Seattle Still Not Getting An NHL Team, Media Hangs On To Every Word Willy Wonka Says

lol labor disputes
Via ABC News, AP Photo/ The Seattle Times,  John Lok

Insert something thoughtful about the Oilers-to-Seattle mess currently in the news here. 

It's all already been said.  It was said way before it was even officially said.  Oilers to Seattle: not going to happen.  Any team, at this present moment, and over the course of the next two years, to Seattle: not going to happen.  Very few people in the media understand this, apparently, or just need something to write about.  PucKChaser gets it.  I'm sure a good chunk of you Kansas Citians out there get it.

Why is this so hard to understand?

As similar as Seattle's situation with the Oilers is to KC's situation with the Penguins was, they differ in one major regard.  The Sprint Center wanted (still wants...?) a tenant, any tenant.  NBA, NHL, the exclusive home of Grave Digger.  Anything.  Seattle just wants the NBA.  After the Sonics/Thunder divorced Seattle, Seattle has been trying to get back a team that kind of looks like the Sonics, but without the bitchy in-laws, and maybe a little more blonde than brunette this time.  They also would prefer nice teeth, but it's certainly not a deal breaker.  An NHL team – after an NBA team, mind you – would be bully for them.  Certainly not enough to build an arena around, though, not matter how much potential she has or how many rings she owns.

This is all I can say to Daryl Katz – owner of the Oilers and the least impressive Martin Short rug I have ever seen: At least make sure the city you are using as leverage actually wants a hockey team before you indeed use them as leverage.

There are some smart thinkers in the ranks of the owners, boy howdy.  Theorists, really.

Since it doesn't get much more black and white as that,  here is one of my early forays into .gif making.  It's Dave Tippett swearing after an LA Kings goal in the Western Conference final.  Because it's never not funny to capture someone swearing on live television:

Also, check out that Grave Digger link.  Lesson number one out there for all you kids thinking about becoming a blogger: there is never a bad time to link to YouTube videos of Grave Digger within a blog post.

True story, I actually went to see Monster Jam or whatever the hell they call it at Kemper about eight years ago, and I was so stoked for the Grave Digger portion of the show which was the finale or something, and the damn thing came out for thirty seconds, hit a ramp wrong, and flipped over.  Sure, it was awesome, but not as awesome as it could have been.

Chris Hansen: Sports Franchise Predator

Earlier today, it was announced that the prospective builder of a new Seattle arena and potential NBA team owner, Chris Hansen, has laid out plans for the construction of a $490 million facility.

The agreement states construction could only begin on a new Seattle arena as soon as it is guaranteed to have at least an NBA tenant.  No NHL franchise is required to start construction on the building, though Hansen has not ruled out an attempt to lure a hard-luck franchise having problems in their current home.  KING 5 in Seattle and Seattle PI have the goods on all of the particulars, and I encourage you to peruse them at your leisure.

Puck Daddy's Greg Wyshynski compiles both stories here, but he goes light on the "geek(ing) out" this time over the prospect of an NHL team in Seattle.  Of course, as you know, a wicked shade of green jersey does not a hockey team make.  Also, remember, Vancouver and Seattle are close.  So, that's always good.

Kansas Citians will remember an arena built a few years ago that was supposed to have a professional sports tenant blah blah blah.... you know the story.

So, anyway, I'm bad at segues, so after the jump potential Seattle arena builder Chris Hansen talks to Dateline NBC's To Catch a Predator's Chris Hansen.  Because, you see, they share the same name.  Enjoy!

***

(Seattle arena extraordinaire Chris Hansen wanders around the outside of a suburban house.  The front door opens, and girl motions to him.)

Gary Bettman Decoy:Come on in!  David Stern and I are watching the Lakers game.  Oh, and I made some sweet tea!  It’s on the counter!

Seattle Chris Hansen:Alright!  I can’t wait to see Kobe hit his patented cross-over jumper!

/Dateline’s Chris Hansen walks in

Dateline Chris Hansen:Why don’t you hit my cross-over jumper?

Seattle Hansen:  Uhh....what?  Who are you?

Dateline Chris Hansen Voiceover: I’ve been doing this for so longgg, but guyyys still don’t know who I am or what I am doing.  They just see me, and, you know, act nonchalant, but I see that look in their eyyyes, like they’ve done something wronggg.  And it’s not like it’s their first rodeo, but they just haven’t gotten caught yet.  It just hasn’t set in at that point.

Dateline Hansen: Why don’t you take a seat?  Just, just take a seat, right over there.

Seattle Hansen:Okay, uh...

/sits down right over there

Dateline Hansen:What’re you doing here?

Seattle Hansen: Uh, What do you mean?  I came to see David Stern, so we could just talk.

Dateline Hansen:  Just talk, huh?  Talk about what?

Seattle Hansen:To...to talk about potential NBA franchises that might relocate to Seattle.

Dateline Hansen: Oh, so you admit you came here to see Mr. Stern?  What about Mr. Bettman?

Seattle Hansen:Well, ya know, I was in the neighborhood... Hey, what’s with all the questions?

Dateline Hansen:  Look, I’m not the one on trial herrre.  Why don’t you tell me what you really came here forrr?

Seattle Hansen: I don’t have to tell you anything!  Who the hell are you, anyway?

Dateline Hansen: That’s not imporrrtant.  What is imporrrtant are the conversations you’ve had with these two sports league commissioners concerrrning some “new arena’ in Seattle.

Seattle Hansen:  Um...okay.  What about it?

Dateline Hansen:Well, it says herrre (points to wad of papers in his hand) you want to build a new arena to lure an NBA franchise to Seattle.

Seattle Hansen: Yes, I believe that is what is best for the people of the city of Seattle.

Dateline Hansen:  Uh-huh.  And how about an NHL franchise?

Seattle Hansen:Yeah, I talked to the NHL, but I never wanted anything to do with them.  That would be wrong.  What does it matter to you?

Dateline Hansen: Look, you don’t need to lie to me, I have the press conference transcript right here.  Soo...whyyy don’t you just tellll me what you are trying to do with Commissioner Bettman?

Seattle Hansen: Lie to you?!  I don’t even know who the hell you are!!!

Dateline Hansen:Now, I already told you, it’s not imporrrtant who I am.  Here, let’s look at the transcript.  What is this about “the city and county contributing $200 million to construction of a new arena” and “only an NBA franchise is needed to begin construction” (pauses and stares at the accused for dramatic effect. Continues.) and “if no NHL team is secured, only $120 million in public money would go to the project, with the county's contribution capped at $5 million and Seattle still on the hook for up to $120 million.”

Seattle Hansen: Look buddy, I don’t want a freakin’ NHL franchise.  I don’t give a crap about the NHL, and I don’t really care if Seattle has an NHL team or not.  I want the Sonics back, and that’s it.

Dateline Chris Hansen Voiceover: This is usually the point in the interviews where these men admit they have done something, um, let’s call it, insincere, but they do not quite admit they have done something wrong.  They act as a hero for the unknowing victims.  I see it a lot in these types of investigations.

Dateline Hansen: So, you are saying you have never talked to the NHL about relocating a franchise to Seattle?

Seattle Hansen: No, I don’t mess around with that stuff, man.  If anything, I warned the NHL to stay out of Seattle.  I’ve seen some pretty messy stuff happen when a city gets tangled up with the NHL.  Heck, it happened in my sister’s hometown, man.  She lives in Atlanta, and...and...she was never the same. 

Dateline Chris Hansen Voiceover:  The funny thing about this reasoning was – when we investigated further into Mr. Hansen’s record – he doesn’t even have a sister, let alone one that lives in Atlanta.

Dateline Hansen: So, you sayyy your sisterrr saw the hearrrtbreak that came with losing an NHL franchise, and that’s whhhyyy you only want an NBA franchise instead? 

Seattle Hansen:Yeah, man, definitely.  That’s why I want to keep the NHL out of Seattle.  Believe me, by getting the NBA, I’m helping Seattleites stay away from the dangers that come along with the NHL.

Dateline Hansen:  Sooo, if I wasn’t herrre, you would just talk to David Stern, and then walk right out that door?

Seattle Hansen:Yeah.  Pretty much.

Dateline Hansen:Look, Chrrris, I’ve been doing this a long time.  I’ve seen cases just like yours, and I’m going to level with you: You arrren’t herrre to warn anyone.  We both know that, okay?  You want to take advantage of an unstable league.  What you want is an NHL franchise for yourrr own, no matter who gets hurt.

