HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Phoenix Coyotes Ownership Saga

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-30-2013, 10:39 AM
  #26
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 31,495
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Quote:
Originally Posted by DimMak View Post
They will not he called the Metropolitans. I don't care how much "history" that name has, it is simply not marketable.



Seattle is in the same time zone as Phoenix, so it doesn't disrupt the realignment.
Not marketable? Yeah right say that to a Mets fan. The problem is that the baseball Mets likely wouldn't let it happen.

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 10:47 AM
  #27
Vic Vinegar
Registered User
 
Vic Vinegar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
Not marketable? Yeah right say that to a Mets fan. The problem is that the baseball Mets likely wouldn't let it happen.
Actually I've always hated that name too. Is "Mets" short for Metropolitans? I never really thought about it. Always just thought it was kind of a dumb name.

Vic Vinegar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 11:01 AM
  #28
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,799
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsholygrail View Post
Does Seattle even have a rink for them?
No, they don't. A pretty important part that seems to be overlooked by fans. Yes, they have a minor league team but if you look at the pictures the place is a gigantic eye sore and would look awful on TV. Luxury suites? Site lines? It would be the worst rink in the NHL while there are other places that have an NHL ready rink. That said if they do move I suggest the Seattle Depression with a crying man wearing flannel as their mascot.

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 11:07 AM
  #29
Fishhead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
I feel as though you know nothing at all about the situation in Seattle.

Seattle will be a very very solid market, and with basketball completely screwing up not heading back there the NHL should seize the chance and corner the market. Seattle has a loooooong hockey history, proven support at lower levels, there is a huge void in winter sports, and Seattle has proven to be a really great sports town with owners that treat them right (Sounders, Seahawks). This will be a great move for the NHL.
I don't agree about Seattle being a sports town, the majority of the people in the area are apathetic towards sports. The city refuses to contribute any money towards venues at all, they want everything 100% privately funded. I'm pretty sure there is a law that the county/city cannot support any sports franchise unless they are profitable. This all comes from the voters. I don't think that's without merit, but it shows that money is more important to the populace than having a team.

They refused to help fix key arena, even though they knew they could lose their basketball team. The sonics couldn't have been that important to them. Then there is the Mariners. No one goes to see the Mariners anymore, despite having a gem of a stadium. They have one of the worst season ticket bases in the league, attendance is utter crap for a MLB team. They went from very high attendance 10 years ago to a bottom feeder. The sounders are doing great, but they are shiny and new, just like Phoenix once was. Only time will tell if they sustain that. The only team that has proven it can succeed there is the Seahawks, because let's face it, the NFL is wildly popular everywhere.

Fishhead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 11:08 AM
  #30
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 18,431
vCash: 500
Seattle Bombers would be cool, with something like this turned into a logo.



The arena could be called "The Fortress"

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 11:09 AM
  #31
Vic Vinegar
Registered User
 
Vic Vinegar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikkanen View Post
No, they don't. A pretty important part that seems to be overlooked by fans. Yes, they have a minor league team but if you look at the pictures the place is a gigantic eye sore and would look awful on TV. Luxury suites? Site lines? It would be the worst rink in the NHL while there are other places that have an NHL ready rink. That said if they do move I suggest the Seattele Depression with a crying man wearing flannel as their mascot.
I remember hearing a while back that they were building an arena for a potential new NBA team. Is that not finished/close to being finished?

Vic Vinegar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 11:11 AM
  #32
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 18,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishhead View Post
I don't agree about Seattle being a sports town, the majority of the people in the area are apathetic towards sports. The city refuses to contribute any money towards venues at all, they want everything 100% privately funded. I'm pretty sure there is a law that the county/city cannot support any sports franchise unless they are profitable. This all comes from the voters. I don't think that's without merit, but it shows that money is more important to the populace than having a team.

They refused to help fix key arena, even though they knew they could lose their basketball team. The sonics couldn't have been that important to them. Then there is the Mariners. No one goes to see the Mariners anymore, despite having a gem of a stadium. They have one of the worst season ticket bases in the league, attendance is utter crap for a MLB team. They went from very high attendance 10 years ago to a bottom feeder. The sounders are doing great, but they are shiny and new, just like Phoenix once was. Only time will tell if they sustain that. The only team that has proven it can succeed there is the Seahawks, because let's face it, the NFL is wildly popular everywhere.
...and why should they? Taxpayers have more important things to fund. Sports stadiums should not be funded publicly. If they are such great money makers, let the owners and players (via reduced contracts) fund them.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 12:30 PM
  #33
HolyShot*
Sniper
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Glendale, CA
Posts: 2,015
vCash: 500
How about the seattle tomahawks.

