View Single Post
09-04-2012, 08:53 AM
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post

Typical east coast thinking I guess. LV is near AZ and Glendale is in AZ, so therefore they're close enough to remain as a fan base. The distance is slightly less than Philadelphia to Boston. No one would ever make that kind of argument there. A hockey fan in Phoenix would be just as likely to switch to the Kings or Ducks as stick with their former Coyotes.

Beyond that, the idea that somehow a market in the desert of less than 2m people, with a boom and bust tourism industry currently in bust, is more suitable for a hockey team than a market in the desert of more than twice the population is pretty hilarious.

There are four markets out there that should never run into issues were they to get a team. They are Seattle, Portland, Quebec City and Houston. And honestly, Atlanta with a dedicated ownership group would be fine too, but we don't have to go too far into that. Every one of those places will run into issues if they have ownership like the Atlanta Spirit Group or sign a lease like what happened in Glendale. Simply up and moving teams to "better" markets doesn't guarantee, by a long shot, that the teams are going to do well where you put them.
Typical "east coast"?

The league tried Kansas City before and thats why it won't work now? How about: Pittsburgh, Philadeplhia, Ottawa, Winnepeg, Atlanta, Denver, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Oakland(LA/Anaheim)...

And yea, moving a team to a more viable market could help the franchise's health.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline