Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

New Expansion Teams

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Stodola

unread,
Jun 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/11/97
to

Last night on Scoreboard Central (a 24 hour sports network) they reported
that the NHL will "PROBABLY" (but it's not 100% yet) will award franchises
to Atlanta, Minnesota/St. Paul, Columbus, and Nashville. The reason being
is that they all have areans or will have soon. Houston, more than likely,
missed out because they couldn't fund a new arena, and Oklahoma City was
too risky a venture at this time. However, they said that they would only
add Nashville in the 98-99 season, and the other 3 teams in the 99-2000
season, because the Nashville arena will be the only one ready at that
time. The NHL isn't too happy about this development, because they wanted
to add 2 teams each year, but unfortunately it isn't going to work out
that way.
Plus they also said there will be some slight realignment. Detroit
and Toronto will go into the Easten Conference (where they should have
been all along) Atlanta will go to the east, St. Paul to the west, while
the other two teams they aren't sure about yet.

P.S. Where are they going to get all of the so-called quality players to
stock these teams?

---
Doug Stodola
sto...@netins.net


Anders Thelemyr (remove BIK if emailing)

unread,
Jun 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/11/97
to

Stodola wrote:
>P.S. Where are they going to get all of the so-called quality players
>to stock these teams?

Well, I hear Latvia is an open market these days... :-)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anders Thelemyr
About BIK!: http://www.algonet.se/~anderst/bik
http://www.algonet.se/~anderst/vem.htm
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Howard Salwasser

unread,
Jun 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/11/97
to

Atlanta...YES! Nashville...YES! Minneapolis/St. Paul...YES!
Colunbus...YES! Houston and Okie City...NO!

Wolf Nipple chips! Get 'em while they're hot, they're lovely!

-From Monty Python's
Life of Brian

Marc Foster

unread,
Jun 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/12/97
to

Stodola wrote:

> Last night on Scoreboard Central (a 24 hour sports network) they reported
> that the NHL will "PROBABLY" (but it's not 100% yet) will award franchises
> to Atlanta, Minnesota/St. Paul, Columbus, and Nashville. The reason being

> is that they all have arenas or will have soon. Houston, more than likely,


> missed out because they couldn't fund a new arena, and Oklahoma City was
> too risky a venture at this time.

Typical media bias. I hope SC's reasons were more in-depth than this,
and that you're simply paraphrasing. Those in the media that say that
Oklahoma City is too risky obviously haven't been paying attention.
OKC's bid featured the strongest arena deal and second strongest
ownership (I rank Eddie Gaylord just behind Ted Turner), to go along
with
the most successful market in minor league hockey, averaging 10,000
a game over the past five seasons. Yup, real risky.

As for everyone else (besides Houston) having their arena situations
solidified, that's crap. Minnesota's arena still lacks the capital
from the State, either $35M or $65M (I forget). Columbus, who wants
a team so bad they voted down the sales tax to build the arena, has
apparently secured private financing, but so far as I know nothing
there is official.

Oklahoma City, throughout this entire process, has been the darkhorse,
the one the media always mentions last when listing the cities biding.
You'd think that after their lesson with the NFL selecting Jacksonville
a few years ago, that they'd look at the darkhorses a little better.

Marc - still carrying the banner for NHL expansion in OKC

--
*********************************************************************
* Marc Foster *
* Email - marc....@oklaosf.state.ok.us OKC *
* remove "nospam" from header to reply NHL *
* NOW! *
* Minor League Hockey Links *
* http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/1638/minor.html *
* *
* The sad thing about Austin Powers is that 95% of Gen X'ers don't *
* get half the jokes... *
*********************************************************************

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,
Jun 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/12/97
to

In article <339FED...@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us> Marc Foster <marc....@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us> writes:

[re NHL expansion prospects]

>As for everyone else (besides Houston) having their arena situations
>solidified, that's crap. Minnesota's arena still lacks the capital
>from the State, either $35M or $65M (I forget). Columbus, who wants
>a team so bad they voted down the sales tax to build the arena, has
>apparently secured private financing, but so far as I know nothing
>there is official.

A new wrinkle has been thrown into the situation here in Houston, as of
yesterday afternoon: Rockets owner Les Alexander has announced negotiations
with Peter Pocklington to buy the Edmonton Oilers and move them to Houston.
Mayor Lanier has already set a June 25 deadline for Alexander and Watson to
come to terms on sharing the proposed new downtown arena, and this will
certainly change that deadline, possibly moving the mayor to decide to push
ahead without Alexander's agreement.

Les Alexander's motive in this case is pretty obvious -- if he doesn't control
*both* major tenants in the new arena, he doesn't want anyone else bringing
the NHL in here. If there's any justice, both Bettman and Mayor Lanier will
give Alexander the finger, and things will return to a saner situation.

--PLH, who will no longer attend *any* home games of any team owned by Les
Alexander

Marc Foster

unread,
Jun 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/12/97
to

Patrick L. Humphrey wrote:
>
> In article <339FED...@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us> Marc Foster <marc....@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us> writes:


> A new wrinkle has been thrown into the situation here in Houston, as of
> yesterday afternoon: Rockets owner Les Alexander has announced negotiations
> with Peter Pocklington to buy the Edmonton Oilers and move them to Houston.

One of Pocklington's conditions of sale is that the team remain in
Edmonton
through 2004... is Alexander willing to wait that long, or will he
simply
reneg and pull them south earlier.

> Mayor Lanier has already set a June 25 deadline for Alexander and Watson to
> come to terms on sharing the proposed new downtown arena, and this will
> certainly change that deadline, possibly moving the mayor to decide to push
> ahead without Alexander's agreement.

> Les Alexander's motive in this case is pretty obvious -- if he doesn't control
> *both* major tenants in the new arena, he doesn't want anyone else bringing
> the NHL in here. If there's any justice, both Bettman and Mayor Lanier will
> give Alexander the finger, and things will return to a saner situation.

We can only hope. I can see Alexander going on a tirade and calling
Bettman every word in the book. Bettman is just the kind of person that
can piss Alexander off enough for it to happen. Is it me, or is
Alexander
like that one Texas politician that couldn't keep his foot out of it,
once
suggesting the women enjoy rape?

Whatever happened to Watson just acting on his own and building his own
place?

Marc

Josh Lee

unread,
Jun 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/12/97
to

Marc Foster (marc....@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us) wrote:
: Stodola wrote:

: Typical media bias. I hope SC's reasons were more in-depth than this,


: and that you're simply paraphrasing. Those in the media that say that
: Oklahoma City is too risky obviously haven't been paying attention.
: OKC's bid featured the strongest arena deal and second strongest
: ownership (I rank Eddie Gaylord just behind Ted Turner), to go along
: with
: the most successful market in minor league hockey, averaging 10,000
: a game over the past five seasons. Yup, real risky.

OKC is the smallest market. The NHL doesn't want to test the waters there
while other smaller markets are having trouble keeping a team.

: As for everyone else (besides Houston) having their arena situations


: solidified, that's crap. Minnesota's arena still lacks the capital
: from the State, either $35M or $65M (I forget). Columbus, who wants
: a team so bad they voted down the sales tax to build the arena, has
: apparently secured private financing, but so far as I know nothing
: there is official.

It's offical for Columbus. If the NHL gives Columbus a team construction
begins right away. The sales tax thing was just...we have stupid people
here. VERY STUPID. Considering how the city would have got so much money,
now Nationwide gets most the money now.

Josh


Marc Foster

unread,
Jun 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/12/97
to

Josh Lee wrote:

> OKC is the smallest market. The NHL doesn't want to test the waters there
> while other smaller markets are having trouble keeping a team.

Jacksonville was the smallest market of the last NFL expansion bidders.

As for OKC being the smallest market, I have to ask in what terms, since
they will not be the smallest TV market. The local broadcast rights
for the OKC team will be sold to a regional broadcast network, with
games being shown in at least 4 or 5 additional TV markets (including
Tulsa and Wichita). The cable carry region for ESPN and Fox broadcasts,
will include Arkansas, New Mexico, and West Texas.



> It's offical for Columbus. If the NHL gives Columbus a team construction
> begins right away. The sales tax thing was just...we have stupid people
> here. VERY STUPID. Considering how the city would have got so much money,
> now Nationwide gets most the money now.

Still, the if/then NHL/arena prospect isn't the most ideal situation,
considering what the NHL has witnessed in Tampa Bay and Ottawa. Of all
the bids, OKC's is the closest to facility completion besides Nashville.

Josh Lee

unread,
Jun 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/12/97
to

Marc Foster (marc....@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us) wrote:
: Josh Lee wrote:

: As for OKC being the smallest market, I have to ask in what terms, since


: they will not be the smallest TV market. The local broadcast rights
: for the OKC team will be sold to a regional broadcast network, with
: games being shown in at least 4 or 5 additional TV markets (including
: Tulsa and Wichita). The cable carry region for ESPN and Fox broadcasts,
: will include Arkansas, New Mexico, and West Texas.

Here is what the Columbus Dispatch wrote June 3rd 1997 about the
expansion teams. This is in terms of tv market and metropolitan market.
And arena.

Atlanta-

arena: Fulton County Commission to vote wednesday on a $140 million
downtown arena, financed by taxable revenue bonds, to be repaid by arena
revenues. To open in 1999.

Metropolitan market: 12th largest

Tv market: 10th largest

Columbus-

Nationwide Mutual insurance and Dispatch Printing Co. to privately fund a
downtown arena if NHL comes.

Metropolitan market 30th largest

tv market 34th largest

Houston-

Watson and Les Alexander, owner of the Houston Rocket, are trying to wrok
a deal to share a new arena, but have made little progress.

Metropolitan market: 10th largest

TV market: 11th

Minneapolis-St. Paul

Arena: St. Pual City Council approved plans yeserday for a downtown arena
using $95 million in state and city funds and $35million from the privite
ownership group.

metropolitan market: 15th

tv market: 14th

Nashville-

Arena: a 19,000 seat downtown arena opened in December.

Metropolitan market 41st

tv market: 33rd

Oklahoma City:

Arena: Work under way on a 19,000 seat downtown arena, one of serveral
prjects funded with a 1 perfect sales tax increase approed by voters in
1993. It could open in 1999.

metropolitan market: 43rd largest

tv market: 43rd

There you have it. So Oklahomia does have the smallest out of the
expansion teams. The only thing it really has going for it is an arena
that could open before the others. Houston looks like it's out. Oklahoma
city I think could get a team if something happens in St. Paul.


: > It's offical for Columbus. If the NHL gives Columbus a team construction


: > begins right away. The sales tax thing was just...we have stupid people
: > here. VERY STUPID. Considering how the city would have got so much money,
: > now Nationwide gets most the money now.

: Still, the if/then NHL/arena prospect isn't the most ideal situation,
: considering what the NHL has witnessed in Tampa Bay and Ottawa. Of all
: the bids, OKC's is the closest to facility completion besides Nashville.

But if I understand it, Ottawa and Tampa Bay started playing before they
had their arena. The NHL probably won't make that mistake again.

Josh


NJDevilCup

unread,
Jun 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/12/97
to

In article <339FED...@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us>, Marc Foster
<marc....@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us> writes:

>
>As for everyone else (besides Houston) having their arena situations
>solidified, that's crap. Minnesota's arena still lacks the capital
>from the State, either $35M or $65M (I forget).

St. Paul has approved the funding necessary (last Wed) should MN get
an expansion team. No more ifs. The funding is in place.

Though I agree with your points about OKC, the fact of the matter
is that OKC is similar to a small-market CAnadian city, due to the
TV market size. The loyalty and funding may be there, but the
small TV market hurts them big. Maybe OKC can land a team,
but as more teams secure funding, their chances get slimmer.

Kuch

Go Devils!
**************************************************************************
New Jersey Devils - 1995 Stanley Cup Champions!

Your source for hockey autograph INFORMATION:
http://members.aol.com/njdevilcup/autogrph.htm

Go Minnesota Vikings! Go Gopher Hockey!

John Alway

unread,
Jun 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/12/97
to

Marc Foster wrote:

[...]

> As for everyone else (besides Houston) having their arena situations
> solidified, that's crap. Minnesota's arena still lacks the capital

> from the State, either $35M or $65M (I forget). Columbus, who wants
> a team so bad they voted down the sales tax to build the arena, has
> apparently secured private financing, but so far as I know nothing
> there is official.


Voting a tax increase down doesn't necessarily correlate
to wanting or not wanting a team. There are larger issues
than a sports team, afterall.


...John

John Alway

unread,
Jun 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/12/97
to

Josh Lee wrote:

[...]

> It's offical for Columbus. If the NHL gives Columbus a team construction
> begins right away. The sales tax thing was just...we have stupid people
> here. VERY STUPID.


In fact, the wise move is to vote against _any_ tax increase.[1]
There are two reasons for this: 1> those who earn their wealth
have the right to keep it, thus it is immoral to tax ones
neighbor. 2> Taxation takes money from the productive and
gives it to the less productive. The later is a lesser reason,
but, still, both the practical and the moral are covered.

> Considering how the city would have got so much money,
> now Nationwide gets most the money now.

I'm not sure what you're saying here.


...John

[1] Caveat, I'm not sure of the reasons why they voted against
the tax increase. They could well have done it for the wrong
reasons.

Bryce McNeil

unread,
Jun 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/13/97
to

Stodola <sto...@netins.net> wrote:
>Last night on Scoreboard Central (a 24 hour sports network) they reported
>that the NHL will "PROBABLY" (but it's not 100% yet) will award franchises
>to Atlanta, Minnesota/St. Paul, Columbus, and Nashville.
The idea of adding as many as four franchises is the most perposterous
thing I`ve heard in a while. And why is the St.Paul area getting a team
back so soon? When does Winnipeg get their second team? Quebec?

> The reason being
>is that they all have areans or will have soon. Houston, more than likely,


>missed out because they couldn't fund a new arena, and Oklahoma City was
>too risky a venture at this time.

Yeah, because the Blazers did well attendance wise. The NHL will take
that over a city that was lukewarm about getting the Whalers, a city
lukewarm about getting the Devils, and a city that just lost a team a few
years ago. (I disclude Atlanta, conditions have changed since the Flames
left).

> However, they said that they would only
>add Nashville in the 98-99 season, and the other 3 teams in the 99-2000
>season, because the Nashville arena will be the only one ready at that
>time. The NHL isn't too happy about this development, because they wanted
>to add 2 teams each year, but unfortunately it isn't going to work out
>that way.

3 teams in one year? That`s scary. Four teams in two years is
ridiculous.

> Plus they also said there will be some slight realignment. Detroit
>and Toronto will go into the Easten Conference (where they should have
>been all along) Atlanta will go to the east, St. Paul to the west, while
>the other two teams they aren't sure about yet.
>

>P.S. Where are they going to get all of the so-called quality players to
>stock these teams?

Exactly my question. The games will have scores of 1-0. It will turn
into soccer. The problem is that every team has about three players at
the most that are capabale of exciting the fans, and they all have
back-up goalies who are capable of starting. The goaltending isn`t
effected, but it`s facing lesser competition. Also, more expansion means
more bad teams, meaning more trapping teams. Hockey is going to die.

Dustin Christmann

unread,
Jun 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/13/97
to

In article <33A032...@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us>,

Marc Foster <marc....@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us> wrote:
>Josh Lee wrote:
>
>> OKC is the smallest market. The NHL doesn't want to test the waters there
>> while other smaller markets are having trouble keeping a team.
>
>Jacksonville was the smallest market of the last NFL expansion bidders.
>
>As for OKC being the smallest market, I have to ask in what terms, since
>they will not be the smallest TV market. The local broadcast rights
>for the OKC team will be sold to a regional broadcast network, with
>games being shown in at least 4 or 5 additional TV markets (including
>Tulsa and Wichita). The cable carry region for ESPN and Fox broadcasts,
>will include Arkansas, New Mexico, and West Texas.

The problems with Oklahoma City go farther than just its market size, but
given the travails with Winnipeg, Quebec City, and possibly Edmonton, I'm
sure that the market size would weigh heavily on the league's mind.

The biggest problem is that there's a team 200 miles down the road which
considers OKC part of its territory and is still losing money. I'm pretty
sure that the Stars would see that OKC's entry into the NHL would come at a
much higher price, in terms of cold hard cash paid for territorial infringement
and in terms of a smaller broadcast region.

Add that to its already-small market, and I'm sure that the NHL isn't exact-
ly salivating over OKC.

--
Thanx, = "Sacred cows make the best hamburger."
Dustin Christmann = -- Mark Twain
==========================================================================
Unofficial Dallas Burn Fan Web Site: http://www.anet-dfw.com/~dustin/burn/

NJDevilCup

unread,
Jun 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/13/97
to

In article <5nqjuv$i2j$3...@thor.atcon.com>, Bryce McNeil <j...@atcon.com>
writes:

> Yeah, because the Blazers did well attendance wise. The NHL will take
>that over a city that was lukewarm about getting the Whalers, a city
>lukewarm about getting the Devils, and a city that just lost a team a few

>years ago. (I disclude Atlanta, conditions have changed since the Flames

>left).

10,000 fans at $10 a ticket is a heck of a lot different than 10,000
fans at $35 a ticket. Combine that with a small market and lower
TV revenues, and the NHL will likely leave OKC in the cold. Atlanta
and St. Paul almost appear to be locks (now that St. Paul has the
funding) simply due to the fact that they are 12th and 14th in market
size, too big for the NHL to ignore.

On the other hand, if Edmonton moves to Houston, that leaves
Nashville, Columbus, OKC fighting for 2 teams. And OKC might
have a step up on COlumbus. Nashville has a big advantage since
they have a building in place for 1998-99.

Res Ipsa Loquitur

unread,
Jun 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/13/97
to

>>years ago. (I disclude Atlanta, conditions have changed since the Flames

>>left).

>10,000 fans at $10 a ticket is a heck of a lot different than 10,000
>fans at $35 a ticket.

That's really not a fair comparison. I supposedly represent the
general thinking here in Atlanta, and I feel that this town considers
itself "major league." A city this relatively large wants to see
marquee names to justify big-league prices. Given the recent influx
of northern transplants over the past decade, there's no doubt in my
mind that the NHL will not only survive, but flourish in Atlanta.

Besides the Knights outdrew the Hawks every year they were here
(granted the Hawks had the second worst attendance in the NBA during
that time span).

>Combine that with a small market and lower
>TV revenues, and the NHL will likely leave OKC in the cold. Atlanta
>and St. Paul almost appear to be locks (now that St. Paul has the
>funding) simply due to the fact that they are 12th and 14th in market
>size, too big for the NHL to ignore.

Bettman wants Ted's money and media exposure.

>On the other hand, if Edmonton moves to Houston, that leaves
>Nashville, Columbus, OKC fighting for 2 teams. And OKC might
>have a step up on COlumbus. Nashville has a big advantage since
>they have a building in place for 1998-99.

Did you know that Atlanta is the only American city to lose a
professional franchise TO Canada? (Actually we did it twice, Flames
and Knights.)

Josh Lee

unread,
Jun 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/13/97
to

John Alway (jal...@icsi.net) wrote:
: Josh Lee wrote:

: > It's offical for Columbus. If the NHL gives Columbus a team construction


: > begins right away. The sales tax thing was just...we have stupid people
: > here. VERY STUPID.

: In fact, the wise move is to vote against _any_ tax increase.[1]
: There are two reasons for this: 1> those who earn their wealth
: have the right to keep it, thus it is immoral to tax ones
: neighbor. 2> Taxation takes money from the productive and
: gives it to the less productive. The later is a lesser reason,
: but, still, both the practical and the moral are covered.

I'm so sick of you vast assholes. The Rich *SHOULD* get richer because
they are paying the money for the NHL expansion team. It's like 80-85
million. They are the ones bring the team here in the first place.

Second: Who says a stadium/arena wouldn't be productive? Ever stop to
think that if kids had somewhere to go/something to do they wouldn't spend
their money on drugs? But thats right all you care is about your damn
money. You can't afford to pay a half cent on a dollar for three years?

Third: The city would have got a lot more money to use for more productive
things. Now Nationwide gets all the money. And your gonna be paying more
to goto the games to pay for the privite construction. I hope Richard
Sheir trys to goto one of the games. This may sound immature, but I hope
everyone throws shit at him.

Josh

Ps: How much did all that alcohol cost at your victory party? I'm sure it
cost more than what you would be paying for the arena.


Jim Jordan

unread,
Jun 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/13/97
to

In article <5nrgld$7...@camel4.mindspring.com>,

Res Ipsa Loquitur <iron...@macon.mindspring.com> wrote:
>Did you know that Atlanta is the only American city to lose a
>professional franchise TO Canada? (Actually we did it twice, Flames
>and Knights.)

Actually, the WHA had a few cross-border moves in a northward direction.
One of the Minnesota Fighting Saints' incarnations became the Michigan
Stags, who became the Ottawa Civics, who became the Denver Spurs, who
then folded, having played a game or two wearing the old Ottawa jerseys.

Somehow, Philadelphia, Vancouver and Baltimore had the Blazers bounce
around those three cities before they folded (or did they move to New
Jersey as the Knights after that, and then fold ... Does it matter now
that Edmonton's the only WHA team left?)

Then there's the Canadian Football Laugh^H^H^H^H^H League's Baltimore
Blanks, who became the Blank Stallions, who wound up becoming the third
incarnation of the Montreal Alouettes.

The IHL's Minnesota Moose migrated to the recently-vacated Winnipeg
Arena to become the Manitoba Moose at the same time as Atlanta's Knights
became Quebec City's Rafales.

But, yes, in leagues that are still regarded as "major," the
cross-border movement has been, with one exception, southward.

Jim

--
W. Jim Jordan, Nortel, Stop 314 Qualicum,
PO Box 3511 Stn C, Ottawa, ON K1Y 4H7 Canada
I do not speak for Nortel.
Unsolicited commercial or bulk e-mail may attract an invoice.

Kirk Dooley

unread,
Jun 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/13/97
to

Jim Jordan wrote:
>
> In article <5nrgld$7...@camel4.mindspring.com>,
> Res Ipsa Loquitur <iron...@macon.mindspring.com> wrote:
> >Did you know that Atlanta is the only American city to lose a
> >professional franchise TO Canada? (Actually we did it twice, Flames
> >and Knights.)
>
> Actually, the WHA had a few cross-border moves in a northward direction.
> One of the Minnesota Fighting Saints' incarnations became the Michigan
> Stags, who became the Ottawa Civics, who became the Denver Spurs, who
> then folded, having played a game or two wearing the old Ottawa jerseys.
>
Wrong.

Both incarnations of the Fighting Saints folded in St. Paul (the second
team was the original Cleveland Crusaders). The Michigan Stags started
as the Los Angeles Sharks, moved to Detroit, then to Baltimore (the
Blades), then folded

The Spurs were an expansion team (first in the NHL--where their team was
put on hold because the NHL had second thoughts--along with the Seattle
Totems, and then in the WHA), moved to Ottawa in mid-season before
folding--all in one year.



> Somehow, Philadelphia, Vancouver and Baltimore had the Blazers bounce
> around those three cities before they folded (or did they move to New
> Jersey as the Knights after that, and then fold ... Does it matter now
> that Edmonton's the only WHA team left?)
>

The Blazers started in Philly (where the Zamboni crashed through the
ice, delaying their first game), moved to Vancouver for four years, then
moved to Calgary as the Cowboys. The New York Raiders changed their
named to the Golden Blades, moved to New Jersey (the Jersey Knights),
then moved to San Diego (the Mariners)

The Oilers played their first season as the Alberta Oilers before taking
the city's name.



> Then there's the Canadian Football Laugh^H^H^H^H^H League's Baltimore
> Blanks, who became the Blank Stallions, who wound up becoming the third
> incarnation of the Montreal Alouettes.
>

Baltimore wanted to call themselves the CFL Colts, but the NFL sued,
saying Indianapolis had worked hard to establish their team with that
name (in Baltimore, no less). Until the appeals ran out, the team was
known as the CFLs (except by the Baltimore fans who still called them
the Colts), then took the Stallions name in the second season (in which
they won the Grey Cup). After Art Modell saw that Baltimoreans still
liked football, he showed his interest in moving the Browns there (at
which point, the pols and the business community dropped their support
of the Stallions--leading to their move to Montreal).



> The IHL's Minnesota Moose migrated to the recently-vacated Winnipeg
> Arena to become the Manitoba Moose at the same time as Atlanta's Knights
> became Quebec City's Rafales.
>
> But, yes, in leagues that are still regarded as "major," the
> cross-border movement has been, with one exception, southward.
>

You may not consider the CFL a "major" league, but I find it to be a
better brand of football than the NFL (and I'm an American, living three
miles from where the Arizona Cardinals "play"). And the WHA was almost
as good a league as the NHL at the time.



> Jim
>
> --
> W. Jim Jordan, Nortel, Stop 314 Qualicum,
> PO Box 3511 Stn C, Ottawa, ON K1Y 4H7 Canada
> I do not speak for Nortel.
> Unsolicited commercial or bulk e-mail may attract an invoice.

It is better to stay silent and be thought a fool than to speak and
remove all doubt.

Kirk Dooley
Mesa, AZ

Marc Foster

unread,
Jun 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/13/97
to

Jim Jordan wrote:

> Actually, the WHA had a few cross-border moves in a northward direction.
> One of the Minnesota Fighting Saints' incarnations became the Michigan
> Stags, who became the Ottawa Civics, who became the Denver Spurs, who
> then folded, having played a game or two wearing the old Ottawa jerseys.

Wrong. Neither of the Saint's incarnations made it out of town. The
original folded, while the second one, formerly the Cleveland Crusaders,
folded in mid-season.

The Michigan Stags were originally the Los Angeles Sharks, and moved
mid-season to Baltimore.

The Denver Spurs moved to Ottawa mid-season, and folded 2 weeks later.
They wore the Denver jerseys, since the original Ottawa team, the
Nationals, had moved to Toronto to become the Toros.

> Somehow, Philadelphia, Vancouver and Baltimore had the Blazers bounce
> around those three cities before they folded (or did they move to New
> Jersey as the Knights after that, and then fold ... Does it matter now
> that Edmonton's the only WHA team left?)

The Miami Screaming Eagles failed to secure an arena and became the
Philadelphia Blazers before the first WHA season began. The next
season they became the Vancouver Blazers, and 2 or 3 years later the
Calgary Cowboys. The NY Raiders/Golden Blades became the Jersey Knights
in mid-season, then went to San Diego the next.

Marc

*********************************************************************
* Marc Foster *

* Email - marc....@oklaosf.state.ok.us (daytime) OKC *
* mfo...@frodo.okcu.edu (nights & weekends) NHL *

John Alway

unread,
Jun 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/13/97
to

Josh Lee wrote:

> John Alway (jal...@icsi.net) wrote:

> : In fact, the wise move is to vote against _any_ tax increase.[1]
> : There are two reasons for this: 1> those who earn their wealth
> : have the right to keep it, thus it is immoral to tax ones
> : neighbor. 2> Taxation takes money from the productive and
> : gives it to the less productive. The later is a lesser reason,
> : but, still, both the practical and the moral are covered.

I would vote against any tax increse primarily for moral
reasons. I simply don't have the right to initiate force
against my neighbors, nor do they have the right to do so
against me. I will never do it as a matter of honor,
and I will fight always anyone who attempts to do it to
me or anyone else.


> I'm so sick of you vast assholes.
> The Rich *SHOULD* get richer because
> they are paying the money for the NHL expansion team.

>...It's like 80-85


> million. They are the ones bring the team here in the first place.


I don't know what you're referring to. I'm referring
to the principle that you shouldn't steal another man's
wealth through taxation.


> Second: Who says a stadium/arena wouldn't be productive?

Nobody. However, the odds that it would be more productive
than private investors who are free to use _their_ money is
highly unlikely, as money tends to gravitate toward the better
wealth producers, which benefits us all on the whole. Those who
invest into black holes aren't going to be a great benefit to
anyone. Those who create computer systems are likely to be a
tremendous benefit. Although, it should be emphasized, nobody
is here to be a benefit to anyone. Every man is king over his
life. It just happens that freedom results in a more benevolent
and rich society.

Furthermore, if it is a productive enterprise, and you
believe in it so strongly, then put your money and effort where
your mouth is. Go out and find investors who will invest of
their own free will. I mean, you stand to make quite a bit, I
understand.

>...Ever stop to


> think that if kids had somewhere to go/something to do they wouldn't spend
> their money on drugs? But thats right all you care is about your damn
> money. You can't afford to pay a half cent on a dollar for three years?


The drug problem is largely caused by weak morals. Kids
are not taught to think independently, nor rationally, and
they are further not taught that there is a right or wrong:
that it's wrong to steal, for instance. Furthermore, society on
the whole isn't as rational as it once was, the results in
bad influences. Upholding rights is a supremely positive
influence, because it's a noble and practical ideal.

As to your second sentence, I care about my money and the
money of others because I care about my life and the lives
of others. I know that money is the result of thought and
effort. Money comes from _time_ invested into ones life.
One's time is ones life. Where do you get the idea you
can forcibly take a minute of another man's life? For what?
A hockey rink?

Some of us have greater dreams, anyway. I like ice hockey
(many people don't like it, btw), and I invest according to
what I can as a fan, but I have more love of physics and
of engineering, and of philosophy, and of nanotechnology,
because they bring greater rewards to me and have open
ended potential to bring ever great rewards.

As to last sentence, it's not about being able to afford
a half cent on a dollar or not, it's about not allowing men
to become parasites on one another.

> Third: The city would have got a lot more money to use for more productive
> things. Now Nationwide gets all the money. And your gonna be paying more
> to goto the games to pay for the privite construction. I hope Richard
> Sheir trys to goto one of the games. This may sound immature, but I hope
> everyone throws shit at him.


Liberty would result in more wealth in all areas of life,
including where hockey is concerned. In fact, there's a
reason that Canada is having such a hard time wrt hockey
right now, it's because they have less freedom economically.
There's a reason why the freest countries in the world are
the wealthiest.

Again, my primary argument is that you don't have the right
to another man's wealth. I would never steal any of your
money, Josh. Never. From both a practical and a moral side
you don't have a case.


...John

Marc Foster

unread,
Jun 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/13/97
to

Dustin Christmann wrote:

> The problems with Oklahoma City go farther than just its market size, but
> given the travails with Winnipeg, Quebec City, and possibly Edmonton, I'm
> sure that the market size would weigh heavily on the league's mind.

Except that for each example you give, the primary reasons for
relocation
are not market size. The Canadian teams suffer because of 1) the poor
exchange rate and 2) Molstar's monopolistic control of the local
broadcasting rights. These two factors coupled with an arena that
provides
little to no revenue assure an eventual relocation. Edmonton's
financial
problems are due to Pocklington's tax troubles.

Oklahoma City does not have to worry about these concerns.

> The biggest problem is that there's a team 200 miles down the road which
> considers OKC part of its territory and is still losing money. I'm pretty
> sure that the Stars would see that OKC's entry into the NHL would come at a
> much higher price, in terms of cold hard cash paid for territorial > infringement and in terms of a smaller broadcast region.

Wrong, Oklahoma considers Dallas *it's* territory. We annex it for an
October weekend every year, remember? Ever heard of Baja-Oklahoma? :)

But to be serious, the Stars cannot make a claim to Oklahoma, since
their broadcast territory does not include it. Count for me the number
of Stars season ticket holders residing in Oklahoma... I'm certain it's
almost zero. Not once have I heard any comments made by the Stars or
the
League regarding territorial invasion.

As for the Stars losing money... it has to do with their building. The
Stars get more money from Oklahoma gate receipts than they do from
Reunion Arena generated revenue.

And as I've said before... Oklahoma City's broadcast area for an
NHL team will be a regional conglomeration of smaller markets, the
sum of which would rank the team's TV market size around 15th in the
league.



> Add that to its already-small market, and I'm sure that the NHL isn't

> exactly salivating over OKC.

That's funny, they seemed to salivating pretty heavily after the bid
presentations in New York... or we're they just salivating over the
fact that Oklahoma City made the only bid where the team would get
100% of all the arena revenue?

Another thing to consider, the NHL isn't salivating about *any* market.
They've kept their mouths shut. The lack of salivation over OKC you
see is from the media, which I've maintained before has not paid one
bit of attention to us.

Marc - hey Patrick, are you the only one paying attention to anything
I say?

--

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,
Jun 14, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/14/97
to

>Patrick L. Humphrey wrote:

>> In article <339FED...@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us> Marc Foster <marc....@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us> writes:

>> A new wrinkle has been thrown into the situation here in Houston, as of
>> yesterday afternoon: Rockets owner Les Alexander has announced negotiations
>> with Peter Pocklington to buy the Edmonton Oilers and move them to Houston.

>One of Pocklington's conditions of sale is that the team remain in Edmonton
>through 2004... is Alexander willing to wait that long, or will he simply
>reneg and pull them south earlier.

Given Alexander's track record so far, there's not too much doubt about
that...he'd be looking for ways to dodge that agreement the moment the NHL
gave their official approval to the sale. Alexander never has been known for
actually living up to his word.

>>Mayor Lanier has already set a June 25 deadline for Alexander and Watson to
>>come to terms on sharing the proposed new downtown arena, and this will
>>certainly change that deadline, possibly moving the mayor to decide to push
>>ahead without Alexander's agreement.

>>Les Alexander's motive in this case is pretty obvious - if he doesn't control


>>*both* major tenants in the new arena, he doesn't want anyone else bringing
>>the NHL in here. If there's any justice, both Bettman and Mayor Lanier will
>>give Alexander the finger, and things will return to a saner situation.

>We can only hope. I can see Alexander going on a tirade and calling
>Bettman every word in the book. Bettman is just the kind of person that
>can piss Alexander off enough for it to happen. Is it me, or is Alexander
>like that one Texas politician that couldn't keep his foot out of it, once
>suggesting the women enjoy rape?

I'm looking forward to something like that happening -- yesterday (the 13th)
afternoon, Alexander made his response to Lanier's statement, and it boiled
down to: I'm not going to contribute to any arena I don't have control of.
Lanier proceeded to state for the record that he will proceed with Watson &
McNair on financing the new arena, though he *did* also add that Alexander
could get back into the negotiations by asking. I don't think that's likely,
at this time.

>Whatever happened to Watson just acting on his own and building his own
>place?

I'd like to know if he was ever intent on that in the first place...but at
least the numbers being bandied about now would have Watson & McNair putting
up around 70% of the money, if Alexander continues to act like the greedy
six-year-old he's been for the last three years. Maybe when the Rockets'
ticket sales start cratering over the next year or two, he *might* realize the
folly of not cutting off one's own nose to spite one's face...

--PLH, looking forward to June 25 (or 18, as some sources are reporting)

NJDevilCup

unread,
Jun 14, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/14/97
to

In article <5nrgld$7...@camel4.mindspring.com>,

iron...@macon.mindspring.com (Res Ipsa Loquitur) writes:

>
>>10,000 fans at $10 a ticket is a heck of a lot different than 10,000
>>fans at $35 a ticket.
>
>That's really not a fair comparison. I supposedly represent the
>general thinking here in Atlanta, and I feel that this town considers
>itself "major league." A city this relatively large wants to see
>marquee names to justify big-league prices. Given the recent influx
>of northern transplants over the past decade, there's no doubt in my
>mind that the NHL will not only survive, but flourish in Atlanta.

You took the above out-of-context. Those were my remarks about
Oklahoma City, where they have averaged close well over 8,000
fans a game for Central Hockey League action.

I NEVER recall the Knights drawing close to that figure. OKC has
led in minor league attendance for several years now.

Susan Carroll-Clark

unread,
Jun 14, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/14/97
to

Greetings!

>And as I've said before... Oklahoma City's broadcast area for an
>NHL team will be a regional conglomeration of smaller markets, the
>sum of which would rank the team's TV market size around 15th in the
>league.

Heck, if you want to talk *regions*--a Columbus team could likely claim
most of the state of Ohio (with the possible exception of Toledo, which
is awfully close to Detroit, and maybe a split of the Northeast with
Pittsburgh) as its broadcast region. That not only includes Columbus,
but Dayton, Cinncinnati, and at least part of the Cleveland/Akron/Canton
region. Ohio's the 7th most populous state in the US but yet has no
NHL hockey team.

Not to mention Columbus' booming economy and tasty demographics. No
wonder the NHL is drooling. I'm just glad Nationwide ponied up the
arena money. I'll always be a Wings fan, but it'd be nice to have
a team to go back to if I end up in Columbus again.

Cheers--
smcc


Josh Lee

unread,
Jun 15, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/15/97
to

Susan Carroll-Clark (scl...@chass.utoronto.ca) wrote:
: Greetings!

: >And as I've said before... Oklahoma City's broadcast area for an
: >NHL team will be a regional conglomeration of smaller markets, the
: >sum of which would rank the team's TV market size around 15th in the
: >league.

: Heck, if you want to talk *regions*--a Columbus team could likely claim
: most of the state of Ohio (with the possible exception of Toledo, which
: is awfully close to Detroit, and maybe a split of the Northeast with
: Pittsburgh) as its broadcast region. That not only includes Columbus,
: but Dayton, Cinncinnati, and at least part of the Cleveland/Akron/Canton
: region. Ohio's the 7th most populous state in the US but yet has no
: NHL hockey team.

They would have some of Toledo, because it's an Ohio team. Why you might
ask? Because some of the people in this state just *HATE* Michigan. Again
you might ask why. Well There is this rivalry called Ohio State vs
Michigan. I know some of the die hard buckeye fans here in Columbus are
dieing to start that stupid Ohio State vs Michigan thing in the NHL. I'm
not with them though. I'm a Red Wings fan for life, even though I do like
Ohio State more than Michigan. If Columbus wants to start a rivalry and
get killed by Detroit every year thats fine by me.

Josh

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,
Jun 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/16/97
to

In article <19970614232...@ladder02.news.aol.com> njdev...@aol.com (NJDevilCup) writes:

>In article <5nrgld$7...@camel4.mindspring.com>,
>iron...@macon.mindspring.com (Res Ipsa Loquitur) writes:

>>>10,000 fans at $10 a ticket is a heck of a lot different than 10,000
>>>fans at $35 a ticket.

>>That's really not a fair comparison. I supposedly represent the
>>general thinking here in Atlanta, and I feel that this town considers
>>itself "major league." A city this relatively large wants to see
>>marquee names to justify big-league prices. Given the recent influx
>>of northern transplants over the past decade, there's no doubt in my
>>mind that the NHL will not only survive, but flourish in Atlanta.

>You took the above out-of-context. Those were my remarks about
>Oklahoma City, where they have averaged close well over 8,000
>fans a game for Central Hockey League action.

Actually, haven't the Blazers been a bit over 10,000 since they joined the
resurrected CHL?



>I NEVER recall the Knights drawing close to that figure. OKC has
>led in minor league attendance for several years now.

I seem to remember the Knights drawing around 9000 or so that first season at
the Omni, but I could be mistaken...but OKC hasn't led the minors in
attendance since the IHL's round of expansion in the 1994-95 season.
Detroit's outdrawn them each of the past three seasons; Houston did it in
1994-95, so did Chicago, Quebec did it this past season, and Louisiana in the
ECHL may have done it this past season as well -- they were in five digits.
I don't know if the NHL will pan out in the long run in the South, but the
minor-league game is alive and well down here.

--PLH, and being a Houston Aeros season-ticket holder, I'm glad it is

Jim Jordan

unread,
Jun 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/16/97
to

In article <33A1C9...@oklaosf.state.ok.us>,
Marc Foster <marc....@nospam.oklaosf.state.ok.us> wrote:

>Wrong. Neither of the Saint's incarnations made it out of town. The
>original folded, while the second one, formerly the Cleveland Crusaders,
>folded in mid-season.

>The Michigan Stags were originally the Los Angeles Sharks, and moved
>mid-season to Baltimore.

>The Denver Spurs moved to Ottawa mid-season, and folded 2 weeks later.
>They wore the Denver jerseys, since the original Ottawa team, the
>Nationals, had moved to Toronto to become the Toros.

And then the Toros went to Birmingham to become the Bulls. I thought
the Toros were original in '72, as were the Nationals... How quickly I
forget, and how muddled the WHA was (has it really been 25 years?)

>The Miami Screaming Eagles failed to secure an arena and became the
>Philadelphia Blazers before the first WHA season began. The next
>season they became the Vancouver Blazers, and 2 or 3 years later the
>Calgary Cowboys. The NY Raiders/Golden Blades became the Jersey Knights
>in mid-season, then went to San Diego the next.

Thanks for the corrections, Marc. Now, does anyone remember what
happened to the Chicago Cougars?

Marc Foster

unread,
Jun 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/16/97
to

Jim Jordan wrote:

> Thanks for the corrections, Marc. Now, does anyone remember what
> happened to the Chicago Cougars?

Died... with many players finding themselves in Denver...

Marc

Marc Foster

unread,
Jun 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/16/97
to

Susan Carroll-Clark wrote:

> Heck, if you want to talk *regions*--a Columbus team could likely claim
> most of the state of Ohio (with the possible exception of Toledo, which
> is awfully close to Detroit, and maybe a split of the Northeast with
> Pittsburgh) as its broadcast region. That not only includes Columbus,
> but Dayton, Cinncinnati, and at least part of the Cleveland/Akron/Canton
> region. Ohio's the 7th most populous state in the US but yet has no
> NHL hockey team.

Claim it... but it doesn't contribute to you market until local
broadcast games are actually seen in those areas.

> Not to mention Columbus' booming economy and tasty demographics. No
> wonder the NHL is drooling. I'm just glad Nationwide ponied up the
> arena money. I'll always be a Wings fan, but it'd be nice to have
> a team to go back to if I end up in Columbus again.

Are we talking about the same booming economy and tasty demographics
that turned down a vote for the arena and stadium? I thought so...

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,
Jun 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/16/97
to

In article <5o3jg7$6...@bcrkh13.bnr.ca> wjjo...@nortel.ca (Jim Jordan ) writes:

[...]

>Thanks for the corrections, Marc. Now, does anyone remember what
>happened to the Chicago Cougars?

After the 1974-75 season, they folded...and many of the players wound up being
signed by the expansion (and short-lived) Denver Spurs the following season.
(Those of us in Houston were fortunate enough to have the Spurs make one trip
to The Summit before they moved to Ottawa and then folded, just past the
midway point of the 1975-76 season.)

--PLH, one of the 10,000 or so to get to see the Spurs in their one Houston
appearance...wish *someone* had got a photo or two, though.

Full Name

unread,
Jun 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/16/97
to

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_01BC7A50.316360A0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> > A new wrinkle has been thrown into the situation here in Houston, as of
> > yesterday afternoon: Rockets owner Les Alexander has announced
negotiations
> > with Peter Pocklington to buy the Edmonton Oilers and move them to
Houston.
>
> One of Pocklington's conditions of sale is that the team remain in
> Edmonton
> through 2004... is Alexander willing to wait that long, or will he
> simply
> reneg and pull them south earlier.
>

> > Mayor Lanier has already set a June 25 deadline for Alexander and
Watson to
> > come to terms on sharing the proposed new downtown arena, and this will
> > certainly change that deadline, possibly moving the mayor to decide to
push
> > ahead without Alexander's agreement.
>

> > Les Alexander's motive in this case is pretty obvious -- if he doesn't


control
> > *both* major tenants in the new arena, he doesn't want anyone else
bringing
> > the NHL in here. If there's any justice, both Bettman and Mayor Lanier
will
> > give Alexander the finger, and things will return to a saner situation.
>
> We can only hope. I can see Alexander going on a tirade and calling
> Bettman every word in the book. Bettman is just the kind of person that
> can piss Alexander off enough for it to happen. Is it me, or is
> Alexander
> like that one Texas politician that couldn't keep his foot out of it,
> once
> suggesting the women enjoy rape?
>

> Whatever happened to Watson just acting on his own and building his own
> place?
>

> Marc

As of last Friday ( 06/13/97 ), Les Alexander sent a letter back to Mayor
Lanier stating that he will not be part of the proposed 50-50 split in the
new downtown arena with Chuck Watson and the new NHL franchise. Alexander
says he deserves more than the 50% of the revenues Lanier proposed to him.
Alexander is just greedy and if he can't control the NHL team in Houston
then he doesn't want anyone else to. I think he got mad when the NHL chose
the Watson-McNair bid over his bid some months ago. Lanier said he and
Watson will move forward on a new arena for the NHL in the hopes that the
Rockets will come on board in the future. Lanier said if we do not build
this arena then we will lose the NHL forever. As far as Watson building
his own arena, he said that he could not financially build his arena AND
pay out about $85 million for the expansion fee also. Watson said he needs
some public money to finance the new arena. As far as I am concerned, I
don't care if the Rockets ever come on board. The NHL is superior to the
NBA. Just build the arena and bring the NHL to Houston.

***********************************************************
Joshua K. Phillips
Information Management
Chevron USA Production Company
Houston, Texas 77010
Phone: 713-754-3060
Fax: 713-754-3099
E-Mail: jk...@chevron.com
***********************************************************
------=_NextPart_000_01BC7A50.316360A0
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head></head><BODY bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><p><font size=3D2 =
color=3D"#000000" face=3D"Arial">&gt; &gt; A new wrinkle has been thrown =
into the situation here in Houston, as of<br>&gt; &gt; yesterday =
afternoon: &nbsp;Rockets owner Les Alexander has announced =
negotiations<br>&gt; &gt; with Peter Pocklington to buy the Edmonton =
Oilers and move them to Houston.<br>&gt; <br>&gt; One of Pocklington's =
conditions of sale is that the team remain in<br>&gt; Edmonton<br>&gt; =
through 2004... is Alexander willing to wait that long, or will =
he<br>&gt; simply<br>&gt; reneg and pull them south earlier.<br>&gt; =
<br>&gt; &gt; Mayor Lanier has already set a June 25 deadline for =
Alexander and Watson to<br>&gt; &gt; come to terms on sharing the =
proposed new downtown arena, and this will<br>&gt; &gt; certainly change =
that deadline, possibly moving the mayor to decide to push<br>&gt; &gt; =
ahead without Alexander's agreement.<br>&gt; <br>&gt; &gt; Les =
Alexander's motive in this case is pretty obvious -- if he doesn't =
control<br>&gt; &gt; *both* major tenants in the new arena, he doesn't =
want anyone else bringing<br>&gt; &gt; the NHL in here. &nbsp;If there's =
any justice, both Bettman and Mayor Lanier will<br>&gt; &gt; give =
Alexander the finger, and things will return to a saner =
situation.<br>&gt; <br>&gt; We can only hope. &nbsp;I can see Alexander =
going on a tirade and calling<br>&gt; Bettman every word in the book. =
&nbsp;Bettman is just the kind of person that<br>&gt; can piss Alexander =
off enough for it to happen. &nbsp;Is it me, or is<br>&gt; =
Alexander<br>&gt; like that one Texas politician that couldn't keep his =
foot out of it,<br>&gt; once<br>&gt; suggesting the women enjoy =
rape?<br>&gt; <br>&gt; Whatever happened to Watson just acting on his =
own and building his own<br>&gt; place?<br>&gt; <br>&gt; Marc<br><font =
color=3D"#0000FF"><br>As of last Friday ( 06/13/97 ), Les Alexander sent =
a letter back to Mayor Lanier stating that he will not be part of the =
proposed 50-50 split in the new downtown arena with Chuck Watson and the =
new NHL franchise. &nbsp;Alexander says he deserves more than the 50% of =
the revenues Lanier proposed to him. &nbsp;Alexander is just greedy and =
if he can't control the NHL team in Houston then he doesn't want anyone =
else to. &nbsp;I think he got mad when the NHL chose the Watson-McNair =
bid over his bid some months ago. &nbsp;Lanier said he and Watson will =
move forward on a new arena for the NHL in the hopes that the Rockets =
will come on board in the future. &nbsp;Lanier said if we do not build =
this arena then we will lose the NHL forever. &nbsp;As far as Watson =
building his own arena, he said that he could not financially build his =
arena <b><i><u>AND</u></i></b> pay out about $85 million for the =
expansion fee also. &nbsp;Watson said he needs some public money to =
finance the new arena. &nbsp;As far as I am concerned, I don't care if =
the Rockets ever come on board. &nbsp;The NHL is superior to the NBA. =
&nbsp;Just build the arena and bring the NHL to Houston. =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<font color=3D"#000000"><br><br><br></p>
<p align=3Dcenter><br><font =
color=3D"#FF0000">*******************************************************=
****<font color=3D"#000000"><br><font size=3D3 =
color=3D"#0000FF"><b><i><u>Joshua K. Phillips</i></b><br></u><font =
size=3D2 color=3D"#800080"><i>Information Management<br>Chevron USA =
Production Company<br>Houston, Texas &nbsp;&nbsp;77010<br></i><font =
size=3D4 =
face=3D"Kauflinn">Phone:&#009;713-754-3060<br>Fax:&#009;713-754-3099<font=
color=3D"#000000"><br><font size=3D2 color=3D"#0000FF" =
face=3D"Arial">E-Mail: &#009;jk...@chevron.com</p>
<p><font =
color=3D"#FF0000">&#009;&#009;&#009;&#009;&#009;*************************=
**********************************<font color=3D"#000000"></p>
</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></f=
ont></font></body></html>
------=_NextPart_000_01BC7A50.316360A0--


Joshua Phillips

unread,
Jun 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/16/97
to

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_01BC7A6F.2BE94E40


------=_NextPart_000_01BC7A6F.2BE94E40

&nbsp;Just build the arena and bring the NHL to Houston.<br><br></p>
<p align=3Dcenter><font =


color=3D"#FF0000">*******************************************************=
****<font color=3D"#000000"><br><font size=3D3 =
color=3D"#0000FF"><b><i><u>Joshua K. Phillips</i></b><br></u><font =
size=3D2 color=3D"#800080"><i>Information Management<br>Chevron USA =
Production Company<br>Houston, Texas &nbsp;&nbsp;77010<br></i><font =
size=3D4 =
face=3D"Kauflinn">Phone:&#009;713-754-3060<br>Fax:&#009;713-754-3099<font=
color=3D"#000000"><br><font size=3D2 color=3D"#0000FF" =

face=3D"Arial">E-Mail: &#009;jk...@chevron.com<br><font =
color=3D"#FF0000">*******************************************************=
****<font color=3D"#000000"><br><font size=3D1 face=3D"MS Sans =
Serif"><br></p>
<p><font size=3D2 face=3D"Arial"><br></p>


</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></f=

ont></font></font></body></html>
------=_NextPart_000_01BC7A6F.2BE94E40--


Susan Carroll-Clark

unread,
Jun 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/17/97
to

Greetings!

>Are we talking about the same booming economy and tasty demographics
>that turned down a vote for the arena and stadium? I thought so...

I, too, thought the vote against the arena and stadium was stupid. However,
Columbus is an essentially fiscally conservative town. Fiscal conservatives
usually favour private ownership of things like arenas, and balk when public
moneys are involved. Obviously, the corporate community in Columbus
wants the team, and obviously some of them are willing to pony up
their own funds to do it.

Booming economy: Last time I checked, unemployment was around 2.5% in
Columbus. Every time I go back for a visit, the city's expanded out
further. Shopping malls going up everywhere, which implies that people
have money to spend. If they'll spend it on shopping, they very well
might spend it on seasons' tickets to a sports team. And the only competition
in town will be a minor league baseball team, a soccer team, and OSU sports.
The good thing, IMHO, about the NHL going into Columbus is that,
unlike the NFL or NBA, they would not be directly competing against either
OSU football or basketball. OSU does have a hockey team, but it's not
the juggernaut football and basketball are. (Quick: Can you name an OSU
hockey grad now in the NHL? Answer in a moment).

Tasty demographics: Columbus' population is heavy on the yuppie/Gen X side.
And because of the employment situation, these people actually have money
to spend. There's also a long-term hockey tradition in Columbus which many
folks may not be aware of--they've had amateur teams for years, and
quite a number of the suburban schools have fielded high school teams for
quite a long time. (Lacrosse is fairly popular, too). Unlike some other
towns, Columbus is not a complete (last 5-6 years) newcomer to interest in
hockey; it's been there a long time, just somewhat underground.

(Answer to my question: Jamie McCowan played four years at OSU in the early
80's)

Cheers--
smcc

0 new messages