If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Sports Illustrated)   Someone in talks to buy the Phoenix Coyotes. Presumably by accident   (sportsillustrated.cnn.com) divider line 154
    More: Followup, coyotes, Jerry Moyes, NHL Commissioner, Gary Bettman, Goldwater Institute, Jim Balsillie, Glendale City Council, Arizona Constitution  
•       •       •

499 clicks; posted to Sports » on 08 May 2012 at 9:21 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



154 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-08 09:14:49 AM
Considering they're in the WCF, now's as good of a time as any.
 
2012-05-08 09:28:01 AM
I was debating with someone why Phoenix would even have hockey fans. Their stadium is probably the only destination in the city where you'd need to wear a sweater.
 
2012-05-08 09:38:05 AM
So some Teabaggers are confounding the Coyotes ownership problems. Guess they're afraid of creeping Canadian socialism.
 
2012-05-08 09:38:41 AM
Well to be fair the Coyotes do own the Blackhawks and Predators.
 
2012-05-08 09:40:57 AM

blazemongr: I was debating with someone why Phoenix would even have hockey fans. Their stadium is probably the only destination in the city where you'd need to wear a sweater.


Phoenix has the same problem St. Pete did when it comes to baseball, in that there are a lot of people who enjoy the sport in that city due to having moved there, but due to the fact people who move to such places are complete assholes, they only turn out for games featuring the team that hails from wherever they moved from.

So lots of Red Wings, Sabres, Blackhawks fans in Phoenix who turn out to root against the home team. (Tampa avoided having that problem in hockey by putting the stadium in the one place there are actual young people and possible new fans.)
 
2012-05-08 09:46:02 AM

mikaloyd: Well to be fair the Coyotes do own the Blackhawks and Predators.


This.

/they deserve a good owner
//go devils
 
2012-05-08 09:59:15 AM

mikaloyd: Well to be fair the Coyotes do own the Blackhawks and Predators.


lololol

Let me cover a few ofl the bases for my fellow Canadians who may be butthurt over this:

* Hockey shouldn't be played in the Desert
* Team is gonna move to in 2 years anyway
* Fairweather fans don't deserve a team

Feel free to add to the list.
 
2012-05-08 10:11:14 AM
"I don't understand. Did you trip over something?"
 
2012-05-08 10:12:50 AM

mikaloyd: Well to be fair the Coyotes do own the Blackhawks and Predators.


Please, the most significant thing the Yotes did vs. the Hawks was put Torres on the ice, though Smith stole game 6 so I can give him props for that. They did legitimately dominate the Preds though; they made them look terrible in every game except game 3.
 
2012-05-08 10:16:50 AM

Mr.Tangent: mikaloyd: Well to be fair the Coyotes do own the Blackhawks and Predators.

lololol

Let me cover a few ofl the bases for my fellow Canadians who may be butthurt over this:

* Hockey shouldn't be played in the Desert
* Team is gonna move to in 2 years anyway
* Fairweather fans don't deserve a team

Feel free to add to the list.


I don't believe that hockey shouldn't be played in the desert; it just shouldn't be played in apathetic cities.
 
2012-05-08 10:23:36 AM
They cheer now, but when their team tanks will they still be there?
 
2012-05-08 10:29:01 AM

bubbaprog: Phoenix has the same problem St. Pete did when it comes to baseball, in that there are a lot of people who enjoy the sport in that city due to having moved there, but due to the fact people who move to such places are complete assholes, they only turn out for games featuring the team that hails from wherever they moved from.

So lots of Red Wings, Sabres, Blackhawks fans in Phoenix who turn out to root against the home team. (Tampa avoided having that problem in hockey by putting the stadium in the one place there are actual young people and possible new fans.)


You nailed it. The Coyotes will have trouble until the kids who grew up in that area with the Yotes have enough money to buy tickets. By then, hopefully their stadium will burn down and force them to put a new one back in a place where people will actually want to go.

It's amazing how much winning can sway an apathetic audience, as well.
 
2012-05-08 10:31:48 AM
Bob_Laublaw:
I don't believe that hockey should be played in the desert; it just shouldn't be played in apathetic cities. everywhere


ftfm
 
2012-05-08 10:32:02 AM
chris.msag.com

//Just gonna leave this here.
 
