal.

Oh man, those stupid circa 2006-2007 gradient undershirts. Those were awful. Yup. They were so bad that the MLB passed a law that said that undershirts had to be all-one-color on the parts exposed or something. For awhile, I actually liked them, mostly because I was twelve when they first debuted. I think that pattern was the manufacturer's (Nike?) way of getting around the rule that their logo could not be shown. I suppose this was MLB's way of making sure manufacturers did not start making these designs, rendering the undershirts un-"uniform" as a Nike-sponsored teammate's pattern would greatly differ from reebok-sponsored teammate's pattern. Good idea, MLB. Hmm. I heard it was because it was too distracting for batters, seeing that active of a design from a pitcher or a defender.

Oh man, those stupid circa 2006-2007 gradient undershirts. Those were awful. Yup. They were so bad that the MLB passed a law that said that undershirts had to be all-one-color on the parts exposed or something. For awhile, I actually liked them, mostly because I was twelve when they first debuted.

Show of class by Tripucka.

Yeah, the first team I think of is the Red Sox. Speaking of Curt Schilling and the Astros: Worst trade ever? I thought it was just Red Sox fans who thought of him as a Red Sox fan first and foremost. Schill also doesn't look wrong in Phillies attire, either. And no, that's not the worst trade ever. The worst trade ever? To the Red Sox: Larry Andersen To the Astros: Jeff Bagwell

May be unpopular, but I think it looks really weird to see Schilling in a D-Backs uniform.

I cannot feasibly see how the NHL would rather have a team in Glendale instead of Quebec City. They will make nothing but money if there is a team in le Ville de Quebec.

Well, it seems the perfect-relocation-storm is hitting once again.

what's the right uniform for him? I suppose the Astros, he spent four-and-a-half seasons with them.

Move over, Mike Morgan.

Agreed. The current Home is the best jersey in Sharks history. Just remove the front numbers That reminds me: I don't mind front numbers at all, and actually like the Stars uniforms.

Ditto. I'm not a fan of their home, but I find their road jersey classy.

As a logo Elvis is better than Pat. However, the uniforms Elvis has been associated with...suck, while the uniform Pat is associated with is timeless and could easily be one of the best in the league, still. The Patriots' winning percentage over the last 19 seasons while Elvis was on the helmet is one of the highest in sports, all-time, for that long of a stretch. Only 3 losing seasons since Elvis debuted in Spring, 1993 (1993, 1995, 2000). I think it's safe to say Flying Elvis has been good to the Patriots. The throwback alternate is great as an alternate. I don't (often) associate uniforms or logos with success on the field (side-eyes at Bruins 1995-2007 set), which is why I didn't freak out when the Red Sox changed their road uniform. I don't care if they had thirty-two straight 0-16 seasons with the classic uniforms. What looks better, looks better. As a logo Elvis is better than Pat. However, the uniforms Elvis has been associated with...suck, while the uniform Pat is associated with is timeless and could easily be one of the best in the league, still. Sacrificing Flying Elvis for a return to the old uniforms would be an awesome trade for Patriots fans. The old uniforms are only timeless in the sense that they're generic, boring and forgettable. The current ones are far superior to them in every way. Under Elvis, the Patriots have worn a glorified practice jersey, a uniform so trapped in the 90s it's probably listening to the Backstreet Boys right now and over-modernized mess, all of which are worse than the 1984-92 set.

while not game worn it looks like a legit fashion jersey With real dirt on it too. Yeah, the guy probably just went outside and stomped on it to make it "look" game worn.

"I want them to go bye-bye." Oh, if only Bettman agreed.