Seattle Lays Out Plan for NHL Arena
Seattle mayor Mike McGinn / KING 5Seattle announced a proposal today that would put a new NHL-caliber arena in the city's stadium district. And as a Seattleite, I'm thrilled at the prospect!
The question of whether the Emerald City will again be home to pro hockey is by no means answered with this announcement, but it sure is a step in the right direction. So what other hurdles need to be cleared to make it a reality?
The proposal comes from hedge fund manager Chris Hansen, who apparently has money to burn — almost $300 million, in fact. Of course the only way he'll burn it is if he's guaranteed some kind of return up front.
Meaning this: unless both an NHL and NBA team can be lined up to occupy the building on Day 1, this whole thing is dead in the water.
There's good news and bad news then. The bad news first. He's more a fan of the NBA than the NHL. So he'll probably work harder to bring basketball back to town. (Seattleites would be thrilled; I'd be indifferent.) The good news for hockey fans here in Seattle? Getting an NHL team might actually be easier.
As we are painfully aware, the Phoenix Coyotes are in bad shape. Another season in Glendale seems like a longshot (sorry, Coyotes fans). There's been talk of sending them to Quebec or Ontario, but 1) Bettman would never go for it, and 2) certainly there's money to be made on expansion fees down the line. After all, neither of those markets have NHL arenas yet — though they're well on their way.
The upshot is there would be a place in Seattle for the Coyotes while a new arena is built. Part of the new arena deal would involve the two new teams playing at Key Arena during construction. I've never actually been to an event there (not a huge fan of the WNBA) but everything I've heard about it is bad. But as a temporary home, I'm sure there are worse buildings.
As for the NBA, I'm sure other blogs can offer better coverage. But my understanding is that Sacramento is working hard to keep the Kings — which may be in vain — but that Anaheim is a more likely place for them to relocate. Elsewhere, the New Orleans Hornets are, like the Coyotes, owned by the league. And it sounds like the NBA wants back in Seattle anyway — as long as we have a suitable building.
So why the blog post on this subject? My excitement aside, I thought you guys might like to spend some time talking about the "what ifs." As in, what if the NHL really did come to Seattle? How would you like to see that work?
Seattle Metropolitans jersey / M Jarred SheltonI'm not in favor of stealing other city's teams, but expansion is out of the question right now. Let's say it's the Coyotes. Do they change the name? If so, to what? Many have suggested Metropolitans — the name of the city's original hockey team and winner of the first Stanley Cup awarded to an American-based club (1917).
The Seattle Totems played here between 1958 and 1975. But my personal favorite is Seattle Breakers. Just has a good ring to it. I can hear myself cheering "Go Breakers!" (unlike Mets or Totems). Plus, the Breakers sound like a hockey team. And think of the marketing slogans.
I also like Sounders but that's taken by our MLS team. Another good name, Seattle Storm, is taken by the WNBA.
What about divisional realignment? Obviously, the NHL wants a major overhaul, but if they don't get it, should Seattle remain in the Pacific division, or move the Northwest? It was a question I raised on Twitter earlier tonight. The response, by far, was that Seattle needs to be in the same division as Vancouver. I agree. In our inaugural season, we have to be able to rub our Stanley Cup in the faces of Canucks fans.
Any other ideas for Seattle? If you've got concept art, please send it along. I'm hoping to relaunch the Concepts page this weekend with a completely new format. I'd love to kick things off with my town!
Chris
Things just got interesting in Seattle's search for an NHL team to occupy its newly proposed arena. Last night — the day after Seattle's mayor made that announcement — reports have surfaced in Phoenix that the Coyotes are close to finding a buyer.
Last night, the guys NWCN's Northwest Sports Tonight talked about what all this could mean for Seattle. Basically, Arizona reporter Dave Zorn said yesterday that the NHL has approved former San Jose Sharks president and CEO Greg Jamison to buy the team — not that a sale has been made yet.
It sounds like there are a number of people in Phoenix right now looking to acquire the franchise, though it's unclear right now who would actually get it. Though with Jamison being NHL-approved, he's probably the best bet. However, NWCN's Paul Silvi said it could be Chris Hansen (of the new Seattle arena proposal) and Don Levin (AHL's Chicago Wolves owner) who are looking at buying the team.
If it's Jamison, who's apparently working with Jeremy Roenick, the Coyotes are likely to stay in Glendale. If not, the team could very well be on the move to Quebec or Seattle. Personally, I think the former is more likely.
Just a little more to add to the discussion there. Thoughts on these new developments?
Chris
For those still interested, KING 5 News in Seattle aired a special last night called "Seattle Arena: Billion Dollar Hat Trick." The show went through everything that would have to happen to bring the NHL and NBA to town. It even went into a little bit of the city's hockey history. You can watch it right here if you'd like.
Some interesting details in there, but all of this still seems like a long shot. The money man from San Francisco doesn't seem to want to be all that involved — he just wants to put the money up. Plus, he doesn't even care about hockey, so who's actually working to bring the NHL here is anyone's guess. Meanwhile, the Kings are staying in Sacramento and the Hornets in New Orleans.
Our sports future looks bleak, but I wouldn't count us out entirely.
Reader Comments (48)
I know that it's already taken by the WHL team in the area, but always personally thought that if Seattle ever actually got an NHL team, they should try to acquire the rights to the "Seattle Thunderbirds" moniker. Just an all-around solid sounding name that I think could fit in quite well with the NHL. Also, if it weren't for the fact that the Nucks have one in their logo, I'd suggest "Seattle Orcas" as a potential name, too.
Other names I've heard online that could work.... Admirals, Cascades, Lumberjacks, and Ospreys.
Its unlikely that the nhl would go to Seattle before a new arena is built since Key Arena would need major renovations to fit an NHL icerink. So if the Coyotes' situation is as bad as I think it is, Quebec is the only option for a move now since the civic arena in Quebec City is adequete as a temporary venue. As a Canucks fan, I would love to go on road trips and catch a game in Seattle but it will only be done when the arena is ready.
The Metropolitans are indeed Stanley Cup winners but so are the Vancouver Millionares!
I still believe Quebec is gonna get an NHL team before Seattle does, if and when Seattle gets an NHL team its gonna be at liest three maybe four years down the road either by another relocation (Florida or Columbus would be my guess) or through expansion.
Just to clarify your point about rubbing the Stanley Cup in the face of Canucks fans. The Seattle Metropolitans winning a cup in 1917 has about the same relevance to a new Seattle team as the Vancouver Millionaires winning the cup in 1915 does to the Canucks. Besides, by the time a team is in Seattle, the Canucks could be looking at back-to-back finals appearances and possibly a cup of their own.
That being said, I think Seattle would be a great addition to the NHL and would certainly be welcomed by the Canucks. It would make for a real geographic rival and certainly cut down on some of the marathon travel they have to go through each year.
Ahem. As a Canucks fan, I'd like to remind you that if your 1917 Stanley Cup counts, so does our 1915 Stanley Cup :p
Seriously, I'd much rather see a team in Seattle than Phoenix. Hope it works out!
Sorry dude, but in your inaugural season, your team wouldn't have a Stanley Cup to rub in anyone's face. Just because the Senators do it doesn't make it right. Different franchise, no championship history.
Both Ontario and Quebec have better temporary buildings in copps and the collisee respectively. The markets are more viable for hockey success and we've already seen the jets among the top earners in the league despite a 15000 capacity building (like copps). That said, Bettman will do everything he can to keep teams out of Canada and Seattle sounds like a good idea as any. My vote is for Seattle metropolitans. Breakers sounds minor league
As a citizen of the province of Quebec (Montreal actually) I would be thrilled to see a team in Quebec City to revive the old Montreal-Quebec rivalery. But to be honest, I think putting a team in Seattle would be waaay more logical economically.