2012-05-08 10:33:46 AM

Bob_Laublaw: I don't believe that hockey shouldn't be played in the desert; it just shouldn't be played in apathetic cities.


Like Chicago, until they started getting good (never above 23rd in the league in attendance until 2007-2008). Or NYC (sure, Long Island, if you want to be more specific - they haven't been out of the bottom 3 in the league in attendance - and have had the worst attendance most often - since the lockout.)
 
2012-05-08 10:35:05 AM

WhiskeySticks: They cheer now, but when their team tanks will they still be there?


That's true of every sport so shut up!

Actually I hate that argument. Southern NHL markets have predominantly gate driven revenue streams as opposed to more established regions that have highly lucrative local and state/provincial broadcasting deals, not to mention merchandising. So while this run is doing great for the Coyotes short term if the front office doesn't work around the clock to take advantage of this(season ticket sales, promotions, ad space, any kind of broadcasting deal) and the team stumbles in a few years, or heck even next year I don't want to hear any complaining from ownership about money problems.
 
2012-05-08 10:40:11 AM

IAmRight: Bob_Laublaw: I don't believe that hockey shouldn't be played in the desert; it just shouldn't be played in apathetic cities.

Like Chicago, until they started getting good (never above 23rd in the league in attendance until 2007-2008). Or NYC (sure, Long Island, if you want to be more specific - they haven't been out of the bottom 3 in the league in attendance - and have had the worst attendance most often - since the lockout.)


I'll give Chicago a pass, Dolla Bill gave fans a reason not to go.
 
2012-05-08 10:42:41 AM

Mr.Tangent: I'll give Chicago a pass, Dolla Bill gave fans a reason not to go.


I'm not saying there weren't reasons, it's just funny when people accuse other markets of being terrible while ignoring the fact that currently thriving markets were recently really, really not caring about their teams, because the teams didn't care.
 
2012-05-08 10:42:45 AM

Mr.Tangent: I'll give Chicago a pass, Dolla Bill gave fans a reason not to go.


Yes, I'd say openly declaring and waging war against the entire fanbase is bad for business.
 
2012-05-08 10:44:28 AM
Someday, I will hopefully get an explanation of why the Coyotes were allowed to hemmorage money and be a burden on the financial structure of the whole league for so long when it was pretty clearly demonstrated that the city officials and a very big chunk of the populace really did not care. How long has the drama been playing out there? 5, 6 years?

But Atlanta, under the same circumstances, was ripped away with nary a whimper from the league. And Pittsburgh also had to fight and almost moved.

It just smells fishy. What's so special about Phoenix?
 
2012-05-08 10:44:49 AM
I have to credit Bettman. I know he is lying. But for once I can't tell exactly what is the lie and how big it is.

This feels like a classic Bettman play to get some heat off the Coyotes' off ice situation so all the talk will be about the on ice success.

Yet, he would never purposely set up a public smokescreen that had even a slight chance of going wrong and make him look like an idiot. Would he?
 
2012-05-08 10:45:35 AM

Flappyhead: WhiskeySticks: They cheer now, but when their team tanks will they still be there?

That's true of every sport so shut up!



*see Toronto, Montreal and Minnesota, even Tampa.
 
2012-05-08 10:48:02 AM

IAmRight: Bob_Laublaw: I don't believe that hockey shouldn't be played in the desert; it just shouldn't be played in apathetic cities.

Like Chicago, until they started getting good (never above 23rd in the league in attendance until 2007-2008). Or NYC (sure, Long Island, if you want to be more specific - they haven't been out of the bottom 3 in the league in attendance - and have had the worst attendance most often - since the lockout.)


Oh man, you're going to get me started. Please don't get me started...

I'll keep it short: When you play in the shiattiest arena in major professional sports and your team has finished higher than the 8-seed only once since 1994, people aren't going to fill said shiatty arena. But as soon as the Islanders sustain decency, the fans will come out. It happened in 2002, and there's always a spike when the Islanders get hot.

