can't u just look this up urself rather than try to keep defending ur position with silly questions
Nordiques attendance was fine. the Canadian dollar was worth $0.72 in USD.
Marcel Aubut sold the team for a major profit and they became the colorado avalanche.
the Montreal Canadiens had to pay for their own new arena. Aubut wanted the government to pay for a brand new facility. The government could never do this if the Canadiens paid for their own new place.
Rather than spend $150 million++ for a new arena he sold the team and collected premium US Dollars in doing so.
Don't compare Quebec City to Seattle as far as support for hockey. There is no comparison.
I spent 1 four month work term in Seattle...no one knows anything about hockey nor cares about it except transplanted Vancouver-ites.
I remember telling people at work i was going out that night to play hockey... half of them said "you mean ice hockey right?"
Are Pens taught how to play like assholes or does it just naturally come to them? You'd think with their marque player and their marque defensemen both suffering concussions they'd be more serious about playing cleaner hockey.
On April 05 2012 18:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: can't u just look this up urself rather than try to keep defending ur position with silly questions
Nordiques attendance was fine. the Canadian dollar was worth $0.72 in USD.
Marcel Aubut sold the team for a major profit and they became the colorado avalanche.
the Montreal Canadiens had to pay for their own new arena. Aubut wanted the government to pay for a brand new facility. The government could never do this if the Canadiens paid for their own new place.
Rather than spend $150 million++ for a new arena he sold thhttp://www.teamliquid.net/sc2/e team and collected premium US Dollars in doing so.
Don't compare Quebec City to Seattle as far as support for hockey. There is no comparison.
I spent 1 four month work term in Seattle...no one knows anything about hockey nor cares about it except transplanted Vancouver-ites.
I remember telling people at work i was going out that night to play hockey... half of them said "you mean ice hockey right?"
Ya, Seattle is a city of several million and QC has almost 200,000 less people than Manitoba.
Sharks vs Kings: What should happen to Ryan Clowe? From the bench he expertly poke-checked the puck away from Jarret Stoll. The closest thing to a pecedant for something like this happening is the band running onto the feild.
I though the leauge would have an intresting desicion to make on orpik but this takes the cake. + Show Spoiler +
On April 05 2012 18:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: can't u just look this up urself rather than try to keep defending ur position with silly questions
Nordiques attendance was fine. the Canadian dollar was worth $0.72 in USD.
Marcel Aubut sold the team for a major profit and they became the colorado avalanche.
the Montreal Canadiens had to pay for their own new arena. Aubut wanted the government to pay for a brand new facility. The government could never do this if the Canadiens paid for their own new place.
Rather than spend $150 million++ for a new arena he sold the team and collected premium US Dollars in doing so.
Don't compare Quebec City to Seattle as far as support for hockey. There is no comparison.
I spent 1 four month work term in Seattle...no one knows anything about hockey nor cares about it except transplanted Vancouver-ites.
I remember telling people at work i was going out that night to play hockey... half of them said "you mean ice hockey right?"
Just because a team isn't necessarily a traditional hockey town doesn't mean it won't be a viable market for hockey. Texas, California, Carolina, Florida, and Georgia all have/had hockey teams.
Also, yes, there are other forms of hockey. I don't see how that is a point at all. We play inline/floor hockey in the summer months all the time here in Minnesota.
On April 05 2012 18:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: can't u just look this up urself rather than try to keep defending ur position with silly questions
Nordiques attendance was fine. the Canadian dollar was worth $0.72 in USD.
Marcel Aubut sold the team for a major profit and they became the colorado avalanche.
the Montreal Canadiens had to pay for their own new arena. Aubut wanted the government to pay for a brand new facility. The government could never do this if the Canadiens paid for their own new place.
Rather than spend $150 million++ for a new arena he sold the team and collected premium US Dollars in doing so.
Don't compare Quebec City to Seattle as far as support for hockey. There is no comparison.
I spent 1 four month work term in Seattle...no one knows anything about hockey nor cares about it except transplanted Vancouver-ites.
I remember telling people at work i was going out that night to play hockey... half of them said "you mean ice hockey right?"
Just because a team isn't necessarily a traditional hockey town doesn't mean it won't be a viable market for hockey. Texas, California, Carolina, Florida, and Georgia all have/had hockey teams.
Also, yes, there are other forms of hockey. I don't see how that is a point at all. We play inline/floor hockey in the summer months all the time here in Minnesota.
Out of the locations you named, only the California teams seem really viable. All others have had trouble in recent years. Dallas had ownership problems and attendence decline, Carolina had 3000 ppl in the stands before winning a cup but then seem to have stabilized in recent years so we'll leave them be for now. Florida Panthers were rumored to move last year and Columbus is just horrible for 10 years now and is also in talks of moving if people don't show up. Just because there is a team there doesn't mean it's a viable market.
The NHL THOUGHT it would be but they made mistakes imo.
On April 05 2012 18:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: can't u just look this up urself rather than try to keep defending ur position with silly questions
Nordiques attendance was fine. the Canadian dollar was worth $0.72 in USD.
Marcel Aubut sold the team for a major profit and they became the colorado avalanche.
the Montreal Canadiens had to pay for their own new arena. Aubut wanted the government to pay for a brand new facility. The government could never do this if the Canadiens paid for their own new place.
Rather than spend $150 million++ for a new arena he sold the team and collected premium US Dollars in doing so.
Don't compare Quebec City to Seattle as far as support for hockey. There is no comparison.
I spent 1 four month work term in Seattle...no one knows anything about hockey nor cares about it except transplanted Vancouver-ites.
I remember telling people at work i was going out that night to play hockey... half of them said "you mean ice hockey right?"
Just because a team isn't necessarily a traditional hockey town doesn't mean it won't be a viable market for hockey. Texas, California, Carolina, Florida, and Georgia all have/had hockey teams.
Also, yes, there are other forms of hockey. I don't see how that is a point at all. We play inline/floor hockey in the summer months all the time here in Minnesota.
Out of the locations you named, only the California teams seem really viable. All others have had trouble in recent years. Dallas had ownership problems and attendence decline, Carolina had 3000 ppl in the stands before winning a cup but then seem to have stabilized in recent years so we'll leave them be for now. Florida Panthers were rumored to move last year and Columbus is just horrible for 10 years now and is also in talks of moving if people don't show up. Just because there is a team there doesn't mean it's a viable market.
The NHL THOUGHT it would be but they made mistakes imo.
Florida is about to clinch their first division title and Dallas and Carolina are both stable now. Furthermore, just because it's a Canadian location doesn't mean it's an absolutely sure thing either. Quebec already lost the team once, and a big part of that is the language barrier between QC and the rest of the league.
On April 05 2012 18:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: can't u just look this up urself rather than try to keep defending ur position with silly questions
Nordiques attendance was fine. the Canadian dollar was worth $0.72 in USD.
Marcel Aubut sold the team for a major profit and they became the colorado avalanche.
the Montreal Canadiens had to pay for their own new arena. Aubut wanted the government to pay for a brand new facility. The government could never do this if the Canadiens paid for their own new place.
Rather than spend $150 million++ for a new arena he sold the team and collected premium US Dollars in doing so.
Don't compare Quebec City to Seattle as far as support for hockey. There is no comparison.
I spent 1 four month work term in Seattle...no one knows anything about hockey nor cares about it except transplanted Vancouver-ites.
I remember telling people at work i was going out that night to play hockey... half of them said "you mean ice hockey right?"
Just because a team isn't necessarily a traditional hockey town doesn't mean it won't be a viable market for hockey. Texas, California, Carolina, Florida, and Georgia all have/had hockey teams.
Also, yes, there are other forms of hockey. I don't see how that is a point at all. We play inline/floor hockey in the summer months all the time here in Minnesota.
Out of the locations you named, only the California teams seem really viable. All others have had trouble in recent years. Dallas had ownership problems and attendence decline, Carolina had 3000 ppl in the stands before winning a cup but then seem to have stabilized in recent years so we'll leave them be for now. Florida Panthers were rumored to move last year and Columbus is just horrible for 10 years now and is also in talks of moving if people don't show up. Just because there is a team there doesn't mean it's a viable market.
The NHL THOUGHT it would be but they made mistakes imo.
Florida is about to clinch their first division title and Dallas and Carolina are both stable now. Furthermore, just because it's a Canadian location doesn't mean it's an absolutely sure thing either. Quebec already lost the team once, and a big part of that is the language barrier between QC and the rest of the league.
That had nothing to do with, Quebec lost their team because they had an old rink and it was hard to make money with the Canadian dollar that weak. Calgary and Edmonton damn near lost their teams too and Winnipeg did. With the Canadian dollar a lot stronger Calgary and Edmonton are both basically cap level spending teams, Winnipeg has had a great season financially and QC is hockey crazy, I'd love to see a team back there.
Hockey has succeeded in really weird markets like San Jose, Carolina and Dallas but it's also had pretty big failures like Atlanta, Phoenix and you can even throw Florida into that group. Lots of teams have struggled with ownership problems like Nashville, Dallas, Phoenix again etc. the Canadian teams have had no problems like that since the dollar has gained strength.
If you don't live in Canada you don't understand how big hockey is here. It's like taking the fans of the other three major sports and just adding them all to the hockey pool in every city. I'd love to see Seattle have a team, but QC would be a much better place right now. Literally the only thing that Canada agrees on is that hockey is awesome.
On April 05 2012 18:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: can't u just look this up urself rather than try to keep defending ur position with silly questions
Nordiques attendance was fine. the Canadian dollar was worth $0.72 in USD.
Marcel Aubut sold the team for a major profit and they became the colorado avalanche.
the Montreal Canadiens had to pay for their own new arena. Aubut wanted the government to pay for a brand new facility. The government could never do this if the Canadiens paid for their own new place.
Rather than spend $150 million++ for a new arena he sold the team and collected premium US Dollars in doing so.
Don't compare Quebec City to Seattle as far as support for hockey. There is no comparison.
I spent 1 four month work term in Seattle...no one knows anything about hockey nor cares about it except transplanted Vancouver-ites.
I remember telling people at work i was going out that night to play hockey... half of them said "you mean ice hockey right?"
Just because a team isn't necessarily a traditional hockey town doesn't mean it won't be a viable market for hockey. Texas, California, Carolina, Florida, and Georgia all have/had hockey teams.
Also, yes, there are other forms of hockey. I don't see how that is a point at all. We play inline/floor hockey in the summer months all the time here in Minnesota.
Out of the locations you named, only the California teams seem really viable. All others have had trouble in recent years. Dallas had ownership problems and attendence decline, Carolina had 3000 ppl in the stands before winning a cup but then seem to have stabilized in recent years so we'll leave them be for now. Florida Panthers were rumored to move last year and Columbus is just horrible for 10 years now and is also in talks of moving if people don't show up. Just because there is a team there doesn't mean it's a viable market.
The NHL THOUGHT it would be but they made mistakes imo.
Florida is about to clinch their first division title and Dallas and Carolina are both stable now. Furthermore, just because it's a Canadian location doesn't mean it's an absolutely sure thing either. Quebec already lost the team once, and a big part of that is the language barrier between QC and the rest of the league.
So Québec lost their team because of the language barrier ....
Now you're going to explain your logic here before I officialy label you as a royal troll haha.
On April 05 2012 18:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: can't u just look this up urself rather than try to keep defending ur position with silly questions
Nordiques attendance was fine. the Canadian dollar was worth $0.72 in USD.
Marcel Aubut sold the team for a major profit and they became the colorado avalanche.
the Montreal Canadiens had to pay for their own new arena. Aubut wanted the government to pay for a brand new facility. The government could never do this if the Canadiens paid for their own new place.
