Don't get me wrong, I care about the NHL. I want our city to have more winter sports, know that I'll grow to love the games and most importantly want to see success for all the great fans and supporters who are passionate about hockey in ways that I am not (yet!).
The individual success and personal well-being of my friends in Sodo is important to me as well. They are nice people and fellow sports fans who have worked hard enough to deserve a part in any win, no matter where that win occurs or who finally gets it done.
I also place great value on sound civic planning and would like to see a thoughtful decision. Do we partner with a local hero to site all of our stadiums together at an established transit hub or team up with an established game changer to shift some of the city's development northward, invest in an existing public asset and revitalize the Seattle Center?
All of that matters, but none of it is as important to me as bringing the Sonics back.
Seattle has been without an NBA team for nearly a decade. Now that we have 2 clearly established bidders, each hoping to have their vision approved within the next few months, we need to ask the essential question:
Who is most capable of bringing the Sonics back?
To bring the Sonics back we need at minimum an arena “plan”. In 2012 we thought a plan had been approved and only "procedural" hurdles remained. Later, we found out the hard way that street vacations and construction permits presented a far greater obstacle than had been anticipated.
Now, after 4 years of aspiring to be “shovel ready in Sodo” the fans are being asked to evaluate two very different methodologies for team acquisition.
Hansen's Sodo vision, just a street vacation away from permit submittal represents the fastest path forward towards a fully permitted facility. At that point, however he would hold off on construction, restarting the process at a later date when a team became available. His team argues that they are years ahead in achieving a fully entitled, "shovel ready" building plan. In this scenario they envision a finalized plan will allow more definitive negotiation of revenue splits and financial partnerships with potential team owners, allowing their group to lie in wait for opportunity with an interim facility (KeyArena), "ready to go" building site and firmly committed NBA and NHL ownership groups to both leagues.
The Oak View Group has substantial doubts about whether "shovel Ready" will satisfy league commissioners. They argue that, after a decade of futility and broken promises, league commissioners need to see more than the the promise of an arena and can only be expected to engage regarding expansion or relocation if and when an arena is actually being built.
A similar argument was made by their recently vanquished competitor AEG, who offered up their recent success in Las Vegas as the only modern example of NBA or NHL expansion. The expansion Vegas Golden Knights, they claimed with certainty would never have been awarded to a "shovel ready" situation and instead required "shovels in the ground" building an actual arena to demonstrate certainty and win league support.
Whether the city choose the immediate path to a firm commitment with Hansen or allows Tim Leiweke additional time to entitle his project before building on spec will be irrelevant if the resulting financial model fails to attract high net worth ownership groups capable of acquiring NBA and NHL franchises.
Hansen earned substantial credibility by adding Steve Ballmer to his proposed NBA ownership group in 2012. Supporters were also encouraged by the potential for an NHL partnership with developer Victor Coleman in 2014. Since that time, however Ballmer has departed to Los Angeles to take over the LA Clippers and Coleman chose instead to partner with AEG at KeyArena. As a result the Sodo group (as currently disclosed) seemingly lacks the financial capacity to complete this transaction and has not been able to lure NHL or NBA partners under a substantially revised financial model.
The Oak View Group, an industry powerhouse with substantial venue and organizational building experience, seems more capable of attracting NBA and NHL investors but have faced questions regarding their business model and revenue splits. Fans of both hockey and basketball have expressed concerns that the lack of committed sports owners may indicate OVG’s intentions to develop KeyArena into a music only facility, similar to their recent (and very successful) renovation of the LA Forum.
Both groups could answer these questions by bringing forward ownership groups capable of acquiring NBA and NHL franchises. Until one or more credible ownership groups comes forward with a commitment to own and operate an NBA or NHL franchise each will face skepticism over whether their financial model is capable of attracting the deep pockets necessary to make franchise acquisition a reality.
There does seem to be a consensus among all interested parties that an "NHL first" strategy represents the fastest path to bringing the NBA to town.
