Ernie
Registered User
- Aug 3, 2004
- 13,497
- 3,499
What Canadian media?
Nobody in the media with any credibility thinks that QC is going to happen.
SAP Center lease expiring in 2025. UPD. No relocation for Sharks regardless of arena deal
- Thread starter LadyStanley
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
What Canadian media?
Nobody in the media with any credibility thinks that QC is going to happen.
LadyStanley
Registered User
No relocation. Repeat, NO RELOCATION outside of region. If new deal does not work out
I called this months ago. This is gonna get juicy. Houston, Atlanta, Quebec and even Phoenix will be keeping a close eye on this.
dj4aces
An Intricate Piece of Infinity
I think that only happens if the Sharks encounter trouble remaining in the Bay area. A lot of things have to go wrong before this is a remote possibility.
rsteen
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2022
- 402
- 284
Phoenix has no owner to keep an eye on anything. Quebec can't afford it and I'm guessing Houston doesn't want to, or else the Utah HC would be the Houston Aeros right now.
Colin226
NJ Devils STH
The article posted right above yours completely refutes any notion of relocation outside the Bay Area. You bored?
They will very likely come to an agreement to stay in the SAP Center in San Jose. This is all almost certainly posturing by everyone.
They certainly will not leave the Bay Area, but what other options in San Jose are referred to?
It would either be the SAP Center or some other city right? I don't think there's another NHL level arena in San Jose and I don't think the NHL wants to go right back to a 5,000 seat arena immediately after getting the Arizona situation dealt with.
In the Bay Area aren't there only three real options? SAP Center in San Jose, Oakland Arena where the Warriors used to play or Chase Center in San Francisco where the Warriors currently play, unless there's another big arena I'm not remembering.
They certainly will not leave the Bay Area, but what other options in San Jose are referred to?
It would either be the SAP Center or some other city right? I don't think there's another NHL level arena in San Jose and I don't think the NHL wants to go right back to a 5,000 seat arena immediately after getting the Arizona situation dealt with.
In the Bay Area aren't there only three real options? SAP Center in San Jose, Oakland Arena where the Warriors used to play or Chase Center in San Francisco where the Warriors currently play, unless there's another big arena I'm not remembering.
Chase is not setup for NHL hockey. They asked the Sharks to join them but the Sharks declined thus it is not configured for the NHL.
Always posturing. It's a billionaire owner who is looking to get 9 figures in renovations from the city to upgrade the building. Kind of how it goes.
There isn't a market better than NorCal that he can move the team to and continue to own it.
Mightygoose
Registered User
I'll concur it's posturing while playing bad cop and good cop at same time.
A savvy negotiator knows how to create leverage
A savvy negotiator knows how to create leverage
LadyStanley
Registered User
Those are the only large arenas currently existing in the 9-county Bay Area.
However, I'd guess the Sharks/Plattner might build a new building if they leave SAP Center. Their fan base is centered around SJ. It's a hour+ to get to either SF or Oakland (especially in commute traffic); I don't know the fans would follow.
There are a few open spaces, or they might buy up some (very expensive) space to build new arena. But access to Light rail, regional train service, bus service, and BART in the future across the parking lot make it an ideal spot.
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 27,931
- 14,859
That rink is in a really good location but it looks like a tight fit for the times I've gone there. Definitely needs to be bigger and ownership should find a way to expand it, not move it. Team needs to stay in SJ and I am not a Sharks fan. That location just makes too much sense.
BigGoalBrad
Registered User
- Jun 3, 2012
- 11,066
- 3,781
Would Chase have as many obstructed seats as Delta center or where the Islanders played in Brooklyn?
Chase is not configured for NHL hockey. I am sure they can do a weekend figure skating or Disney on ice event, for 12-13K of fans, but it's not going to have 17-18K of unobstructed seats for hockey. They made it more of a basketball and concert arena after the Sharks opted not to join them in SF. The moment that decision was made, it eliminated Chase from even being a future home for them.
LadyStanley
Registered User
Yes, Amazon is building work/live village.
Some of the parking would become lower floors of parking for office/apartment buildings.
Chase Center doesn't have an ice plant. Hell, it's doesn't even have pipes embedded in the floor to connect chillers to. They would have to completely dig up the floor and replace it to get permanent ice in there. That ain't happening, especially since the seating bowl isn't big enough for a hockey rink (Barclays/Footprint-style).
Fun fact, Disney on Ice has a portable rink system for when they play in a venue with no ice plant. It's also only large enough to cover the area of a basketball court, as that's all they use for a performance space.
Fun fact, Disney on Ice has a portable rink system for when they play in a venue with no ice plant. It's also only large enough to cover the area of a basketball court, as that's all they use for a performance space.
Last edited:
cptjeff
Reprehensible User
Are there any rumblings about the Sharks beginning the process of trying to build a new arena? They really probably should be looking at that rather than trying to keep SAP going, right?
RussianShark
Cheech
Not that i've heard.
I think most fans would prefer SAP. Walking distance from downtown, still looks modern from the outside, and is a pretty smooth experience inside.
Personally, I love the intimacy of only 2 levels and almost everyone sharing the same concourse. The acoustics are great because of the low roof.
varsaku
Registered User
Rebuilds are never a guaranteed success. Look at the sabers and oilers. A length rebuild could be disastrous in a market that has fewer die hard following.
Also need to factor in infrastructure of a new location. Transit, parking, etc. Most buildings from the 90's have that infrastructure built up over the past 30 years. If you have the footprint/land to expand the concourse or whatever, there is not much you are going to change with regards to the playing area/viewing of an NBA/NHL/concert/ etc. Mainly, it's been creating more "luxury" sections for the high end paying customer.
It's the area outside the seating area that have the biggest changes.
Vamos Rafa
Registered User
More and more NBA teams want new arenas that aren’t specifically shaped for hockey rinks. A basketball court in a hockey rink is so appalling to look at.
There are far worse arenas in the NHL. The Tank has decent sized concourses and great hockey sight lines. The concrete look is tired but that's easy to dress up. Maybe expand the outside walls a bit on a couple sides and it would be quite nice. For fans upstairs the lack of a club level below it means much better views. Those boxes at the top are pretty horrible, probably one thing that could change to the detriment of the real fans.
No nearly as appalling as trying to squeeze a hockey rink into an arena built for a smaller basketball court. Just ask the Islanders. Or the Coyotes 20 years ago. Basketball in a hockey arena is fine, hockey in a basketball arena doesn't work.
Last edited:
