Stadiums and Arenas of Canada part 2 - Page 51

Oilkountry · #**1001** Posted **May 19, 2015, 4:55 PM**

Again it's really great that you guys are optimistic. I would love nothing more than to have a team back in Quebec. What a story it would be. But...Quebec unfortunately is very undesirable in the NHL's eyes. You guys are chalking this up as a conspiracy as though the NHL is hiding something about the Quebec situation being in the bag without really having any grounds to do so.

And again the Winnipeg situation was completely different. You had a team (almost 2) that were available and one city to put it in. That same favorable supply and demand ratio doesn't exist in 2015. It's Naive for any of you to believe the NHL would rather be in Quebec than Seattle or Vegas

does this seem optimistic or reassuring to you?

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada...-nhl-ready-arena-just-one-little-problem

Oilkountry · #**1002** Posted **May 19, 2015, 5:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

Would the NHL really elevate a less desirable market on the basis of the fact that it's closer to the west coast than Quebec? I have my doubts. NHL geographic designations strike me as rather arbitrary... I mean, would the world really end if Columbus got shifted to the west and balance was restored?

Less desirable? Seriously esquire snap out of it. In bettmans eyes do you really think he views Seattle or Sin city as "less desirable" than Quebec? You're acting like the NHL is just gitty to get into Quebec. You're ignorance to the fact the Quebec isn't the top dog in the NHL race is actually pissing me off. Should the NHL be in Quebec? Obviously unbelievable fan base,Great arena one of the strongest ownership groups in the league, Natural rivalry's the list goes on and on why Quebec is the best place for the League to expand/relocate. That however doesn't change the fact that the NHL would rather be in Vegas and Seattle. And to talk about it like Quebec isn't the underdog with that cocky attitude makes you seem delusional or just plain arrogant and usually I agree with most of your points.

Oilkountry · #**1003** Posted **May 19, 2015, 5:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew

Balance isn't restored, its still 16 versus 14, and therefore harder to make playoffs in the East.

I am just pointing out, that this is something that works against Quebec, regardless of how good a market we know it will be.

IMO, it just means Quebec will only be rolled out as part of a larger expansion including cities in the West (and will need to wait till then, that could be many years) or it has to wait out failure of another franchise, and be ready to go, like TNSE was with Winnipeg.

The fact Quebec is seemingly ready and willing to pay to get the franchise IMO also works against them, as the NHL knows they have a sure thing, squirreled away until its required. Quebec can wait until the NHL figures out some of the question marks in the west (Seattle, LV).

Exactly

esquire · #**1004** Posted **May 19, 2015, 5:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

Less desirable? Seriously esquire snap out of it. In bettmans eyes do you really think he views Seattle or Sin city as "less desirable" than Quebec? You're acting like the NHL is just gitty to get into Quebec. You're ignorance to the fact the Quebec isn't the top dog in the NHL race is actually pissing me off. Should the NHL be in Quebec? Obviously unbelievable fan base,Great arena one of the strongest ownership groups in the league, Natural rivalry's the list goes on and on why Quebec is the best place for the League to expand/relocate. That however doesn't change the fact that the NHL would rather be in Vegas and Seattle. And to talk about it like Quebec isn't the underdog with that cocky attitude makes you seem delusional or just plain arrogant and usually I agree with most of your points.

I'm sure the NHL would love to be the main attraction in Seattle or Vegas. It would love to be the main attraction in Tokyo, London, Moscow and Shanghai too. Doesn't mean it's goning to happen, though. The NHL has to take what it gets.

The competitors are no different now than when Winnipeg got its team. The fact that no one stepped up to beat out poor little, cold little Winnipeg tells you how supposedly in demand NHL teams are. What has changed since 2011 that Seattle, Las Vegas and KC could be overlooked then but are supposedly locks for a franchise now? Nothing.

The divisional balance thing is the most bogus argument I have ever heard. There is no reason that there can't be two 15 team conferences. Why it is possible for Nashville to be in the west but not Columbus or Detroit, and that this is somehow a problem that only expansion to Vegas can solve makes no sense whatsoever.

Acajack · #**1005** Posted **May 19, 2015, 5:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

The competitors are no different now than when Winnipeg got its team. The fact that no one stepped up to beat out poor little, cold little Winnipeg tells you how supposedly in demand NHL teams are. What has changed since 2011 that Seattle, Las Vegas and KC could be overlooked then but are supposedly locks for a franchise now? Nothing.

.

