Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« Booze News You Can Use! | America's Newest Union Advocates »

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Sports The Seattle Oilers?

Posted by Goldy on Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Even as Seattle City Council members were preparing yesterday to approve a new $490 million arena in Sodo, the Internets were buzzing with news that the owners of the NHL's Edmonton Oilers were touring KeyArena in consideration of a possible move.

Yeah... don't get your hopes up, local hockey fans.

The Oilers have two years remaining on their current lease, and have been deep in negotiations with Edmonton officials on a new arena deal that would keep the team in the city (and in the black) in one of the league's smallest markets. No doubt the team's owners are happy to use Seattle as leverage, but it's hard to imagine this visit is about anything more than that. The NHL is committed to keeping teams in Canada, and Edmonton officials would be committing political suicide if they allowed their hockey-crazy town to lose its beloved franchise.

Personally, I'm much more of a hockey fan than I am a basketball fan, but I don't expect Seattle to acquire an NHL franchise anytime soon. And neither does Chris Hansen. When we spoke a couple weeks ago, Hansen wouldn't comment on how far along he was in finding an interested NHL ownership group, but he did point out that KeyArena doesn't really work well for hockey, even as a temporary home. The best situation for an NHL team, Hansen emphasized, would be to come in after the new Sodo arena opened. And that would be three years from now, at the soonest.

FacebookShare

Comments (17) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

These teams should just cut around all the red tape at City Hall and use Tacoma Dome.

We could have basketball and hockey now.

Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe

on September 25, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Instead of buying a stadium, why not just buy a team? Then you can tell them to play wherever you want and they can't leave because you own them.

Posted by Urgutha Forka on September 25, 2012 at 10:51 AM

@2 Because the leagues won't allow it. The Packers are grandfathered in.

Posted by Goldy on September 25, 2012 at 11:05 AM

They could change their name to the Seattle Coal Trains.

Posted by Fnarf

on September 25, 2012 at 11:14 AM

The Oilers are a good young team, but does Seattle want to steal a team from a town that adores it like the Sonics were stolen? The Florida Panthers are also a good young team, and would be successful here. Hockey in Florida is not really selling.

Posted by biffp on September 25, 2012 at 11:19 AM

@4 for the insightful Child Choking and Respiratory Distressing win!

Posted by Will in Seattle

on September 25, 2012 at 11:24 AM

I have no problem stealing an NHL team from any city below the Mason Dixon line, but not from north of the border. That's just wrong on so many levels.

Posted by SPG on September 25, 2012 at 11:30 AM

@3,
Ah. That's probably a good idea, since the Packers have been such a colossal failure and the city of Green Bay can't stand them. A single person owning a team has historically been much more loyal to the town the team started in, never moving them and always showing their devotion to the fans by buying them a nice stadium to watch their team play in.

Overall a great decision by the league. It really shows you that their hearts are with the fans.

Posted by Urgutha Forka on September 25, 2012 at 11:33 AM

@5,

Agreed. Either of the Florida teams would be fine really. The quality & talent of the team at the time of sale shouldn't really have any impact, but there's no reason for two teams to exist down there. A case could be made against even one, for that matter.

Posted by mikethehammer on September 25, 2012 at 11:34 AM