Slog Comments

 

Comments (17) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Supreme Ruler Of The Universe 1

These teams should just cut around all the red tape at City Hall and use Tacoma Dome.

We could have basketball and hockey now.
Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe http://www.you-read-it-here-first.com on September 25, 2012 at 10:46 AM
Urgutha Forka 2
Instead of buying a stadium, why not just buy a team? Then you can tell them to play wherever you want and they can't leave because you own them.
Posted by Urgutha Forka on September 25, 2012 at 10:51 AM
Goldy 3
@2 Because the leagues won't allow it. The Packers are grandfathered in.
Posted by Goldy on September 25, 2012 at 11:05 AM
Fnarf 4
They could change their name to the Seattle Coal Trains.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on September 25, 2012 at 11:14 AM
biffp 5
The Oilers are a good young team, but does Seattle want to steal a team from a town that adores it like the Sonics were stolen? The Florida Panthers are also a good young team, and would be successful here. Hockey in Florida is not really selling.
Posted by biffp on September 25, 2012 at 11:19 AM
Will in Seattle 6
@4 for the insightful Child Choking and Respiratory Distressing win!
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on September 25, 2012 at 11:24 AM
SPG 7
I have no problem stealing an NHL team from any city below the Mason Dixon line, but not from north of the border. That's just wrong on so many levels.
Posted by SPG on September 25, 2012 at 11:30 AM
Urgutha Forka 8
@3,
Ah. That's probably a good idea, since the Packers have been such a colossal failure and the city of Green Bay can't stand them. A single person owning a team has historically been much more loyal to the town the team started in, never moving them and always showing their devotion to the fans by buying them a nice stadium to watch their team play in.

Overall a great decision by the league. It really shows you that their hearts are with the fans.
Posted by Urgutha Forka on September 25, 2012 at 11:33 AM
mikethehammer 9
@5,

Agreed. Either of the Florida teams would be fine really. The quality & talent of the team at the time of sale shouldn't really have any impact, but there's no reason for two teams to exist down there. A case could be made against even one, for that matter.
Posted by mikethehammer on September 25, 2012 at 11:34 AM
GlamB0t 10
Um, no. The Lightning will stay right where they are thankyouverymuch.
Posted by GlamB0t on September 25, 2012 at 12:07 PM
11
God damn it @4 I was going to make that exact same joke.

I salute your hilarity.
Posted by beef rallard on September 25, 2012 at 12:29 PM
prompt 12
Well, there is a freeze on new NBA franchises, but not one on new NHL franchises, so there's that.
Posted by prompt on September 25, 2012 at 12:42 PM
13
I’m not sure if novelty scarf sales in Seattle will offset season ticket sales in Edmonton.
Posted by Greydon Clark on September 25, 2012 at 12:44 PM
Matt from Denver 14
@ 12, if anyone at the NHL is even entertaining the idea of expansion, then they have their head so far up their ass that there is no hope at all.
Posted by Matt from Denver on September 25, 2012 at 12:55 PM
Puty 15
NO.
Posted by Puty on September 25, 2012 at 1:15 PM
biffp 16
@13, that's a beauty.

@14, couldn't agree with you more, but Bettman might.
Posted by biffp on September 25, 2012 at 4:08 PM
rob! 17
@4, 11: Colliers brings the euphony, along with the retro.
Posted by rob! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZBdUceCL5U on September 26, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Add a comment