The NHL and the Emerald City
My recent relocation from sunny Florida to rainy Seattle is no big secret to regular readers.
It's a great city where I landed a great job. But more important than that, as a hockey fan, I want to know if it could someday soon be home to an NHL franchise?
That was the subject of a news report on a local TV station — where I found that great job, by the way. One of our reporters headed up to Vancouver, B.C. where he'd lined up an exclusive interview with NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly to talk about the future of the NHL in Seattle.
One quick note about the clip above before the comments explode. Our anchor mistakenly says the the Canucks won the series in six games instead of five. I don't know if it was a typo in the script or what.
Daly was in Vancouver for Game 5 of the Western Conference Finals — which saw the Canucks clinch their first Stanley Cup Final berth since 1994 (on the strangest goal ever). He says the league has been in contact with a group in Seattle about purchasing a franchise but wouldn't go into anymore detail.
Clearly, I'd love nothing more than to have an NHL team in town — Vancouver is an irritating three-hour drive north (that's not counting the border crossing). It's worth it when the Lightning are visiting, however, such as the 5-4 OT Tampa victory I enjoyed back in December.
In our rundown meeting at work this afternoon, the question came up: Is the NHL looking to expand? Obviously not right now while several teams are struggling financially. And even if the deal is all but done to send the Thrashers to Winnipeg, Phoenix could be an option in 2012. But Quebec City is already licking its chops over the prospect of snatching the them away.
None of that really matters, though. Seattle still has no hope. The problem is the shocking lack of a proper arena here. KeyArena sits in the shadow of the Space Needle but seats only 11,000 for hockey. It's too big for the WHL. Too small for the NHL. And as Daly points out, obstructed views are a problem.
So for now, while the city lacks a building, the NHL is a long shot. And it doesn't look like there are any plans to change that in the foreseeable future. At the very least, I'll keep hoping for an NHL exhibition game or two at the Key to get Seattlites excited about the sport. Until then, I'll cheer on my Bolts from afar.
(And thank you for putting up with one more post about hockey in Seattle. I'll make it up to you.)
Chris
Wednesday brought another day of speculation with regard to the possible future of the NHL in Seattle — this time, bad news.
Just a day after Bill Daly said publicly that the league has been in contact with a group interested in bringing a team to the city, comes a new wrinkle.
KING 5 reporter Chris Daniels learned that a deal to buy a piece of land in nearby Bellevue to build a new arena had fallen through. This is unfortunate news but is by no means the end of the Seattle hockey story, I'm sure.
If you haven't watched the package above, you should. Chris tracked down former NHL defenseman Jamie Huscroft — a member of my Tampa Bay Lightning for parts of two seasons (the Vancouver Canucks too, by the way). He runs two hockey rinks in the area. He likes the idea of a Seattle-Vancouver rivalry just like many commenters on this post. (Though he's apparently misjudging the distance between the two cities.)
I'll keep you updated on this as more details trickle out. It's definitely not happening next season and you'd have to be extremely optimistic to think 2012-13 — and heck, the world might end by then, right? But if it doesn't, I'm eyeing the 100th anniversary of the formation of the old Seattle Metropolitans in 2015.
One more thing. A couple of you have asked about my team allegiance if, say, the Stinkin' Panthers were to relocate to Seattle. Would I still root for them? As long as they're not the Stinkin' Panthers, sure. But only because they'd be closest geographically and would bring the Lightning to town at least once a year. Nothing will change the fact that the Bolts are my team. I've said it before: You don't pick your team, it picks you.
And lastly, as far as naming ideas go, I think Metropolitans and Totems are equally terrible. In the comments, Erik brought up the Seattle Breakers — the Thunderbirds' old name. (Another team Jamie Huscroft played for, by the way. No kidding!) For more about Seattle's hockey history, check out SeattleHockey.net.
Breakers would get my vote all the way! Fits nicely with the Mariners and Sounders theme. And speaking of the Sounders, I wouldn't mind borrowing their colors too. Their official names are Sounder Blue, Rave Green and Cascade Shale. Yes, yes and yes.