Quebec is a small city (765k people) with no real other supporting cities around. There aren't a lot of companie's Head Offices so it would be difficult to guarantee a financial success despite having a full house every night. Also, unlike Montreal, Quebec City is almost exclusively French speaking, and finally, despite being a beautiful city with a lot of history, for a young person with a lot of money there's not much to do in Quebec City so I doubt they could get free agents that easily - seeing how hard it is in Montreal already.
So for those reasons, I understand Bettman not wanting a team there. Seattle is a good bet, but to be honest, I would love both cities to have a team.
Actually Chris I would like to have your opinion on this, as a Seattleite. Do you think that a 3.4 million inhabitants metro area can support the Seahawks, the Mariners, the Sounders, the New-Sonics, AND an NHL team at the same time? I mean eventually the "recreational budget" of a family has its limits and I would guess the major corporations in Seattle prefer to bring their clients to a Seahawks, Mariners or Sonics game before the NHL. I strongly believe that Seattle has a lot of Hockey fans, but it takes more than filling your arena to make a team viable (see Minnesota for example). Anyways that's my only concern about Seattle getting an NHL team.
expansion is not out of the question. parity has never been greater, overall revenue is at annually increasing levels and the cba is up. the league wants to realign. the nhlpa vetoed a proposed realignment partially based on the uneven number of teams per conference/division. sure, phoenix is in trouble and also maybe the panthers (although their strong play this season may help their bottom line) , but don't be surprised to see the nhl announce a plan for a 2 team expansion coming out of the cba negotiations following the 2012 season.
Seattle Sockeye!
For those of you in the know Sockeye is the name of Seattle's ultimate team and 3 time national champion...but I think they can share it.
I remember that the Breakers was used by the WHL team before it switched to the Thunderbirds. I liked the Totems because it reminds me of the city's heritage and of the old Western pro league team that used to battle my Denver Spurs in the 60s. Having lived in Seattle, I don't remember seeing breakers on the Sound, but maybe that's because I just didn't spend enough time along the Sound. I do remember seeing a lot of razor clamshells. What about the Razor Clams? Or the Geoducks? Ok, maybe Breakers isn't such a bad idea.
Hate to break it to you but the Vancouver Millionares won the cup in 1915. Don't think you'll be rubbing anything in anyones faces. ;)
I'm hopeful but not sure Seattle is the best market. If I recall, the Mariners were on the verge of moving in the mid 1990s and losing the basketball team was awful.
Still ... if it can happen, I'd be the second in line to buy a jersey.
I think that Seattle would be a good place for hockey and as long as Quebec and/or Hamilton gets a team in the foreseeable future I'm (along with probably other Canadians) good with Seattle. Bonus: Maybe it will also attract all those Canucks fans away from just beating on the Oilers/Flames
I'd love to see a team in Seattle, being in Vancouver, BC. I would think if they do make the move from PHX next year they would leave Seattle in the Pacific division for now. Once the realignment is done the year after (hopefully) they'd be together with Vancouver (and SJ, LA, ANH, COL,CGY, EDM). My only question is if the fan support would be there? They seem to support the junior team (Thunderbirds). Lots of big corporate sponsors also. As for the name, I like the Mets for the Stanley Cup tie in, but Totems and Breakers maybe be better and unique to the area. Love to see it happen.
Hey there, Canucks fan here. FYI, Vancouver won a Stanley Cup as well... when we were the Millionaires in 1915. So your new team would be just in the same boat as us, no Cup in the modern era.
A new NHL team in our division would be awesome. The weekend games would be busy with Vancouverites on the weekend Amtrak run! Let's hope our CDN loonie stays at par with the American dollar for a while.... It'll be a good rivalry for sure, hopefully like the Sounders and Whitecaps could be.
I'm very excited about the possibility of a team in Seattle. I'm not from there, and have never been there, but it seems like a city that ought to have hockey. I would hate to see the Coyotes relocate, but I think even their fans want an end to the 'last season in Phoenix' drama they've been living every year - one way or another.
While I do prefer the name Metropolitans over the other available suggestions (mostly for history's sake), I'm open to new ideas. I hope whatever they choose is classic and more importantly, classy. Please no minor league looking angry cartoon animal logos or (sorry Chris) singular natural disaster names. I'm still in shock over the 10-steps back that turned the Whalers into the Hurricanes (thank goodness that one is at least plural).