/It's a moot point since the Islanders probably won't be in Nassau past 2015
 
2012-05-08 10:48:38 AM

Bobo_Spiewack: What's so special about Phoenix?


That's Bettman's pride and joy. He wants there to be one city where he'd actually be cheered when he's introduced to present the Stanley Cup.
 
2012-05-08 10:49:34 AM

Bobo_Spiewack: Someday, I will hopefully get an explanation of why the Coyotes were allowed to hemmorage money and be a burden on the financial structure of the whole league for so long when it was pretty clearly demonstrated that the city officials and a very big chunk of the populace really did not care. How long has the drama been playing out there? 5, 6 years?

But Atlanta, under the same circumstances, was ripped away with nary a whimper from the league. And Pittsburgh also had to fight and almost moved.

It just smells fishy. What's so special about Phoenix?


The owner putting the team into bankrupcy and making a deal against league rules to sell the team to Balsillie really, really pissed them off.
 
2012-05-08 10:53:32 AM

WhiskeySticks: Flappyhead: WhiskeySticks: They cheer now, but when their team tanks will they still be there?

That's true of every sport so shut up!


*see Toronto, Montreal and Minnesota, even Tampa.


The Leafs are a special case. No other sports franchise in the world has this kind of fan insanity. Not even the Yankees or Red Sox could sell every seat after 7 or 8 years of mediocre play and not have to worry if it continued for another 5.
 
2012-05-08 10:53:59 AM

FreakinB: When you play in the shiattiest arena in major professional sports and your team has finished higher than the 8-seed only once since 1994, people aren't going to fill said shiatty arena. But as soon as the Islanders sustain decency, the fans will come out


Again, that's not the argument I'm making - I'm saying that a lot of places have sh*tty support when the team sucks. I'd be willing to bet that if there weren't a constant situation of: "This team sucks" and/or "When are they moving?", people would be far more likely to show up in Phoenix.

If they're sold to an ownership group that tries, and following the success of this season, I'd expect them to do fairly well next year. And if they win a lot again next year, then they'll do better still in attendance.

/even during that spike, the Isles never broke out of the bottom 10 in attendance - ESPN's charts don't have percentages, though, back then, so I'm not sure how much is due to arena limitations
 
2012-05-08 10:55:14 AM
Add Edmonton to that list. Garbage product on the ice, but they still show up.

Link
 
2012-05-08 10:56:41 AM

Decillion: The Leafs are a special case. No other sports franchise in the world has this kind of fan insanity. Not even the Yankees or Red Sox could sell every seat after 7 or 8 years of mediocre play and not have to worry if it continued for another 5.


Montreal had 100% capacity attendance this year, too. So they might be up there with the Leafs. But we'll see if they sustain it. And they're consistently in the top 2 in attendance (largely because they have a large arena, but they still fill it up).
 
2012-05-08 11:01:45 AM

IAmRight: FreakinB: When you play in the shiattiest arena in major professional sports and your team has finished higher than the 8-seed only once since 1994, people aren't going to fill said shiatty arena. But as soon as the Islanders sustain decency, the fans will come out

Again, that's not the argument I'm making - I'm saying that a lot of places have sh*tty support when the team sucks. I'd be willing to bet that if there weren't a constant situation of: "This team sucks" and/or "When are they moving?", people would be far more likely to show up in Phoenix.

If they're sold to an ownership group that tries, and following the success of this season, I'd expect them to do fairly well next year. And if they win a lot again next year, then they'll do better still in attendance.

/even during that spike, the Isles never broke out of the bottom 10 in attendance - ESPN's charts don't have percentages, though, back then, so I'm not sure how much is due to arena limitations


Ah, I misunderstood. You're basically saying the same thing about the Coyotes that I am about the Isles, and I agree. As for the attendance I'm talking mid-season spikes, nothing sustained. I know it happened last season when they finished strong. Capacity is a problem though, the Coliseum was easily the smallest arena in the league until Winnipeg came back.
 
2012-05-08 11:18:36 AM

Bobo_Spiewack: Someday, I will hopefully get an explanation of why the Coyotes were allowed to hemmorage money and be a burden on the financial structure of the whole league for so long when it was pretty clearly demonstrated that the city officials and a very big chunk of the populace really did not care. How long has the drama been playing out there? 5, 6 years?

But Atlanta, under the same circumstances, was ripped away with nary a whimper from the league. And Pittsburgh also had to fight and almost moved.

It just smells fishy. What's so special about Phoenix?


Pittsburgh was a major power play by Bettman and Lemieux to extract a new arena from the city and state. And it worked like a charm. Bettman spent years trying to find a new owner for the Thrashers (just as he did the Jets in 1993-95). There was literally nobody interested in owning a team in Atlanta. And given Bettman's ability to find a sucker to take over pretty much every other team is a damning indictment of Atlanta's market. The difference between Phoenix and Atlanta is that the Moyes/Balsillie bankruptcy plan forced the league to deal with Phoenix under a spotlight.

Bettman is an easy man to loathe, but he is farking brilliant. If you put aside the emotional arguments, it is actually pretty amazing to see what he's pulled off here. He beat back Balsillie's bankruptcy scam. A scam, incidentally, that would have crippled all of the major leagues' ability to control where their franchises were located. And while the league was forced to take on the Coyotes as owners as a result, Bettman managed to convince Glendale to eat $50 million in losses over two years. Jamieson is now the fourth sucker he's found with an interest (four more than existed in Atlanta). And whether or not this deal succeeds or falls apart like the rest, Bettman has Quebec City, Seattle and Hamilton/Toronto/Markham salivating at the possibility of a team. All three markets are willing to build new rinks and all three are willing to pay huge expansion/relocation fees. Even if the Coyotes stay put and the Islanders remain in the metro New York area, these markets are in play. And expansion to 32 teams will give the existing owners hundreds of millions of dollars.

The Coyotes have never been profitable in Phoenix, and I doubt they ever will. Jamieson is going to lose on this deal. Glendale is going to lose on this deal. But Bettman is going to win. And hes going to make his employers boatloads of money in the process.
 
2012-05-08 11:22:58 AM
Bettman hates Canada
 
2012-05-08 11:26:20 AM

Resolute: The Coyotes have never been profitable in Phoenix, and I doubt they ever will. Jamieson is going to lose on this deal. Glendale is going to lose on this deal. But Bettman is going to win. And hes going to make his employers boatloads of money in the process.


I've tried explaining how the NHL is selling the brand and can afford a couple of franchises who are losing to further the whole, but it seldom sticks with the crowd who use Bettman as a scapegoat for every perceived ill. Good luck. I'm rooting for you.
 
2012-05-08 11:31:37 AM

FreakinB: Ah, I misunderstood. You're basically saying the same thing about the Coyotes that I am about the Isles, and I agree.


Yeah - I used those specifically because I think that exactly zero people would say "Chicago/NYC just aren't hockey markets/don't care about hockey."

Hell, even Pittsburgh was down in the attendance sh*tter less than a decade ago when moving them was discussed. Crazy how having a bad team and lots of discussion about moving a team causes people not to want to spend money on them. And how having a good team that you know is going to be around for years to come improves attendance.
 
2012-05-08 11:33:15 AM

swahnhennessy: Resolute: The Coyotes have never been profitable in Phoenix, and I doubt they ever will. Jamieson is going to lose on this deal. Glendale is going to lose on this deal. But Bettman is going to win. And hes going to make his employers boatloads of money in the process.

I've tried explaining how the NHL is selling the brand and can afford a couple of franchises who are losing to further the whole, but it seldom sticks with the crowd who use Bettman as a scapegoat for every perceived ill. Good luck. I'm rooting for you.


You can be the devils public rellations guy but at the end of the day he is still the devil. you cant change that
 
2012-05-08 11:43:43 AM

ontariolightning: swahnhennessy: Resolute: The Coyotes have never been profitable in Phoenix, and I doubt they ever will. Jamieson is going to lose on this deal. Glendale is going to lose on this deal. But Bettman is going to win. And hes going to make his employers boatloads of money in the process.

I've tried explaining how the NHL is selling the brand and can afford a couple of franchises who are losing to further the whole, but it seldom sticks with the crowd who use Bettman as a scapegoat for every perceived ill. Good luck. I'm rooting for you.

You can be the devils public rellations guy but at the end of the day he is still the devil. you cant change that


No offense, but the guy with the thoughful, well-reasoned post is going to come off a lot better than the guy who just name-calls. Bettman is far from perfect, but I agree with Resolute. He's done a much better job in certain areas than he's given credit for,
 
2012-05-08 11:45:45 AM

Resolute: There was literally nobody interested in owning a team in Atlanta. And given Bettman's ability to find a sucker to take over pretty much every other team is a damning indictment of Atlanta's market.


Atlanta didn't fail the Thrashers, the Thrashers failed Atlanta. Worst ownership group ever.
 
2012-05-08 11:49:42 AM

ElwoodCuse: Atlanta didn't fail the Thrashers, the Thrashers failed Atlanta. Worst ownership group ever.


Yeah, if only the Thrashers ownership had put together a perennial winner they could have given Atlanta fans some more playoffs to ignore like they did with the Braves.
 
2012-05-08 11:54:46 AM

Yanks_RSJ: ElwoodCuse: Atlanta didn't fail the Thrashers, the Thrashers failed Atlanta. Worst ownership group ever.

Yeah, if only the Thrashers ownership had put together a perennial winner they could have given Atlanta fans some more playoffs to ignore like they did with the Braves.


Atlanta is just expanding their role as a hub - they're most famous for their airport, and they're second-most famous because the NHL keeps routing Canadian teams through there before they get to their destination.
 
2012-05-08 11:57:14 AM

FreakinB: No offense, but the guy with the thoughful, well-reasoned post is going to come off a lot better than the guy who just name-calls. Bettman is far from perfect, but I agree with Resolute. He's done a much better job in certain areas than he's given credit for,


I've been able to see every playoff game I wanted to see this year on TV, for the first time ever. The league recently signed its most lucrative TV deal ever. The parity of the league means teams with solid coaching and management can compete against free-spending teams. The Winter Classic is awesome. HBO's series around the Winter Classic is awesome. Love them or hate them, the league has personalities that you know of. You may hate hockey in Phoenix, but a butt-ton of new eyes are watching the sport who wouldn't have if there weren't hockey there. You can't grow the game if you only cater to people where the markets are established. Other than the inconsistent punishment for cheap shots, I'm having a hard time finding reasons why Gary Bettman isn't the exact guy the league's owners want for that job. He's making them rich.
 
2012-05-08 12:07:33 PM

WhiskeySticks: Flappyhead: WhiskeySticks: They cheer now, but when their team tanks will they still be there?

That's true of every sport so shut up!


*see Toronto, Montreal and Minnesota, even Tampa.


Check your snark detector.
 
2012-05-08 12:14:27 PM

ElwoodCuse: Resolute: There was literally nobody interested in owning a team in Atlanta. And given Bettman's ability to find a sucker to take over pretty much every other team is a damning indictment of Atlanta's market.

Atlanta didn't fail the Thrashers, the Thrashers failed Atlanta. Worst ownership group ever.


There is certainly truth to that. But whether you want to argue that Atlanta was a bad market to begin with, or that the last owners killed any potential the market had, or that both are true, Atlanta was a dead market. Which is something of a shame, I like that the NHL is regaining its focus on the traditional markets after spending so much time in the 1966 and 1990 plans focused on the south, but I don't hate the south either. I like seeing what Nashville has managed. And Tampa (except for 2004, grr), and San Jose. It is a shame Atlanta couldn't be a part of that, but such is life. Calgary has lost three professional baseball teams in the last decade. Some markets just can't support some sports.
 
2012-05-08 12:14:34 PM
It feels like a million years since I checked into a hockey thread. Been slammed at work and trying to find a house to buy.

Gods of hockey, forgive my transgressions! I have been watching, just not drunkenly posting!
 
2012-05-08 12:26:25 PM

Funzo: FreakinB: No offense, but the guy with the thoughful, well-reasoned post is going to come off a lot better than the guy who just name-calls. Bettman is far from perfect, but I agree with Resolute. He's done a much better job in certain areas than he's given credit for,

I've been able to see every playoff game I wanted to see this year on TV, for the first time ever. The league recently signed its most lucrative TV deal ever. The parity of the league means teams with solid coaching and management can compete against free-spending teams. The Winter Classic is awesome. HBO's series around the Winter Classic is awesome. Love them or hate them, the league has personalities that you know of. You may hate hockey in Phoenix, but a butt-ton of new eyes are watching the sport who wouldn't have if there weren't hockey there. You can't grow the game if you only cater to people where the markets are established. Other than the inconsistent punishment for cheap shots, I'm having a hard time finding reasons why Gary Bettman isn't the exact guy the league's owners want for that job. He's making them rich.


He has his issues with the on-the-ice stuff, and no matter what good came of it we did lose a season under his watch. But yeah, on the business end he's been great since then. You could point to the southern expansion as a problem but that was high risk/high reward. In the long run I think the successes will outweigh the failures, especially in the form of players coming from places they never have before.
 
2012-05-08 12:33:48 PM
I have connections to Arizona, so I follow the Yotes in the West anyway, but rooting for the Coyotes appeals to my inner troll just like rooting for Tim Tebow does.

They are the team/player EVERYBODY wants to see fail, so I'll push back that much harder to see them succeed.
 
2012-05-08 12:35:32 PM
It's not even worth responding to some of you in this derp fest, but here's what I will say:

1) Look at what Jamison did with the Sharks when he was running things there. He knows what it takes to be successful in a non-traditional market. Is this going to be a bigger challenge than the SF Bay Area? Yeah but...

2) What has been built by GM Don Maloney, coach Dave Tippett and the rest of the organization while dealing with all this crap is nothing short of remarkable and we're all seeing the fruits of that labor now. Jamison probably feels like he's won the lottery with the timing of this.

3) Fan support- as I've said over the last couple of days, this team is dealing with the effects of what I'm calling the "attention whore" era of the Coyotes. It was the era where the team sucked balls and ownership worried more about getting deals that boosted their other businesses than putting winning teams on the ice (which those of us who have followed this team from day 1 put almost all blame on Wayne Gretzky for because he hired his cronies to run the team instead of competent people. If you even remotely follow the NBA, we were the Charlotte Bobcats).

What happened yesterday on the ice and off might go down as the biggest day in Coyotes history. The win on the ice means that they stay the talk of the Valley of the Sun for another 2-3 weeks and hopefully longer (and this area rallies around winning teams like no other city does). The win off the ice (should no c*cksucking lawyers come along to f*ck things up) is the sign to everyone that this franchise is making a long term commitment to the area, which was the only thing that kept a lot of fans from making that commitment to the Coyotes in return.

After this spring, there are no more excuses for the Coyotes to succeed on the ice and off. If we, the fans, aren't damn near filling that arena every night next season; then we fail and the Coyotes should move.
 
2012-05-08 12:38:40 PM
cdn.nhl.com

/Kings in 6
 
2012-05-08 12:41:04 PM

MattyFridays: I have connections to Arizona, so I follow the Yotes in the West anyway, but rooting for the Coyotes appeals to my inner troll just like rooting for Tim Tebow does.

They are the team/player EVERYBODY wants to see fail, so I'll push back that much harder to see them succeed.


Meh. I'm indifferent to them. But as soon as the matchups for the East semis were set it became clear to me that I'd be rooting for whoever came out of the West. I have a natural dislike for the Flyers, the Devils, and (especially) the Rangers, and though I like the Caps' players they're coached by the guy who did this. So whether it's the Kings or the Coyotes, go them.
 
2012-05-08 01:15:02 PM
I have been as anti-Bettman as anybody, but I have to give him credit for dealing with the Phoenix Phiasco pretty much as well as could be done. Also, the man goes on national radio every Thursday and takes calls from fans. He answers questions and actually does e-mail callers later if he needs to do some research on an issue.
 
2012-05-08 01:22:44 PM

Resolute: And expansion to 32 teams will give the existing owners hundreds of millions of dollars.


The NHL needs to contract, not expand. Get rid of, say, Phoenix, Dallas, Floria and Columbus, and then we'd have a better league.

/shorter regular season would help, too
 
Displayed 50 of 154 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report