Reader Comments (48)
An NHL franchise in Seattle is way way way long overdue IMO, and I for one would certainly love to see it happen one day, the Canucks owners might disagree however. With a metro population of 3.4 million, Settle could easily support a franchise, and so could Portland Oregon with a metro population of 2.226 million. Why the NHL felt the need to explore non traditional sunbelt markets instead of places with good hockey history like Seattle and Portland, is beyond me. Just think of the potentially great rivalry between Vancouver and Seattle, with only a 4 and a half hour drive seperating the two markets, fans would be drawn from either side during road games for their team. It would really be nice to actually be able to go see my team play live on the road more often. Make it happen, NHL make it happen.
I know how you feel Chris - I make the trek from VAN to SEA for Mariners and Seahawks games.
I've talked to a lot of Seattleites and the consensus I got was the leadership that was there for when Qwest and SafeCo fields were needed and subsequently green-lit all but evaporated when it came time to help the Sonics with a new arena. And that's unfortunate - if the arena for the Sonics did go ahead, they'd likely pursue an NHL team as a tenant to help defer the costs.
I think there is hope for Seattle, a great sports town if I may say so. But until they get a new arena, this will be a pipe dream.
But how would you feel if the Seattle team happens to be a relocation of the Florida Panthers? ]:)
Either way, Québec is next in line IMO. I think that Peladeau et al. will get first crack at the Coyotes should Glendale ever decide to not renew that $25 Million safety net (such as when voters oust each and every member of that city council in the next election!). Besides, there's absolutely no reason that Les Nordiques can't play out of the Colisée for a couple of years while they wait for the new arena to be built.
I'd also love to see Milwaukee get a shot at the NHL!
I lived/worked in Seattle when Peter Nedved, Glen Goodall, the Malgunas brothers and Turner Stevenson were playing for the WHL Thunderbirds. At that time hockey interest appeared to be at a peak when there was talk of the Global Hockey League and NHL expansion. But sobering statistics about what ticket packages might cost cooled that speculation a bit. And at that time, the Seattle Center Coliseum/Key Arena was about to undergo renovations. The decision was made to make the place bigger, albeit basketball friendly rather than NHL friendly. NHL expansion teams went to Tampa Bay and Ottawa, Nedved moved on to the NHL the WHL added Everett, added and then subtracted Tacoma and finally watched the Thunderbirds move south to Kent. Portland has a better shot than Seattle, but the question remains whether the locals there want/can/will pay the prices that an NHL team will seek for tickets and also support the Trailblazers. Winterhawks are a less costly option right now. Seattle, Sonics or no, can be much like Atlanta: a great college sports town and yet indifferent (when it comes to buying tickets) to losing professional teams, which is much more common in the history of Seattle sports.
If Seattle were to get a hockey team, it would do wonders for both the Emerald City and Vancouver. It would bring about a rivalry along the lines of my Buffalo vs Toronto. I'm pulling for you, Chris...as well as all hockey fans in Seattle. They have the other three major league sports, why not add the most important one?
I hear the Manitoba Moose might be looking for a good home...close to Vancouver. If there was any traction or interest in a team, that would be a heck of a way to start. I know based on the total lack of support for the Aeros here in Houston that the NHL would never succeed. As much as the demographics say it's workable, they could just never get enough support.
Out of curiosity, what would you do if (and I know this is a humongous if) Seattle actually gets a new arena and a certain team relocates to start playing there. Who would you root for in a match-up in the Emerald City between the Tampa Bay Lightning and the Seattle Panthers?
Obviously, only bringing up the Panthers as a hypothetical to raise the inner anguish in you, haha.
Seattle is making progress little by little on the arena situation, as state representatives are talking about putting a 'jock tax' in on players of visiting teams, which will bring in millions over the next few years, hopefully towards the Keyarena. Clay Bennett, owner of the OKC Thunder, also owes the city $30 million in 2013 if an NBA franchise is not put in Seattle by that time. As a Seattleite, it'd be a dream come true to get our Sonics and possibly an NHL team, but we'll have to be patient.
Regarding the question of whether I'd support a move of the Panthers to Seattle... I'd really hate to see any team relocated. But whether expansion or relocation, regardless of the team, I'll always be a Lightning fan. And if a team in Seattle means the Bolts come to town once a year, that would be enough of a reason for me!
Vancouver fan here. I'd love to see a team in Seattle, and I can't think the Canucks ownership would have much objection; we're not really quite close enough for the markets to overlap, and I certainly don't think any substantial portion of Canuck revenue comes from Seattle fans making the trip north.