HolyShot* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 12:50 PM
  #34
ReverseSweep
Kingspiracy.
 
ReverseSweep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rancho Santa Margari
Posts: 3,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsholygrail View Post
Does Seattle even have a rink for them?
Yes, I used to live in Seattle about a mile away from it. It's Key Arena where the WHL team Seattle T Birds play now and the Supersonics used to play. My wife and I listen to the radio (Dori Monson pod cast) shows a lot up there and the idea is that Seattle will break ground when they get a team on a new arena so it will be a lot like how the Sharks played in the Cow Palace for a bit before they got a larger arena. They would also use the spot for a new NBA team.

Key Arena is a smaller venue but its serviceable. Ice seemed fast, but they would sell a lot more tickets up there once the get a larger area. It wasn't made for hockey but it works on a temporary basis. But the city is being very firm in the idea that they won't spend a dollar on a new rink until they have a NBA team or hockey team. Profits would come in through merchandise for the first year or so while new ground breaks on the arena which is supposed to go next to the football and baseball stadiums which are right next to each other off the sound.

A lot of folks from BC live in Seattle and there are other WHL teams like the Everett Silvertips not too far from Seattle so there is call for it. Plus, that would be a great rivalry between Vancouver and Seattle. Those guys would love to hate each other like we hate the Ducks.


Last edited by ReverseSweep: 06-30-2013 at 01:00 PM.
ReverseSweep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 12:53 PM
  #35
ReverseSweep
Kingspiracy.
 
ReverseSweep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rancho Santa Margari
Posts: 3,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishhead View Post
I don't agree about Seattle being a sports town, the majority of the people in the area are apathetic towards sports. The city refuses to contribute any money towards venues at all, they want everything 100% privately funded. I'm pretty sure there is a law that the county/city cannot support any sports franchise unless they are profitable. This all comes from the voters. I don't think that's without merit, but it shows that money is more important to the populace than having a team.

They refused to help fix key arena, even though they knew they could lose their basketball team. The sonics couldn't have been that important to them. Then there is the Mariners. No one goes to see the Mariners anymore, despite having a gem of a stadium. They have one of the worst season ticket bases in the league, attendance is utter crap for a MLB team. They went from very high attendance 10 years ago to a bottom feeder. The sounders are doing great, but they are shiny and new, just like Phoenix once was. Only time will tell if they sustain that. The only team that has proven it can succeed there is the Seahawks, because let's face it, the NFL is wildly popular everywhere.
That's not true. They just fixed Key Arena a few years back and the Sonics said it wasn't good enough because Mariners and Seahawks had huge upgrades over the Sonics. Sonics wanted more box seats for profit and the City said they didn't have enough cash to cover it since they just blew a ton on two other teams so they wanted them to wait awhile and pay off the current balance. Sonics said no, Paul Allen sold the team and they held half ass negotiations for 6 months to a year and then just bounced. People were livid because Paul Allen didn't vet the guy completely and didn't think to put something in the contract to make the team stay. Allen said he didn't see a move coming.

ReverseSweep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 12:56 PM
  #36
ReverseSweep
Kingspiracy.
 
ReverseSweep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rancho Santa Margari
Posts: 3,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitman47 View Post
How about the seattle tomahawks.
I like it but the Indigenous population would go ape **** there. Seattle is way too PC. They would call it Seattle Treehuggers or Electric busses first.

ReverseSweep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 12:59 PM
  #37
DryIslandBartender
KCCO
 
DryIslandBartender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishhead View Post
They have one of the worst season ticket bases in the league, attendance is utter crap for a MLB team. They went from very high attendance 10 years ago to a bottom feeder. The sounders are doing great, but they are shiny and new, just like Phoenix once was. Only time will tell if they sustain that. The only team that has proven it can succeed there is the Seahawks, because let's face it, the NFL is wildly popular everywhere.
Winning cures all. It's the same in every city.

DryIslandBartender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 01:10 PM
  #38
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 31,495
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishhead View Post
I don't agree about Seattle being a sports town, the majority of the people in the area are apathetic towards sports. The city refuses to contribute any money towards venues at all, they want everything 100% privately funded. I'm pretty sure there is a law that the county/city cannot support any sports franchise unless they are profitable. This all comes from the voters. I don't think that's without merit, but it shows that money is more important to the populace than having a team.