Touché, Canucks fans. Just wanted to see if you were paying attention. :)
Well as a Seattlelite and a hockey fan, this news has me pretty excited. I (like some of the other commentors) am realistic though in thinking that Quebec will probably get a team first. Perhaps even KC. I just can't see a franchise playing in Key Arena or anywhere else for a year.
Personally, the team name has to be Metropolitans. It's a classic name that works well in baseball. The visuals could be pretty cool of the skyline. Plus it would honor the team that won the first US cup. Obviously this team has nothing to do with this team (I believe the Red Wings are the distant descendent of the original Mets), but it doesn't mean they can't be honored. And how kick *ss will the throwbacks be for the Winter Classic at Qwest field! :)
How about calling them the Seattle Silver. I find it has a good ring to it. :)
Seriously, Seattle, with an NHL team for NEXT season. As much as Bettman would prefer it (based only on the current alignment than anything else) I really don't see this happening. The KeyArena isn't even viable for the city's WHL franchise, it's not even an issue as to whether it would be NHL viable (it won't be).
Québec City is easily the leading candidate. Le Colisée Pepsi is a venue that is suitable as a temporary venue, and while the market isn't attractive from certain logistical factors that Chris listed above, it does have one thing going for it that NO OTHER CITY competing for the Coyotes does.
It will be the only game in town.
That's the key X-factor here. Heck, even the CFL, if they were to expand into Québec City, is still easily five or more years off. The new arena is being built in preparation for an Olympic bid (for either 2022 or 2026, and is the reason public money is being utilized.)
Also, this isn't Seattle first flirtation with the NHL. Seattle was awarded a conditional franchise for a failed 1976 expansion, along with Denver. However those plans were scuttled when two franchises were forced to relocate (ironically one of them moved to Denver.)
Don't let my statement have you believe that Seattle isn't a a market where NHL hockey could thrive. None of us know that now. What I am saying, is that it just isn't workable....
Now.
If Seattle got a team, that'd be great - all of our in-division rivalries are running kind of stale. Four and especially one game per regular season is nothing compared to six. The downside is that I'd be contractually obliged to hate you. :(
Seattle is the BEST option for the NHL and the NBA.
1) Tons of corporate money. Starbucks, Costco, Microsoft, etc. C'mon, how could a league president NOT want a chance at the pie!!
2) The building was always the biggest hurdle, now it's gotten a lot smaller of a hurdle. To me, I'm guessing the backroom deals have already been done. It's just a matter of logistics and legal mumbo jumbo...that's always a pain, but it'll get done.
3) When you think "Mets", you think of my favorite baseball team, the NY Mets. Believe me, you don't want people to be reminded of the NY Mets as they are rarely associated with "sucess". My vote is for "Seattle Wolverines"!!! There's gotta be wolves in Seattle, right?
4) They'll be in the new "Pacific" division when the NHL realigns after next season - so long as the NHLPA agrees to it and there's no lockout (yeah, you all forgot the CBA is up after next year...right?).
5) The big problem will be the uni's. Vancouver is using the blue and green. The Blue Jackets and Winnipeg Jets are rockin' the navy blue and silver. And the red/tan/green is already being used by the Minny Wild. Maybe black and green?!?!?!? Just a thought.
Seattle is a great market, I've thought they should have a hockey team for over 25 years. Plus I can't help notice that the concept page is conspicuous by its absence - curious if you've decided to move away from that direction, or do you have something new up your sleeve Chris?
Having a team in Seattle could make a true Pacific division with them, Van, SJ, LA and Ana, that'll probably never happen though. And they need to wear green, for some reason I think of that color when I think of Seattle/Pacific NW, besides there aren't enough green teams in the NHL.
DC32, I like that idea, no matter how unrealistic it is. If the Coyotes move to Seattle, the realignment is simple enough - keep PHX/SEA in the Pacific, move Dallas to the Central, Nashville to the Southeast, Winnipeg to the Northwest, and Vancouver to the Pacific. There you go.