FWIW, I think Seattle should get a basketball team back, too. It's such a great sports city, and Seattle can definitely support the teams.
I would love to see the NHL in Seattle, but it would have to be through relocation. The talent pool is diluted enough as it is without further expansion.
I lived in Seattle for 6 months, wearing one of these just about every day. ONE person commented and said "Hey Go Canucks" as they walked into a shop.
http://www.stadiumstyle.com/eCart/catalog/CanucksSweaterJersey.jpg
Also, the hockey scene is really oddly spread out. If you want to play, you're going to have to travel, since the GSHL (greater seattle hockey league) spreads its games out across all the arenas. It's really inconvenient if, say, you're really close to one and want to play in a simple house league. The league is well-organized, nice website and stat-tracking though. I lived in Las Cruces, New Mexico before moving to Seattle, and it was easier to play 3-4 times a week in the desert than seattle. Kinda sad. The city just has no fanbase for it.
While I agree that Seattle may not currently have the built-in hockey fan base you might find in a Canadian town like Winnipeg or Quebec City, folks here are wild about their sports teams — a little less so when they're playing poorly (Mariners, of course). But if you ever have a chance to see a Seahawks or Sounders (MLS) game on TV, just take a look around Qwest Field... all they need is a team to root for, if you ask me, and they'll be 100% behind them.
I'd be surprised if the Canucks ownership was against this. Like Mark, I don't think there's a enough overlap of support for the Canucks in Washington state such that it would significantly affect their revenues. I'd actually hazard a guess that they'd be for it, as not only would it be a cool geographical rival, but would help the Canucks brutal travel schedule.
Still - without a 15,000 person+ NHL friendly arena, it won't happen. For hockey fans in the Northwest, I sincerely hope it happens for them.
I've love a team in Seattle - tho, to be honest, I think Portland has a better hockey fan base - but the problem as always is a building. There is nowhere for them to play. And the Tacoma Dome is just damned awful for sight lines; it's like watching hockey in a football stadium.
Here's the deal. Seattle seems to be a great place for NHL hockey but, the financial reality doesn't really add up. The Business sector is definitely there in Seattle, but are the fans really going to spend 200 bucks a seat to watch a loser for 10 years (Expansion situation)?
In a relocation situation I firmly believe the NHL will NOT take a team from say, Atlanta and then move them to a question mark city. Atlanta, Phoenix, Florida, and Nashville will be in Winnipeg/Quebec City/Toronto area (possibly Hamilton)/ and the last city will be a crazy location like Houston or Mexico or Vegas. If the 10x more popular NBA left the city, It can't really be counted on from the NHL's point of view.
Also with Everett, Portland, Seattle, Spokane, and Kennewick all amazing WHL cities, I doubt the NHL wants to upset a great situation in the feeder system. I think the NHL in Seattle is a very cool choice, I always have, Vancouver has always lacked a true rival, but it won't happen for at least 25 years.
Hockey Day in Canada with border teams would be amazing: MTL@QUE WPG@OTT BUF@HAM DET@TOR CAL@EDM Seattle @VAN
I will admit, I never thought of putting a team in Seattle, but now that i read this I have to say it could work well. Let's get the NHL into some of the Northern United States where hockey is bigger because you can actually play it outside. Also opens up the possibility of the SuperSonics returning to Seattle (I'm not a basketball fan but I know the Sonics are important for Seattle) but would a basketball team returning only hurt the new hockey team?
I believe hockey is not doing so well is Atlanta and Phoenix is two-fold 1) None traditional hockey markets and 2) have to compete with NFL, MLB and NBA teams for people to come see, Seattle could get the same problem (saving the money in hockey season for baseball tickets is what i mean by competing with the MLB franchises)
I would love to see a team in Seattle...The way I see it Quebec City gets the next available franchise (either Coyotes or Panthers) then possible a new northwest team (Seattle or Portland). Here's the main question if the team moves to Seattle what will they call themselves and what colors would they use. With the majority of Seattle teams in the past and present using green and blue as there main colors and Vancouver just a quick drive away using the same colors.Other markets nhl should be looking at is Wisconsin (Green Bay or Milwaukee), Quebec City, Portland, and one more New England team (Hartford, Baltimore)
I realize Seattle is nowhere close to getting a team without an arena, but I would love a concept art post based on Seattle. Some throwback jerseys the T-Birds have worn in the past include the Totems and Breakers, which I think would be great names if the NHL ever came back. Maybe even the possibility for another rare green NHL jersey, seeing as it is the emerald city. Anyways, love to see some concept art!
I would love to see a team in Seattle. As a Vancouverite and a Canucks fan it would become an instant rival and would be fun to make the trip for road games. If you have ever attended a Seahawks game, you know that it is one of the greatest sports atmospheres you will find, (however it doesn't hurt that it is probably the loudest stadium in north america) and it would be great to create that same atmosphere with a Seattle hockey team.
The only reason why Seattle doesn't have a team is because the original owner of the Sonics did everything to sabotage the NHL from setting up there. The NHL WANTED to get into Seattle during the late 60s but the owner at that time pulled his expansion bid so that no other group could bid and to stymie the league. He later made the city renovate Key arena in such a way that it would not work for hockey. Search this info out on the net sometime. I think seattlehockey.net had a story about it. It's clear that the Sonics' owner did pretty much everything in his power to keep the NHL from competing with his basketball club.
Historically, Seattle was always a very strong market from the arrival of the Mets in the 1910's up until the heyday of the pro WHL league. Sadly I dont think that would be the case now if the NHL were to set up shop. Hockey is just too foreign of a sport these days to justify the high cost of NHL tickets in that town. It's too bad though. I have no doubt that if Seattle had a team from 1970 on they would have carried the fan momentum and been a good hockey town. Now it's a niche sport at best.
So my question is this: lets say the impossible happens and the Florida Panthers relocate to seattle. Does Chris support the hometown team?
Oh BTW, the only colour scheme for a Seattle NHL team is green and white and the team should be called the Totems.
It is so hard to believe that a big city like Seattle and its politicians are not into the new millenium when it comes to having a proper state-of-art indoor for professional sports, considering Seattle's rich sports history. Without a shadow of a doubt, Seattle would be a huge success story in American hockey. A Vancouver-Seattle NHL rivalry would be as big as the historic Whitecaps-Sounders soccer rivalry.
To answer Bryand's questions regarding colour scheme and team name, I could see Seattle going back to the old Totems name from the old Western Hockey League. As for the colours, the Canucks use royal blue as their primary dark colour. Seattle would probably use the old 80s Whalers kelly green or a deep Northwest green as their primary dark colour with blue or teal accents. In the old NASL, the Whitecaps wore royal blue and sky blue and the Sounders wore teal and Northwest green. Blue and green can be have different variations.
Until there's any serious news about a new arena for hockey or basketball, where they're definitely going to build one, all of this is just nonsense. As a lifelong Seattlite, it would be great to have an NHL team here, but you absolutely cannot have them play in keyarena. It's beyond awful for hockey. It felt like a joke watching the thunderbird games at the keyarena. The scoreboard wouldn't even hang over center ice. I think in a few years, they'll eventually build a modern multipurpose arena that could house both basketball and hockey, in an attempt to get the Sonics back and potentially an NHL team. Also, I'd have to ask around to see if other people feel the same way, but for me, it would be pretty weird at first supporting a Seattle team after supporting the Canucks through good and bad times my whole life. However it would be great to have a team here, as weird as it would be switching teams after all those years, I know I would be one of the first in line for season tickets. And PS I would love to see some concept art. :)
i'd love a team in Seattle. it would give Vancouver a great rival. as for a name. how about the Seattle Reign?!
I hate to throw some cold water on the fire, but my guess is this story would not have anywhere near the legs it does if the Canucks weren't in the Finals. The Canucks are a good story, but flipping that to "the NHL is coming to Seattle" is an incredible stretch.
The discussion can't even BEGIN to take place until a new building is up. I'd love to see some local leaders (both public and private) step up to the plate to get the ball rolling on a new arena, but they sat around with their thumbs up their asses when Clay whisked away the Sonics. The city of Seattle can't even figure out how to replace a bridge that's liable to kill thousands if another earthquake hits this area.
Nobody wants a team here more than I do, but the number of hoops to jump through before that happens is daunting, to say the least.
Can the NHL support an expansion? In my opinion, absolutely. But, can the NHL support an expansion with Gary Bettman leading the way; no. The original Southern expansion had great merit and promise, but the distracted research led to disproportionate decisions and faulty accomodations. Take South Florida, home of the Panthers, an area of the country where Football reigns supreme and other sports (including baseball) struggle. Is there room for a hockey team here, yes, but not an NHL franchise. The Panthers would have been better suited for maybe Birmingham, Alabama or Richmond, VA before bunking up in Sunrise, FL.
The biggest problem the NHL has with expansion/relocation is regulations regarding arena capacity, accomodations, and population trends. Phoenix would have worked...if the team was in Phoenix and not suburban Glendale. Atlanta has never been a hockey city, the Flames struggled here in the 70's/80's and a second chance was unnecessary. Atlanta's demographic supports football and baseball much better than a hockey team. In a perfect NHL, with perfect facilities/arenas, the correct area demographics, and commissioner to owner communication we could be looking at this:
Eastern Conference: Boston Bruins, Hartford Whalers, New York Rangers, New York Islanders, Buffalo Sabres, Ottawa Senators, Toronto Maple Leafs, Quebec Nordiques, Washington Capitals, NHL Richmond, Carolina Hurricanes, Tampa Bay Lightning, NHL Hamilton (Ontario), New Jersey Devils, Pittsburgh Penguins, Philadelphia Flyers, Nashville Predators -- 18
Western Conference: NHL Seattle, Calgary Flames, Vancouver Canucks, Winnepeg Jets, San Jose Sharks, Los Angeles Kings, Anaheim Ducks, NHL Kansas City, Dallas Stars, NHL Oklahoma, Colorado Avalanche, Detroit Red Wings, Chicago Blackhawks, St. Louis Blues, Minnesota Wild, NHL Wisconsin, NHL Cleveland, NHL Portland -- 18
I think we'll eventually see a team in Seattle; the fan base is incredible here and they will support the team no matter what. Keeping the Sounders/Seahawks colors would give the city additional identity in their sports franchises and a new arena may open up the doors for a return of a NBA team.
Would there be an issue of the Canucks already taking the Pacific Northwest Color Scheme of blue and green?
AJ: Obviously, the story was precipitated by the Canucks being this deep in the playoffs. It's why Chris was able to get the interview with Bill Daly. What made the story was Daly confirming a group is interested in putting a team in Seattle. And yes there will be a lot of hoops along the way, but you have to start somewhere.
Jake: The Sounders' colors are very different from the Canucks' colors. Plus, I'd want to see them in Rave Green home jerseys. Let blue be a trim color. They'd look nothing like Vancouver.
I think Seattle Salmon or Seattle Seagulls sounds good for a team. Not really but i have been wanting a team to come to Seattle for a while (Don't know why, I'm from NE Missouri so Seattle has nothing to do with me) and Breakers would be a pretty cool name. Not as good as St. Louis Blues of course but we can't all be perfect.
Previous professional hockey teams in Seattle have been named the Seattle Metropolitans (won the Stanley Cup in 1917, becoming the first American-based team to win it), the Seattle Totems, the Seattle Americans, and the Seattle Bombers.
I feel like Portland (OR) would be a better fit for the NHL to return to America's northwest, because of the already built Rose Garden which the NBA finds good enough. If Seattle did get a team I would have liked to name them something like Thunder or Shock(ers?) because of the city being home to major companies in electronics such as Microsoft and Amazon. But those names might be too similar to the Lightning.
Seattle Emeralds, anyone?
Billy Bob: the NHL doesn't have enough talent to support 36 teams. You think goons are a problem now? Just wait until 138 new jobs are created. If anything, the NHL needs contraction.
After being away from hockey for a while, I've gone nuts this season over my local WHL team, the Portland Winterhawks. The WHL has a great product--entertaining games, great talent. The league really knows how to take care of the kids, too, with scholarship money set a side for any player who doesn't end up with a pro contract. The Seattle Thunderbirds (of Kent, WA) had a rough year, but you should definitely check out the WHL.
The NHL won't be coming to Portland as long as Trailblazer's owner Paul Allen owns the Rose Garden Arena. Start talking hockey to him and he starts yawning and looking the other way. Also, I don't think he wants another big league winter sports team competing for his Trailblazers gate receipts.
Patrik: You need a name that sounds powerful when you shout it. Emeralds doesn't quite fit the bill.
Jeff: I definitely plan to make it to some Thunderbirds and Silvertips games next season. We were still getting settled into the area as this past season was winding down. Caught parts of a few games on TV. But from everything I've heard about the WHL, it's definitely something I want to see in person.
I think Seattle Metropolitans (Mets?) sounds just fine. Seattle Breakers doesn't sound bad, but it would be a missed opportunity to bring back the name of an old Cup champion.
I think the Seattle Americans name would be fitting given the rivalry that would form with the Canucks.
OK, Chris. Say by some chance the Lightning had to pack it in and they moved to Seattle. How about the Seattle Storm?
How about either way we make it the Seattle Storm?
Not a chance. We have a WNBA team named the Seattle Storm. But I'd settle for Seattle Thunder.
Whalers. And play off the old Hartford Logo/Colors.
Portland is the correct answer here. The city has an arena, they have thrown their support behind the Winterhawks since ownership turned the team around, Bettman has wanted a team in Portland since the 90s, and they only have 2 major league sports teams (blazers, timbers). I'd say it's still 2-3 years off, but if support for the Winterhawks continues to be strong, I wouldn't be surprised if the Coyotes or Panthers move to the NW.
I don't think a sports team in Seattle can ever be called the Thunder considering the Sonics were stolen from Seattle, and became the OKC 'Thunder'. The name would never be popular in Seattle.
would it be wrong of me to suggest Seattle Whalers as a potential team name?
Just look at the intense rivalry and passion between the Sounders, Whitecaps, and Timber supporters. I think Seattle and Portland would translate well into hockey cities. In fact, during the initial expansion era of the NHL circa 1967, Portland and Seattle were supposed to get franchises. It was messed up politics of the league at the time that kept hockey out of the Pacific Northwest and the same bs is what took the New York/Brooklyn Americans away from the NHL in the 40s. Once the money comes together for a new arena, the NHL and (thankfully) the NBA should make an overdue return to Seattle.
Personally, I've always thought the Vancouver Canucks were 5 bad seasons away from moving to Seattle or Portland. Though these days, its possible to have a team in both cities. If the Thrashers move to Winnipeg doesn't pan out, they could just as easily move the Metro Seattle and play in the Tacoma Dome. It seats something like 15,000 for hockey, and could be used to house a team for a couple seasons while a more permanent rink is built. As for a team name, I do believe they would keep with something along the lines of Metropolitans, Totems, Breakers, or Sasquatch.
That being said, I'd think Portland to be the more likely West Coast candidate for a team. The Flames threatened to move there back in 2000 when season ticket sales were low, and they do have the 18,000 seat Rose Garden for a team to play in.
The Canucks had 16 bad seasons in a row and some of the most inept owners in the NHL. They did not move. In fact they flourished as soon as they had a couple decent years in the early 90's and went to the Stanley Cup Final. There were a couple years in the late 90's that werent great in terms of attendance, but they had a bit of an image problem then.
Would love to see a team down the road in Seattle! In is wrong that Seattle lost the Sonics but great to see the Sounders are thriving. Seattle is a terrific sports city and its fans are deserving of a team. Would love to see a rivalry born between our two fine cities.
Growing up in Seattle I never really appreciated hockey. No one I knew was really into it and I had my M's, as horrible as they were (minus those 6 years when band-wagoners made it impossible to get tickets). It took some time abroad to finally come around to hockey and now I'm hooked. Now as an avid hockey fan, I would love to see a team back home. If I ever move back and I don't have hockey that would be a sad day.
It would be great to have a joint arena and bring basketball back to Seattle as well.
I'm not sure about the East Side aspect, but at least it's not in the S Curves in Renton where they were thinking of putting the new Sonic's area before they left. That was a horrible idea. Nothing against Renton, it was just logistically one of the worst possible places they could have put it.
That being said I've thought over potential names. "Tridents" has been a favorite of mine for some time. Ties in with the M's, naval history and Banger over in Kitsap. "Krakens" is another favorite, especially since it means 'octopus' and we have some of the largest in the world just there in the Sound. Besides how fun would it be of having fan art of Krakens taking down the VAN Orca or Sharks? I'm not sure how it would work but "Tsunami's" might be alright. "Volcanoes" is another possibility.