There are a few things that are different (Canadian dollar, Rogers TV contract) but as for the state of the league itself things are basically the same. There are still several wonky franchises (both in the Sunbelt and in the northern tier of the US too) and also very few Americans with deep pockets interested in being an NHL owner.

If anything the owners are as I said earlier probably more weary than they were back then with propping up the sad-sack money losers, regardless of where they are located.

king10 · #**1006** Posted **May 19, 2015, 6:57 PM**

Bell, Tanenbaum partner up to own Argonauts.

Its a done deal

http://www.tsn.ca/bell-tanenbaum-partner-up-to-own-argonauts-1.286511

Argos to BMO should follow soon.

Acajack · #**1007** Posted **May 19, 2015, 7:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by king10

Bell, Tanenbaum partner up to own Argonauts.

Its a done deal

http://www.tsn.ca/bell-tanenbaum-partner-up-to-own-argonauts-1.286511

Argos to BMO should follow soon.

I think this is good news. Except for one year with TSN-Labatt, the Argos have never been owned by a huge media property which is probably a really good thing and will help their visibility via TSN, CTV, etc.

esquire · #**1008** Posted **May 19, 2015, 7:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think this is good news. Except for one year with TSN-Labatt, the Argos have never been owned by a huge media property which is probably a really good thing and will help their visibility via TSN, CTV, etc.

TSN/Labatt owned the Argos from 1994 to 1999 IIRC, and interestingly, it coincided with probably the most precipitous slide in the team's popularity. In the early 90s they were still a fairly significant presence on the city's sports scene, but by the late 90s they were hanging by a thread, despite coming off of a couple of magical years with back to back championships and Flutie at the helm. It got better in the 2000s, but things really dropped off under TSN/Labatt's watch... of course, it was a pretty rough time for the CFL overall.

Hopefully things will be better this time with Bell and Tannenbaum in charge.

Migs · #**1009** Posted **May 19, 2015, 8:12 PM**

Old & new.

king10 · #**1010** Posted **May 19, 2015, 8:14 PM**

Holy crap. That shot makes it look big league.

THF only had 2 portable cranes. Nevermind 4 permanent ones.

rich m · #**1011** Posted **May 19, 2015, 8:46 PM**

construction amphitheatre de quebec facebook page

Horus · #**1012** Posted **May 19, 2015, 8:47 PM**

Hopefully tomorrow's Argos announcement will also set the record straight on how BMO will be reconfigured to accommodate CFL football. There have been some conflicting statements and proposals bandied about, so hopefully there will be a definitive plan revealed.

rich m · #**1013** Posted **May 19, 2015, 8:50 PM**

construction amphitheatre de quebec facebook page

Oilkountry · #**1014** Posted **May 19, 2015, 9:10 PM**

I want nothing more than to be wow'd by that arena But for some reason i just cant be? maybe when it's finished it will look more appealing it just looks so bland to me

Oilkountry · #**1015** Posted **May 19, 2015, 9:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horus

Hopefully tomorrow's Argos announcement will also set the record straight on how BMO will be reconfigured to accommodate CFL football. There have been some conflicting statements and proposals bandied about, so hopefully there will be a definitive plan revealed.

I Think I jumped to major conclusions on the set up of BMO (insert witty comment below) now that I look at it their is basically only one way to do it. Wipe out the entire north stands retractable seating for about 7-10 rows of the south end stands. Even then I think the end zones will be about 16-18 yards. It wont be completely centered but i think it will be damn close

this picture really brings it into perspective how tight it will be

esquire · #**1016** Posted **May 19, 2015, 9:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

I want nothing more than to be wow'd by that arena But for some reason i just cant be? maybe when it's finished it will look more appealing it just looks so bland to me

You must be joking... I would trade MTS Centre for that thing in a heartbeat. It looks great. And the location is not right downtown, but it's still relatively central... by no means an Ottawa-style exurban debacle.

esquire · #**1017** Posted **May 19, 2015, 9:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

I Think I jumped to major conclusions on the set up of BMO (insert witty comment below) now that I look at it their is basically only one way to do it. Wipe out the entire north stands retractable seating for about 7-10 rows of the south end stands. Even then I think the end zones will be about 16-18 yards. It wont be completely centered but i think it will be damn close

It'll be tight, but I have never heard anyone suggest that they will have to chop the football endzones down. Besides, let's face it, the south endzone stand is not some mammoth untouchable structure. It can be modified or, in a worst case scenario, demolished to make room for a full CFL field.