Seattle Hansen: No, man, I don’t!  No I don’t at all!  That’s a lie!

/starts sobbing

Dateline Hansen:Look, Chrrris, it’s time to come clean.  If I wasn’t here, you would have forced yourself on an unsuspecting Gary Bettman and tried to make him relocate a franchise?

Seattle Hansen: No, man. *sniffles* I just want what is best for the city. *sniffles* I am creating jobs through a great financial investment...

Dateline Hansen:Hmmm....okayyy, well, I think you should know that my name is Chrrris Hannnsennn from Dateline NBC, and we are doing a story about sports franchise predators.

/camera crew rushes into the room

 If there is anything you would like to say or ask me, now is the time.  If not, you are free to go.

Seattle Hansen: Am I going to jail or something?

Dateline Hansen: That’s not for me to decide.

Seattle Hansen: I-- I’m just gonna go.

Dateline Hansen:That is your choice.

/Seattle Chris Hansen leaves, sulking

Dateline Chris Hansen Voiceover: You know, some of these guys come in here – and it’s the same story every time – they say they are making a difference in people’s lives by keeping the NHL out of their city, when you know they would just put a franchise in a new arena if they had the chance.  And, it’s really sad, and that’s why I am here: to stop them from hurting anyone.

The Sprint Center an "Unintentional Experiment," and No New Expansion

The Kansas City model?

Here are a few links to check out from over the past few days:

Sacramento Bee: Mayor Kevin Johnson still wants Sacramento railyard complex

KC Star: NBA, NHL commissioners rule out expansion

Newsday: NHL head Bettman: Islanders need new home

First thing's first.  An interesting article from the Sacramento Bee of the arena situation in that city.  If you don't know what is going on there by now, basically the Sacramento Kings are run a problematic ownership group that doesn't seem to want to sell the team, but they don't do much for the success of the franchise (the Maloofs -- I urge you to check out the "Maloofs' Key Issues" bullet points just to the right of the article).  So, Sacramento mayor, Kevin Johnson, is taking matters into his own hand to build a new arena for the city, team or no team.  How will they get this done?  By following the "Kansas City model."

The Sacramento Kings had been expected to serve as tenant in a proposed $391 million arena in the downtown railyard before pulling out of the deal last week. Members of the Maloof family, which owns the team, have said they are committed to staying in Sacramento and have floated the idea of renovating Power Balance Pavilion. 

Johnson said city officials should remain focused on a downtown arena and perhaps follow "the Kansas City model." That Midwestern city constructed the Sprint Center – one of the world's busiest arenas – without a professional sports franchise.

Hey, that's cool, I guess.  Until you see why that is such a bad idea.  Bold added by me for emphasis:

If the sides remain apart, Johnson said the city should explore what was done in Kansas City.AEG, which had agreed to operate Sacramento's facility, contributed $53 million to the Kansas City project and operates Sprint Center. 

The Kansas City model is likely to be a difficult one to emulate. 

Gary Bongiovanni, editor in chief of Pollstar magazine, which follows the concert industry, said the Sprint Center was "an unintentional experiment." The city expected to lure an NBA or NHL franchise to the building after it opened in 2007, but that still has not happened. 

"Until Kansas City did it, I'm not sure there was a major example of an arena being built without a sports team," Bongiovanni said. "It becomes a little iffier if you don't have a sports team." 

Arenas with sports anchors generate more revenue from signage and naming rights – advertisers want to be in a building that will be on television broadcasts, Bongiovanni said.  Nonetheless, the Sprint Center has succeeded without a sports team. In the first quarter of 2012, Pollstar ranked the arena the second busiest in the country and seventh busiest in the world based on ticket sales for non-sporting events. Power Balance Pavilion was not in the top 50. 

While the Sprint Center is considered a success by industry experts, Bongiovanni said Sacramentocould not support a new downtown arena if Power Balance Pavilion continued to operate. 

The key to the Sprint Center's success was the financial involvement of AEG, said Troy Schulte, the city manager of Kansas City. 

"There's a vested financial stake (for) them to fill the arena," he said. "I doubt we would have been as successful as a standalone arena without AEG." 

Johnson said the city would continue talking with AEG about a new arena. AEG officials declined comment Tuesday.