They refused to help fix key arena, even though they knew they could lose their basketball team. The sonics couldn't have been that important to them. Then there is the Mariners. No one goes to see the Mariners anymore, despite having a gem of a stadium. They have one of the worst season ticket bases in the league, attendance is utter crap for a MLB team. They went from very high attendance 10 years ago to a bottom feeder. The sounders are doing great, but they are shiny and new, just like Phoenix once was. Only time will tell if they sustain that. The only team that has proven it can succeed there is the Seahawks, because let's face it, the NFL is wildly popular everywhere.
Obviously you don't watch soccer but Sounders fans have been fanatics forever.

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 01:30 PM
  #39
Holden Caulfield
Global Moderator
The Eternal Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,585
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DimMak View Post
I remember hearing a while back that they were building an arena for a potential new NBA team. Is that not finished/close to being finished?
This is finalized. The wording is currently for an NBA team, but can easily be changed for an NHL team. The second Seattle gets a new top level pro team in either NBA or NHL they will break ground on a new arena.

With some public funds, but mostly privately backed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishhead View Post
I don't agree about Seattle being a sports town, the majority of the people in the area are apathetic towards sports. The city refuses to contribute any money towards venues at all, they want everything 100% privately funded. I'm pretty sure there is a law that the county/city cannot support any sports franchise unless they are profitable. This all comes from the voters. I don't think that's without merit, but it shows that money is more important to the populace than having a team.

They refused to help fix key arena, even though they knew they could lose their basketball team. The sonics couldn't have been that important to them. Then there is the Mariners. No one goes to see the Mariners anymore, despite having a gem of a stadium. They have one of the worst season ticket bases in the league, attendance is utter crap for a MLB team. They went from very high attendance 10 years ago to a bottom feeder. The sounders are doing great, but they are shiny and new, just like Phoenix once was. Only time will tell if they sustain that. The only team that has proven it can succeed there is the Seahawks, because let's face it, the NFL is wildly popular everywhere.
Quite simply a lot of false info here. If you knew about the Seattle situation, you would know that the city has committed 80 million dollars towards the building of a new rink. They are simply waiting until Hansen gets his NBA team or the NHL group brings in an NHL team.

They put a lot of money into a huge renovation at Key arena like 10 years ago. Then suddenly the NBA kept moving the goal posts to get that team out of there. Go watch Sonicsgate and you will understand that it was the NBA and a terrrible owner with an agenda that got Sonics out of Seattle, not the city.

Mariners are a joke of franchise. They are not supported since they do deserve it, bad ownership, terrible teams.

Seattle has rabid junior hockey support, something you only see in Minnesota elsewhere in USA. That bodes incredibly well for a hockey team. Not too mention an underserved large population in terms of pro sports. As well as a looong hockey history with them having the first American team to win the Stanley Cup. Oh and a brand new rink in a great location already guaranteed the second the team is moved. How in the hell would that not be a huge success?

Holden Caulfield is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 01:36 PM
  #40
DryIslandBartender
KCCO
 
DryIslandBartender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatty View Post

A lot of folks from BC live in Seattle and there are other WHL teams like the Everett Silvertips not too far from Seattle so there is call for it. Plus, that would be a great rivalry between Vancouver and Seattle. Those guys would love to hate each other like we hate the Ducks.
Be funny as hell to see the Seattle team win a cup before Vancouver.

DryIslandBartender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 01:36 PM
  #41
ReverseSweep
Kingspiracy.
 
ReverseSweep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rancho Santa Margari
Posts: 3,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
They put a lot of money into a huge renovation at Key arena like 10 years ago. Then suddenly the NBA kept moving the goal posts to get that team out of there. Go watch Sonicsgate and you will understand that it was the NBA and a terrrible owner with an agenda that got Sonics out of Seattle, not the city.
Didn't know there was a movie on it too. THANKS!!!!!!!!

ReverseSweep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 01:38 PM
  #42
Ron
Bandwagon Since 1967
 
Ron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brea, California
Country: United States
Posts: 13,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
Not marketable? Yeah right say that to a Mets fan. The problem is that the baseball Mets likely wouldn't let it happen.
The Los Angeles Kings had no issue when the NBA Cincinnati Royals moved to Kansas City-Omaha and rechristened their name as the Kings.

__________________
Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 01:40 PM
  #43
William H Bonney
Registered User
 
William H Bonney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sierra Nevada
Country: United States
Posts: 20,033
vCash: 500
I'd love to see Seattle get a team. One of my favorite cities and a beautiful area. They would have some of the biggest losers on their team for awhile but I still hope Seattle gets the Coyotes.

William H Bonney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 01:42 PM
  #44
ReverseSweep
Kingspiracy.
 
ReverseSweep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rancho Santa Margari
Posts: 3,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BerniernextRoy View Post
Be funny as hell to see the Seattle team win a cup before Vancouver.
Ooooohhhhhhhh.... that would be the best..... Just imagine the bragging rights.... Did it a 100 years ago and did it again when they got back. Such humiliation......


ReverseSweep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 01:53 PM
  #45
Fishhead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
Obviously you don't watch soccer but Sounders fans have been fanatics forever.
I do, but it's been what, 6 years? They are by far the best in the league, but I'm thinking long term.

Fishhead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 01:59 PM
  #46
Reclamation Project
Technically Missing
 
Reclamation Project's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 27,023
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Seattle Bombers would be cool, with something like this turned into a logo.



The arena could be called "The Fortress"
Love it! That would be awesome.

Reclamation Project is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 02:01 PM
  #47
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,799
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
Key Arena would seat 15,177 for ice hockey and is 52 years old. Estimates that any NHL team that moves there would lose 20 million a year until the new arena is finished. Key Arena only provides 9000 unobstructed seats when configured for hockey. Sound like something the NHL would want to get into for 2 years?

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 02:20 PM
  #48
Fishhead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
This is finalized. The wording is currently for an NBA team, but can easily be changed for an NHL team. The second Seattle gets a new top level pro team in either NBA or NHL they will break ground on a new arena.

With some public funds, but mostly privately backed.



Quite simply a lot of false info here. If you knew about the Seattle situation, you would know that the city has committed 80 million dollars towards the building of a new rink. They are simply waiting until Hansen gets his NBA team or the NHL group brings in an NHL team.

They put a lot of money into a huge renovation at Key arena like 10 years ago. Then suddenly the NBA kept moving the goal posts to get that team out of there. Go watch Sonicsgate and you will understand that it was the NBA and a terrrible owner with an agenda that got Sonics out of Seattle, not the city.

Mariners are a joke of franchise. They are not supported since they do deserve it, bad ownership, terrible teams.

Seattle has rabid junior hockey support, something you only see in Minnesota elsewhere in USA. That bodes incredibly well for a hockey team. Not too mention an underserved large population in terms of pro sports. As well as a looong hockey history with them having the first American team to win the Stanley Cup. Oh and a brand new rink in a great location already guaranteed the second the team is moved. How in the hell would that not be a huge success?
The city is proposing to loan them the money, and there is already a huge lawsuit against it saying it is against the law and also violates their state constitution.
I do know the Seattle situation, both with the Sonics and with potential teams. I have plenty of relatives there who follow it closely and were as upset as anyone when they left.

Their ownership sucked, but you know what, the voters could have saved them, and they didn't. It was very similar to Glendale, they just didn't want them bad enough. Even my relatives (transplants) tell me most people in the city aren't that into sports. It's a more bookish, coffee culture town where people tend to spend their time outside and in nature.

The Mariners may have turned into a joke now, but they were very solid until about 6 years ago. They always had a very high payroll compared to other teams. They absolutely sucked in 2008, but still pumped $100M into their payroll. Their budget dropped because people stopped coming, not the other way around. Attendance was outstanding in the early 2000's because they were a playoff team and always were in competition for the division. At the first sign of them not winning, the fans stopped coming, regardless of how much they spent on the team. Seattle is very similar to Phoenix in that they are both areas that don't get the support unless the teams are winning. Is that the kind of place you want to put an NHL team? Where would the Kings be if our fans were like that? The Kings sucked for more than a few years in the 2000's and they never got close to averaging half capacity.

I would actually love a team in Seattle, my relatives would love it too, I'd be happy for them. I'd love for them to succeed. But the past history of sports support in the city says otherwise.

Fishhead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 03:20 PM
  #49
scryan
Registered User
 
scryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 1,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
Not marketable? Yeah right say that to a Mets fan. The problem is that the baseball Mets likely wouldn't let it happen.
Thats two people in this thread who never knew the Mets were the Metropolitans...

I think you kinda just argued against yourself, considering that the name is not marketable enough for people to even realize its the actual name of the Mets? Considering the complete lack of use of the actual name of the team, it would seem that the teams marketing department also thinks its not marketable.
Mets is not the same name as Metropolitans, the nickname is catchy but I would agree 100% that the actual name "Metropolitans" sound "dumb" this day and age is really not that marketable.

scryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2013, 04:45 PM
  #50
HolyShot*
Sniper
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Glendale, CA
Posts: 2,015
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatty View Post
I like it but the Indigenous population would go ape **** there. Seattle is way too PC. They would call it Seattle Treehuggers or Electric busses first.
ha. The seattle fish marketers.

HolyShot* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:00 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.