Coyotes Tempe arena project rejected by public referendum - will remain at Mullett Arena for 2023-24

TLEH

Pronounced T-Lay
Feb 28, 2015
22,030
19,331
Bomoseen, Vermont
Phoenix market isn't the problem. It is a market the NHL should be in. The problem is the ownership and the NHL allowing them to operate in this fashion. The runway has ran out, but I don't think Bettman or the NHL was wrong in trying to make Phoenix work. They were wrong in allowing it to get to this point due to idiot ownership.
 

bleedblue94

Registered User
Jun 8, 2004
9,735
10,618
It's clear they don't have an immediate Plan B because they're just gonna stay at Mullet Arena for the season while figuring out their options.

It's not an argument. I am correct. You're the one trying to divinate the NHL's secret 10 dimensional plan here.
Argument comment is based on you putting words in my mouth in previous comments and then trying to launch stuff in my direction based on that. i am all about a conversation but i am not going to argue against things i did not even say.

How else would you propose they try to quell this right now until after the finals and the draft? saying they will stay in mullet right now means they put out a direction but you really think that what they said the day after the vote is absolutely the direction they are going? I can absolutely see a situation where after the finals or draft an announcement is made regarding next season and beyond. they had to put something out there in the short term bc people keep speculating. the mullet thing for next year i am certain is not a concrete thing right now. the league could be in the process of force selling the team back to the league and they could put it in a one year location that we wont know about until the force sale is complete. they have had contingencies, but the way this happened i am sure has affected things bc there is plenty of smoke going now that the league wants to severe ties with this ownership group based on what just happened. ownership messed this up and it is a stain on the league now
 

WATTAGE4451

Registered User
Jan 4, 2018
2,005
1,549
Really, they cannot even be bothered to spend on campaigning?

Yeah, this should be relocated. Hopefully to a more deserving city.
I mean these owners almost got locked out from last arena mid season and had to get new home after season cuz they didn't pay rent and taxes, so this shouldnt be that surprising.
 

ShootIt

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 8, 2008
18,980
7,077
So, was this the last straw for the Arena, IE no other chance it could be re-voted on? Or something that would have to start from scratch again?
 

Ciao

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 15, 2010
10,362
6,204
Toronto
If the NHL were really committed to the Arizona market they could put their money where their mouth is.

They could buy development land in a prime location -- I understand that is available, even in Scottsdale -- and build their own arena with their own money. No public funding. No tax breaks. No public votes. Just an NHL-owned arena that they could sell or lease to their franchisee.

That would be a significant long-term investment in a significant long-term market.

Otherwise, they can continue to go begging for other-people's money, probably elsewhere.
 

Harvey Birdman

…Need some law books, with pictures this time…
Oct 21, 2008
9,232
2,352
Penguins Legal Office
So, was this the last straw for the Arena, IE no other chance it could be re-voted on? Or something that would have to start from scratch again?
To my understanding they would have to start from scratch again similar to how they went through the process of this attempt. Take it to city council have them vote on it. Then have another public vote. So yes. Start completely from scratch if they wanted to take another swing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ShootIt

patnyrnyg

Registered User
Sep 16, 2004
11,096
1,118
If the NHL were really committed to the Arizona market they could put their money where their mouth is.

They could buy development land in a prime location -- I understand that is available, even in Scottsdale -- and build their own arena with their own money. No public funding. No tax breaks. No public votes. Just an NHL-owned arena that they could sell or lease to their franchisee.

That would be a significant long-term investment in a significant long-term market.

Otherwise, they can continue to go begging for other-people's money, probably elsewhere.
That would be a very bad precedent to set and bad business on the league's part.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CTHabsfan

WarriorofTime

Registered User
Jul 3, 2010
32,029
21,378
For sure I just think it's a financial disadvantage when the team's income is in Canadian dollars with tickets, merchandise, and concessions... local sponsorships.. but their payroll is paid in a more valuable currency. I don't know how you fix that without saying "it is what it is" but it's a thing.
If Canadian franchises are all as vibrant and successful as everyone says, you charge higher prices on tickets, merchandise and concessions and the extra demand will be able to meet those prices.
 

ShootIt

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 8, 2008
18,980
7,077
To my understanding they would have to start from scratch again similar to how they went through the process of this attempt. Take it to city council have them vote on it. Then have another public vote. So yes. Start completely from scratch if they wanted to take another swing.

Thank you.
 
Mar 12, 2009
7,519
7,795
I’ve heard, not read, from people who’ve really looked into this that Tempe residents chose not to pay toward cleanup (neighborhood of 20 mil), even though the projected outlook over 10 years was around 350 million
Again I’ve only heard this, but it’s mind boggling if true.
View attachment 709815
lol historically arena's cost the city way more money that in brings in to the city or via jobs it creates. The jobs it creates are miniscule compared to the cost to the city/taxpayers (and it's not an "either or" where you get arena and more jobs, or no arena and no more jobs. Other things will be done with that space and presumably create some sort of job as well)), and the revenue ends up in the hands of the private owners. It's a good scam if you can get a city to build an arena for one of the teams in your league...not too mention even in the good times for the Yotes they've cost the league money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rich Nixon

bossram

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
16,913
17,561
Victoria
Argument comment is based on you putting words in my mouth in previous comments and then trying to launch stuff in my direction based on that. i am all about a conversation but i am not going to argue against things i did not even say.

How else would you propose they try to quell this right now until after the finals and the draft? saying they will stay in mullet right now means they put out a direction but you really think that what they said the day after the vote is absolutely the direction they are going? I can absolutely see a situation where after the finals or draft an announcement is made regarding next season and beyond. they had to put something out there in the short term bc people keep speculating. the mullet thing for next year i am certain is not a concrete thing right now. the league could be in the process of force selling the team back to the league and they could put it in a one year location that we wont know about until the force sale is complete. they have had contingencies, but the way this happened i am sure has affected things bc there is plenty of smoke going now that the league wants to severe ties with this ownership group based on what just happened. ownership messed this up and it is a stain on the league now
They're staying in Mullet Arena next season. There's like 5 months to next season to find a buyer, relocate, change the team branding, sell season tickets, reconfigure an arena...it's not happening. There is no contingency. It only happened with Winnipeg because there was an instant ready-made option.

What would you wager they aren't at Mullet?
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,675
11,942
Murica
Phoenix market isn't the problem. It is a market the NHL should be in. The problem is the ownership and the NHL allowing them to operate in this fashion. The runway has ran out, but I don't think Bettman or the NHL was wrong in trying to make Phoenix work. They were wrong in allowing it to get to this point due to idiot ownership.
This is really it in a nutshell. You see all this handwringing on HF over markets like Atlanta, Houston, Phoenix, etc. and the reality is the NHL will never stop pursuing those markets or trying to make it work due to the population, $$$, and media potential. What it comes down to is sound ownership. The Yotes have been plagued by one grifter after another. That's been the real issue.
 
Last edited:

TheTotalPackage

Registered User
Sep 14, 2006
7,684
6,068
I don't think there has been any league try keep a team like the way the Yotes have been kept in Arizona.

I've also never heard talk in any league the way there is about Arizona with potential relations to a TV deal. The other leagues don't have this issue
Holding on to Arizona because of its market size and potential relations to a TV deal has always struck me as extremely odd.
 

bleedblue94

Registered User
Jun 8, 2004
9,735
10,618
They're staying in Mullet Arena next season. There's like 5 months to next season to find a buyer, relocate, change the team branding, sell season tickets, reconfigure an arena...it's not happening. There is no contingency. It only happened with Winnipeg because there was an instant ready-made option.

What would you wager they aren't at Mullet?
Why do you think that they need to sell the team in order to avoid mullet next season?

They can do a temp season in a different location in order to avoid mullet for all the issues that come with it and buy themselves a year to formally figure this out if they have to.

I am not putting percentages on anything bc right now any noise coming from the league is to try to let this settle during this series and hopefully allow the finals to become the focus of their time. After the finals is when things will start coming out and what is happening. This entire back and forth was based on you suggesting they had no plan and no contingencies as if they are just winging it. Bettman has literally been meeting with perspective owners for relocations and expansion over the past 6 months so they do have groundwork on a lot of possibilities. It is just crazy to me that people think a bunch of lawyers that run a league dont have contingencies. There has literally been strong speculation that the team actually has a backup site in the tempe area that they have the possibility to move forward on that would be based around a less lucrative team deal for them to purchase and build on, that is literally a contingency so it is odd to me to suggest they have none
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
29,697
11,549
Holding on to Arizona because of its market size and potential relations to a TV deal has always struck me as extremely odd.
AZ was up against from the very start.