Rather than spend $150 million++ for a new arena he sold the team and collected premium US Dollars in doing so.
Don't compare Quebec City to Seattle as far as support for hockey. There is no comparison.
I spent 1 four month work term in Seattle...no one knows anything about hockey nor cares about it except transplanted Vancouver-ites.
I remember telling people at work i was going out that night to play hockey... half of them said "you mean ice hockey right?"
Just because a team isn't necessarily a traditional hockey town doesn't mean it won't be a viable market for hockey. Texas, California, Carolina, Florida, and Georgia all have/had hockey teams.
Also, yes, there are other forms of hockey. I don't see how that is a point at all. We play inline/floor hockey in the summer months all the time here in Minnesota.
Out of the locations you named, only the California teams seem really viable. All others have had trouble in recent years. Dallas had ownership problems and attendence decline, Carolina had 3000 ppl in the stands before winning a cup but then seem to have stabilized in recent years so we'll leave them be for now. Florida Panthers were rumored to move last year and Columbus is just horrible for 10 years now and is also in talks of moving if people don't show up. Just because there is a team there doesn't mean it's a viable market.
The NHL THOUGHT it would be but they made mistakes imo.
Florida is about to clinch their first division title and Dallas and Carolina are both stable now. Furthermore, just because it's a Canadian location doesn't mean it's an absolutely sure thing either. Quebec already lost the team once, and a big part of that is the language barrier between QC and the rest of the league.
So Québec lost their team because of the language barrier ....
Now you're going to explain your logic here before I officialy label you as a royal troll haha.
I didn't say that was the only reason, but to my knowledge, QC speaks French more or less exclusively, yes? This creates a barrier between the rest of the league and that city. This isn't Europe. We don't exactly have a multilingual culture, so speaking different languages can ostracize fans from outside the region and players that may be looking to play there.
On April 07 2012 23:44 Orcasgt24 wrote: All 30 teams play game number 82 tonight. The NHL put this TV guide together for tonights games. I figured I'd bring it here
A hell of a night for some hockey. Who's getting the President's Trophy - NYR or Vancouver? And who's gonna lock up the Pacific Division? I'm calling Vancouver for the trophy and Phoenix for the division.
On April 05 2012 18:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: can't u just look this up urself rather than try to keep defending ur position with silly questions
Nordiques attendance was fine. the Canadian dollar was worth $0.72 in USD.
Marcel Aubut sold the team for a major profit and they became the colorado avalanche.
the Montreal Canadiens had to pay for their own new arena. Aubut wanted the government to pay for a brand new facility. The government could never do this if the Canadiens paid for their own new place.
Rather than spend $150 million++ for a new arena he sold the team and collected premium US Dollars in doing so.
Don't compare Quebec City to Seattle as far as support for hockey. There is no comparison.
I spent 1 four month work term in Seattle...no one knows anything about hockey nor cares about it except transplanted Vancouver-ites.
I remember telling people at work i was going out that night to play hockey... half of them said "you mean ice hockey right?"
Just because a team isn't necessarily a traditional hockey town doesn't mean it won't be a viable market for hockey. Texas, California, Carolina, Florida, and Georgia all have/had hockey teams.
Also, yes, there are other forms of hockey. I don't see how that is a point at all. We play inline/floor hockey in the summer months all the time here in Minnesota.
Out of the locations you named, only the California teams seem really viable. All others have had trouble in recent years. Dallas had ownership problems and attendence decline, Carolina had 3000 ppl in the stands before winning a cup but then seem to have stabilized in recent years so we'll leave them be for now. Florida Panthers were rumored to move last year and Columbus is just horrible for 10 years now and is also in talks of moving if people don't show up. Just because there is a team there doesn't mean it's a viable market.
The NHL THOUGHT it would be but they made mistakes imo.
Florida is about to clinch their first division title and Dallas and Carolina are both stable now. Furthermore, just because it's a Canadian location doesn't mean it's an absolutely sure thing either. Quebec already lost the team once, and a big part of that is the language barrier between QC and the rest of the league.