What doesn't make sense is that they'd want both the NHL and NBA before they build the arena. I get that the guy wants to make some money off of this, but if they get one and not the other (which may well be the case) the one they get is in SERIOUS immediate trouble.
If the coyotes stay, it won't be long until there is another bankruptcy
Cant believe there's still people out there that think hockey in the desert will work AND think they can make a profit!! A fool and his money are soon parted?? Flogging a dead horse?? Seriously, Bettman needs a massive reality check and just MOVE the damn team to seattle (or quebec).
I like the idea of Seattle with an NHL team, it'll be a while before the NHL comes to Seattle (or returns to Quebec). The arena's aren't built yet, and the current facilities just wont do. That being said, Portland Oregon could/should be the number one spot on the list to get a team. The city currently has a major league caliber arena that is NHL ready, as well as the financial/corporate support to keep a team long term.
I hope Seattle gets an NHL franchise. It's been my dream ever since I was a kid going to Totems games at the Coliseum. If I could buy an NHL team, Totems would be my first choice as the colors and logo from the late 60's are great. But Metropolitans is cool too. It would instantly re-establish (really) old rivalries with the Montreal Canadiens and Ottawa Senators. And a Stanley Cup banner could be hung from the new arena before a puck is even dropped! Seattle has already had three attempts at landing an NHL franchise. Hopefully 4th time's a charm.
Really the only thing that will stop the coyotes is if the NHL doesn't want to look weak before the CBA negotiations
Even though I hope to see Canada get another NHL franchise first, I still enjoy the idea of Seattle getting one too. Totems sounds pretty good to me. I think they should wear kelly green & White with black accents. This league NEEDS more GREEN!
I think Bettman will be more open to sending a team to Seattle then Quebec City honestly. I know right now the NHL is down with QC, but that is because there will be an arena there. If Seattle can secure that brand spanking new arena it is a perfect market. Plus moving PHX to QC makes it harder for realignment.
Just a side note to all Seattalites out there. Would you prefer the teams name to be: Seattle, Washington (well maybe that's already taken) or The Emerald City?
Personally I think Seattle has enough character to go by Seattle or Emerald City.
"Emerald City" came out of a nickname contest in 1981. Before that Seattle was known as the Jet City as well as the Queen City. Any of those nicknames, it would sound more like a roller derby team. Seattle takes its name from Chief Sealth of the Duwamish tribe. I much prefer Seattle. But I could see a lot of unofficial nicknames for the team with "Emerald City" from the sports media..
@ C-eh-N-eh-D-eh - Agreed. More green! I like that suggestion of the touch of black. The Totems did have black in their logo on their away uniforms. Looked great against the all-green:
http://www.seattletotems.org/Uniform%20History.html
Queensryche (from Seattle) has a song called "Jet City Woman" ... so I always think of Seattle as Jet City, well that and my uncle has worked for Boeing since '75.
Anyhow, I think the Seattle Sound rolls off the tongue quite nicely (referring to the Puget Sound area of course) .... but thats just me.
@ David,
I am totally with you regarding the Totems name. It's a natural. And you can rest assured that my Canucks will eventually replace the orca with Johnny Canuck, the team's old Western League logo. Did you see the Totems play the Canucks back then? I was born in '69, but I know of the rich history between these two teams. A revived Totems-Canucks rivalry at the NHL level will equal the Sounders-Whitecaps NASL/MLS rivalry.
Like most posters, I am huge on Seattle going with green as the primary. The only team that wears green is Minnesota, but only as a third. Bring back the North Stars and revive the Totems. It's easy be'in green!
I have a really good feeling about this...
I don't buy (pun intended) the news about a sale being close. At least, I don't believe it's to an individual who is willing to keep the team in Arizona. Reinsdorf has had 3 years, it's not going to happen. Jamieson has been involved almost a year. The NHL wants to sell the team so badly, if he had the money they'd be sold right now. No way he's going to attract investors given the state of the economy and the mess that is the Coyotes. Roenick? I don't think he's that rich. Sorry Phoenix, it's NOT going to happen.
Isn't it curious that news surfaces of a potential buyer DAYS after Chris Hansen announces plans to build an arena in Seattle? Either the news inspired Reinsdorf, Jamieson or Roenick to move their asses (doubtful due to the reasons above), or Don Levin is this mystery owner. It's perfect. He's had interest in bringing the NHL to Seattle, but doesnt have the cash to build an arena. Chris Hansen does, and announces he plans to build it within the next few years. Levin contacts Gary Bettman and expresses interest in the team. Bettman approves, but can't come out and say the team is being relocated public because A) he has hope this threat of imminent relocation can get a deal finally done in Phoenix and B) because it would cripple the few ticket sales the Coyotes make. So I expect a relocation announcement as soon the the Coyotes season finishes.
Seattle is perfect for the NHL. it's an untapped market, steeped in hockey history. It's a large American TV market. It's on the West Coast, meaning it would fit nice in the current Pacific Division. It's also got an owner who has run an excellent AHL franchise for years.
However, if I'm wrong and the Coyotes stay in Glendale or even relocate to Quebec (unlikely since there's an American option and the current Canadiens language debacle) , I have a strong feeling Don Levin will relocate the Chicago Wolves to Seattle. He saw what True North did with the Manitoba Moose, and his team currently has an affiliation with the Vancouver Canucks. Again, too perfect.
Where the NHL should go: Houston, Kansas City,
Where the NHL could go: Portland, Hamilton, Quebec City, Oklahoma City,
Where the NHL wants to go: Las Vegas, Seattle, Toronto (2nd team)
I think most people fro m Seattle like the Totems nick-name. You can just call them the "Totes"
Metros is just not good for obvious reasons.
No Kings for you!
@ GelatinousMutantCoconut
your list makes no sense on any level.
yousaid:
Where the NHL should go: Houston, Kansas City,
Where the NHL could go: Portland, Hamilton, Quebec City, Oklahoma City,
Where the NHL wants to go: Las Vegas, Seattle, Toronto (2nd team)
I say:
Kansas city is the most overextended sports market on the planet. Houston is not exactly the best option either.
Portland is not happening unless Allen sells the Trailblazers. Hamilton is out because of Toronto. Oklahoma is a long shot. Quebec may be an option and would probably be successful.
No one really knows where the NHL wants to go. They left a major American market to go to Winnipeg so anything is possible. Seattle would be good from a league scheduling perspective as there are zero American teams in the pacific northwest and it would make sense divisionally.
LOL! And it looks like Phoenix is going to be saved...
@EL
That list was mine. Leave poor @GelatinousMutantCoconut alone! ;)
Houston is one of the largest TV markets in the country and have a history of supporting the Aeros. With the right owner it could be a very solid hockey market. You have a point about KC but once again there is a tradition there and natural rivals St Louis.
The issue with Hamilton is Buffalo, not Toronto. You could put 3 NHL teams in the GTA and every game would sell out if MLSE would allow another team in their territory. The NHL is protecting the Sabres. I know cause I've waited in the long line ups at the border on game days. Also the rink is 4 miles from the Canadian border.
If I told you 20 years ago Raleigh North Carolina would be a far better hockey town than Atlanta, Phoenix, and Dallas you would probably think I was nuts. Nashville is doing alright also. Winnipeg has made the most money this year. They always did sell out. The only reason they left was a weak Canadian dollar and an ageing arena.
Quebec City has itself convinced they are the next city to get a team. Bettman says expansion is off the table so who knows what will really happen.
Personally I would love to see a team in Seattle. I just think it's an afterthought in the equation to get an NBA team again.
Doesn't Tacoma have an arena, the Tacoma Dome. Tacoma is in the Seattle metro arena, so it would work as a Seattle franchise.
The Tacoma Dome, like Key Arena, would need a major upgrade to bring it to NHL specs - including seats.
The Tacoma Dome does not have it's ice plant anymore.