Balsillie group accuses Bettman of forcing Preds to break off talks

[Opie 308]

I like that idea, works well and the wings travel would be a little bit less.

BTW lets see how many people ***** about you cutting out the lanche because they wouldn't get Pheonix moving there and using the name!!

[StevieY9802 6]

I like that except would like to see the Wings in the east instead of CBJ but what ya gonna do?

[Kp-Wings 3]

I like the idea of moving the Capitals from D.C. to Salt Lake City. I've been to Salt Lake City, and they have a good hockey following there. It'd be a great market for a team.

D.C. is a horrible market, and next to Nashville, are the team that I have wanted to be moved the most. They have no fan support at all, and the local sports media in D.C. couldn't give a two s***s about the Capitals at all. Even when all the D.C. teams are bad, they go after the Baltimore teams, and so on and so fourth. It's hard to believe Maryland is such an anti-hockey state, because technically it is a northern state. It confuses me why they don't care at all.

I don't think Phoenix should be given up on though, because back when the Coyotes first moved there and were a good team, they had a great fan following. Give it time. If the Coyotes do turn it around, I'm sure the fans will start going back to watch. There are a lot of northerners in Phoenix too.

Edited July 23, 2007 by Kp-Wings

[drwscc 212]

Quebec and Winnipeg have already proven they cannot support a franchise. Why move a team from Atlanta, where they actually do have pretty good attendance numbers?

Won't we be having the same argument again 9 years from now when the Winnipeg Thrashers can't draw flies and are about to fold?

[vangvace 12]

I like the idea of moving the Capitals from D.C. to Salt Lake City. I've been to Salt Lake City, and they have a good hockey following there. It'd be a great market for a team.

D.C. is a horrible market, and next to Nashville, are the team that I have wanted to be moved the most. They have no fan support at all, and the local sports media in D.C. couldn't give a two s***s about the Capitals at all. Even when all the D.C. teams are bad, they go after the Baltimore teams, and so on and so fourth. It's hard to believe Maryland is such an anti-hockey state, because technically it is a northern state. It confuses me why they don't care at all.

I don't think Phoenix should be given up on though, because back when the Coyotes first moved there and were a good team, they had a great fan following. Give it time. If the Coyotes do turn it around, I'm sure the fans will start going back to watch. There are a lot of northerners in Phoenix too.

IMO based on three years living in Northern Utah...

SLC has potential to fall in love with another top tier fanchise, but it wouldn't be overnight. After a few years they became fanatical about the Jazz and attendance number have been good (over 16K in two seasons) for their MLS team. They might lose the MLS team due to stadium building issues though. If an NHL team were to be placed there stadium issues would be a problem because the two arenas that they currently have, the E center and Delta center, are both below 15,000 seats for hockey.

Something that concerns me is that thier minor league team went from an AHL to ECHL team do to lack of support and costs. Technically the AHL team left and the ECHL team came in, both with the same team name. It was very confusing.

Finally, the NHL might not like some of the squirrilly schedule demands that would come from a LDS owner like only home games on Sunday. Which is something that the Jazz currently have in place. (Assuming that it would be a LDS owner of course)

Personally since I'm planning on retireing there for now. Everything else be damned and add a team there!

Ironically DC did what Nashville's fans are trying to do now and held rallies and what-not to keep thier team.

I was surprised about how much the local media was talking hockey over the draft weekend. It took up two local stations and got alot of radio play... but if they don't win or the Redskins start playing again I could see all of that going away really quick.

[Hank 0]

If there was any justice in the NHL...there would be some serious relocation of franchises.

Hamilton Predators

Winnipeg Thrashers (Renamed as the Jets if the Coyotes surrender copyrights to name and logo). So Long Atlanta.

Wisconsin Panthers (Home games played in Milwaukee) Panthers are not native to the Wisconsin region...perhaps call them the Wisconsin Lakers, Bull Moose, or Warriors. I don't know. The Panthers need to leave Miami.

Quebec Coyotes. (Renamed Nordiques if the Avalanche surrender copyrights to name and logo). Bye Phoenix.

Salt Lake City Capitals. (Since SLC is the capital of Utah...the name can stay). Bye Washington, DC.

New Division Re-alignments:

EASTERN CONFERENCE:

Atlantic Division

Boston Bruins

Carolina Hurricanes

New Jersey Devils

New York Islanders

New York Rangers

Philadelphia Flyers

Pittsburgh Penguins

Tampa Bay Lightning

Northeast Division

Buffalo Sabres

Columbus Blue Jackets

Hamilton Predators

Montreal Canadians

Ottawa Senators

Quebec City NHL Team

Toronto Maple Leafs

WESTERN CONFERENCE

Midwest Division

Chicago Black Hawks

Dallas Stars

Detroit Red Wings

Minnesota Wild

St. Louis Blues

Winnipeg NHL Team

Wisconsin NHL Team

Pacific Coast Division

Anaheim Ducks

Calgary Flames

Colorado Avalanche

Edmonton Oilers

Los Angeles Kings

Salt Lake City NHL Team

San Jose Sharks

Vancouver Canucks

Looks good.

Although, I believe Quebec still has the rights to the name Nordiques? Just like Conneticut has the rights to the Whalers.

Might be wrong though.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Why did you lump Columbus in with Nashville?

It's the biggest city in Ohio. It's in the same region as Detroit and Chicago. People play hockey there (though, obviously, not anywhere near as many as in other Northern cities). It's the site of a very large university (which attracts people from other areas, many from Michigan even) and a state capitol.... Hell, the Buckeyes even have a hockey team.

I had no problem with an expansion into Columbus. If anything, it was worth a shot. Nashville, on the other hand, was a little bit of a stretch.

Ohio doesn't get near the respect it should. Does anyone know that Ohio State won the NCAA title some years back? Does anybody know that Miami of Ohio fields one of the best teams in the entire nation basically every single season. Do people realize that some pretty darn good hockey players have come out of places like Bowling Green University (Rob Blake being one of them)

The city, the fans, the area in which the Jackets are located is bumping. It's a great place to go see a game and the fans really get into it. The problem is that they suck. It's sort of reverse of the Nashville situation IMO where you have a great team and poor support versus Columbus with a poor team and great support.

[vangvace 12]

Hahaha! Speaking of the whale, I was watching Classic Series' on the NHL Network over the weekend and they showed the '92 series between the Whale and the Canadians.

Schneider still looked young (and wearing #8) and the pairing of Andrew Cassells and Geoff Sanderson was a force.

I loved that era. The late 80's and early 90's was a great time for hockey.

And how can you go wrong with those awesome Whalers uniforms???

The brass bonanza is the ringer on my cell phone

[Kp-Wings 3]

Balsillie is, at this point, simply whining and crying to get his way.

One thing people should remember: Balsillie tried to purchase and move the Pens when they had been sitting at the bottom of the attendance list. Bettman and the BOG refused to allow them to be purchased with the intent to be moved. Why should Balsillie be allowed to move Nashville but not Pittsburgh? And why should his blatant disregard for NHL rules and regulations be ignored?

Pittsburgh had bad attendance when they had a bad team. Look at it this year. They put together a solid team, and now they average a pretty good share of sellouts.

Nashville, on the other hand, had an ever better team, yet couldn't manage to put together any sort of sellout streak at all. The fans excuses are so damn lame too. "We don't like to go watch teams like Columbus and Phoenix. That's why we don't sell out". You know, most fans who have good teams usually go watch, no matter who their playing. I didn't see the Sabres not selling out when the Flyers were in town.

I don't understand the support for Nashville. It's pretty clear it's been a failure of a market. Just because the fans had a rally to sell tickets doesn't mean they are all of a sudden a good market. The only reason it's happening is because their teams is in danger of moving. If Leipold had kept the team, nothing would be happening at all right now, and it'd be the same thing next year as it was this year. Nobody would really care.

There are better US markets that could support a team. Houston, for example, would be a much better market to have a team over Nashville. It's probably the best southern market to not currently have a team at that matter. KC and Salt Lake City would also be better in my opinion.

[eva unit zero 271]

If Atlanta gets a 2nd chance @ having an NHL team - why not give Winnipeg another shot?

USA $ and the Canadian $ are not far off in terms of value; Winnipeg also has a new arena which is capable of seating a tad over 15,000. With a salary cap in place there's no reason why a team cannot do well there.

Winnipeg has no need for an arena that large. They have never averaged even close to 15000 in any season AT ANY LEVEL. In fact, since the 2002-03 season, EVERY SINGLE NHL TEAM has ecllipsed the 13,900 mark for average attendance at least once, something the Jets never did in their entire history. Chicago and the Islanders are the only teams that have to go back before the lockout to hit that mark. 2003 is also the last time Phoenix was UNDER that mark.

Ultimately, Winnipeg and Quebec proved they could not support an NHL team. Nashville is floundering, but FAR from done. How about give them another ten years like Winnipeg, Hartford, and Quebec had? They already get comparable fan support to those teams, and are far from established. Given that Winnipeg, Quebec, and Hartford were considered hockey markets when the WHA put teams there, and Nashville is considered a non-hockey market...shouldn't their support be considered good?

[vangvace 12]

Quebec may not have the facility today for an NHL team, but Winnipeg does, & the city has grown as well. All I'm saying if Colorado, San Jose/San Francisco, & Atlanta can get another shot @ the NHL - why can't Winnipeg too?

Looks like it takes time for that to happen. Winnipeg in 2011!

San Jose/Fran

Left: 1976

Returned: 1991

Atlanta

Left: 1980

Returned: 1999

Colorado

Left:1982

Returned: 1996

Minn

Left:1993

Returned: 2000

[eva unit zero 271]

Owners of both teams wanted new arenas, & neither wanted to spend their own $$$ to build them - so they moved to the States. In their last 6 season the Nordiques averaged 14,487 in attendance (Colisée de Québec could hold 15,750 max) that's 92%. The Jets averaged 13,190 for their last 6 seasons (Winnipeg Arena could hold 15,565) only 85% - even though many fans were able to raise $13 million in attempts to keep the team in Winnipeg.

Quebec may not have the facility today for an NHL team, but Winnipeg does, & the city has grown as well. All I'm saying if Colorado, San Jose/San Francisco, & Atlanta can get another shot @ the NHL - why can't Winnipeg too?

Is there an owner out there who is considering moving to Winnipeg? If not, is there a prospective owner with a Winnipeg team in mind? I feel I can say pretty reliably the answer to both questions is NO, and THAT is why Winnipeg has no team.

[Hiei 192]

The MTS Centre has a secondary design implemented in its construction.

They've thought ahead at the prospect of an NHL Team to come back to Winnipeg. If they so desired, about $360,000 worth of work needs to be done to raise the capacity from 15,300 to 18,300.

Still not quite as big as the soon-to-be-built BOK Center in Tulsa, Oklahoma (18,500 for Hockey)

[Kp-Wings 3]

Ultimately, Winnipeg and Quebec proved they could not support an NHL team. Nashville is floundering, but FAR from done. How about give them another ten years like Winnipeg, Hartford, and Quebec had? They already get comparable fan support to those teams, and are far from established. Given that Winnipeg, Quebec, and Hartford were considered hockey markets when the WHA put teams there, and Nashville is considered a non-hockey market...shouldn't their support be considered good?

It's comparable to say that Winnipeg, Quebec, and Hartford never had very good teams compared to the current day Nashville Predators.

Winnipeg never won a division in their entire NHL history. They've also never made it past the Division Semi-final. Generally, their arena was also smaller than Nashville's arena.

Quebec won a total of 2 divisional titles in their NHL history. In the 80's they were a pretty good team. Even during the 90's, when they really sucked, they still averaged decent attendance, better than which the current Nashville organization averages on a game-to-game basis. Quebec's only problem is that they don't have an NHL facility to put a team, because their current arena is small and old.

Hartford won 1 divisional title in their NHL history, but also only once won a playoff series. They were a horribly managed team, yet still had fairly decent fan support. I can imagine that if the Whalers had been successful, they would have had great fan support, far better than what Nashville is getting right now.

Winnipeg is the only one you can that couldn't beat out Nashville for attendance. Comparably, it was a bad market, as they were more successful than current day Nashville, yet still had worse attandence.

Quebec and Hartford, on the other hand, were both pretty bad teams for the most part, but still had decent fan support. In fact, they average about the same amount of people per game with mediocre teams as what Nashville currently does with a great team.

Honestly: I really hate the fact that Nashville has a team. I'm sorry, I just think it's a horrible market. It's not only because their from the south either. I'd advocate moving them to Houston if it were possible.

[Kp-Wings 3]

If Bettman didn't have the dreams of having teams in hotbed markets such as Atlanta, Columbus, Nashville, Florida X 2, etc etc you wouldn't see teams there now either (BTW I never recall people in these cities rallying FOR an NHL team to come there)...Since Gary B cares less about Winnipeg doesn't mean that the folks there don't want a team - THEY DO!

As I mentioned earlier the city has grown in the past 10 to 15 years (more businesses, & more people = more $$$). Combine that with the USA, & CDN $$$ nearly being equal, & a team cap in place - the chance for a smaller market team in Canada with a passion for hockey to succeed is much greater today than it was 1 decade ago (take a look @ Ottawa).

Columbus is a very good market. They have great fan support for being such a crappy team. It's unfortunate that Columbus has such a bad team considering they have great fans, while Nashville has a great team but no one cares. It's really annoying.

Replace Columbus with Anaheim and you're set.

[tony 3]

i dont doubt it buttmans anti canada that damn midget

Edited July 25, 2007 by tony

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

i dont doubt it buttmans anti canada that damn midget

How so? Care to elaborate?

[Mickeyisms Rule! 0]

I'm not too sure on Bettman being anti-Canada.

But you can bet your ass that Canada is anti-Bettman.

[eva unit zero 271]

If Bettman didn't have the dreams of having teams in hotbed markets such as Atlanta, Columbus, Nashville, Florida X 2, etc etc you wouldn't see teams there now either (BTW I never recall people in these cities rallying FOR an NHL team to come there)...Since Gary B cares less about Winnipeg doesn't mean that the folks there don't want a team - THEY DO!

You really don't get how it works, do you?

First of all, the Florida teams were already there when Bettman took over. Second of all, a point I have detailed MANY times:

Bettman's only influence on expansion was input regarding the bids placed for the most recent four teams. The eleven expansion bids that time around included Atlanta, Nashville, Columbus, Minnesota, Portland, Houston (had four separate bids), Hamilton, and Oklahoma City.

Hamilton's refusal to consider an arena other than the dilapidated Copps Coliseum was a major factor in their rejection by the BoG. Portland was viewed as a potential threat to a Vancouver team that was struggling with attendance at the time. This leaves Atlanta, Nashville, Columbus, Minnesota, Houston, and Oklahoma City. Houston is out because Dallas was still establishing their presence; they would win the Cup the next year and solidify their fan base, but that had yet to happen. So one more of Atlanta, Nashville, Columbus, Minnesota, and Oklahoma City must be gone. OKC is the pretty obvious choice of that group.

But my ultimate point is: Atlanta, Nashville, Columbus, and Minnesota got teams over Winnipeg because THEY PLACED A BID. Winnipeg never placed an expansion bid, and nobody has ever considered moving their team to Winnipeg. It's not a situation where Bettman unilaterally decides "Ok Caps, you're moving to Winnipeg." That is a decision that must be made by the team's owner and approved by the BoG. Bettman actually has very little power over that sort of thing.

[drwscc 212]

Geeze..all these conspiracy nuts are really making this alot more difficult than it should be.

Bettman was not the deciding factor in this. Leipold decided to pull the plug because Balsille wouldn't sign a binding agreement (meaning that the team was going to be sold and money changing hands) before getting assurances from the BOG that he'd be able to move the team before next season.

That's not the way the BOG rules work. They have to rule on the sale first, which requires a binding agreement. No binding agreement, no approval of sale.

Balsille also wanted them to rule that he could move the team before next season, and before the team was even his to move. The BOG cannot rule on a move for a team in the same session they approve a sale, and they definitely won't rule on a move without even a binding contract.

Balsille is a whiner, nothing more. Ends do not justify means.

[eva unit zero 271]

Well there's the supposed email Bettman sent to Leipold - an order to "cease & desist" any further dealings with Balsillie...Bettman needs to mind his own business

EDIT - ESPN Scott Burnside

One major flaw in that article. It says the arena lease and season ticket deposits were intended to level the playing field with Kansas City, but the KC bid wasn't even in play until after the letter of intent expired.

Oh, and the fact that Balsillie wasn't willing to sign a binding agreement. Bettman didn't HAVE to put the kibosh on Balsillie; The BoG couldn't approve the sale if Balsillie never signed a binding agreement, and Balsillie wasn't willing to sign one unless he had approval to move the team. Nothing to do with Bettman.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Geeze..all these conspiracy nuts are really making this alot more difficult than it should be.

Bettman was not the deciding factor in this. Leipold decided to pull the plug because Balsille wouldn't sign a binding agreement (meaning that the team was going to be sold and money changing hands) before getting assurances from the BOG that he'd be able to move the team before next season.

That's not the way the BOG rules work. They have to rule on the sale first, which requires a binding agreement. No binding agreement, no approval of sale.

Balsille also wanted them to rule that he could move the team before next season, and before the team was even his to move. The BOG cannot rule on a move for a team in the same session they approve a sale, and they definitely won't rule on a move without even a binding contract.

Balsille is a whiner, nothing more. Ends do not justify means.

If what you say is true it seems pretty obvious that the BOG couldn't do anything to help Basille out. However, can you blame Basille for not plunking down a quarter of a billion dollars without assurances that a relocation of the team would definitely happen? If you were Basille you'd be thinking twice about buying something and having the potential for some BOG to say "NO", you can't move the team. Now Basille is the sucker, just replacing Leipold in essence and having to suffer with a team that can't make money in a city that can't support it.

IMO, the BOG is some dinosaur if it can't find a way to help a guy with deep pockets feel comfortable enough to sign the binding agreement. Here's a guy who has the cash and the logistics in place to facilitate a move to a new opportunity and the BOG has to do things in some antiquated mode that would likely prevent any prospective buyer from signing a binding agreement. Any buyer with the intention of moving of course.

[eva unit zero 271]

If what you say is true it seems pretty obvious that the BOG couldn't do anything to help Basille out. However, can you blame Basille for not plunking down a quarter of a billion dollars without assurances that a relocation of the team would definitely happen? If you were Basille you'd be thinking twice about buying something and having the potential for some BOG to say "NO", you can't move the team. Now Basille is the sucker, just replacing Leipold in essence and having to suffer with a team that can't make money in a city that can't support it.

IMO, the BOG is some dinosaur if it can't find a way to help a guy with deep pockets feel comfortable enough to sign the binding agreement. Here's a guy who has the cash and the logistics in place to facilitate a move to a new opportunity and the BOG has to do things in some antiquated mode that would likely prevent any prospective buyer from signing a binding agreement. Any buyer with the intention of moving of course.

You act as if Hamilton is more deserving than Nashville, and that the BoG is committing a crime against the natural order by NOT approving the move before the binding agreement. What you seem to be forgetting is that there is a lease currently in place in Nashville; the BoG CAN'T approve a move before this current season without facing legal repercussions. They could approve a move if Nashville fails to reach 14,000 paid attendance this year, but as that hasn't happened yet, there is nothing the BoG could do to give Balsillie assurances about a move.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

You act as if Hamilton is more deserving than Nashville, and that the BoG is committing a crime against the natural order by NOT approving the move before the binding agreement. What you seem to be forgetting is that there is a lease currently in place in Nashville; the BoG CAN'T approve a move before this current season without facing legal repercussions. They could approve a move if Nashville fails to reach 14,000 paid attendance this year, but as that hasn't happened yet, there is nothing the BoG could do to give Balsillie assurances about a move.

Oh I know there was nothing they could do about it for reasons you stated. I'm just saying that I wouldn't blame Basillie for not shelling out the cash on the chance that maybe the team could be moved. He only wants the team if it moves. He wouldn't want it if it had to stay in Nashville. So with the boards hands being tied and no assurances at all given I don't fault Basillie for not following through. I wouldn't buy a team I wanted to move if there was a chance other people wouldn't let me move it. Would you?

I'm just saying the system seems sort of crappy. I guess if the attendance mark had already been missed maybe that would have been enough to help facilitate this, I don't know. As for Hamilton, my point has nothing to do with them or any other city or Basilie for that matter. I'm just saying that if somebody comes along with the dough and the arena and a new opportunity to replace what appears to be a failed one, some sort of assurance from the BOG would be nice to help facilitate a sale.

[Dixie Wingslover 0]

It was already explained. Twice now, Balsillie has tried to buy a team and set them up in Hamilton before he even had a deal. Somebody said it earlier: The owners are essentially a private club. Piss off the owners (and their voice of policy, Bettman) and you will not get into the club.

Balsillie is a spoiled *******. I'm thinking he must also be a liar, because the Penguins were only to be sold to someone who would keep the team in Pittsburgh, and he would have had to pay lip service to that idea despite obviously wanting to move them to Hamilton. Then he took it one step further with the Predators by actually acting if the team was already in Canada.

The explanation to this is far more complex than "hurrrrrrr buttmanz a doosh *** him!" Bettman is not a unilateral dictator, he's the voice of policy for the 30 owners of the league. And if 29 other owners step up and say, "Look, we don't want Balsillie to own an NHL team," then Bettman will say just that. You can bet, for example, there's heavy pressure from the owners of the Leafs, and some pressure from the Sabres, Wings, and Senators too, NOT to allow a team in Hamilton.

Why would the Wings not want them moved to Hamilton? or any other team there?