NHL Anti-Thread: Bad Business Decision Aggregator

[spartacat_12]

4 hours ago, Gary said:

https://arizonasports.com/story/3523771/arizona-coyotes-expect-play-mullett-arena-2023-24/?fbclid=IwAR0_KZ3IbvlxKtr8UOMpWZanpU-qRpLm-kDa0eokuD0lz-2oYOWjLZw5CEA&mibextid=Zxz2cZ
 

The circus will play on for another season

 

It would have been very ambitious to move the team to a new market this off-season. The Thrashers to Winnipeg announcement happened in May, but it sounds like most of the details had been worked out well before that. 

 

2 hours ago, IceCap said:

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.

The North bubble division was built out of necessity. No one wants a 3 hour time change to travel for a divisional game. 

[Sodboy13]

Is Patrick paying? Is Jake from State Farm paying? No? Next.

[Red Comet]

I'm pretty sure this is nothing, but IMO, an NHL team has a better shot at long-term success than an NBA team does. If the NBA team sucks, people can go to Lawrence, Manhattan or Columbia to watch good basketball. Not so much with an NHL team. Plus, there's the whole in-state rivalry with St. Louis but, again, I'm pretty sure that Patrick Mahomes is :censored:posting. 

 

Also, let me highlight this

 

 

Edited May 18, 2023 by Red Comet

[Gary]

Spoiler

 

 

 

[Dilbert]

As much as Id love to see Quebec City back in the NHL, I think in order to keep the divisional and conference alignment set the best options would be Houston, Kansas City and Salt Lake.  A move to the East to Quebec would mean either Columbus or Detroit would have to move back to the west, which I know neither want to do, or they could do the Covid divisional alignment with an 8 team Canadian division, and an East, Central, and West divisions and scrap the conferences.

[LMU]

31 minutes ago, Gary said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

“Re-engaging”

 

Translation: they’re showing up at city halls in Mesa, Scottsdale, Goodyear, and Surprise with gift baskets.

 

[BBTV]

42 minutes ago, Dilbert said:

As much as Id love to see Quebec City back in the NHL, I think in order to keep the divisional and conference alignment set the best options would be Houston, Kansas City and Salt Lake.  A move to the East to Quebec would mean either Columbus or Detroit would have to move back to the west, which I know neither want to do, or they could do the Covid divisional alignment with an 8 team Canadian division, and an East, Central, and West divisions and scrap the conferences.

 

The last thing they should care about is divisional/conference alignment.  Put the teams in the best places and then figure it out from there.  It's 2023 - temporarily having a team east of it's divisional time zone isn't ideal, but not insurmountable.  If Quebec is the best available market, then go there and don't look back.  Same if if one of KC or Houston is deemed the best market.  None of this SLC nonsense.

[who do you think]

> noooooooo you can't go to Quebec City it will mess up the alignment!

 

Gets more ridiculous every time I read it.

[FiddySicks]

8 hours ago, SCMODS said:

I don't think Golden 1 Center in Sacramento has a hockey set up. 

It doesn’t by design because the Kings dumbass owners didn’t want to risk the potential competition. 
 

I wouldn’t say Sacramento is a good option for a hockey team, but people are throwing out places like Portland and Salt Lake City so yeah, why the not? Sacramento Coyotes FTW.

It would be really nice to finally get a professional hockey team in Northern California. Been too long without one. 

[VampyrRabbit]

1 hour ago, LMU said:

“Re-engaging”

 

Translation: they’re showing up at city halls in Mesa, Scottsdale, Goodyear, and Surprise with gift baskets.

 

Glendale - "how about the rent you still owe you cheap f***ers?

[CS85]

3 hours ago, Red Comet said:

I'm pretty sure this is nothing, but IMO, an NHL team has a better shot at long-term success than an NBA team does. If the NBA team sucks, people can go to Lawrence, Manhattan or Columbia to watch good basketball. Not so much with an NHL team. Plus, there's the whole in-state rivalry with St. Louis but, again, I'm pretty sure that Patrick Mahomes is :censored:posting. 

 

Also, let me highlight this

 

 

Ah yes, just what the NHL is missing:  teams in red and black.  

[SCMODS]

Death, Taxes & the Arizona Coyotes. Evil never dies. 

[maz]

Just play half of the home games in Puerto Rico. Worked for the Expos, right?

[gosioux76]

15 hours ago, Sodboy13 said:

The Québec City metro area has an estimated population of 840,000-850,000, putting it on par with metropolitan statistical areas like North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton, Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, and Columbia, SC. The Hartford MSA is a shade over 1.2 million, by the way.

 

The Canadian Dollar is worth 74 American cents, which oddly, was also the going rate in May of 1995.

 

The American TV partners probably would not be thrilled trading out Market 10 (even given the current l-o-l state of interest in the NHL there) for a foreign country and language, and those deals are worth a whole lot more real money than they used to be.