It isn't fair to call the Sprint center an "unintentional experiment" because it's not like other cities have built successful arenas (or not arenas) in other cities without a major tenant (look at the top 20 US cities on that list).  Arenas and other venues are built for specific entertainment purposes, and not necessarily for an anchor tenant.  Now, maybe Kansas City's citizens were a part of an intricate social psychological experiment administered by AEG and city officials back in the mid-2000s when they were attempting to promote constructing the Sprint Center.  If so, we are all entitled to monetary compensation for our part.

That second bolded section-- "advertisers want to be in a building that will be on television broadcasts"-- yeah, haven't we been told something else?  Something along the lines of "an arena is sustainable, and even more profitable without an anchor tenant"?  I don't know who this Bongiovanni is (great name), but I'm inclined to agree.  Why wouldn't a venue seen around the world generate more revenue?

***

Moving on, apparently Gary Bettman (and NBA commissioner David Stern) have absolutely no intention of expanding their leagues, which really isn't anything new, but here is what Bettman said anyway.

“There’s interest,” he said. “I hear from a half a dozen cities on a regular basis that would like to have a team, but that’s not anything we’re focused on.” 

While he stopped short of identifying those parties in Kansas City, Bettman was quick to trumpet the virtues of the Sprint Center as a venue amply capable of harboring a franchise. 

“Without being specific,” he said, “because I’m not sure they want to be identified, we hear on a regular basis that there’s this wonderful arena there just waiting for a tenant.”

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/04/20/3567294/nba-nhl-commissioners-rule-out.html#storylink=cpy

That's the Bettman statement ever.  "I'm willing to talk about something, but I can't really go into any details so as to not have the media not to go nuts."  Whatever, again, not anything all that new, but something that happened.

In the meantime, Bettman offers advice to Kansas Citians, and citizens of other cities seeking an NHL franchise:

“Get the outer market (premium broadcasting) package or watch NBC for the time being,” he said. “Look, I don’t like raising expectations. I don’t really think that’s fair.”

Yeah, we'll get right on that.

Oh, also, the Islanders need a new building, but Bettman seems pretty dedicated to keeping the team there (because he is consistent).  Kansas City is mentioned.  That's about it.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/04/20/3567294/nba-nhl-commissioners-rule-out.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/04/18/4422311/mayor-kevin-johnson-still-wants.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/04/18/4422311/mayor-kevin-johnson-still-wants.html#storylink=cpy

Quebec Fallout: What the Hell is Going On Out Here?

NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly and the Travel Channel's Andrew Zimmern. Separated at birth?

I was harsh on ruling Gary Bettman a "failure" when it comes to the possible move of the Phoenix Coyotes (or some mystery franchise -- I'm looking at you Dallas) to Quebec City.  Two franchises relocating to cities that have lost teams earlier in your tenure does not necessarily make you a failure.  Nor does one lockout (now two, that may be a problem).  I'll admit, that's a harse assessment.  Bettman has transformed the NHL into a multi-billion dollar industry by spreading the sport to other markets and through TV rights deals.  Plus, he confesses to his mistakes.  I guess that's a good thing, even from a fan's standpoint.  But, I come from an American perspective.  Canadians do not want him to take hockey away from its homeland and place it in the desert or the beach.  Which makes sense, more or less, because although I would like to see more Canadian MLB teams it's hard to imagine the outrage if, say, the Rays moved up north. (By the way, just for fun, I searched "What are good things Gary Bettman has done for hockey?" into Google.  Not a lot of positive reviews came up.  Just FYI.)

Perhaps, though, much of the fuel of my anger comes from this assumption that the Coyotes are already on their way to Quebec.  An assumption, of course.

From the CBC:

NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly was asked on Sunday whether the possibility of the struggling Phoenix Coyotes being relocated to Quebec City was strengthened by the announcement on Sunday. 

"No, there's nothing new here," Daly wrote in an e-mail.

The same Bill Daly that denied any deal was done less than a month ago.  Damn, Daly sounds like one tough hombre.  Do not cross that man.

His response makes sense, though.  The NHL is not going to tip its hand, nor outright say "Oh heck, yeah, that changes everything!"  No, they are playing the game just like everyone else in this situation.  Quebecor, that crazy Saskatoon guy, any and all of the Coyotes possible owners.  Everybody.  What we know is that the NHL is doing everything they can (or have done everything they could for the past three years) to keep the Coyotes at Jobing.com Arena.  Meanwhile, Quebec City and Seattle are building arenas and assembling owner-type people in hopes of getting a wayward franchise.  In reality, Mayflower moving trucks are not converging on Glendale, Arizona as you read this.  Possibly...

And that's where it gets confusing.

Earlier this week we heard about the NHL's "Plan B", their probable contingency plan for the Coyotes if all ownership candidates fall through.  In that contingency plan, the NHL will likely relocate the team to one of three cities: Seattle, Quebec City, or Kansas City.

From PucKChaser:

Kansas City was mentioned as a “in the mix”, but no one has ever explained why. 

That is the money statement, right there.  Quebec makes sense because of what we have seen from Quebecor and the new arena, etc.  Seattle makes sense because of their possible arena deal, and a possible owner attached to said arena.  Kansas City makes sense because of... is it still because of the Sprint Center?  Or AEG?  Barbecue...?  Something does not add up.

Easy answer:  The NHL is full of crap.
Fun answer: We are not being told everything, and the rabbit hole goes much much deeper than we know.  Kansas City, Seattle, and Quebec City.  Those three cities, not any others.  Apparently, they have more significance than Las Vegas or Saskatoon in this case.  We just do not know exactly why.  Obviously, though, the NHL must be on speaking terms with these cities.  Therefore, Bill Daly's comments do not hold much truth.  Then again, they do.  The NHL could care less about new arenas.  Also, not only has the NHL not sold the Coyotes, they have a Plan B.  But, a new Quebec or Seattle arena will not sway that opinion.  What about the owners.  Pierre-Karl Peladeau and Quebecor in Quebec.  Christopher Hansen et al. in Seattle.  Who in Kansas City?  Mystery guy?  Has AEG found someone and nobody knows.  Not likely.  But, what strange goings-on, indeed.

The only thing that might have some truth is that the NHL operates like the Knights Templar, guarding secrets and leaking (possibly) faulty information to keep us all guessing.

Playing with the King of Hearts, knowing it ain't really smart.

Quebec New Arena Deal -- Build It and Someone Might Come (ADDENDUM)

Read this first:

Puck Daddy: New $400 million, 18,000 seat arena in Quebec City to be ready by Sept. 2015

That's ridiculous!  What city would build an arena with one already, and no prospective tenant for --- what, uh, ohhhh...

In fairness, Kemper Arena is past its prime, and Kansas City wanted to embark on a huge downtown revitalization plan.  The Sprint Center was to become a showpiece, an arena that could lure any and all concerts, acts, sporting events, and performances and generate revenue for the city with nearby restaurants and watering holes (i.e. Power and Light District).  Sprint Center was a replacement for Kemper, and it has served that purpose and then some.  It doesn't have a permanent tenant, but it does bring big acts to Kansas City.  In the paraphrased words of Tim Leiweke, "it doesn't need a permanent tenant to be successful."  It can stand alone.  So, does Quebec need a new arena?

In March, Labeaume said that millions of dollars in upgrades would be completed this summer to Le Colisee, the former home of the Nordiques; so should the Phoenix Coyotes -- or any other NHL team given the sharp left turn that happened a year ago -- have to be relocated this summer, a temporary home in Quebec would be available for the next three years while the new arena is being built.

Just a quick look at the ExpoCite, or Colisee Pepsi website, one can see that the building is not short on events.  Pitbull is coming, and OH LOOK an evening with Bryan Adams!!!  Only an evening?!?!

My point is, does a metropolitian area with under one million residents need TWO arenas (or "amphitheaters," as Quebecers call it)?  Obviously, Quebec doesn't need a new arena, they just want a NHL team, again.  That is just a rather specfic use of money.

Good luck to Quebec and Quebecor in their quest for a NHL franchise, but if another team from Gary Bettman's southern influence zone (*cough* Phoenix *cough*) were to move north of the border, I think it might be time to search for a new commissoner.  And, yes, a lot of people will say Bettman sucks already and he has ruined the league blah blah blah, but spreading the game in American markets has been his plight since he started in the '90s, and failing that WILL make him a failure as a commissoner.

But, really, wouldn't we all be a lot happier if every NHL team played in Canada?

ADDENDUM
Okay, maybe not a failure, but it certainly will be a major goal he did not accomplish during his tenure.  Then again, if Phoenix or whoever moves to Quebec, you really can't blame league officials for trying to sustain the league for the future.  There is no doubt Quebec will take to a new team as well as Winnipeg (and a fan of the sport would hope that support will last), but what does the NHL care about more: large markets, or filled arenas?

Hey, When are the Coyotes Moving to Seattle?

Just a timeline of links of things that are going on with the Coyotes and Seattle and a possible new arena and all of that mumbo-jumbo.

NHL Denies Report That the Coyotes Have Been Sold
Despite a report from KING in Seattle (since taken down) saying that the 'Yotes have found an owner.  This means that they are neither staying in Glendale, nor are they moving anywhere.

NHL Denies that Greg Jamison's the Next Phoenix Coyotes Owner
Yes, Puck Daddy again, and yes, I could write another whole post on this article, but I will take the high road on this one.  The only part I will challenge is the final few sentences.

Everything I've heard is that this is the last year in the desert for the Coyotes.

Sources would be fantastic to list here, as Wysh has not given anything more than speculation in his previous articles.  Bettman thinks Seattle would be a fine place for a franchise, just like he thinks that of KC, LV, Glendale, etc., so yeah, he isn't a source.  Also, other like-minded people are not reputable sources if they report the same thing as you do without sources.

But guarantees have really never had a home in this drama, which seems to take a new turn every week.

No, it does not, because most of this "drama" was manufactured out of some guy in Seattle wanting to build an arena, but who is not in the team ownership business.  Plus, we have been talking about the same thing with the Coyotes ownership for a while now.  That is, there is no real front runner.  "Drama" implies an ownership situation has gone from one extreme to another.  If anything, this situation is droll.  So very, very droll.

NHL Denies Phoenix Coyotes Sale Report, Seattle Sports Fans Keeping Watchful Eye
Maybe if the Coyotes do move to Seattle, they can call the team the Watchful Eyes, or Sky Eyes, or Alan Parsons.  If some guy named T.J. Eckleburg purchases the Coyotes and moves them to Seattle, then I quit.

Concerns Raised About New Seattle Arena Plan
Why Seattle's Initiative 91 on sports subsidies may present some obstacles for a new arena.

Initiative 91 Explanation

Seattle Arena Proposal: Deal Contingent on NBA, NHL Franchise First
What a concept...  Article also explains how I-91 may not be a problem anyway.

NHL Relocation: Why the Phoenix Coyotes Won't Move to Seattle This Summer
Don't let the title fool you, this article does not do any of that.

Personally, I don't know why Seattle "is really the best location for (the Coyotes) to land" or makes the most sense than any other potentially interested city.  Seattle, Kansas City, Las Vegas, Quebec City, Hartford, etc. all have a hockey history, all have an interested fan base, all have no real ownership group, and hell, all have geographic rival cities.  What Travis Hughes, the author of the article in the last link, fails to argue is why Seattle is a better location than any other city.  Greg Wyshynski at least claims to have some sort of weird attraction to Seattle hockey.  I don't know, maybe I'm crazy, or just biased or whatever.  I'm not saying the Coyotes won't move to Seattle.  It could very well happen.  But, the reporting on an initial story (Coyotes ownership) and connecting it to a new Seattle arena proposal story does not a relocation make.

Consider this a Kansas City based Coyotes Relocation Open Thread.  Have an opinion on the relocation matter?  Think Seattle is a nice city to get a cup of coffee?  Think Quebec City is kind of cold this time of year?  I certainly do not share your opinion, so tell us your opinions in the comments.  Come on, everyone has a Google account nowadays, so it's really easy to comment.  To borrow and paraphrase a line from blog Jewels From the Crown, it's time to stop lurking and get the dialogue moving.

EVEN MORE Relocation Super Fun Time

"The building challenges for Seattle, Quebec City as NHL markets"

No longer is what Greg Wyshynski doing with these articles in any way constructive or informative.  Really, this article seemed to be damage control for the one he wrote the other day basically saying how great it would be if Seattle had an NHL team, and then posted a video with Gary Bettman saying nothing about Seattle.  It was some hard-hitting journalism, I tells ya!

Enough is enough, though, and Wysh is not the only one doing it.  Look, no one wants to move a team (the Coyotes) to Seattle right now.  No one (viable owners) wants to move a team to Kansas City right now, although the people that own the local arena (AEG) probably wouldn't mind.  Some people want to move a team to Quebec City, but they are not as forceful as True North and the city is dragging its feet on an NHL-caliber arena.  No one but maybe some guy Gary Bettman goes fishing with wants to move a team to Las Vegas right now.  It is what it is.  If anything, owners are selling teams.  The Blues, Stars, etc. to more or less operate in the same cities.  It's cheaper than moving.  The Devils and Coyotes fit into a category of NHL money hemorrhagers, but it is hard to see an established organization like New Jersey to just pick up and leave town to go to a market with more questions than answers.

The argument against KC and QC are "well they had a team and now it's someone else's turn."  Obviously, those arguments are ineffective and pointless, causing more arguments than actually giving evidence towards solving one.  So what?  Minnesota had their chance with the North Stars, right?  Winnipeg had their chance already?  Didn't Atlanta already get a chance?  What about Northern California?  Just by saying someone had their chance already does not make a city or area's hockey community any smaller or weaker.  Plus, that ignores the whole business-side of things.  If someone sees a good investment (i.e. no lease payments for an arena) with minimal risk, the deal can get done.  This also deflects from the reasons why Seattle has never housed an NHL team.  It's not like there is a pecking order, and Seattle drew the short straw in 1917 and are just now getting a crack at housing an NHL franchise.

What certainly doesn't help is our very own The Pitch's myopic view on things.  Wysh links to Jonathan Bender's article in The Pitch, calling KC "emo" due to the advent of the Seattle issue.  Although Bender's article does raise a good question (when is the Sprint Center too old to attract suitors?) it plays to the whole notion that Seattle is just lying in waiting for Bettman and the NHL to say "ohhh, I'm so sorry Glendale, but time is up.  You lose.  It looks like your team will be moving to Seattle.  But we have some lovely parting gifts..."  I use the term myopic to describe this article, but perhaps that is not fair.  It's not fair, because all Mr. Bender is doing is giving a very broad local reaction to an article from NBC Sports talking about how Seattle is such a great fit for the NHL.  The NBC Sports article is, like the multiple articles on Puck Daddy, PURE SPECULATION.  Observe:

"As we wrote back in December, there are lots of things Seattle's got going for it:
-- Large metro population
-- Plenty of rich people (editors note: BWHAHAHAHAHAA who writes this?!?!)
-- High-profile companies like Amazon.com, Starbucks and Microsoft
-- Close enough to draw from Portland and Vancouver
-- "Let's do something indoors" weather during the winter"

This is what passes for acceptable writing nowadays, folks.  And The Pitch's blog LINKS TO THIS!  So, now, nationally recognized writers (Greg Wyshynski) look at this reaction in KC, believe KC is bitter, and it fuels their argument that has no basis in fact and has taken on a life of its own.  The NBC Sports article even links to a story from the Winnipeg Free Press calling Seattle the "lead horse" when it comes to relocation cities, without giving any other reasons.  It just is, I guess.  It's just as baseless as any other article on the same topic.  It's like a bunch of media outlets got together to write the same story, then linked to each other's stories to generate buzz for something no one has talked about in the history of ever!

Ahem.

But, let's compose ourselves for a moment.  How about a few questions for the pro-NHL to Seattle crowd.  Who will own this team?  Do the citizens even want the NHL?  Are city officials even willing to ponder an NHL team?  Will an arena deal even get traction?  How will they pay for a new arena?  Is "Let's do something indoors" weather like "Rainy day" weather, or more on par with "Let's not go out to eat tonight, I had to work all day and am kind of tired" weather?  Why is Seattle housing many of the nation's rich people?  Aren't Seattleites too laid back to care about hockey?  And maybe the biggest question, will Gary Bettman let the Coyotes out of Glendale?

This is an injustice to actual Journalism, with a capital J.  This is a story for the sake of a story.  No city has ever been the "leader in the clubhouse" for the Coyotes; that is not a real thing that has ever existed.  Words of advice to our hockey loving friends in Seattle:  Don't get your hopes up.

This makes me lightheaded.


(P.S.: Wysh runs a great blog, but I just do not agree with this particular topic.  Read it for the other good work, though.  And Seattleites, I do not intend to be mean with my words of advice, but the citizens of Kansas City have seen this before firsthand.)

