Will Atlanta Get Another Team?

[sexydonut]

The Atlanta Thrashers were analogous to the Vancouver Grizzlies. Carpet bagging owners using team cash flow to service their own debts. Then they cook the cash from the sale and bolted to smaller "traditional" markets that provided subsidized arenas and tax breaks.
Ironically both teams would be worth much more if they had stayed in their original locations.

And now we get idiot fans/snobs who deride Atlanta hockey fans, yet are clueless about the white collar frauds and short term financial greed that are the ultimate cause of relocation.

 

[Fantomas]

Great insight. You're entirely wrong, however.

Eight Seven bigoted, litigious people didn't care about hockey here. Unfortunately, they were the only seven people that mattered. The fans here did far more than should have been expected, given the circumstance of an ownership group that, from day one, intentionally sabotaged the franchise to force its sale, which not coincidentally happened on the very first day they could legally do so.

Although I agree that Thrasher fans got a raw deal, having lived in Atlanta for several years I just didn't see any interest there in hockey. No one talked hockey. No one watched hockey in a pub. No one - even a single time - brought up the Thrashers.

I understand that state economies in the US are controlled by powerful interests and people don't have much control over what they can watch or even read, but I saw not much of a remnant of hockey culture in Georgia. Sorry to say.

 

[HisIceness]

Nobody cares about hockey there.

You sure about that? Atlanta is a metro of close to 6 million. I'm sure somebody is interested. Hell maybe even another somebody!

 

[nhlfan79]

Although I agree that Thrasher fans got a raw deal, having lived in Atlanta for several years I just didn't see any interest there in hockey. No one talked hockey. No one watched hockey in a pub. No one - even a single time - brought up the Thrashers.

That's because the Thrashers never did anything to make themselves relevant in this city. For their entire existence, they were either a miniscule line item entry on AOL-Time Warner's spreadsheet as that company collapsed, or were being deliberately run into the ground by ASG. No marketing, bottom of the league payroll, no front office accountability, ever.

Because of the way they were run, none of the many millions of northern transplants who live here were ever given a reason to become *Thrashers* fans. So, they kept loyalty to their hometown teams and bought tickets only when they visited twice a year, but that's it. That's how the Thrashers ended up with 13,000 to 15,000 a night. 8,000 hardcore Thrashers fans, and the other half made up of fans of whoever the other team happened to be. Thus, no home ice advantage to give the Thrashers any emotional lift, which just compounded the talent gap.

All ownership had to do was give people who were already hockey fans any reason to support the local team. Atlanta would have/should have become another Tampa, Dallas, or Nashville. But they didn't, and here we are.

Looking at Atlanta United's runaway success, you have to think that they filled the void that the Thrashers would have occupied had they had interested ownership.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Even if you (for whatever reason) don't believe ownership was solely responsible for the Thrashers leaving:

For those who say it was the Canadian dollar that was responsible for Quebec and Jets 1.0 moving, 2008-2011 was the worst economic period in Atlanta in decades. Almost 140,000 jobs lost in 2009 alone.

Since 2011, Atlanta has added back half-a-million jobs, and is now home to 15 Fortune 500 HQ's (soon to be 16 with Norfolk Southern relocating here). Economics and corporate money play a huge roll.

That said, a willing owner plays the biggest role, and it doesn't appear one is on the horizon.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Although I agree that Thrasher fans got a raw deal, having lived in Atlanta for several years I just didn't see any interest there in hockey. No one talked hockey. No one watched hockey in a pub. No one - even a single time - brought up the Thrashers.

I understand that state economies in the US are controlled by powerful interests and people don't have much control over what they can watch or even read, but I saw not much of a remnant of hockey culture in Georgia. Sorry to say.

I, too, can't figure out why there wasn't more buzz around a franchise that was icing a first defensive pairing of Daniel Tjarnqvist and Yannick Tremblay in their fifth year.

This is a team that, ten years into its existence, iced an actual pairing of an ancient Mathieu Schneider and an aging Niclas Havelid.

But they were able to eventually find a Hall of Famer....a 48-year-old Chris Chelios.

 

[Negan4Coach]

They tried it twice, why go down that road again?

The area is just not a good fit for hockey. There are plenty of other non traditional places that would work better and deserve a shot at it: Virginia Beach, Kansas City, albuquerque maybe.

 

[Melrose Munch]

They tried it twice, why go down that road again?

The area is just not a good fit for hockey. There are plenty of other non traditional places that would work better and deserve a shot at it: Virginia Beach, Kansas City, albuquerque maybe.

How is Atlanta a bad fit but Raleigh a good one?

 

[aqib]

Even if you (for whatever reason) don't believe ownership was solely responsible for the Thrashers leaving:

For those who say it was the Canadian dollar that was responsible for Quebec and Jets 1.0 moving, 2008-2011 was the worst economic period in Atlanta in decades. Almost 140,000 jobs lost in 2009 alone.

Since 2011, Atlanta has added back half-a-million jobs, and is now home to 15 Fortune 500 HQ's (soon to be 16 with Norfolk Southern relocating here). Economics and corporate money play a huge roll.

That said, a willing owner plays the biggest role, and it doesn't appear one is on the horizon.

A couple of things:

1) What metro areas didn't lose a lot of jobs in 2009? It was literally the height of the recession

2) What metro areas haven't added a ton of jobs since then

3) Hasn't it already been demonstrated a bunch of times that population doesn't always translate to support for pro-sports teams? If that was the case we would have 2 teams in Mexico City

 

[Dirty Old Man]

Hasn't it already been demonstrated a bunch of times that population doesn't always translate to support for pro-sports teams? If that was the case we would have 2 teams in Mexico City

Except for the travel costs and the fact that all those Mexicans are too poor to afford tickets, amirite?

/sarcasm

 

[BKIslandersFan]

3) Hasn't it already been demonstrated a bunch of times that population doesn't always translate to support for pro-sports teams? If that was the case we would have 2 teams in Mexico City

Clearly US and Mexico have the same capacity to support sports teams financially. Clearly they are in similar situations and are absolutely comparable.

 

[blueandgoldguy]

The Atlanta Thrashers were analogous to the Vancouver Grizzlies. Carpet bagging owners using team cash flow to service their own debts. Then they cook the cash from the sale and bolted to smaller "traditional" markets that provided subsidized arenas and tax breaks.
Ironically both teams would be worth much more if they had stayed in their original locations.

And now we get idiot fans/snobs who deride Atlanta hockey fans, yet are clueless about the white collar frauds and short term financial greed that are the ultimate cause of relocation.

With regards to value and revenue, agree on the Grizzlies staying in Vancouver vs. Memphis...Memphis is last or next to last in revenue and there was an article just a few years back discussing their terrible gate revenue per game...something like $250,000 or so per game. Vancouver's revenue was higher. Fortunately the new national tv contract eased the bleeding.

Definitely do not agree with the that with regards to Atlanta to Winnipeg. The team in Winnipeg has had a far higher gate then anything in Atlanta. Also, Miami - a city of similar size as Atlanta - has had a team for 25 years, and was recently purchased by what many classified as a "good owner." Yet the team is at the bottom (or second from the bottom) of the league in terms of revenue and value. Why would Atlanta be any different? Given the current arena location in Atlanta, why would things be any different for the team's valuation and revenue today? Very unlikely....

As I stated before, I could see the league trying Atlanta again, but it will likely be a decade and a half to a couple decades before it happens. At that point, if the will is there and right circumstances present themselves, an arena may be built in the northern part of Atlanta where the hockey-loving demographic is more present...or at least that is my understanding based on the posts of others in the past. Of course, demographics change so maybe that won't be the most ideal spot.

Anyways, a couple decades from now will have healed most wounds...many won't remember the last incarnation...a new arena will be needed. It sure won't happen in the next 5 - 10 years with the recent renovation to the current arena and a perfectly fine newish arena in Gwinnett that is apparently good enough for some of the biggest concert acts of all-time like U2.

 

[zetajerk]

With regards to value and revenue, agree on the Grizzlies staying in Vancouver vs. Memphis...Memphis is last or next to last in revenue and there was an article just a few years back discussing their terrible gate revenue per game...something like $250,000 or so per game. Vancouver's revenue was higher. Fortunately the new national tv contract eased the bleeding.

Definitely do not agree with the that with regards to Atlanta to Winnipeg. The team in Winnipeg has had a far higher gate then anything in Atlanta. Also, Miami - a city of similar size as Atlanta - has had a team for 25 years, and was recently purchased by what many classified as a "good owner." Yet the team is at the bottom (or second from the bottom) of the league in terms of revenue and value. Why would Atlanta be any different? Given the current arena location in Atlanta, why would things be any different for the team's valuation and revenue today? Very unlikely....

As I stated before, I could see the league trying Atlanta again, but it will likely be a decade and a half to a couple decades before it happens. At that point, if the will is there and right circumstances present themselves, an arena may be built in the northern part of Atlanta where the hockey-loving demographic is more present...or at least that is my understanding based on the posts of others in the past. Of course, demographics change so maybe that won't be the most ideal spot.

Anyways, a couple decades from now will have healed most wounds...many won't remember the last incarnation...a new arena will be needed. It sure won't happen in the next 5 - 10 years with the recent renovation to the current arena and a perfectly fine newish arena in Gwinnett that is apparently good enough for some of the biggest concert acts of all-time like U2.

Florida (not Miami) has had a team for 25 years and it has made the playoffs 5 times. Their "good owner" completely blew apart their roster and coaching staff after a great season and now they're spinning their wheels on the ice again. I could just as easily point to Dallas, Tampa, Nashville and ask why a properly run franchise in Atlanta would be any different from them.

 

[nhlfan79]

Yesterday, they did a media tour of the final renovations of State Farm Arena, which re-opens tomorrow. Here are a couple of pics of the seating bowl. There's been a lot of discussion here about how it could no longer accomodate a hockey setup, but these seem to show that it remains theoretically possible. The courtside seating within the ice rink dimensions is retractable/portable.

I asked the AJC's Hawks beatwriter on Twitter whether it could accomodate hockey, and he replied:

 

[nhlfan79]

Anyways, a couple decades from now will have healed most wounds...many won't remember the last incarnation...a new arena will be needed. It sure won't happen in the next 5 - 10 years with the recent renovation to the current arena and a perfectly fine newish arena in Gwinnett that is apparently good enough for some of the biggest concert acts of all-time like U2.

Point of information: Philips Arena opened in 1999, and the Infinite Energy Arena opened in 2003. IEA is perfectly nice for what it is---a 12,000-seat mid-size arena---but it's not comparable in size or amenities to a Class A arena like you'd see in the NHL or NBA. It would be ideal for an AHL team, however.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

A couple of things:

1) What metro areas didn't lose a lot of jobs in 2009? It was literally the height of the recession

2) What metro areas haven't added a ton of jobs since then

3) Hasn't it already been demonstrated a bunch of times that population doesn't always translate to support for pro-sports teams? If that was the case we would have 2 teams in Mexico City

1) And the Canadian dollar was crappy for more teams than just two.

Ultimately, it was the ownership that never wanted the team that was the reason they moved, but I was also making a point to add the recession as another factor.

2) A non-NHL team metro adding that many jobs along with the corporate money here? Houston only other.

3) The Mexico City comment. I feel like it's 2010 all over again.

With the last two points, I think you're not realizing or considering that Atlanta is the #9 metro (soon to overtake Philly at #8) in terms of population. Couple that with the corporate presence. Sure, Jackson, Mississippi probably added jobs, but half a million? In a city with 6 million people? No.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Point of information: Philips Arena opened in 1999, and the Infinite Energy Arena opened in 2003. IEA is perfectly nice for what it is---a 12,000-seat mid-size arena---but it's not comparable in size or amenities to a Class A arena like you'd see in the NHL or NBA. It would be ideal for an AHL team, however.

It'll be interesting to see (if it gets built) what the new mixed-use development will do to IEA. Mark Toro has plans for a smaller scale "Battery" to be built around the arena (called Revel).

 

[Melrose Munch]

Yesterday, they did a media tour of the final renovations of State Farm Arena, which re-opens tomorrow. Here are a couple of pics of the seating bowl. There's been a lot of discussion here about how it could no longer accomodate a hockey setup, but these seem to show that it remains theoretically possible. The courtside seating within the ice rink dimensions is retractable/portable.

I asked the AJC's Hawks beatwriter on Twitter whether it could accomodate hockey, and he replied:

So it's still ice compatible then, just not official NHL standards. That is not the big deal it's made out to be then.

Florida (not Miami) has had a team for 25 years and it has made the playoffs 5 times. Their "good owner" completely blew apart their roster and coaching staff after a great season and now they're spinning their wheels on the ice again. I could just as easily point to Dallas, Tampa, Nashville and ask why a properly run franchise in Atlanta would be any different from them.

They play in the Miami suburbs. They're the Miami team. Dallas is and was a much better sports town then Atlanta as well.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Dallas is and was a much better sports town then Atlanta as well.

Just curious, what is this based on?

 

[Melrose Munch]

Just curious, what is this based on?

Atlanta not selling out Braves playoffs games in the afternoon.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Atlanta not selling out Braves playoffs games in the afternoon.

Better sports town because The Braves didn't sell a couple thousand tickets to a 2:00 NLDS game in a 52,000 seat baseball stadium 5 or 6 years ago? OK.

Well, the Braves had better attendance this year than the Rangers and the Atlanta MLS team outdraws the Dallas team by more than 3 times, so now Atlanta is the better sports town

 

[Melrose Munch]

Better sports town because The Braves didn't sell a couple thousand tickets to a 2:00 NLDS game in a 52,000 seat baseball stadium 5 or 6 years ago? OK.

Well, the Braves had better attendance this year than the Rangers and the Atlanta MLS team outdraws the Dallas team by more than 3 times, so now Atlanta is the better sports town

Atlanta has had a "bad sports town" rep for years. It's not a hockey situation, it's a sports one imo. That said if Atlanta gets an NHL team thenI'm all for it, we need the presence.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Atlanta has had a "bad sports town" rep for years. It's not a hockey situation, it's a sports one imo. That said if Atlanta gets an NHL team thenI'm all for it, we need the presence.

I've never understood that, especially when factoring in College Football.

 

[De Montreal]

 

[Mayor Bee]

Better sports town because The Braves didn't sell a couple thousand tickets to a 2:00 NLDS game in a 52,000 seat baseball stadium 5 or 6 years ago? OK.

Well, the Braves had better attendance this year than the Rangers and the Atlanta MLS team outdraws the Dallas team by more than 3 times, so now Atlanta is the better sports town

Things Atlanta never had to do but Detroit has:

• Be able to sell SCF tickets for face value on game day
• Tear out seats in a brand-new arena to hide the fact that there is maybe 50% of lower-bowl seats occupied