Jump to content

Dallas Stars Up for sale?


DustDevil61

Recommended Posts

So he's sold the Rangers, and he's thinking about selling the Stars.

He's either trying to get cash to keep hold of Liverpool, or that'll be next on the block. They're hemorrhaging money.

This was one team that should never left the Twin Cities. If they move, they should go to either Quebec City or Regina!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So he's sold the Rangers, and he's thinking about selling the Stars.

He's either trying to get cash to keep hold of Liverpool, or that'll be next on the block. They're hemorrhaging money.

Hicks Sports Group took out a lot of debt which creditors are calling in. HSG basically used the value of the Rangers, stars, and share in the American Airlines Center in order to purchase Liverpool, but the line of credit for Liverpool is separate.

The WSJ had a story last April on HGS and how they defaulted on many loans. While the WSJ story talks about the bad economy, Hicks tried in 1999 to start a regional sports network, but it never took off and he sold the teams broadcast rights to FSN Southwest.

From April 2009- HSG in Default

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was one team that should never left the Twin Cities. If they move, they should go to either Quebec City or Regina!

While I'll agree on the franchise leaving Minnesota, Dallas is one southern city that I would rather not see lose its NHL team. Mr. Cuban, where are you when Dallas NHL fans need you?

Still, if someone from Utah is interested and not named Dave Checketts (he owns the Blues) we could be seeing the Utah Stars--on ice! :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So he's sold the Rangers, and he's thinking about selling the Stars.

He's either trying to get cash to keep hold of Liverpool, or that'll be next on the block. They're hemorrhaging money.

This was one team that should never left the Twin Cities. If they move, they should go to either Quebec City or Regina!

I'm not quite sure the EPL would be keen on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dallas has proven itself a fair hockey market, I just wish it wasn't at the expense of the Twin Cities, which is a radical place and kind of the vector of American hockey. Sure, they have a team again, but their name is retarded, their sweaters don't match, and their old team won a championship after leaving. The damage is done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If baseball can have Red Sox and White Sox, or Red Sox and Reds, then why can't we have North Stars and Stars (Lone Stars?). I find it extremely hard to believe that even with the trademark issues that SOMETHING can't be worked out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So he's sold the Rangers, and he's thinking about selling the Stars.

He's either trying to get cash to keep hold of Liverpool, or that'll be next on the block. They're hemorrhaging money.

This was one team that should never left the Twin Cities. If they move, they should go to either Quebec City or Regina!

Bettman doesn't want to move a completely useless franchise that is in Phoenix, I cannot see the Stars leaving Dallas considering how much success they have had on and off the ice in their 16 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If baseball can have Red Sox and White Sox, or Red Sox and Reds, then why can't we have North Stars and Stars (Lone Stars?). I find it extremely hard to believe that even with the trademark issues that SOMETHING can't be worked out.

"Red Sox" and "White Sox" are different enough to co-exist since they've been around forever and " Stockings" has always been pretty traditional ballteam nomenclature. I suppose there's the issue of each team's fans claiming that only its team can simply call itself "the Sawx" or "the Sahhx," respectively, and I'll take the South Side's...er, side, since they've been wearing simply "Sox" for so damn long, but whatever, no big deal. The Red Sox and Reds don't really cross paths enough to have much trouble, and nobody calls the Red Sox the Reds for short.

Having the North Stars and the Stars (you can't have twenty Lone Stars) would be a mess because it's not an established situation, and you'd have the North Stars who became the Stars playing a bunch of games against the North Stars who are not the Stars but sometimes go by Stars because even then people just called 'em the Stars. It's like a crazy double-helix of The Cleveland Deal and The Sneetches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If baseball can have Red Sox and White Sox, or Red Sox and Reds, then why can't we have North Stars and Stars (Lone Stars?). I find it extremely hard to believe that even with the trademark issues that SOMETHING can't be worked out.

"Red Sox" and "White Sox" are different enough to co-exist since they've been around forever and " Stockings" has always been pretty traditional ballteam nomenclature. I suppose there's the issue of each team's fans claiming that only its team can simply call itself "the Sawx" or "the Sahhx," respectively, and I'll take the South Side's...er, side, since they've been wearing simply "Sox" for so damn long, but whatever, no big deal. The Red Sox and Reds don't really cross paths enough to have much trouble, and nobody calls the Red Sox the Reds for short.

Having the North Stars and the Stars (you can't have twenty Lone Stars) would be a mess because it's not an established situation, and you'd have the North Stars who became the Stars playing a bunch of games against the North Stars who are not the Stars but sometimes go by Stars because even then people just called 'em the Stars. It's like a crazy double-helix of The Cleveland Deal and The Sneetches.