So Québec lost their team because of the language barrier ....
Now you're going to explain your logic here before I officialy label you as a royal troll haha.
I didn't say that was the only reason, but to my knowledge, QC speaks French more or less exclusively, yes? This creates a barrier between the rest of the league and that city. This isn't Europe. We don't exactly have a multilingual culture, so speaking different languages can ostracize fans from outside the region and players that may be looking to play there.
Alright. Well let me reassure you here. Yes, 80% of people in the province of Québec is born speaking french. The major concentration of non french speaking people is in Montréal. I'm 20 minutes north of MTL and there's not a lot of english this far out. Now the Canadiens don't have trouble signing players because of that. They have trouble because they suck and the pressure to play here is the highest in the league (maybe Toronto is on the same level).
Now when the Nordiques were around, most of the staff were people from Québec but I assure you that everyone important speaks english very well. The only incident that is really known of a player refusing to come play in Québec City is Eric Lindros and that was because he was being managed by his parents who were anti-French Canadians. When the nordiques left, they had most of the players who helped them win the Stanley Cup the very next year.
Players who played in Québec City always had, to my knowlege, just really good memories and good things to say of the city. Hell even some who didn't play here. I'd invite you to read a recent blog by former NHLer Bobby Holik. He has interesting points and even mention some of the challenges that awaits a new team in Québec. It's a good read:
And another point about "ostracize fans from outside the region". The Montréal Canadiens are the only NHL team in Québec province right now and they certainly have the most fans on the road. Their glory days created fans everywhere in the league and they regularly show up in the crowd when the Habs are on the road. And it seems like we find unusual MTL fans all the time to my surprise. When we drafted Mike Komisarek and Chris Higgins (2 Americans born in New York) they said their fathers were huge MTL fans and so they had adopted the team. You know the actor Viggo Mortensen? Who the hell would've thought he was habs crazy! Another born American. And there are hundreds like that. We have visibility as much as any other team in spite of the "Language barrier".
So I don't really know how the language barrier has anything to do with the problems that Québec had in the past.
On April 05 2012 18:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: can't u just look this up urself rather than try to keep defending ur position with silly questions
Nordiques attendance was fine. the Canadian dollar was worth $0.72 in USD.
Marcel Aubut sold the team for a major profit and they became the colorado avalanche.
the Montreal Canadiens had to pay for their own new arena. Aubut wanted the government to pay for a brand new facility. The government could never do this if the Canadiens paid for their own new place.
Rather than spend $150 million++ for a new arena he sold the team and collected premium US Dollars in doing so.
Don't compare Quebec City to Seattle as far as support for hockey. There is no comparison.
I spent 1 four month work term in Seattle...no one knows anything about hockey nor cares about it except transplanted Vancouver-ites.
I remember telling people at work i was going out that night to play hockey... half of them said "you mean ice hockey right?"
Just because a team isn't necessarily a traditional hockey town doesn't mean it won't be a viable market for hockey. Texas, California, Carolina, Florida, and Georgia all have/had hockey teams.
Also, yes, there are other forms of hockey. I don't see how that is a point at all. We play inline/floor hockey in the summer months all the time here in Minnesota.
Out of the locations you named, only the California teams seem really viable. All others have had trouble in recent years. Dallas had ownership problems and attendence decline, Carolina had 3000 ppl in the stands before winning a cup but then seem to have stabilized in recent years so we'll leave them be for now. Florida Panthers were rumored to move last year and Columbus is just horrible for 10 years now and is also in talks of moving if people don't show up. Just because there is a team there doesn't mean it's a viable market.
The NHL THOUGHT it would be but they made mistakes imo.
Florida is about to clinch their first division title and Dallas and Carolina are both stable now. Furthermore, just because it's a Canadian location doesn't mean it's an absolutely sure thing either. Quebec already lost the team once, and a big part of that is the language barrier between QC and the rest of the league.
So Québec lost their team because of the language barrier ....
Now you're going to explain your logic here before I officialy label you as a royal troll haha.
