IceCap

Nothing about the Bills' Kelly-era look does it for me. I prefer tradition to modern and the Kelly-era look is certainly better than the crapfest that replaced them but on their own they're a bit too plain for my liking. They look like generic off the rack designs. It doesn't help that the Giants of that period looked almost identical from the neck down. I actually really like the current look. The only thing that bugs me is the tapered helmet stripe. Totally stupid and unnecessary. It's a really great look other than that though. Traditional without looking dull. You see it immediately and know it's the Bills yet it doesn't have to slap a giant BUFFALO wordmark or do something stupid with the jersey and pants striping.

We're past the grace period for "we need some extra cash because no one can come to games" Arenas have been full for two seasons now.

I think you're projecting some other stuff onto a discussion where it isn't warranted. A lot of people don't like the way uniforms look with ads, and corporate greed is part of that. If this turns into a socialist circle jerk we'll be on that but "I don't like how ads have impacted uniforms" is fair game.

We discuss sports aesthetics here. The idea that we're not going to discuss part of that because it annoys some people is baffling to me.

This is a board meant to discuss sports logo and uniform aesthetics. Uniform ads fall under that and are fair game. Don't like it? Don't like it? Sorry

They have a NHL caliber arena and fans willing to pay to go see NHL hockey games. Neither of which Arizona has, despite the league insisting Quebec can't have a team/Arizona should for thirty years. The market loves hockey and will pay to see it. The team left for a variety of reasons in 1995. The need for a new arena lined up with a Quebec provincial government that couldn't help foot the bill after a failed independence referendum. That plus Bettman actively looking to offload the smaller market Canadian teams to American markets and... well... you get what you get. The potential Quebec ownership group is headed by a media tycoon, the arena is NHL-ready (more then you can say for Arizona... or even SLC), and Quebec separatism is dead if the last few Quebec provincial elections are any indication. As for the language issue...yes QC is almost an exclusively French locale but if you scroll up in the thread you'll find evidence that the "no one wants to play there" stuff was overblown. European stars liked it just fine and English Canadian talent that were hesitant about playing there found that the fans embraced them. The idea that Quebec City isn't a viable market because of the French language is sad enough given that Coyotes defenders try to portray the team's existence as a win for diversity, but on top of that? It's an overblown problem anyway only because Eric Lindros was a momma's boy.

Funny thing is unless they go to Quebec City and are the Nordiques any relocation is going to result in the first identity designed from the ground up by Fanatics.

Salt Lake Jell-Os

Yep. Here's a tip- if your locker room can be constructed by high schoolers something's gone amiss

Oh man. Remember those? "I'm sure the LAMESTREAM CANADIAN MEDIA will make fun of our sheets and pipes locker rooms but they're just haters."

Quebec City is actually less rabidly separatist than the French parts of Montreal are, historically. Quebec City is almost entirely Francophone which means the French Canadians there don't really feel like their culture is under siege that much. Meanwhile Montreal has a significant Anglophone population which means the separatists there tend to have to deal with English occasionally and that makes them upsetti spaghetti. In fact during the 1995 independence referendum the pro independence side knew they were in trouble when their votes in Quebec City ended up being less than they needed to overcome the duelling voting blocs in Montreal. They needed to max out the independence votes in QC to overcome that and they didn't. Of course that was 1995 and the Parti Quebecois is a distant fourth in the provincial legislature today. Separatism as a whole isn't what it once was.

Please compare this to how Bettman couldn't get them out of Winnipeg fast enough in the mid 90s

What's funny to me is the idea that the team signed an iron clad lease with ASU for two more seasons, which only makes sense if there was a new arena in the area coming. Like ideally you might maybe make it a year to year thing? In case the vote doesn't work out? But no. They pushed everything on the garbage dump plan. Turns out Tempe prefers the garbage dumb. It's hard to blame them. It's more useful.