Hockey, unlike basketball, is in the midst of an ongoing expansion process and has made no secret of their desire to capture this lucrative market. The resulting sense of urgency is creating deadlines and driving progress at a rate the NBA would be unlikely to match on their own.
If and when the NHL does arrive speculation is rampant that this would increase pressure on the NBA to return more quickly so as not to allow a winter sports competitor time to establish dominance in the region.
So lets challenge these ownership groups:
Show us your plan to win the leagues support.
Prove that plan is attractive to potential ownership groups by finding and naming your investors.
Take action on the NHL before this window closes.
Bring back the Sonics.
Comments
Yep. This. All of this.
So much of this. Exactly this.
Bring back our Sonics. And let’s go Kraken!
By Chris Meirose on 06.06.17 1:42pm
SeaWolves. . . . fixed that for you. You're welcome.
By kinsesu on 06.06.17 1:50pm
I disagree.
We should really name them the Sonics again.
By Thane of Cascadia on 06.06.17 3:43pm
I look forward to the day when kraken are thrown on the ice at a Seattle NHL game
By TheTrialist on 06.06.17 3:40pm
Assuming OVG beats out Hansen and gets the remodel for key arena going
Wouldn’t Seattle Metropolitans fit more with the historic key arena given its an iconic name to Seattle hockey.
By gstommylee on 06.06.17 3:45pm
It fits better, but it's just an extremely dumb name. That's the problem.
I still say they buy the rights to the Thunderbirds (definitely possible for less $ than you probably think) and instantly have the best logo and team name in all of the NHL. Done.
By Throbert Bedford on 06.06.17 5:39pm
No Thunder in the name please
I just don’t like it!
By Ultrasonics on 06.06.17 8:05pm
There's plenty of people in the area that hate the Thunderbirds.
I know because it’s Seattle we just assume everyone roots for them, but there’s a team 20 miles north that an awful lot of us do. Not to mention Portland/eastern WA fans.
I don’t want my new hockey team using the effing T-Birds’ name. Cool Bird belongs on my Thanksgiving dinner table.
By Drunk Viking on 06.07.17 9:24am
Yeah But
Most of those fans 20 miles north were Thunderbird fans before the league expanded lol.
By Kodi on 06.07.17 9:27am
I'm sure the people living within less than 20 miles of Seattle are the only ones interested in seeing NHL games <img src="//fonts.voxmedia.com/emoji/unicode/1f60a.png" alt=":blush:" class="emoji">
"Guys, we’re adding a new AFL team next door over in Oakland, and we’re thinking of calling them the 48’ers…."
I live in Renton. I saw dozens of games with Justin Hickman. Screw that little punk, he and the Bruins deserve each other.
By Drunk Viking on 06.07.17 11:36am
I get that you hate the "team"
I would too if my team couldn’t beat them in them in the playoffs year after year. I think the point is looking at team names and history that may be available to purchase if a team moves up here and not naming the team the same as a junior team (though I think using the historical name of the Seattle Seahawks which was a hockey team before a football team may not work….). In any case if and when Seattle gets an NHL franchise I’ll support them no matter what they call them.
By Kodi on 06.07.17 12:21pm
Truth be told I don't think many Silvertip fans are very tech-savvy or we'd probably have different representation numbers here.
All kidding aside, you sorta keyed into my other problem with calling them the TBirds. Namely, that it seems like a little league naming convention. Take an existing local (semi-)professional team, and call your new team that because d’awwww he’s a little Seahawk!. Like the 20 crapdillion "Vikings" and "Huskies" high school mascots we seem to have.
This may annoy me more than usual because there’s a little league football team starting up soon called the Patriots that use the actual NE team logo. Ugh.
By Drunk Viking on 06.07.17 12:52pm
Except the Thunderbirds name and logo is pro-level already. That's the difference.
Doesn’t matter at all if you don’t like them as a team.
By Throbert Bedford on 06.07.17 7:30pm
Or Hawks, or Americans, or Chiefs, or...
I’m aware there’s a difference. That’s why I said "it seems a little like", not "it’s no different than".
Frankly I’m surprised people feel so strongly that the new NHL team should be Thunderbirds. Switch the roles, and I’d be equally as annoyed if they tried calling them the "Seattle Silvertips". Conversely, if I was a Tbird fan, I’d still hate the NHL team calling themselves "Tbirds". Like you said, there’s already a pro-level (I question this parlance, btw) team already, so let’s at least come up with something different.
By Drunk Viking on 06.07.17 9:27pm
Wait...you guys get that I'm just goofing, right?
I mean yeah, it’s a rivalry and all that, but good heavens, aside from the Hickman comment which I have very good reason for, we’re all hockey fans here – those of us talking about all this anyway. Nothing against any other teams’ fans. Heck, we all want the same thing here.
By Drunk Viking on 06.07.17 9:43pm
Yeah, yet you made this an Everett-Seattle thing first. I like the WHL and all, but I'm definitely
biding my time until I can root for the next level. It was great to see the T-birds win the WHL championship, but that level of hockey is lacking in many ways. I’ll still support them when they change their name to the Totems to make way for NHL, but my end goal is pro-level hockey (and not in stupid Kent, either).
By Throbert Bedford on 06.08.17 11:16am
I'm lucky that I live so close to ShoWare.
I mean yeah, it sucks being the away fan and all, but it also makes it easier to plan out which games to go to since there’s so fewer to choose from. Always seemed weird to move them from the Key. First WHL game I went to was Tbirds vs. Chiefs back in … I want to say ’07 or so? Something like that.
It is frustrating going from Center Ice to a minor league game though. Fun seeing those few star players skate circles around everyone else, but for the most part it’s just really sloppy. Still, they do a pretty decent job making it a fun experience.
By Drunk Viking on 06.08.17 4:38pm
Yeah, I take it for what it is: kids grinding it out trying to get picked up at the next level.
Watching guys like Barzal and Bear tear it up is fun, but the team is not as cohesive as an NHL team (hello capt. obvious). That’s where things really shine. Crisp passes, plays that develop as intended, no-look stuff, all that is pretty rare in the WHL. They play their asses off, but it’s just not the same.
I went to every T-birds home playoff game this year and there were some really exciting moments.
By Throbert Bedford on 06.08.17 6:01pm
When I said pro-level, I meant PRO as in NHL. The Thunderbirds name and logo is already NHL-level.
Could easily spruce up the logo a bit for NHL and you’re done. Sadly, the rest of the WHL does not share in that level of naming.
By Throbert Bedford on 06.08.17 11:14am
Might need to change the colors
Too reminiscent of Vancouver. Of course, the same could possibly be said about the tribal imagery.
By Taylor Bartle on 06.08.17 11:39am
Tell me a good alternative...
Metropolitans – dumb, too close to the Mets, history, sure, but a dumb name
Kraken – yeah, it’s funny but also way too cheesy
Totems – maybe an option, but there have to be better ones
Silvertips – haha, even worse for pro hockey
So?
By Throbert Bedford on 06.08.17 11:20am
Meh. Tips fans can decide not to go to NHL games if the name bothers them that much. Everett isn't going to be the main support of the team anyway.
Point is, the "silvertips" is a dumb ass team name, unlike the Thunderbirds. Should be Frostedtips (you can have Justin Bieber as your mascot). You may not like the team because it’s a rival that usually wins, but the name itself is literally 1000x better. Like it or not.
Portland and EA WA? Come on now. Who gives a crap what they think in this? Nobody should, that’s for sure.
By Throbert Bedford on 06.07.17 7:27pm
Sweet Jesus, calm down, we're all friends here.
You may be taking this a little personally.
By Drunk Viking on 06.07.17 9:28pm
My reply was exactly on the level of your first post on the topic.
No calming down needed as I wasn’t upset in the slightest. Can’t dish it out and then tell others to calm down. Right?
By Throbert Bedford on 06.08.17 11:17am
Go Sonics.
By Drunk Viking on 06.08.17 12:35pm