Las Vegas Coytoes?

[rams80]

4. Gretsky is a Multi- Millionaire. He should from a consortium with some of his fellow Canadians to buy the Coyotes and move the team BACK TO WINNEPEG!!!!

Since the Habs last won the cup back in 1993, The Stanley Cup Should be Renamed THE BETTMAN CUP!!!

[The_Admiral]

Any solution that involves Wayne Gretzky is worthy of being griddlebunnied: here's a guy who pays himself $8 million to be a bad coach. He's more like MJ than we thought.

[rams80]

Yes, but even more transparent a threat.

(Reuters) - The co-chief executive officer of BlackBerry maker Research in Motion Ltd received U.S. antitrust approval to buy the National Hockey League's Phoenix Coyotes, U.S. officials said on Tuesday.

Antitrust authorities completed their review of James Balsillie's deal for the Coyotes without taking any action to block it, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission said in a notice.

Balsillie offered to buy the money-losing hockey team in May when it filed for bankruptcy protection, but his offer is contingent on relocating the Coyotes to Ontario. NHL officials have said the league is committed to keeping the team in Phoenix and have fought with Coyotes' owner Jerry Moyes over who controls the hockey team.

Balsillie has threatened to drop his offer if the team's sale and relocation cannot be agreed upon by June 29.

The Coyotes have not made a profit since moving to Arizona in 1996.

Okay, so where do we go from here?

Back to bankruptcy court. I'm of the understanding that all this ruling says is that Balsillie's possible ownership of a telecommunications company and a hockey team is kosher under US anti-trust laws.

[stolilv87]

As a Northern Nevadan, I'd absolutely LOVE to see a pro sports franchise fall flat on it's face in that stink hole.

When did living an hour away from Nevada make you a northern Nevadan, and why so hateful? Don't listen to what other people tell you, go and see for yourself you'd actually like it down there.

Personally as a former Nevadan I think it would be nice to see the NHL be the first to jump at Las Vegas and a consortium Reinsdorf and Jerry Bruckheimer would probably be able to afford the expansion/relocation fee and could probably pay for most if not all of an arena. It wouldn't only help Las Vegas, but all of Nevada to finally have a major league team within the state, as Reno would more than likely become the ECHL or maybe even AHL affiliate of said team.

Unfortunately, at this time it won't happen. The current economic situation is very bad for Las Vegas, major building projects are being suspended or canceled in the case of the AEG/Harrah's Arena plan and the population boom is slowing down. Las Vegas is in the process of rebounding and building a 17-20,000-seat arena is still another five years down the road at least. The major problem though is fan support, most residents are transplants who either carry affiliations with teams from their hometown or will not support the team unless they're winning. Right now, Las Vegas is comfortable as a Class-AA hockey town in the ECHL and are actually the most stable affiliate the Calgary Flames have had for the past six years.

[Gothamite]

Can someone truthfully say what the heck the NHL and Bettman have against Jim Balsillie? Is it a legitimate business reason or is it some immature personal one? I mean really, he's loaded, he wants to invest in the league during a stressed economical climate, he wants a team to succeed by putting it in a market that will actually support the team as a social staple and not just a niche, he's familiar with the sport and supports it - not jut jumping on a bandwagon, and he's willing to do whatever it takes to achieve financial stability and success. What on Earth do these guys want?

Someone who doesn't use his money as an excuse to take a wild and prolific piss on the league's rules, regulations, and procedures, one would guess.

Okay, I'm not a hockey fan. So I haven't been following his three bids that closely. What exactly has he done to warrant that description?

[Sodboy13]

Can someone truthfully say what the heck the NHL and Bettman have against Jim Balsillie? Is it a legitimate business reason or is it some immature personal one? I mean really, he's loaded, he wants to invest in the league during a stressed economical climate, he wants a team to succeed by putting it in a market that will actually support the team as a social staple and not just a niche, he's familiar with the sport and supports it - not jut jumping on a bandwagon, and he's willing to do whatever it takes to achieve financial stability and success. What on Earth do these guys want?

Someone who doesn't use his money as an excuse to take a wild and prolific piss on the league's rules, regulations, and procedures, one would guess.

Okay, I'm not a hockey fan. So I haven't been following his three bids that closely. What exactly has he done to warrant that description?

Well, with Nashville, he started selling season tickets to a team he didn't actually own yet, which soured the NHL on hm. After that, knowing that he probably wouldn't be able to buy and move a team through standard channels, he's attempting to backdoor his way in through a bankruptcy loophole. In other words, he did things that made the league want no part of him, and now he's just trying to play the role of the world's richest party crasher. But yeah, once he forces he way in, I'm sure he'll fall right in line and follow every rule to the letter. (Your sarcasm detector should have made a notable blip right there.)

[Gothamite]

Well, okay - he did one thing. And at the time, that didn't seem so unreasonable. Grandstanding, sure. But "a wild and prolific piss on the league's rules, regulations, and procedures" seems a bit unfair.

From an outsider's point of view, it seems that Bettman has his panties in a bunch over a potential owner who's not afraid of him. I'm trying to think of examples of such owners who actually bought teams, and all I can come up with are Mark Cuban and Bill Veeck.

Now, I happen to worship at the altar of Veeck. And even though I don't have a terribly high opinion of Cuban I can't deny that he's been immeasurably good for the sport. So I fail to see Bettman's problem. Frankly (and speaking again as an outsider), I think more people ought to stand up to Bettman.

[CJR]

Keep in mind that the Predators fiasco came after Balsillie tried to buy the Pengiuns. There the NHL told him "You can buy the team but we reserve the right to step in and make decisions for you." He didn't do any of his ridiculous stuff until after the NHL did that.

[mantleisthebest7]

Personally, and perhaps I dont know enough about the situation, but I would like to see a team stay in Phoenix. At the same time, I would like to see some different locations get some teams. Unfortunately, hockey is a sport that dosnet catch the attention of certain locations (the South and parts of the west, for example) like other sports do. Thus, it is reallly confusing as to the direction the NHL will take from here on out. The NHL so far does not exist a three locations off the top of my head that have pro teams in each of the other big four, these locations being Seattle, Houston, and Oakland, and other locations which have two teams in the big four (New Orleans, Kansas City, San Francisco, Indianapolis, San Diego, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Milwaukee off the top of my head). Now youre thinking, many of those probably wouldnt work because of thier location and market. Here's my thought:

I believe putting teams in one or some of these locations has just as good a chance as any other location. Honestly, it depends on the success of the team. For example, who wouldve ever thought Tampa Bay would be a location a hockey team would stay in for more than 15 years? If the Lightning hadnt won the Stanley Cup in 2004, whos to say they wouldnt be a team in question of moving right now? Because they have a ring, interest grew in Florida and now the team, for the moment being, seems secure. Same with Anaheim, if they dont have the success theyve had in the past 6 or so years, what happens to the Ducks? What if Gretzky never went to Los Angeles? What if Dallas dosent win a stanley cup and appear in another? See what I mean? Its worth the risk sometimes to put teams in these seemingly farfetched locations. Just ask the Ducks, the Lightning, the Kings, the Stars, even the Sharks, etc.

So try a team in Seattle, try a team in Houston. Heck, try a team Kansas City or Indiana for all I care. You never know what could happen.

My second thought is, what if locations who may only have one team in the big four as of now or even no teams got a hockey team? Dont you think the residents of that location would pour all or most of thier support into that team? I'll use my beloved Utah for an example. Sports basically hates us. We have our Jazz and Real and we LOVE them. You guys have no idea. But we never get so much as a whisper in a conversation about anything else. We try, dont get us wrong. It may seem like we dont but we do try. The reason it seems like we dont is because no one gives us the light of day! Hockey is big with us here, currently we have the Grizzlies (whom we also LOVE). The E Center is consistenly packed and I cant tell you how many of my friends go to Grizzly games. Its bigger here than you think. Im 95% positive that if we had a team here, it would flourish. Just because we really honestly have nothing else, so now wed have something else to come to. Especially IF the Coyotes moved here and brought Gretzky along with them, HOLY COW! I could only imagine ticket sales here. Were always desperate for any star power to come here, how do you think the Jazz flourished as they did (and still do)? We had two of the 10 greatest players of all time in Stockton and Malone play most of or thier entire careers here. IF we had Gretzky coach here, i could imagine, whether we used the E center or the ESA, we'd be sold out every game. If the Coyotes considered us, thers no doubt we'd not only jump, but pounce at it.

I can imagine the same could be said for other locations in the same boat.

I am for also hockey in Canada, namely Hamilton and Winnipeg. Hamilton seems like a great market and the Winnipeg fans were always faithful to the end for their Jets. Nashville could move to Hamilton and Atlanta could move to Winnipeg to become the Tigers and Jets, respectively. Nashville and Atlanta seem to be the two teams in most trouble aside from Phoenix, and are perhaps the "gambles" that went bad. In other words, the polar opposites of Anaheim, Tampa Bay, Dallas, LA, and San Jose etc.

In a nutshell, what im saying is dont give up in southern and western locations. I named at least five teams who are doing well in locations as these. You never know what could happen, so go ahead and give it a go. Try locations that dont have many other, if not any at all, teams to root for. Go ahead and try Winniped and Hamilton. Fuse these all of these ideas together somehow and i think you'll have a successful NHL.

[BBTV]

Mantle,

You're ideas for who should get teams does not factor things like areas having suitable venues, local political and corporate commitments, market size, local revenue streams, etc.

There's a good reason why many if not all the cities on your list aren't factors in sports expansion / relocation discussions.

[Gothamite]

Yeah, mantle. You're ignoring some pretty substantial factors.

But even if we were to accept the idea that it's worth trying some of your locations, keeping a team there is another story. Otherwise you'd put the NHL out of business in three years.

If the Coyotes have never made a profit in Arizona, it might be time to pull that plug.

[STL FANATIC]

Frankly (and speaking again as an outsider), I think more people ought to stand up to Bettman.

You realize Bettman is executing the wishes of the owners (at least the large majority of them) who employee him, and not forcing his wishes on them, yes?

Bettman is not the dictator of the NHL, he works for the owners. When he stops doing what they'd like, I'm sure they'll stand up to him.

If the Coyotes have never made a profit in Arizona, it might be time to pull that plug.

I still contend that a more acceptable solution would be, "it might be time to see if Phoenix is interested in a competitive organization."

[mantleisthebest7]

Yeah, mantle. You're ignoring some pretty substantial factors.

But even if we were to accept the idea that it's worth trying some of your locations, keeping a team there is another story. Otherwise you'd put the NHL out of business in three years.

If the Coyotes have never made a profit in Arizona, it might be time to pull that plug.

Oh yes i understand completely what you and bringbackthevet said, and you guys are right I shouldve included those factors as well. All I was trying to say was that there has been more success in these "farfetched" locations than people realize. Of the southern and western teams, more have enjoyed some or great success compared to those who havent. I was just trying to make a point that if a market in these areas were availiable, that it would still have a chance of succeeding. It would just depend on the teams play in its coming future, just as any expansion or moving team would.

I did breifly mention in my argument for Utah there were at least two existing venues that could possibly work. If the Grizzlies' E Center ended up not cutting it, then I dont see why the Energy Solutions Arena couldnt work. It houses the Jazz just fine and is relatively young compared to other venues. Plus, Jazz games are consistently packed and among the greatest atmospheres in the NBA in my opinion. If an NHL team in Utah had the success that I envision and believe theyd have, Im positive the same atmosphere and attendance would exist for them.

[IceCap]

Well, okay - he did one thing. And at the time, that didn't seem so unreasonable. Grandstanding, sure. But "a wild and prolific piss on the league's rules, regulations, and procedures" seems a bit unfair.

From an outsider's point of view, it seems that Bettman has his panties in a bunch over a potential owner who's not afraid of him. I'm trying to think of examples of such owners who actually bought teams, and all I can come up with are Mark Cuban and Bill Veeck.

Now, I happen to worship at the altar of Veeck. And even though I don't have a terribly high opinion of Cuban I can't deny that he's been immeasurably good for the sport. So I fail to see Bettman's problem. Frankly (and speaking again as an outsider), I think more people ought to stand up to Bettman.

Watch it Goth. That kind of talk gets you labelled a Utopian dream smasher who hates everyone who ever lived south of the Mason-Dixon line.

Frankly (and speaking again as an outsider), I think more people ought to stand up to Bettman.

You realize Bettman is executing the wishes of the owners (at least the large majority of them) who employee him, and not forcing his wishes on them, yes?

Bettman is not the dictator of the NHL, he works for the owners. When he stops doing what they'd like, I'm sure they'll stand up to him.

And you know of the inner working of the NHL how? How exactly do you know how the Bettman/NHL ownership relationship works? You don't. Neither do I. So until one of us gets some super secret insider knowledge neither of us should pretend we know what the relationship between the varying factions of NHL leadership are.

So in absence of that information Gary Bettman is responsible for the NHL's decisions as he is the the de facto head of the league. I realize it's the INTERNET COOL GUY trend to go against the common perception of things, and call those who hold those common perceptions to be unformed rubes, but come on now.

If the Coyotes have never made a profit in Arizona, it might be time to pull that plug.

I still contend that a more acceptable solution would be, "it might be time to see if Phoenix is interested in a competitive organization."

Again, I fail to see how this is relevant. The reason for the Coyotes losing hundreds of millions of dollars for over a decade is really inconsequential. For WHATEVER reason the market is dead. Play the blame game all you want. Just get the team out of a market where they aren't making any money.

FTR the Coyotes were a regular playoff team for the first six years of their existence. Do you know how many new market teams would kill for that kind of off-the-bat record?

[STL FANATIC]

IceCap, you're more jaded then the people you attempt to call out. I say that (1) Phoenix can succeed, and (2) Gary Bettman isn't a dictator idiot, and it means I'm some uber supporter of hockey down-south just for the hell of it?

I don't have to know the personal relationship between Gary Bettman and the owners, because I know this fact. WE know this fact. The owners employ Gary Bettman. I'll say it again. THE OWNERS EMPLOY GARY BETTMAN.

If they didn't support what he was doing, he would be let go. To argue that is silly.

The Phoenix market is not dead, it is dormant. A legitimate effort could see the market thrive. I understand you think that whether it was a bad effort or not that the city can never again be interested in the NHL, but I think that's silly. Put a team contending team in that market and it will draw great crowds within 3 years.

Sure they had a playoff team in 5 of the first 6 years. They also supported the team the first couple of years. But 16 out of 30 teams make the playoffs, and it was 16 out of even less back then. And the Coyotes got knocked out in the first round in ALL FIVE of those playoff seasons. It wasn't like the fans were being treated to a regular Cup contender. For the most part they were borderline playoff teams. And that's not gonna entice people to become diehard fans, very easily. Certainly not when they also chose to sell off the fan favorites.

If the Phoenix Coyotes owners would have planned for losses that set up for future gain, they could have had a monetarily successful franchise probably in the last few years. But they didn't, they just operated on short-term plans and never established anything.

You say enough is enough, the market is dead. I say it's been a crummy 13 years, but they aren't at square -13, they're just still at square 1.

And at any point an ownership group decides to run that team in a proper manner, then we'll have a chance to see the Phoenix market flourish.

But I just hate Canada and you just don't think hockey can exist south of Minnesota.

[The_Admiral]

You work harder to make better excuses for that sorry-ass outfit than the people sitting in bankruptcy court.

[DG_YouKnowWhatThatMeans]

You work harder to make better excuses for that sorry-ass outfit than the people sitting in bankruptcy court.

It's the Tom Friedman defense. "Just six more months -- YOU'LL SEE! This time for real!"

[Brian in Boston]

And you know of the inner working of the NHL how? How exactly do you know how the Bettman/NHL ownership relationship works?

While I can't speak for STL FANATIC, here's my story.

I am a former sports journalist. One of the regular beats I covered was the National Hockey League. Amongst the interviews I conducted over the years were Q&As with every level of NHL personnel, including players, coaches, GMs and owners. I have had the latter two classes of interview subjects discuss the overall NHL power-structure with me. Their description confirms what STL FANATIC outlined: the NHL's commissioner is hired by the collective of the league's owners and works for the betterment of the league at their behest. The commissioner is, in point of fact, an employee. He is not making decisions unilaterally, he is not making decisions without the input of the NHL's owners and he is most definitely not making decisions that don't square with the wishes of the majority of the league's owners on any given issue.

In short, while it may be simplistically comforting to establish Gary Bettman as the all-powerful "boogeyman" responsible for each and every one of the NHL's ills, reality does not conform to the parameters of that fantasy.

[IceCap]

And you know of the inner working of the NHL how? How exactly do you know how the Bettman/NHL ownership relationship works?

While I can't speak for STL FANATIC, here's my story.

I am a former sports journalist. One of the regular beats I covered was the National Hockey League. Amongst the interviews I conducted over the years were Q&As with every level of NHL personnel, including players, coaches, GMs and owners. I have had the latter two classes of interview subjects discuss the overall NHL power-structure with me. Their description confirms what STL FANATIC outlined: the NHL's commissioner is hired by the collective of the league's owners and works for the betterment of the league at their behest. The commissioner is, in point of fact, an employee. He is not making decisions unilaterally, he is not making decisions without the input of the NHL's owners and he is most definitely not making decisions that don't square with the wishes of the majority of the league's owners on any given issue.

In short, while it may be simplistically comforting to establish Gary Bettman as the all-powerful "boogeyman" responsible for each and every one of the NHL's ills, reality does not conform to the parameters of that fantasy.

Of course Gary Bettman is the employee of the collective NHL ownership. Yes, they pay his salary. I never doubted that. That's a well-established fact.

What I'm saying is that you need to look at what the NHL ownership employees him to do. Do they employ him (or, in theory, anyone else in the future who may be NHL Commissioner) to simply be a spokesman for the policies and decisions they as a group come up with? Hardly. To hire someone at that salary to just be the spokesman of your club/partnership/collective ownership is a huge waste of money.

No, Bettman isn't the helpless lackey getting blamed for the NHL ownership's decisions you and STL paint him out to be. You said it yourself, he's hired by the owners for the betterment of the league on their behalf. What does that say to me? It says the NHL owners hire him to make decisions. Thus meaning that he's more then just a hapless figure head. He impacts NHL policy just as much as the owners who hire him.

Is it simplistic to view Mr. Bettman as the all power tyrant of the NHL? Yes, it is. It's equally simplistic, however, to assume he's just a puppet for the collective NHL ownership.

IceCap, you're more jaded then the people you attempt to call out. I say that (1) Phoenix can succeed, and (2) Gary Bettman isn't a dictator idiot, and it means I'm some uber supporter of hockey down-south just for the hell of it?

I don't have to know the personal relationship between Gary Bettman and the owners, because I know this fact. WE know this fact. The owners employ Gary Bettman. I'll say it again. THE OWNERS EMPLOY GARY BETTMAN.

If they didn't support what he was doing, he would be let go. To argue that is silly.

The Phoenix market is not dead, it is dormant. A legitimate effort could see the market thrive. I understand you think that whether it was a bad effort or not that the city can never again be interested in the NHL, but I think that's silly. Put a team contending team in that market and it will draw great crowds within 3 years.

Sure they had a playoff team in 5 of the first 6 years. They also supported the team the first couple of years. But 16 out of 30 teams make the playoffs, and it was 16 out of even less back then. And the Coyotes got knocked out in the first round in ALL FIVE of those playoff seasons. It wasn't like the fans were being treated to a regular Cup contender. For the most part they were borderline playoff teams. And that's not gonna entice people to become diehard fans, very easily. Certainly not when they also chose to sell off the fan favorites.

If the Phoenix Coyotes owners would have planned for losses that set up for future gain, they could have had a monetarily successful franchise probably in the last few years. But they didn't, they just operated on short-term plans and never established anything.

You say enough is enough, the market is dead. I say it's been a crummy 13 years, but they aren't at square -13, they're just still at square 1.

And at any point an ownership group decides to run that team in a proper manner, then we'll have a chance to see the Phoenix market flourish.

But I just hate Canada and you just don't think hockey can exist south of Minnesota.

Reading is fun and informative. I have stated on many occasions regarding this whole Coyotes debate that if Hamilton is so offensive to the NHL (oh no not Canada!) I would be more then happy to see the team move to Kansas City, another market where I think they have a fantastic chance at success, in no small part due to your Blues. So you're overly simplistic pot shot there at the end has no real value, not even in a satiric sense, as it doesn't all reflect my position on NHL markets. Not only would I be in favour of the Coyotes going to KC, I've also said that southern teams such as Tampa Bay, Dallas, and Carolina should be left alone and losing them would be hit to the NHL as a whole. Again, overly simplistic statements designed to make a point only work if there's some truth behind them. There is none, at least not behind the half that deals with me.

In short I'm not anti-southern NHL hockey, I'm anti-Arizona NHL hockey because I believe that this one particular market's continued existence will ultimately be detrimental to the league. The NHL doesn't have the appeal to the causal American sports fan or the cash necessary to play Montreal Expos with a franchise ala MLB. Even then, we all saw how that situation ended up.

The half that deals with you on the other hand....

Well I'll just say you profess one thing while continuing behaviour that seems to enforce the opposite. Nashville? That was borderline. There was a chance for it to get better before it gets worse, and we're still waiting for the final verdict on that one. Phoenix though? They've past the point of no return. $400 million lost. Just think about that number. How many of us here will even get to see $1 million in our own name by the end of our lives?

$400 million? That's a staggering number. The fan support in Phoenix currently makes Nashville look like an Original Six team. A Save the Coyotes rally drew 200 people. I've seen more at indy pro wrestling events. To me it seems pretty clear that this market is dead. Any attempt to revitalize it will fail because the time it would take to build a winning team would just result in a continued loss of hundreds of millions of dollars. Yet you're fighting fanatically to try and convince us that Phoenix IS a viable market, despite 13 years of money being flushed down the toilet telling us all otherwise.

The question of "why?" has to come up.

First Nashville, now Phoenix. It's a trend of you trying to argue for the continued existence of NHL teams in worse and worse financial condition. How bad does a team have to have it before STL gives it his blessing to leave the market? 'Cause without waiting for your answer I can tell you it's unrealistic. The Coyotes are at the bare minimum of fan support needed to survive. It's the ideal time to move, actually. Yet you keep insisting that "in a few more years, you'll all see."

Really? In a few more years at their current level they won't even be financially viable enough to move to a new market.

The time to move this franchise is now. Waiting only runs the very high risk of getting them deeper into debt.

Again, I have to point out, this team made the playoffs five of its first six years in Phoenix. Did they ever advance past round 1? No. Does that matter? It shouldn't. Again, owners of new market teams would kill to just get their team into the playoffs at the ratio the Coyotes did at the beginning in Phoenix. They were, by every definition, a regular playoff team. That should be enough to build a solid fanbase in a new market.

[The_Admiral]

The only justification I can come up with for STL FANATIC's insufferable Coyotes cheerleading is that since the salary cap is based on league revenues, it helps the small-market Blues if the cap stays low. Even that doesn't make any sense.