WestCoastBias

2 minutes ago, Red Comet said:

Oakland is going to have to have a wealth boom before any major league team ends up there again. It’s too small, too poor and too broke to have more than one and even that’s in question. 

I could say the same thing about a lot of rust belt cities if they were in this position. The only difference is they were willing to shell out millions of taxpayer dollars in awful new stadium deals and Oakland isn't.

IF Vegas falls through then I hope the only option left is for Fisher to sell and the team stays in Oakland. 

However, if the A's were to move to Nashville instead then the divisions would get all messed up, Kansas City to the AL West? I think MLB would have to expand at the same time the A's are moving to balance out the divisions. Portland or Salt Lake City might be the more likely back up options for the A's. 

On 5/3/2023 at 11:48 AM, CDCLT said:

Forcing three-letter abbreviations is one of my biggest pet peeves. The NHL is awful about it. A team's abbreviation should be entirely based on the geographic name unless two teams share the same geographic name.

 

TBL -> TB

VGK -> VGS

LAK -> LA

CBJ -> CBS

NJD -> NJ

 

This isn't related to any particular league but the abbreviations on the pro sport reference websites absolutely kill me. NWE? KAN? GNB? TAM? CHO? It drives me nuts.

Are the Knights not allowed to use LV because their technically the Vegas Golden Knights? I never liked that decision by them. 

2 hours ago, FiddySicks said:

I went to ASU and part of the “taxes” I had to pay on my education went directly to propping that sad organization up, so yeah, it kind of is our money. 
 

Also LOL to the idea that Houston is more of a wasteland than Phoenix. Don’t get me wrong, they both suck and are miserable places to be in the middle of the year especially, but Phoenix is uniquely depressing. 

I said both were wastelands but that I like Phoenix more.

52 minutes ago, McCall said:

Ok, you're literally just talking to yourself. I don't think you're gonna find anybody who agrees with you. At least not to the extent your taking this.

I agree with him. The Dodgers selling a Jackie Robinson city connect jersey that "salutes the team’s connection with its Latino fanbase" and "nods to the City’s street art culture and the murals which add color to buildings throughout Los Angeles" is kind of ridiculous for someone who didn't even play for the Dodgers in LA.

The Pirates one though seems to be based off the bridges in Pittsburgh? One of which is named after Clemente, who did play in Pittsburgh unlike Robinson and LA. That feels fine to me. 

4 minutes ago, IceCap said:

I'm sorry my answer to that was is boring then. 

 

But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about you asking "which sunbelt teams are acceptable?" 

 

We've been litigating that this whole time. And it's not even something you have to have read every post in this thread to get. 

"The Sunbelt markets that work are acceptable the ones that are failing aren't" isn't some crazy take. 

Okay yeah but opinions vary, I was just asking. Carolina and Florida in addition to Arizona could be considered "unacceptable", you even said yourself they still aren't great business wise. Wasn't someone in this thread just defending Dallas having a team too? Maybe you think the Ducks are unnecessary? It was just a question, you don't have to reply if you don't want to. 

1 minute ago, IceCap said:

That's a terrible reason to keep a team in a market that's been failing for 30 years. 

Yeah I know

2 minutes ago, IceCap said:

Coming in midway through an ongoing conversation to demand people repeat crap they've been saying for years for your benefit isn't a good look. Read some of the older posts. 

Demand? Cmon man don't be dramatic. 

The dream NHL 32 is a fun question, could of been a good discussion. 

1 minute ago, IceCap said:

Questions that have been answered over and over again. 

You were acting like it was unfair a team that's failed to draw fans or a profit in thirty years was unfairly picked on and then asked "well what Sunbelt teams are acceptable?" like you were put upon. 

 

Anyway I answered both of your questions.

I don't read everything you post.

This is was my whole "argument" to keep the Coyotes:

1 hour ago, WestCoastBias said:

I mostly just don't want to see the Kachina go, I think it'd enter into Whalers and Nordiques nostalgia territory if they moved away and rebranded. And while both are wastelands of urban sprawl, Phoenix > Houston. 

I like the logo and Phoenix as a city more than Houston. That's why I don't want to seem the Coyotes move. That's me acting like its unfair? I'll give you illogical but idk about acting unfair. 

46 minutes ago, WestCoastBias said:

So what sun belt teams are acceptable and what aren't?

And this is just an honest question. Maybe acceptable wasn't the right wording but I was just curious. I mean weren't Carolina and Florida train wrecks too not that long ago?

Just now, IceCap said:

The ones that are successful are acceptable. 

 

Jesus H. Christ on a cracker. NO WHERE in this sprawling thread, a monument to the NHL's habitual buffoonery, have I, or anyone else, said that every sunbelt team needs to be gotten rid of. No where. You can check.

 

I've ALWAYS said teams like Tampa, Nashville, Dallas, even Vegas, have proven the Sunbelt experiment could work.

But teams like Arizona that have utterly failed need to move. And they need to move to some place with a loyal, dedicated fanbase. Up north.

 

I really don't like that I had to repeat myself to assuage your hurt feelings but whatever. 

 

Dude I'm just asking questions. I don't have hurt feelings. I've only started paying attention to hockey the past two years since I started going to Kings games. The hate on sun belt teams is intriguing to me as someone who is new to the sport and also lives in the sun belt (I think?). I've always thought Carolina and Florida were weirder NHL fits than the Coyotes, but that's just my west coast bias.

12 minutes ago, Red Comet said:

Everything is a social construct if you break it down, thus, that term has no meaning. What is true, is that time has an effect on other people and Canadians like @IceCap are tired of being treated like second-class fans.

 

So what sun belt teams are acceptable and what aren't?

36 minutes ago, IceCap said:

It's someone's money. Millions of it from Arizona taxpayers. 

 

I'm tired of this failure of a franchise and failure of a market getting pass after pass, either from the league and their Sunbelt infatuation, the fans who buy into that narrative because it makes them feel smarter than everyone else, or because they had/have quirky uniforms. 

 

Here's the problem with that. Unlike the Phoenix metro area Houston hasn't spent close to thirty years discrediting itself as a NHL market. 

 

Now I'll be frank, I think Houston is a bad idea for reasons I talked about earlier and and in a just world they'd go to Quebec City because enough with propping up Sunbelt experiments at the expense of the sport's most loyal fans. 

 

But if you must reduce this to Arizona vs Houston then Houston wins easily simply by virtue of Arizona's total and complete and indefensible failure as a market. 

What's your dream 32 for the NHL?

Also, am I crazy for wishing MLB would of just done helmet ads instead? Like they've done in the past for international series. It's a much better look in my opinion and is at times more visible. 

I guess it's all inevitable and would of happened anyway, just like the NHL that started with the helmet and now has them on the jerseys. 

Just now, IceCap said:

So is money but that somehow doesn't make the twenty-seven consecutive seasons in the red and millions upon millions lost any easier to justify. 

I mean it's not our money 

I mostly just don't want to see the Kachina go, I think it'd enter into Whalers and Nordiques nostalgia territory if they moved away and rebranded. And while both are wastelands of urban sprawl, Phoenix > Houston. 

18 minutes ago, CardsFan79 said:

Cardinals announce their jersey ad.  I guess it could be worse, but I still hate it.

I'm conflicted here.

The ad matches the Cardinals uniform so well that if you didn't know any better you might just think that it was part of the uniform,  like a memorial patch for some ex player named Stifel or something. Is that a good thing or bad thing? 

12 minutes ago, IceCap said:

It's been almost thirty years my guy 

Time is a social construct my guy 

I hope Arizona figures it out.

I always liked the O and stripes look for the Senators..

The Seattle Mariners don't new a brand refresh or new uniforms. The identity introduced in 1993 is a modern classic and, aside from maybe having too many outlines on their wordmarks, their uniforms are perfect as is. 

Not sure if this is unpopular but it needs to be said with the new City Connect recently being released. 

What would it look like with the same green as the Green Monster?

5 hours ago, roxfan00 said:

More info coming out of Colorado

 

"Uncle Neely (@theepregameshow) says Coach Prime and Colorado will rival Oregon in terms of uniform combinations #SkoBuffs"

 

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/8BtqYkY4T6o

All the Buffs need is a template upgrade. They have done a good job with having traditional uniforms that still allow for a bunch of combinations. I would even argue they execute the gray uniforms better than anyone else in college football even though it's completely unnecessary.

And this is just perfection. Please don't ruin it Coach Prime.

56 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

 

I'm confused by this discussion. It's not like it's unusual for a MLB team to share the same market with their AAA affiliate. This is happening right now in the Twin Cities with the St. Paul Saints and has been the case since at least 1995 with the Mariners and the Tacoma Rainiers. Sugar Land, home to the AAA Skeeters, is in the Houston MSA, which is similar to Atlanta and Gwinnett. 

 

What exactly is the issue? 

- Houston is 5th largest metro area, 7.2 million people.

- Atlanta is the 8th largest metro area, 6.1 million people.

- Tacoma and Seattle are over 30 miles away from each other. Tacoma is also it's own city rather than a suburb, it's port is on par with Seattle in total trade for example. Also, 4 million people in the metro area.

- We all know Twin Cities is kind of a unique situation where Minneapolis and St Paul share the professional teams. The NBA arena is in Minneapolis while the NHL arena is in St Paul, it makes sense that St Paul would support the Triple-A team while the Twins play not too far away. Also, 3.7 million people in the metro area. 

I don't consider any of these existing examples relevant to whether the A's and Aviators could coexist 11 miles apart in a market that's only home to 2.3 million people. With the Golden Knights and Silver Knights, at least the Silver Knights are in Henderson which is an actual city (2nd largest in NV) that might have it's own identity to a degree rather than Summerlin which is a master planned community who's downtown is an outlet mall. It could work out fine, but there's nothing wrong with being skeptical about this. 

10 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

What are the chances of them being able to use Allegiant until their stadium is ready? I know the Raiders wouldn't want too many visitors in their new house, but for a one to two year stint it could be useful. 

I'm pretty sure Mark Davis hates Fisher and the A's as they did the Raiders no favors when Davis was trying to get a new stadium at the Coliseum site. 

And Allegiant is a football only venue too. 

I would love to see Fisher somehow blow this Las Vegas deal and be forced to sell the team. 

It seems like a pretty aggressive deadline to try to get $500 million from a state government, especially when there is no guarantee Fisher will actually invest in the team on the field once he gets there. Let's remember this guy has been trying to get a ballpark built for the last 20 years in multiple municipalities and hasn't been able to get it done, and yes not all the blame goes to Fisher but he is the one constant in every negotiation. Joe Lacob, please have your checkbook ready just in case. 

20 hours ago, McCall said:

It's already been stated that Las Vegas will get to keep the Aviators. Whether they stay Triple-A or not, I don't know. The California League is the only other option. Either way, I think they'd at least change their name to something like the Southern Nevada Aviators, just to avoid confusion. And the trend has been placing Triple-A, and to an extent, Double-A closest to the MLB parent club for closer proximity for call-ups so they're not having to travel so far and can be ready to play sooner.

You can still have Triple-A teams in secondary cities and still be close enough to the parent club. A good example is the Giants and Sacramento River Cats. A bad example is the Dodgers and OKC Dodgers, but even that's still better than Sugar Land Space Cowboys and Round Rock Express. Leave teams in no name suburbs to Single-A and Double-A. 

With the A's now going to move to Las Vegas, it seems like a good time to redo the Pacific Coast League. No, I don't think Las Vegas should get to have both a MLB and a Triple-A team (no matter how nice their stadium is) and the Texas teams no longer get affiliates in smaller cities. Triple-A teams should be located in larger secondary cities that are generally considered right below professional level cities (and in some cases these cities do have pro teams in other sports).

Albuquerque Isotopes - Rockies

El Paso Chihuahuas  - Padres

Fresno Grizzlies - Dodgers

Oklahoma City 89ers - Rangers

Reno Aces - A's

Sacramento River Cats - Giants

Salt Lake Bees - Angels

San Antonio Missions - Astros

Tacoma Rainiers - Mariners

Tucson Toros - Diamondbacks

Possible Expansion

Boise Hawks - Portland MLB