Is Atlanta Burning?

[the admiral]

Basically the theory is that the NHL has done so much to keep the Coyotes in Phoenix that Bettman won't let them move because he'll look like an idiot if they do after the fight he's put up to keep them there.

He's also yanked Winnipeg's chain long enough though, and the True North conglomerate that wants to bring a team to the MTS Centre is headed up by a legitimate billionaire, someone the NHL wouldn't mind having among their ownership ranks. So they sell the Thrashers off to True North, Winnipeg gets a team, and the NHL saves face in Glendale.

This is completely illogical, as the Thrashers aren't nearly as bad off as the Coyotes are, so it's exactly the type of thing Bettman and his marry band of idiots would do.

A likely scenario, but it hasn't stopped being illegal for Boots Del Hulsizer to buy the Coyotes with a grant from the taxpayers, and the league isn't relenting on its overinflated sale price that necessitates said grant (which is only-the-goddamned-NHL-worthy, because this entire Goldwater mess could be obviated by selling him the team at their market value of about $40 million and taking a $100 million bath for the right to fail where they see fit, which is why they bought the team in the first place, if you still remember when Jim Balsillie was trying to move the team to Hamilton), so I don't see how the Thrashers are going to beat the Coyotes to Winnipeg. And as much of a Winnipeg booster as I've been from day one of this fiasco (I was never in favor of a Hamilton team), even I think the entire idea of two teams jockeying for a mid-sized city in North Dakota Bonus Coverage is absurdly implausible.

But anyway, it sounds like there are indeed Atlanta groups trying to buy all the Spirit properties, so lots of luck with that one. Even if they have their crap together better than the Spirit group, they're not going to make greater Atlanta stop being an unnavigable asphalt spiderweb that nobody wants to reckon with on a Wednesday night.

[BigMac12]

Apparently it is, when the Coyotes, who have absolutely no fans or support in Glendale, are being kept from moving by the local government (with illegal schemes) and the NHL.

Yea, because the downfall of IceEdge lays squarely on the feet of the Coyotes fans. That is illogical and a compelte fallacy!

[BBTV]

Wouldn't that story break on something other than a small-town blog post? Maybe I'm underrating that Clarence fellow, but if true, wouldn't other outlets be all over it? Even though it is the NHL, I'd expect it to be somewhere legitimate. Also - move "before the end of the season"? I'm assuming he means "announce a move".

[Lights Out]

Yea, because the downfall of IceEdge lays squarely on the feet of the Coyotes fans. That is illogical and a compelte fallacy!

The Coyotes could be owned by the devil himself and renamed the Phoenix Evil Fruits, and it still wouldn't be an excuse not to show up to the games if you want the team to stay. Fans boycotting the games because the owner is terrible is what got the Hornets moved from Charlotte to New Orleans, for example.

[the admiral]

Let's come up with which NHL owners aren't terrible. Here's my list:

Mike Ilitch: spends tons of money on the Red Wings because they're his favorite toy and keeps ticket prices low because they play in a metal box in effing pisshole Detroit and thus can't get away with charging more

Rocky Wirtz: spends tons of money on the Blackhawks because it seems to make him lots of money and it spites his dead dad

Comcast-Spectacor: spends tons of money on the Flyers because it's Comcast and they can

National Hockey League: schedules all the Coyotes' home games on weekends so that everyone from Hockeytown USA (Scottsdale) can make it to the games, and then spends the other 29 teams' money at the trade deadline. Who else gets to do that?

Everyone else pretty much blows, and is either incompetent, cheap, poor, imaginary-rich (same as poor), or headed to prison (often connected to imaginary-rich). This is why I don't really care when Atlanta folks say they have "bad ownership." You and everyone else, pal.

[rams80]

Apparently it is, when the Coyotes, who have absolutely no fans or support in Glendale, are being kept from moving by the local government (with illegal schemes) and the NHL.

Yea, because the downfall of IceEdge lays squarely on the feet of the Coyotes fans. That is illogical and a compelte fallacy!

Yes, because this presupposes that the Coyotes have fans.

[the admiral]

The downfall of Ice Edge was that they were basically internet trolls with diplomas. Also, they didn't have any money, which is apparently more often a requirement for buying an NHL team than having money. They call the NFL the No Fun League. Call us No Honest Liquidity.

[BBTV]

I don't know. This isn't the NFL, or even (in some places) baseball, where going to the game is about a lot more than just going to the game. If a team is threatening to leave, or even just looking like it's going to leave, why, unless possibly as part of some kind of organized effort, invest yourself financially and/or emotionally into it only to end up being all butthurt when they eventually do go? Why do I bring my kid to a game, only for him to get hooked on the team (which is exactly what they want), and then have to explain to him why we can't go to any games anymore? I can also see not wanting to put money into the hands of a scumbag owner. Again, it isn't like the NFL, where in all but a few markets, Lucifer himself could be writing the checks, and 80,000 would still come out. This isn't really to defend "Ow Ow Ahrooooh!" Nation, because I really don't think it would have mattered either way, just that it's too easy to just flat out criticize a fan base for not showing up. Even in the cases of a good market where people stay away for some reason, there still shouldn't be a team there just "because", but sometimes a situation just doesn't work out for reasons that aren't really anyone's "fault". Again, that's not the case here, because there's been mistakes made the entire way by the league, the city, the ownership, the... well, everyone.

[the admiral]

I can also see not wanting to put money into the hands of a scumbag owner.

This disqualifies every team but the Packers, then, doesn't it? And even then, some of those stockholders have some skeletons in their closets. The staff at Walleye Wally's Supper Club in Slinger hasn't forgotten...

[rams80]

I don't know. This isn't the NFL, or even (in some places) baseball, where going to the game is about a lot more than just going to the game. If a team is threatening to leave, or even just looking like it's going to leave, why, unless possibly as part of some kind of organized effort, invest yourself financially and/or emotionally into it only to end up being all butthurt when they eventually do go? Why do I bring my kid to a game, only for him to get hooked on the team (which is exactly what they want), and then have to explain to him why we can't go to any games anymore? I can also see not wanting to put money into the hands of a scumbag owner. Again, it isn't like the NFL, where in all but a few markets, Lucifer himself could be writing the checks, and 80,000 would still come out. This isn't really to defend "Ow Ow Ahrooooh!" Nation, because I really don't think it would have mattered either way, just that it's too easy to just flat out criticize a fan base for not showing up. Even in the cases of a good market where people stay away for some reason, there still shouldn't be a team there just "because", but sometimes a situation just doesn't work out for reasons that aren't really anyone's "fault". Again, that's not the case here, because there's been mistakes made the entire way by the league, the city, the ownership, the... well, everyone.

The problem is the team didn't have good attendance when they had reasonably solid ownership and weren't facing an immediate existential crisis. Which is why they don't have solid ownership now.

Additionally, anybody who follows hockey at all can see the literal mountains that are being moved to try to save this franchise, and would note that if this fanbase showed any sort of pulse at all, this team could be saved. If there are Coyotes fans, this is what makes their inability to show up (except to vote "Present" by howling) relatively inexcusable.

[pcgd]

I prefer "Chasin' Chubbies" in the Dells personally...

[Sodboy13]

I prefer "Chasin' Chubbies" in the Dells personally...

Well, if that's your thing, Wisconsin certainly is the state to get your fill.

[Don]

Let's come up with which NHL owners aren't terrible. Here's my list:

Mike Ilitch: spends tons of money on the Red Wings because they're his favorite toy and keeps ticket prices low because they play in a metal box in effing pisshole Detroit and thus can't get away with charging more

Rocky Wirtz: spends tons of money on the Blackhawks because it seems to make him lots of money and it spites his dead dad

Comcast-Spectacor: spends tons of money on the Flyers because it's Comcast and they can

National Hockey League: schedules all the Coyotes' home games on weekends so that everyone from Hockeytown USA (Scottsdale) can make it to the games, and then spends the other 29 teams' money at the trade deadline. Who else gets to do that?

Everyone else pretty much blows, and is either incompetent, cheap, poor, imaginary-rich (same as poor), or headed to prison (often connected to imaginary-rich). This is why I don't really care when Atlanta folks say they have "bad ownership." You and everyone else, pal.

I may be a homer and all, but you cant leave Ted Leonsis off this list. Spends a ton of money on the Caps and actually listens to the fans.

[pcgd]

Talk about a reply fail... Not only did I mistake the admiral's comment for a strip club joke (supper= stripper???) I got the place's name wrong. It's crusin chubbies...

Nothing to see here...

[BBTV]

I don't know. This isn't the NFL, or even (in some places) baseball, where going to the game is about a lot more than just going to the game. If a team is threatening to leave, or even just looking like it's going to leave, why, unless possibly as part of some kind of organized effort, invest yourself financially and/or emotionally into it only to end up being all butthurt when they eventually do go? Why do I bring my kid to a game, only for him to get hooked on the team (which is exactly what they want), and then have to explain to him why we can't go to any games anymore? I can also see not wanting to put money into the hands of a scumbag owner. Again, it isn't like the NFL, where in all but a few markets, Lucifer himself could be writing the checks, and 80,000 would still come out. This isn't really to defend "Ow Ow Ahrooooh!" Nation, because I really don't think it would have mattered either way, just that it's too easy to just flat out criticize a fan base for not showing up. Even in the cases of a good market where people stay away for some reason, there still shouldn't be a team there just "because", but sometimes a situation just doesn't work out for reasons that aren't really anyone's "fault". Again, that's not the case here, because there's been mistakes made the entire way by the league, the city, the ownership, the... well, everyone.

The problem is the team didn't have good attendance when they had reasonably solid ownership and weren't facing an immediate existential crisis. Which is why they don't have solid ownership now.

Additionally, anybody who follows hockey at all can see the literal mountains that are being moved to try to save this franchise, and would note that if this fanbase showed any sort of pulse at all, this team could be saved. If there are Coyotes fans, this is what makes their inability to show up (except to vote "Present" by howling) relatively inexcusable.

Well you missed the part where I said that this really doesn't apply in this situation, because it's a lousy hockey market anyway. Just saying that it's too easy to just say "you could have saved them by showing up". Again, in this case there's plenty of evidence to show that the fans really aren't there. I get it. I'm on board with turning Jobbing.com into the least-parked-in parking lot ever.

Let's come up with which NHL owners aren't terrible. Here's my list:

Mike Ilitch: spends tons of money on the Red Wings because they're his favorite toy and keeps ticket prices low because they play in a metal box in effing pisshole Detroit and thus can't get away with charging more

Rocky Wirtz: spends tons of money on the Blackhawks because it seems to make him lots of money and it spites his dead dad

Comcast-Spectacor: spends tons of money on the Flyers because it's Comcast and they can

National Hockey League: schedules all the Coyotes' home games on weekends so that everyone from Hockeytown USA (Scottsdale) can make it to the games, and then spends the other 29 teams' money at the trade deadline. Who else gets to do that?

Everyone else pretty much blows, and is either incompetent, cheap, poor, imaginary-rich (same as poor), or headed to prison (often connected to imaginary-rich). This is why I don't really care when Atlanta folks say they have "bad ownership." You and everyone else, pal.

Well Comcast-Spectacor is more Spectacor which is Ed Snider, who's owned and run the team since day one, and it's his life. He had the resources before the merger, but of course, there's a ton more there now. The people of Comcast are invisible.

[Lights Out]

Again, it isn't like the NFL, where in all but a few markets, Lucifer himself could be writing the checks, and 80,000 would still come out.

But the Raiders only drew 46,431 on average last year, last in the league.

[Lee.]

Let's come up with which NHL owners aren't terrible. Here's my list:

Mike Ilitch: spends tons of money on the Red Wings because they're his favorite toy and keeps ticket prices low because they play in a metal box in effing pisshole Detroit and thus can't get away with charging more

Rocky Wirtz: spends tons of money on the Blackhawks because it seems to make him lots of money and it spites his dead dad

Comcast-Spectacor: spends tons of money on the Flyers because it's Comcast and they can

National Hockey League: schedules all the Coyotes' home games on weekends so that everyone from Hockeytown USA (Scottsdale) can make it to the games, and then spends the other 29 teams' money at the trade deadline. Who else gets to do that?

Everyone else pretty much blows, and is either incompetent, cheap, poor, imaginary-rich (same as poor), or headed to prison (often connected to imaginary-rich). This is why I don't really care when Atlanta folks say they have "bad ownership." You and everyone else, pal.

I may be a homer and all, but you cant leave Ted Leonsis off this list. Spends a ton of money on the Caps and actually listens to the fans.

What the hell, throw Francesco Aquilini in there too. Everything he's touched since he won the Canucks in court has turned to gold.

[charger77]

Let's come up with which NHL owners aren't terrible. Here's my list:

Mike Ilitch: spends tons of money on the Red Wings because they're his favorite toy and keeps ticket prices low because they play in a metal box in effing pisshole Detroit and thus can't get away with charging more

Rocky Wirtz: spends tons of money on the Blackhawks because it seems to make him lots of money and it spites his dead dad

Comcast-Spectacor: spends tons of money on the Flyers because it's Comcast and they can

National Hockey League: schedules all the Coyotes' home games on weekends so that everyone from Hockeytown USA (Scottsdale) can make it to the games, and then spends the other 29 teams' money at the trade deadline. Who else gets to do that?

Everyone else pretty much blows, and is either incompetent, cheap, poor, imaginary-rich (same as poor), or headed to prison (often connected to imaginary-rich). This is why I don't really care when Atlanta folks say they have "bad ownership." You and everyone else, pal.

I may be a homer and all, but you cant leave Ted Leonsis off this list. Spends a ton of money on the Caps and actually listens to the fans.

What the hell, throw Francesco Aquilini in there too. Everything he's touched since he won the Canucks in court has turned to gold.

What about Avalanche ownership? Up till recently they have always been willing to spend.

[Don]

Let's come up with which NHL owners aren't terrible. Here's my list:

Mike Ilitch: spends tons of money on the Red Wings because they're his favorite toy and keeps ticket prices low because they play in a metal box in effing pisshole Detroit and thus can't get away with charging more

Rocky Wirtz: spends tons of money on the Blackhawks because it seems to make him lots of money and it spites his dead dad

Comcast-Spectacor: spends tons of money on the Flyers because it's Comcast and they can

National Hockey League: schedules all the Coyotes' home games on weekends so that everyone from Hockeytown USA (Scottsdale) can make it to the games, and then spends the other 29 teams' money at the trade deadline. Who else gets to do that?

Everyone else pretty much blows, and is either incompetent, cheap, poor, imaginary-rich (same as poor), or headed to prison (often connected to imaginary-rich). This is why I don't really care when Atlanta folks say they have "bad ownership." You and everyone else, pal.

I may be a homer and all, but you cant leave Ted Leonsis off this list. Spends a ton of money on the Caps and actually listens to the fans.

What the hell, throw Francesco Aquilini in there too. Everything he's touched since he won the Canucks in court has turned to gold.

What about Avalanche ownership? Up till recently they have always been willing to spend.

Change in ownership: shifting it to Stan Kroenkes son changed everything. Stan willing to spend, his boy not so much apparently.

[Lee.]

It might help if they got a better GM in there, too. It's one thing to spend, it's another thing to spend wisely. Right now, the Canucks are spending wisely.