 

Short of a bulletproof billionaire coming in for QC like one did for Winnipeg, it all seems like a really tough ask, no matter how much the city loves its hockey and misses its team.

 

I know nobody likes to hear the realities of sports economics, but @Sodboy13 makes some really good points here. The NHL's return to Winnipeg may have been successful, but I can't imagine franchise owners and broadcast partners being enthusiastic about what adding a second small, but plucky Canadian market to the league will do it their valuations and revenue potential. 

 

I think there's no doubt that QC is the market that deserves a team.  But professional sports leagues aren't known to be charitable when it comes to profit potential. 

[kolob]

16 hours ago, mcj882000 said:

Sorry to be pedantic but acktually it's from the World Figure Skating Championships a year earlier  

In all seriousness yeah, it's from 20 years ago, but it's not actually any better now. At the very least this more modern photo shows that the NHL rink does not, in fact, have to run under the sideline bleachers the way the international-sized ice seemed to, thankfully, but it's still not good as a long-term solution. And since I don't think the Jazz are looking for a new arena (yet), a long-term solution is what it would have to be.

At said 2002 Olympics though, they didn't even do the hockey gold medal games here, they ran those at the E Center way out in West Valley City; and lest anyone think another suburban arena is the solution to the Coyotes problems: the E Center only seats 12,000 fans. 

 

Yeah, the Delta Center is not a long term solution. And, the Maverik Center location works for minor league hockey even with a renovation. However the west side of the valley is growing rapidly that it COULD work, but I am of the belief that if hockey is going to work long term here in SLC it will have to be owned by Ryan Smith, or whoever owns the Jazz, with a shared arena.

[habsfan1]

1 hour ago, gosioux76 said:

 

I know nobody likes to hear the realities of sports economics, but @Sodboy13 makes some really good points here. The NHL's return to Winnipeg may have been successful, but I can't imagine franchise owners and broadcast partners being enthusiastic about what adding a second small, but plucky Canadian market to the league will do it their valuations and revenue potential. 

 

I think there's no doubt that QC is the market that deserves a team.  But professional sports leagues aren't known to be charitable when it comes to profit potential. 

 

I won't deny that are some good points too. But there are some things that lead to confusion.

 

The part that's the most mind boggling is that even though Quebec City is not the most lucrative town, it can still sell hockey more than Arizona and it can still succeed. I find it absurd that the League executives would rather make more American dollars by other means (network money, etc) from a team that can't afford it's own building, low attendance, and low interest for the sport overall, instead of having a team in Canada where hockey simply sells.

 

I always thought Gary Bettman's job was to make money selling hockey. But from some of the things I read, it seems like he's content to continue making NHL money off of Arizona, in spite of the decades of hockey problems.

 

At least with Houston, their chances for success are high because the city is large, the building is suitable, and they have a good attendance history for the Aeros franchises.

[gosioux76]

27 minutes ago, habsfan1 said:

 

I won't deny that are some good points too. But there are some things that lead to confusion.

 

The part that's the most mind boggling is that even though Quebec City is not the most lucrative town, it can still sell hockey more than Arizona and it can still succeed. I find it absurd that the League executives would rather make more American dollars by other means (network money, etc) from a team that can't afford it's own building, low attendance, and low interest for the sport overall, instead of having a team in Canada where hockey simply sells.

 

I always thought Gary Bettman's job was to make money selling hockey. But from some of the things I read, it seems like he's content to continue making NHL money off of Arizona, in spite of the decades of hockey problems.

 

At least with Houston, their chances for success are high because the city is large, the building is suitable, and they have a good attendance history for the Aeros franchises.

 

But attendance (i.e. ticket revenue) and local interest aren't a big part of the equation when evaluating the big money drivers of pro sports, which is the size of the potential TV audience and franchise valuations. 

 

I'm not going to pretend to have the number on this, but it seems logical to me that the league's value with a failing team in a top 10 market like Phoenix (or Atlanta or Houston) is higher when it comes to pursuing TV revenue than a league that has a super-successful team in a tiny market like QC. 

[AJM]

14 hours ago, LMU said:

“Re-engaging”

 

Translation: they’re showing up at city halls in Mesa, Scottsdale, Goodyear, and Surprise with gift baskets.

 

 

I can tell you that Mesa has been a quiet convo in economic development circles in the valley for at least a year...somewhat in the background in case the deal fell apart. Fiesta Mall site.

[kolob]

Honestly, the NHL shouldn't have expanded to 32 until the Arizona situation was solved. It would have been much easier to sell/move the Coyotes to Vegas or Seattle and then expand. Now if the Coyotes leave for Quebec, Houston, SLC, etc., etc. the situation is more hasty than if the NHL opened up an expansion bid process.

 

MLB is smart in waiting to expand until Tampa and Oakland are figured out.

[WestCoastBias]