I didn't say that was the only reason, but to my knowledge, QC speaks French more or less exclusively, yes? This creates a barrier between the rest of the league and that city. This isn't Europe. We don't exactly have a multilingual culture, so speaking different languages can ostracize fans from outside the region and players that may be looking to play there.
Alright. Well let me reassure you here. Yes, 80% of people in the province of Québec is born speaking french. The major concentration of non french speaking people is in Montréal. I'm 20 minutes north of MTL and there's not a lot of english this far out. Now the Canadiens don't have trouble signing players because of that. They have trouble because they suck and the pressure to play here is the highest in the league (maybe Toronto is on the same level).
Now when the Nordiques were around, most of the staff were people from Québec but I assure you that everyone important speaks english very well. The only incident that is really known of a player refusing to come play in Québec City is Eric Lindros and that was because he was being managed by his parents who were anti-French Canadians. When the nordiques left, they had most of the players who helped them win the Stanley Cup the very next year.
Players who played in Québec City always had, to my knowlege, just really good memories and good things to say of the city. Hell even some who didn't play here. I'd invite you to read a recent blog by former NHLer Bobby Holik. He has interesting points and even mention some of the challenges that awaits a new team in Québec. It's a good read:
And another point about "ostracize fans from outside the region". The Montréal Canadiens are the only NHL team in Québec province right now and they certainly have the most fans on the road. Their glory days created fans everywhere in the league and they regularly show up in the crowd when the Habs are on the road. And it seems like we find unusual MTL fans all the time to my surprise. When we drafted Mike Komisarek and Chris Higgins (2 Americans born in New York) they said their fathers were huge MTL fans and so they had adopted the team. You know the actor Viggo Mortensen? Who the hell would've thought he was habs crazy! Another born American. And there are hundreds like that. We have visibility as much as any other team in spite of the "Language barrier".
So I don't really know how the language barrier has anything to do with the problems that Québec had in the past.
Wouldn't the bold part be a response to your whole post? If Montreal is very bilingual, then that negates a lot of the troubles that QC might have had. The rest of your post has nothing to do with a team in QC because you're talking about Montreal.
On April 06 2012 16:42 Sub40APM wrote: Ya, Seattle is a city of several million and QC has almost 200,000 less people than Manitoba.
the population of Manitoba is 1.2 million.. i have no clue where u r going with this one... how do u propose the good citizens of Churchill attend a Jets game? arrive by dog sled?
the population of Quebec is almost 8 million.
the population of Metro Quebec City is slightly larger than the population of Metro Winnipeg ... Metro QC is SMALL... making it easy for any one living in Metro QC to go to the Nordiques game. just like they do right now for Ramparts games.
if you think only people who go to Ramparts games live in "city" Quebec City and not "metro" Quebec City.. just LOLz.
people from places like Levis, Drummondville, and Sherbrooke will attend games in QC just like they do right now for junior games. What is that .. another half million people ?
The total population of Quebec City and the other small towns within a 1 hour drive is a lot bigger than the total population of Winnipeg and its surrounding area.
Winnipeg is the smallest market in the league population-wise and will remain that way after the Coyotes move to Quebec City.
originally you were claiming no move was going to be made at all? have you now retracted taht comment ?
are you predicting Seattle then?
who is the owner in Seattle?
where do they play in Seattle?
what is the probability they can sell 12,000 seasons tickets in a week in Seattle? ..
`the move` is going to be so late in the season ticket sales cycle that this is hwat you'll have to accomplish.
did you see the Colisee on Friday night? that is who your season's ticket holders will be.
everyone knows the answers to all these questions if the move is to Quebec City. if you don't know the answer to "owner" , "building" , "ticket sales drive" go here: http://www.FAN590.com
if you can't clearly answer all the above questions (re Seattle) then you have no evidence the Coyotes are moving to Seattle.
The wheels have already been set in motion... as soon as the Coyotes' season ends all that is left is for the NHL to make official what every one already knows.
EPT