If it can work in the CFL (Rough Riders/Roughriders) and in the AHL (Admirals/Admirals) the i know that it can work in the NHL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If baseball can have Red Sox and White Sox, or Red Sox and Reds, then why can't we have North Stars and Stars (Lone Stars?). I find it extremely hard to believe that even with the trademark issues that SOMETHING can't be worked out.

"Red Sox" and "White Sox" are different enough to co-exist since they've been around forever and " Stockings" has always been pretty traditional ballteam nomenclature. I suppose there's the issue of each team's fans claiming that only its team can simply call itself "the Sawx" or "the Sahhx," respectively, and I'll take the South Side's...er, side, since they've been wearing simply "Sox" for so damn long, but whatever, no big deal. The Red Sox and Reds don't really cross paths enough to have much trouble, and nobody calls the Red Sox the Reds for short.

Having the North Stars and the Stars (you can't have twenty Lone Stars) would be a mess because it's not an established situation, and you'd have the North Stars who became the Stars playing a bunch of games against the North Stars who are not the Stars but sometimes go by Stars because even then people just called 'em the Stars. It's like a crazy double-helix of The Cleveland Deal and The Sneetches.

If it can work in the CFL (Rough Riders/Roughriders) and in the AHL (Admirals/Admirals) the i know that it can work in the NHL!

They are minor leagues, with minor league branding concerns. These are the majors, with much larger concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If baseball can have Red Sox and White Sox, or Red Sox and Reds, then why can't we have North Stars and Stars (Lone Stars?). I find it extremely hard to believe that even with the trademark issues that SOMETHING can't be worked out.

"Red Sox" and "White Sox" are different enough to co-exist since they've been around forever and " Stockings" has always been pretty traditional ballteam nomenclature. I suppose there's the issue of each team's fans claiming that only its team can simply call itself "the Sawx" or "the Sahhx," respectively, and I'll take the South Side's...er, side, since they've been wearing simply "Sox" for so damn long, but whatever, no big deal. The Red Sox and Reds don't really cross paths enough to have much trouble, and nobody calls the Red Sox the Reds for short.

Having the North Stars and the Stars (you can't have twenty Lone Stars) would be a mess because it's not an established situation, and you'd have the North Stars who became the Stars playing a bunch of games against the North Stars who are not the Stars but sometimes go by Stars because even then people just called 'em the Stars. It's like a crazy double-helix of The Cleveland Deal and The Sneetches.

By that standard, you can't have twenty North Stars (or twenty Maple Leafs for that matter). And someone new to hockey wouldn't be any more confused at Stars and North Stars than someone new to baseball would be to some of its nicknames. If they brought back the "classic" North Stars colors, both teams would be using different shades of green and yellow/gold. Add to it Dallas' preference for black over green and they wouldn't even have similar identities. I'm still not seeing a reason why it wouldn't work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, trust me, it's really too much of a mess. Forget it; we had a good thing going and they ruined it, the end, now we're stuck with the dopey-ass indoor youth soccer team "Minnesota Wild" and there's no turning back.

Nobody's really new to baseball, anyway. You don't get into it like you "get into" hockey, which takes a conscious effort. It's just sort of around you for you to take in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree because I can't imagine a mess that wouldn't be worth it to get rid of "Wild" and give the U.S. hockey capital back its true identity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree because I can't imagine a mess that wouldn't be worth it to get rid of "Wild" and give the U.S. hockey capital back its true identity.

I have to agree with the admiral here. While I would have loved the North Stars to stay...they did not. I'd have taken a Cleveland Browns deal too (name/logo/uniforms but not faux history), but that ship has sailed. Besides, the love for the Wild here is undeniable. If most people feel it's a stupid name (which I do), they seem to have gotten over it.

I don't feel that the "stars" and "north stars" would work out well. When they were still here, we often referred to the North Stars as the "Stars". It's possible, but just does not make any sense.

There is no bottom-line reason to make the change. The history is fully with the Dallas franchise (as it should be and as the original Browns should be in Baltimore) and the Wild are very successful in terms of popularity and merchandise sales.

It's too bad hockey is not nearly as huge in the US as football. If it was, the idea of moving a team from Minnesota to Dallas may have caused enough outcry to give us a Browns deal. But it's long over and changing now would be a mess.

I'll never feel about the Wild as I did about the North Stars (who moved away when I went of to college...losing my team and living the next 12 years in non-NHL places slid the NHL down my list), but it's the team we have now and I doubt dubbing them the north stars would have made that much of a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Outside of the messy branding, the main reason to do it is that the Dallas Stars are the former Minnesota North Stars, the Minnesota Wild are not.

Perhaps the Cleveland Browns treatment would have been better, perhaps not, but as others have said, that's over now. They don't flaunt it, but I'm pretty sure the Stars honor or at least take note of their North Stars history.

And honestly, outside of the fact that I'd make some changes to their jerseys, I don't think the Wild have a bad thing going. On it's face the name seems a little lame, but I really don't mind it. At all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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