No matter how rock stupid a design is you can always count on a few people to defend it

Stern or Goodell would have told Arizona to eat as soon as Quebecor's cheque cleared.

Coyotes apologists- the team deserves another chance. Tempe is closer to their fanbase anyway! Once they get that arena done they're set! Tempe arena vote fails Coyotes apologists- They deserve one more chance in Mesa, which is even further away than Glendale!

Well that's the kicker, isn't it? For all of Quebec's drawbacks it's still a clear improvement over Arizona. If Arizona had worked out it wouldn't be but Arizona didn't work out. So to keep the team there at the expense of QC is just ridiculous. If Seattle were still open then that would be a convenient out but this league is run by idiots so that's not an option. So now we need to talk about where they could go that's an improvement over QC. Salt Lake City? No NHL calibre arena. KC? Has an arena, but no interest. Atlanta? lol two lost teams to smaller Canadian cities* and no arena. Houston? Has an arena, has potential ownership, but the market has hallmarks that made Atlanta and Phoenix missteps. Houston is the only one that makes any sort of sense because the arena and ownership are there, but between the ownership not being as bullish on the league as QC's and the market being about potential rather then a sure thing it raises the question if the smart play isn't to take the sure thing? It's not a bad proposition after nearly thirty years of chasing potential that never materialized. *and that's the kicker... Winnipeg proved this can work. It's not hypothetical. Which is more than we can say about Arizona's value as a NHL market.

The NHL, more than any other of the Big Four, is a gate driven league.

gonna stop you right there Sparky

You could move a few teams around here and there. Also this wouldn't just be a retread of the COVID season. The divisions would be scheduled against each other

This league is willing to let this team play in a 5,000 university arena with curtain and piping locker rooms rather then going to Quebec. They'd rather send them to Atlanta, a market that's failed twice, instead of Quebec. It's truly, monumentally stupid.

Yeah they went on an impressive playoff and Cup run. I don't see what there is to be angry about.

Move Arizona to Quebec City North Calgary Flames Edmonton Oilers Montreal Canadiens Ottawa Senators Quebec Nordiques Toronto Maple Leafs Vancouver Canucks Winnipeg Jets Central Carolina Hurricanes Chicago Blackhawks Columbus Blue Jackets Dallas Stars Detroit Red Wings Florida Panthers Nashville Predators Tampa Bay Lightning East Boston Bruins Buffalo Sabres New Jersey Devils New York Islanders New York Rangers Philadelphia Flyers Pittsburgh Penguins Washington Capitals West Anaheim Ducks Colorado Avalanche Los Angeles Kings Minnesota Wild San Jose Sharks Seattle Kraken St. Louis Blues Vegas Golden Knights Four divisions, eight teams each

I guess this should go in the Reel Line Mint thread, but I'm not actually posting a realignment? Just sort of talking about possibilities... One of the more annoying arguments against Quebec City is that it's in the East and moving the Coyotes to the East would require either the Blue Jackets or Red Wings to move back to the West and G-d forbid the Red Wings play in the West again. So hard done by in that conference, I swear. This is annoying for two reasons. The first is the one I touched on above, that the Red Wings are somehow a special, delicate franchise that will wilt if they have to play in the West. Which is ridiculous. The second reason it's annoying is because it assumes the current alignment system is in any way good or worthy to keep around. For 's sake, they put Tampa and Florida in a division with Toronto, Buffalo, Boston, Montreal, and Ottawa. This isn't some holy thing here. It's dumb. So my proposal is to go back to what the league did for the 2020-2021 season...with a twist. Bring back the four geographic divisions but instead of keeping them isolated have them scheduled against each other. You can toss Quebec City into the North/Canada Division, and group the Red Wings and Blue Jackets with teams in their general region. It's just a thought. Quebec City's a great market and "we'd love to but the alignment" is dumb because if the choice is between an alignment system or a market that will actually pay real, hard currency for tickets then you take the latter.