HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Metro Seattle: NHL, NBA and Arena - Part VI

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-06-2013, 10:42 PM
  #251
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 24,569
vCash: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Absolutely, same here. Thunderbirds and Winterhawks, two great names and cities to join the NHL.
Hawks would veto like you wouldn't believe, just like they did with the proposed Mohawks, who apparently wanted to go with this look....



.... before settling on the Scouts.

No Fun Shogun is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 11:16 PM
  #252
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,684
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Hawks would veto like you wouldn't believe, just like they did with the proposed Mohawks, who apparently wanted to go with this look....



.... before settling on the Scouts.
And of all the people I could've made that comment to. LOL. Yes, you're probably right, unfortunately.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 02:17 AM
  #253
Holden Caulfield
Moderator
Perennial Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,615
vCash: 500
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I think "Kraken" would kind of cool name.

__________________


Holden Caulfield is online now  
Old
02-07-2013, 04:37 AM
  #254
PSGJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 499
vCash: 50
Is Vancouver an option as a temporary home for a Seattle team while the arena is being built?

I've read a study, linked to on this forum, that suggests that Vancouver could actually support a second team. With Nucks ticks so hard to get and expansive there's got to be some support. Rogers arena only has one permanent tenant so dates shouldn't be a problem.

In the weekends the Seattelites (Seattlians? What are they called?) could take a day trip up to Vancouver the check out their future team.

PSGJ is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 04:42 AM
  #255
Steve Bennett*
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yes
Posts: 766
vCash: 500
How about the Seattle Washingtons? Hey it worked wonders for Houston in the nfl...

Steve Bennett* is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 09:22 AM
  #256
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 41,459
vCash: 500
DUDE!!! ****ing AMAZING!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by silvercanuck View Post
a few Totems concepts with green and black:
You are REALLY onto something, here. I LOVE these.

The ONLY thing I don't really love is the white shoulders, so something (if I didn't quite butcher it so badly) like this would be PERFECT...



...I also added a little black pencil along the white on the greens. If I didn't suck, and didn't use paint, I think it'd look a little more finished.


Last edited by rt: 02-07-2013 at 09:54 AM.
rt is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 09:22 AM
  #257
superdeluxe
Seattle SuperSonics
 
superdeluxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sodo, Wa
Country: South Korea
Posts: 2,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSGJ View Post
Is Vancouver an option as a temporary home for a Seattle team while the arena is being built?

I've read a study, linked to on this forum, that suggests that Vancouver could actually support a second team. With Nucks ticks so hard to get and expansive there's got to be some support. Rogers arena only has one permanent tenant so dates shouldn't be a problem.

In the weekends the Seattelites (Seattlians? What are they called?) could take a day trip up to Vancouver the check out their future team.

I don't think so, because if the thought that your primary ticket holder base is in puget sound, having them travel 2 hours + dealing with the border would be a non-starter.

superdeluxe is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 10:15 AM
  #258
nwpensfan
Registered User
 
nwpensfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: The 14th Tee
Country: United States
Posts: 2,530
vCash: 500
Just heard Dan Patrick say that the Sacramento Kings coming to Seattle would be two years before a move according to Commissioner. Anyone else hear anything like that

nwpensfan is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 10:19 AM
  #259
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nwpensfan View Post
Just heard Dan Patrick say that the Sacramento Kings coming to Seattle would be two years before a move according to Commissioner. Anyone else hear anything like that
Patrick heard wrong. Commissioner never said two years before a move. Relocation is for 2013-14 season Stern said they would play 2 years maybe 3 in Key arena. If NBA approves sale to Hansen's group they are moving immediately. NBA can't make them wait 2 years that would be illegal.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 10:22 AM
  #260
snovalleyhockeyfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Bend, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Patrick heard wrong. Commissioner never said two years before a move. Relocation is for 2013-14 season Stern said they would play 2 years maybe 3 in Key arena. If NBA approves sale to Hansen's group they are moving immediately. NBA can't make them wait 2 years that would be illegal.
I concur. It seems Patrick isn't as tuned into this as some of the guys nationally who are more closely covering the league.

snovalleyhockeyfan is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 10:22 AM
  #261
nwpensfan
Registered User
 
nwpensfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: The 14th Tee
Country: United States
Posts: 2,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Patrick heard wrong. Commissioner never said two years before a move. Relocation is for 2013-14 season Stern said they would play 2 years maybe 3 in Key arena. If NBA approves sale to Hansen's group they are moving immediately. NBA can't make them wait 2 years that would be illegal.
That is what I had heard as well. Did not know if something new came out. Thanks.

nwpensfan is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 10:27 AM
  #262
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,202
vCash: 500
http://www.king5.com/video/featured-...190125291.html

Chris Daniels ‏@ChrisDaniels5
Stern: The #Seattle application is to play in Key Arena, to play 2 years, possibly 3.

This has always been the case play in Key arena for a couple years than move into the new building.

Like i said if NBA approves sale Kings are coming here immediately. Only way they have to wait couple years if there is a lease in Sacramento that Hansen can't buy out but there is no lease keeping the Kings in Sacramento.

Another thing if NBA make Hansen wait that would be 2 more years of lame duck season in Sacramento and potential anti-trust lawsuit.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 10:34 AM
  #263
nwpensfan
Registered User
 
nwpensfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: The 14th Tee
Country: United States
Posts: 2,530
vCash: 500
I only brought up the Patrick comment because he expressed surprise that they would not be in Seattle next year if approved. He probably misunderstood that 2 or 3 years at the Key part.

nwpensfan is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 10:37 AM
  #264
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nwpensfan View Post
I only brought up the Patrick comment because he expressed surprise that they would not be in Seattle next year if approved. He probably misread that 2 or 3 years at the Key part.
Yea he misread. With how the arena deal is done Sodo arena won't be built until team is secured which means they are playing at Key arena for a few years the move in the new one when its done.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 10:50 AM
  #265
superdeluxe
Seattle SuperSonics
 
superdeluxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sodo, Wa
Country: South Korea
Posts: 2,304
vCash: 500
http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/planning/...da/default.asp

Design commission to talk about the arena today

9:00am - 10:30am
Commission Business
Discussion Items
A. South Lake Union
B. Arena

I'm guessing Chris Daniels will be tweeting this.

superdeluxe is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 10:54 AM
  #266
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superdeluxe View Post
http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/planning/...da/default.asp

Design commission to talk about the arena today

9:00am - 10:30am
Commission Business
Discussion Items
A. South Lake Union
B. Arena

I'm guessing Chris Daniels will be tweeting this.
Wonder what they would be talking about regarding the arena i know the next design review meeting is in march.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 10:55 AM
  #267
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,202
vCash: 500
Update on relocation filing.

Chris Daniels ‏@ChrisDaniels5
One AM clarification: I’m hearing Maloofs filed for #NBAKings relocation on behalf of Hansen group, since franchise sale not approved yet.

With 30m in their pockets would make sense.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 11:22 AM
  #268
PSGJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 499
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by superdeluxe View Post
I don't think so, because if the thought that your primary ticket holder base is in puget sound, having them travel 2 hours + dealing with the border would be a non-starter.
I was thinking more along the lines that the team would be sustained mainly by Vancouverites with the chance for the people from Seattle to take in a game a few times per season.

And yes, it is not a good idea. The question is if it is a worse idea than the Key Arena or the team playing lame duck seasons in Glendale.


Last edited by PSGJ: 02-07-2013 at 11:27 AM.
PSGJ is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 12:38 PM
  #269
nwpensfan
Registered User
 
nwpensfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: The 14th Tee
Country: United States
Posts: 2,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSGJ View Post
I was thinking more along the lines that the team would be sustained mainly by Vancouverites with the chance for the people from Seattle to take in a game a few times per season.

And yes, it is not a good idea. The question is if it is a worse idea than the Key Arena or the team playing laments duck seasons in Glendale.
I can't imagine a team set to play in Seattle play its first seasons two hours away ever being a better idea than playing at the Key. The Key will work fine for however long it is needed.

nwpensfan is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 02:18 PM
  #270
MuzikMachine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSGJ View Post
Is Vancouver an option as a temporary home for a Seattle team while the arena is being built?

I've read a study, linked to on this forum, that suggests that Vancouver could actually support a second team. With Nucks ticks so hard to get and expansive there's got to be some support. Rogers arena only has one permanent tenant so dates shouldn't be a problem.

In the weekends the Seattelites (Seattlians? What are they called?) could take a day trip up to Vancouver the check out their future team.
It would probably significantly hurt the new Seattle team financially (worse than staying in Glendale). When the Hurricanes first moved to Carolina they played in Greensboro, 80 miles away from their current home in Ralagh, and drew flies - but at least they were still both in North Carolina. Off the top of my head that's the furthest distance that an NHL team has spent between a temporary home and perminant home without it being considered an outright relocation.

The question is why Vancouverites would support a team that is supposed to be a rival to the Canucks and would only be around for a couple seasons? People in the Lower Mainland love their hockey, but I highly doubt they would support a lame duck franchise on loan from another market. Vancouver is 141 miles from Seattle and in another country, so probably the only Seattle hockey fans would be the relative few ones that go up to see the Canucks right now. A comparable in terms of distance would be if the Ottawa Senators had to play their games 125 miles away in Montreal when they first rejoined the league. Saying that, the NHL and the Canucks would probably not allow it.

Portland would probably be worse. It's in the same country, but it's 174 miles from Seattle. Considering the potential rivalry and distance between the two cities, it would be similar to the Flames having to play their games 185 miles to the north in Edmonton for a couple years.

If Key Arena was an absolute no-go, it would make the Tacoma Dome (34 miles) seem like a good alternative; however people have talked about the distance and traffic.

MuzikMachine is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 02:34 PM
  #271
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Getting excited about this - will be GREAT for Canucks to have a down-the-road rival!

 
Old
02-07-2013, 02:38 PM
  #272
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuzikMachine View Post
It would probably significantly hurt the new Seattle team financially (worse than staying in Glendale). When the Hurricanes first moved to Carolina they played in Greensboro, 80 miles away from their current home in Ralagh, and drew flies - but at least they were still both in North Carolina. Off the top of my head that's the furthest distance that an NHL team has spent between a temporary home and perminant home without it being considered an outright relocation.

The question is why Vancouverites would support a team that is supposed to be a rival to the Canucks and would only be around for a couple seasons? People in the Lower Mainland love their hockey, but I highly doubt they would support a lame duck franchise on loan from another market. Vancouver is 141 miles from Seattle and in another country, so probably the only Seattle hockey fans would be the relative few ones that go up to see the Canucks right now. A comparable in terms of distance would be if the Ottawa Senators had to play their games 125 miles away in Montreal when they first rejoined the league. Saying that, the NHL and the Canucks would probably not allow it.

Portland would probably be worse. It's in the same country, but it's 174 miles from Seattle. Considering the potential rivalry and distance between the two cities, it would be similar to the Flames having to play their games 185 miles to the north in Edmonton for a couple years.

If Key Arena was an absolute no-go, it would make the Tacoma Dome (34 miles) seem like a good alternative; however people have talked about the distance and traffic.
Tacoma Dome is a no go.

Arena MOU agreement stated that they must play in Key Arena if NHL arrives before competition of the new arena.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 02:44 PM
  #273
silvercanuck
Registered User
 
silvercanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,051
vCash: 500
It would make more sense to put a team in Portland temporarily. It's pretty much the same distance to either city named Vancouver.....

Have to wonder about those poll choices. Is there ever a reasonable standard when people submit names? 95% of those are awful.

silvercanuck is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 02:48 PM
  #274
silvercanuck
Registered User
 
silvercanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,051
vCash: 500
What is the Seattle Portland rivalry really like? I've heard rumblings about it but I highly doubt it's anything like Calgary Edmonton - trust they hate everything Edmonton in Calgary it's Springfield Shelbyville times a million... Do Seattle and Portland share any teams? NFL for instance?

silvercanuck is offline  
Old
02-07-2013, 02:54 PM
  #275
Shaz
Registered User
 
Shaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Tacoma, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 122
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by silvercanuck View Post
What is the Seattle Portland rivalry really like? I've heard rumblings about it but I highly doubt it's anything like Calgary Edmonton - trust they hate everything Edmonton in Calgary it's Springfield Shelbyville times a million... Do Seattle and Portland share any teams? NFL for instance?
The only thing we've ever shared in terms of sports Rivalries were The Sonics/Blazers in the NBA and the Sounders/Timbers in Soccer (Pre MLS for most of it)

Shaz is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:13 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.