: News Article:
New Arena deal agreed to by city and Katz group:mod warning #616
View Single Post
04-23-2013, 10:00 PM
Join Date: Nov 2006
Originally Posted by
What prevents another move into Seatlle by another owner BEFORE Katz?
Why would Katz move to seattle in what is a far worse deal than what he's stated he requires here?
Given that the Seattle arrangement wasn't attractive, and wasn't very enticing to a prospective NHL club (and why would it be in that market) what other prospective markets would offer a better deal? Finally, which of those would be viable, and better hockey markets than this one.
Sure Katz COULD move. But why would he?
Hypotheticals are interesting. Katz leveraging in this regard is sublime comedy. " I'll move really I will, if only I could find a better place and better deal"...
Watching Katz stumbling with idle threats and apologies has been the best entertainment offered by this org in years.
It's literally new arena or bust for the Oilers. Can't get much simpler than that. Katz doesn't want to move the team at all, but if the future is unsustainable and we end up barely being able to afford a cap floor roster then its a strict business decision to sell.
I mean, what do you think is going to happen if this arena deal falls through? Katz just signs a 35 year lease anyway?
A new outside owner moves the team. Whether that's to Seattle, Quebec City, Nepal, it doesn't matter.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by smackdaddy