Jump to content

NHL Anti-Thread: Bad Business Decision Aggregator


The_Admiral

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, wildwing64 said:

 

 

Is this satire? Cause I genuinely can’t tell. One the one hand, “30-year non relocation agreement” is just the kind of ridiculous hyperbole that someone uses when they’re trying to satirize something, but on the other hand, it’s Gary Bettman and the Coyotes, so who even knows anymore. 

  • LOL 1

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So these agreements become null and void after an ownership switch (because they didn’t agree to it) I see this continue to be a toilet bowl of a franchise, ownership sells in about 5 years and new ownership finally ends this madness. Either that or the madness is allowed to continue and then the team ultimately folds because Bettman refuses to see the inevitable. It’s you move Gary which one do you think will be the larger embarrassment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point Gary's just going to keep punting the Coyotes discussion to the next quarter until he runs out the clock and retires and then the Coyotes are the next guy's problem. 

  • Like 2
  • Applause 1

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the NHL's other ownership groups loving having a team that brings down overall revenues and by extension the salary cap number?

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, rams80 said:

Most of the NHL's other ownership groups loving having a team that brings down overall revenues and by extension the salary cap number?

 

I am guessing missing out on some revenue doesn't mean much for some of the owners.  What's a couple of million to them especially in the big markets?  They must take great pleasure of not having to pay the players as much as they probably would have if there was no cap.

I saw, I came, I left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, dont care said:

So these agreements become null and void after an ownership switch (because they didn’t agree to it) I see this continue to be a toilet bowl of a franchise, ownership sells in about 5 years and new ownership finally ends this madness. Either that or the madness is allowed to continue and then the team ultimately folds because Bettman refuses to see the inevitable. It’s you move Gary which one do you think will be the larger embarrassment.

 

I image they would make the sell of the franchise dependent on the new owner agreeing to remainder of this deal (if it actually happens). It's too big of an investment from the city to not guarantee the 30 years regardless of a new team owner.

jNTsTyQ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TalktoChuck said:

 

I image they would make the sell of the franchise dependent on the new owner agreeing to remainder of this deal (if it actually happens). It's too big of an investment from the city to not guarantee the 30 years regardless of a new team owner.

What owner in their right minds would buy the team and agree to that? No one in Arizona wants the team. No new owner from elsewhere will buy the team with the thought of keeping them there. And the city can’t keep the current owners from selling to who ever they want.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dont care said:

What owner in their right minds would buy the team and agree to that? No one in Arizona wants the team. No new owner from elsewhere will buy the team with the thought of keeping them there. And the city can’t keep the current owners from selling to who ever they want.

Nobody wants the team, but someone will probably want the gambling rights that come with the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/2/2022 at 5:47 PM, wildwing64 said:

 

 

 

Feels like they've been under a 30-year non-relocation agreement this whole time.

  • Like 3

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/2/2022 at 6:49 PM, Red Comet said:


On one hand, glad I’m not the only open Gundam fan here. On the other, it’s sad that the one thing stopping this insanity is going to be a suburban city council. 

im a Gundam fan too.  the UC is the better timeline.

 

so long and thanks for all the fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.