Puck Daddy Relocation Super Fun Time (UPDATE)

"NHL relocation to Seattle: Will new arena, Coyotes' plight bring pucks to Pacific Northwest?" (link fixed)

These articles are always fun, because they are pure speculation and basically don't solve anything.  I shall paraphrase:  "There is a guy in Seattle who wants to build a new arena for the NBA.  Also, possibly for the NHL.  A Seattle-Vancouver rivalry would be cool."

LOOGIT HOW CLOSE THEY IZ!

The Glendale/Coyote situation is pretty simple to figure out:

• The Coyotes represent a team in Bettman's southern influence zone.  Taking that team away does not 'spread the influence of the game.'  Bettman does not want to lose another one of those teams (e.g. Atlanta).
• The NHL also does not want to own the Coyotes anymore.  They lose over $20 million annually.
• No particular "cities" are interested, meaning none of the current possible ownership groups are looking to move the Coyotes from Glendale.  None of these groups are like a True North for Winnipeg.
• Thus, no one has said anything about Seattle getting an NHL team.  But, some guy wants to build a new arena for a future NBA team because the Key Arena is junk.

What can Seattle learn from Kansas City?  Well, first, they need an owner to bring a team to Seattle.  Also, they need an hockey (NHL) ready arena, which has caused this speculation.  Third, they need city officials willing to bring in a NHL team.  Plus, a whole bunch of other things to go the right way just to take one team to another city.

So, yeah, do that, and then maybe we have a story.

UPDATE: Yeah, also Bettman never says anything about Seattle in this video that Greg Wyshynski has embedded in his article talking about a possible NHL team in Seattle.  I think the key phrase is "we don't like moving franchises," a point Bettman has harped on before when talking about the stability of the league and continued growth of the game.  If keeping the team in Arizona is the priority, then KC, Seattle, Quebec, etc. are not even being discussed by the "interested buyers."

The 'Nos' Have It: Long Island Residents Reject New Arena Plan

Just forget you know what this looks like

According to reports on Long Island, voters rejected a referendum to borrow $400 million to build a new arena for the New York Islanders and build a minor baseball stadium.  The future of the Islanders is now in the air, as this was probably the last ploy by owner Charles Wang to keep the team on Long Island.  The team's lease in the rustic Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum runs out in 2015.

This means Kansas City's chances of getting a hockey team in the short-term remain on life support.  The Islanders uncertainty stems further than just the need for a new arena and lack of support in their current location, but also the New York area's ability to support three NHL franchises.  Of course, KC is a long shot, but another NHL franchise may be mobile unless Wang sells the team or he starts building an arena brick by brick in a field somewhere.

In the meantime, KC's focus should not be fully on landing an NHL team.  As KC hockey blogger pucKChaser says, grow the game in the area through a grassroots movement and youth involvement.  Quit closing local rinks, because that's just silly.

The Day of Arena Voting Will Come Anon

I was going to do something incredibly stupid and respond to certain snippets from press articles on the upcoming August 1^st vote on Long Island for a new arena/minor league ballpark/etc.  I was going to, but this article by Jed Morey at the Long Island Press has everything you will need to know to form your own damn opinions.  Basically, if Long Islanders vote yes on the arena proposal, they will be one step closer to a new arena and keeping their struggling (but up and coming) Islanders.  If they vote no, then for all intents-and-purpose owner Charles Wang will take his ball and go home (or relocate the team).  This new arena deal appears to be the final offer Wang is making to Nassau Countians to keep the Islanders on Long Island.

Of course, with a ‘no’ vote the implications for Kansas City become interesting.  For example, the city will be talked about for relocation, only to have the Islanders move to Brooklyn or somewhere in the greater New York City area.  Bu hey, the Sprint Center will be on the news!!!  Either way, who knows what will happen, but stay tuned to this channel on August 1^st or 2^nd (or whenever I feel like looking at the results).  This may mean something for KC...or not (especially with everyone calling KC's chances dead.  I don't believe they are dead, just unlikely that any one within the city would be willing to revive them).

Here is the argument for a ‘no’ vote.

Interesting stuff from over at Islanders’ blog Lighthouse Hockey about a realistic cost to taxpayers with or without a new arena.