1) out of the 5/16 expansion or relocations from the early 90’s to now AZ was the only one that didn’t have an old arena that needed to be replaced like in Miami, Colorado, Dallas.
2) Nor did they have the same owner for both teams like Atlanta and Colorado did.
3) And have the nba team control the revenues of the arena. Iirc Dallas and Miami the city controlled it and this Heat and Panthers went their separate ways while Mavs and Stars worked together on a new arena.
4) AZ needed to either privately finance a new arena or work with another city or county for one.
5) thus it almost doesn’t matter than the suns arena couldn’t accommodate nhl since the suns would control the revenues and the nhl needs to at leave split with the nba team or be the one in control of the arena unless owned by the same entity.
6) suns owners never bought into the coyotes. Thus preventing a reunion when the suns were nearing the end of their 30 years lease and needed either major renovations or a tear down to make it nhl compliant.
7) then add in all of the mistakes the nhl and owners have made
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeeto

bossram

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
16,913
17,561
Victoria
Why do you think that they need to sell the team in order to avoid mullet next season?

They can do a temp season in a different location in order to avoid mullet for all the issues that come with it and buy themselves a year to formally figure this out if they have to.

I am not putting percentages on anything bc right now any noise coming from the league is to try to let this settle during this series and hopefully allow the finals to become the focus of their time. After the finals is when things will start coming out and what is happening. This entire back and forth was based on you suggesting they had no plan and no contingencies as if they are just winging it. Bettman has literally been meeting with perspective owners for relocations and expansion over the past 6 months so they do have groundwork on a lot of possibilities. It is just crazy to me that people think a bunch of lawyers that run a league dont have contingencies. There has literally been strong speculation that the team actually has a backup site in the tempe area that they have the possibility to move forward on that would be based around a less lucrative team deal for them to purchase and build on, that is literally a contingency so it is odd to me to suggest they have none
So you'll admit you're wrong when they open the season at Mullet?

What is this "speculation" there is a backup site in Tempe? Another place for an arena to get voted down?
 

bleedblue94

Registered User
Jun 8, 2004
9,735
10,618
So you'll admit you're wrong when they open the season at Mullet?

What is this "speculation" there is a backup site in Tempe? Another place for an arena to get voted down?
Again, you are trying to cause shit with your "so you'll admit you're wrong when..." crap

They may very well play there next year but just bc they do does not mean they haven't had contingencies in place if this vote flopped like you originally suggested.

Also, if you don't know about the other sites in play then I suggest you actually look into it instead of throwing darts at me.
 

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
86,990
145,654
Bojangles Parking Lot
Ottawa and Edmonton both have over a million people and metro areas of 1.5 million.

That's definitely not minor league. That's the same ballpark as Pittsburgh for example.

Pittsburgh is like 50% bigger than those cities.

I think it's fair to say they're on the major/minor borderline. There are similar or larger places like Norfolk, Louisville, Greensboro, Hartford which don't have a major league team. But there are also smaller places like Memphis and Buffalo that do. There's not a magic population line where a city goes from major league to minor league, it's more about specific circumstances.
 

tomd

Registered User
Apr 23, 2003
10,138
6,054
Visit site
Seriously the best answer at this point is to disperse the Arizona franchise and then add a 32nd team when the NHL can find a city that has the interest and the facilities to work. That process could take 2-3 years and the NHL will look silly supporting a DOA franchise in Arizona in the meantime. The fans won't show up and the players won't want to be there.
 

BKarchitect

Registered User
Oct 12, 2017
8,381
15,082
Kansas City, MO
While the expansion teams have been a success lately and I’d certainly rather start from scratch than inherent a good number of NHL franchises - I will say that if the timeline is one more year in AZ and then move - the new market has the potential to be a huge success from the jump…kind of how after years of poor results the Nordiques finally had something pretty awesome developing only to see it come to fruition in Colorado.

It’s going to potentially be an awesome situation for a new market. The Yotes org has some great young pieces, a great young coach and more prospects and upcoming picks than you can shake a stick at. They look right on track to bust out around that 24-25 timeline of a move. That’s tremendously appealing if you are trying to establish a foothold in a new market. Absolutely ideal for a huge but hockey naive market like Houston to get a team on the up to generate a strong initial presence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeeto

Voodoo Glow Skulls

Formerly Vatican Roulette
Sponsor
Sep 27, 2017
5,812
3,074
Yea, they’re a professional sports franchise in a supposed major sport playing in a 4,500 seat arena.

At this point the NHL will adapt the rules to allow roller hockey so they can play on a street somewhere in Arizona before moving them.

Car!

(Moser moves the net outta the way)
 
  • Like
Reactions: wraithsonwings

BergyWho37

Only The Strong Will Survive (Never Give Up)
Jun 18, 2012
3,347
1,317
True North
How many years do we need to keep hearing about this franchise ?

Gary just can’t say no to his late night booty call “ Coyote ugly “ and you can Bet on that man.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad