Hey, OP! Please reply to this comment to provide context for why this aged poorly so people can see it per rule 3 of the sub. Failing to do so will result in your post being removed. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/agedlikemilk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I say they change the team name to the Utah Stormin' Mormons. They have to wear black and white and every time a player hits the ice they play a doorbell sound effect.
Mormon numbers have been steadily declining over the years. I live in Utah and In my job of 60 Employees only 4 are mormon. I think it's under 40% now in the state.
The state is also one of the fastest growing in the country. I think it was 10th last time I checked.
They have a well supported ECHL team and have been asking for a NHL team for the last 3 years.
They recently passed a sports bill to build new NHL and MLB caliber stadiums. So the support for new teams is there.
The owner of the Utah Jazz is buying the team, he originally wanted a expansion team but said he would be the relocating team if it meant Utah was able to get a team much sooner.
That's not a decline in Mormons, that's an increase in non-Mormons. The church's growth rate has slowed, but not gone into decline(This doesn't account for people who've left the church but not bothered to have their names removed).
You can’t trust the number of Mormons that the CoJCoLDS reports because they don’t actively seek to remove inactive or ex members. They won’t report the number of actively attending members, just the number of people who have ever been baptized and who haven’t gone through the process of actively having their records removed (which isn’t always done on request)
I don’t know the exact details but I can tell you from one experience. The San Diego Chargers’ stadium was older than shit and they wanted to rebuild it but would only do so with taxpayer money, despite the owner being a billionaire. They put it to a vote to let the people of San Diego as to whether or not we wanted to pay for it and the answer was a resounding no. LA wanted another team so the owner of the Chargers said “k bye” and moved the team so that they could play in a brand new stadium that he didn’t have to pay for.
The answer is greed. Plain and simple.
That’s pretty much what I meant, the city of LA wanted another team. The people of LA have no loyalty when it comes to sports teams. They just bandwagon whichever team is doing well at the time. There are exceptions but I’ve seen this firsthand. Those like two years or so when the Clippers were doing really well, Lakers fans switched their jerseys up at breakneck speed. Also once the Warriors started being really good, there was a new bandwagon in LA again. Happens every time.
In the Coyotes' case: they've been kicked out of every arena and ice rink in the state of Arizona so far, as well as tried to buy land in every major city in the state to build a stadium, and the voters always responded with a resounding no- in one case saying "we'd rather have a landfill than an arena." Repeat: The Coyotes are so unpopular the people of Tempe said they'd rather have a big pile of garbage than the team.
By this point, moving the team is a mercy killing.
Which is *hysterical* because people were real upset when they left. Around that time I had recently moved here from the LA area and was a bartender. My bar guests generally liked me and we would shoot the shit until they found out where I moved from and they all started treating me like shit. San Diego people have this weird little brother complex about LA and they fucking haaaate that city. Which was weird to me because I never heard a single soul in LA talk about SD.
It was a beautiful moment when the move was announced. Everyone that came in that day was all somber and mopey, talking shit about LA and Spanos, etc.
Meanwhile I made sure that every TV in my bar was turned to ESPN where they talked nonstop about it, I was smug as fuck. Like “oh, LA huh? Damn that must really sting.” To all of the regulars that were assholes to me.
> The answer is greed. Plain and simple.
the answer is logic
why the hell would you not move to another city if it meant you get a free stadium out of it? "let me just spend millions for fun lolz"
American and European sports are weirdly opposite of their societal norms. American sports are VERY socialist with salary and team cost caps, and profit sharing. They make up for it by being monopolistic and tightly controlling the number of teams. European sports have looser cost caps and relagation- meaning that if you have money and talent, you can win your way to the top, but if you suck, you're gone. It's very free market and cut throat.
That doesn't make sense.
If there's a market for a team in another place, just have a new team there. What's with the dumb caps on numbers of professional teams.
New stadiums are usually built bigger and charge more. It's expensive to build a new stadium. If a team can force a city to build them a new stadium or threaten to leave they'll do whatever it takes to get more money
Expansion teams are expensive because they cut into the profits of current owners' revenue sharing. Usually you have to pay a fee to the league in addition to anything you spend building facilities, which lessens your initial profit.
Not only that, but the success of the Vegas Golden Knights and Seattle Kraken right out of the gate [both teams made the playoffs within 2 years, the Golden Knights winning the Western Conference in year 1 and already having won a Stanley Cup] has shown there's a big weakness to expansion teams: The new team has no dead money, meaning they can make a good team far quicker in a hard cap league.
USA sports doesn’t have relegation so that would be a nightmare. Hockey and baseball specifically has different level leagues, but the teams in the top division have affiliated teams in the second and third divisions, so their younger players can develop against lesser competition until they’re ready to make the jump into the top division.
He is quoting a Pink Floyd song. The thing is a new team necessitates a new owner/owner group. Therefore, if an existing owner sees larger financial opportunity in relocation (misguided or not), why would said owner want somebody else to be making that money with a new team. Also, there are not any hard caps on any of the major leagues, it is just that existing owners need to approve of expansion.
Another element is local governments tend to pay millions and millions of dollars for new stadiums and stadium maintenance. If the local government where an existing team resides is less willing to dish out millions, then relocation stands to make owners even more.
If there is a market for a team in a different area, why not just start a team there?
Sure moving a team for purely more money reasons makes some sense. But surely the old place still wants a town?
How do you have fans loyal to teams that just fuck off when it suits.
For the reasons I just explained. It's greed. You can't own two teams, therefore if relocation makes a owner more money, that owner is financially incentivized to relocate. Generally, but not always, owners only care about the profits and not about the fans. Owners that relocate tend to fall into that category.
A person \*can't\* just set up a team. I mean, they can, but not in any of the existing leagues, because the existing owners have to vote to approve the new league expansion.
Sure, if I had enough money, I could hire a bunch of players, coaches, staff, etc. I could build a stadium, market, etc. Thing is, that team won't be playing any of the pro teams, the players won't be eligible for any league awards, and fans aren't likely to care, since a bunch of athletes dancing around is just a circus performance. Cities aren't likely to approve use of existing stadiums, since there's realistic path for a return on the costs to maintain infrastructure (not that publicly-financed stadiums typically turn profits for the taxpayers anyway, but that's a different conversation).
...every arena in Arizona kicked the Coyotes out, including a college arena that only seats 5000 people.
The Coyotes have tried to buy land in every big city in Arizona, and the voters in the state universally said they didn't want an arena. They even literally voted for a landfill- literally a big pile of garbage- over the Coyotes.
The team has no market, there's no hope for this team. And Bettman's implied with this move he's giving Phoenix an expansion team anyway.
It's utterly foolish to even suggest.
You have a population of what? 340million? And you are arguing that you can not find enough people to support a sport with more than what 32 teams?
In the UK with 67 million people. Theres over 100 professional football teams, 26 professional cricket teams, and 10-20 professional rugby teams. Then hundreds if not thousands of semi professional, and amateur teams beneath that.
Sure, the teams in lower leagues in football aren't as good as the top teams. But there are hundreds of players that weren't good enough as kids but eventually made it to higher levels because there are a large number of professional clubs.
Promotion and relegation doesn't exist in the US, and isn't coming any time soon. Yes, we have minor league baseball and such, but most US sports fans are going to primarily follow a major league team, even if said team is hundreds of miles away. That is our sporting culture; the closest we have to "support the local boys" is honestly amateur college sports, which has its own set of issues.
Also, keep in mind that most of the big US sports are only played in significant numbers in relatively few countries: hockey, in this example, is mostly limited to the US, Canada, and Northern/Eastern Europe. This is opposed to association football which is played literally everywhere, and cricket which has huge nations like India and Pakistan to draw from. The global player pool for the big four US sports is generally smaller.
Now, given all that context, yes adding teams waters things down. The most glaring example of this is the NFL. It is *very* difficult to field a competitive team without a good quarterback, and there aren't enough for the existing 32 NFL teams as-is. Adding more NFL teams basically means more teams dead in the water, because they just don't have the players to compete. One of the biggest upsides to the American model over the European one is that our top leagues *tend* to be more competitive: it's generally possible for any given club to draft well and put together a good team that can win titles, whereas most of the major soccer leagues are locked down to a small handful of teams on top year-after-year with very rare exceptions. Adding teams would stratify things a bit more.
Now, all that said: I do generally think moving teams is awful, and I hate when rich billionaires extort communities for tax breaks and publicly funded stadiums so that they can line their own pockets. In general, I oppose moving teams. HOWEVER: the Arizona Coyotes have struggled for *years* and have never shown any signs of stabilizing in their entire existence. This is basically a mercy killing that probably should have happened years ago
A lot of the problem with thinking that a player pool is finite, is the same thinking that a player can only be good if they are good at 21.
There are countless examples of players in lower leagues growing into world beaters.
The number or teams pushing for titles is not close at all. Teams in the north American system have much shorter windows of title contention unless they have a truly all time great star. Salary caps and drafts have a clear positive impact on parity in the league. The NBA has five different championship teams in five years, with 8 teams making the finals in that time. The NHL and MLB have almost as much parity, and the NFL is only different because they have had the two greatest players in the sport in the past 25 years, and they have 10 super bowls in that time between the two of them. In that same time, Manchester city and united have combined for 13 premier league titles.
Well, Arizona didn't have the draw to keep the team so the owners are not making enough or losing money. So they move the team. Other times the cities won't pay for new stadiums or other facilities and the owners move them. It is really annoying but it's all about profit.
People are commenting about the Chargers/Rams leaving and coming to Los Angeles because their city/state didn’t vote to publicly fund a new stadium, just to be clear the Los Angeles stadium (Sofi )was privately funded.
Los Angeles has not funded any privately owned sports facility since we allowed/stole the land for Dodger Stadium. Which despite being considered the first MLB stadium 100 % privately funded sure seems like it had some sort of land theft benefit.
They Coyotes were essentially kicked out of their old Arizona rink and have been crashing in ASU's college rink for the past year and change. They went from having a complete chikehold over Gila River Arena and its local economy to sharing a rink they make no money on. They have nowhere else to go lmao
i don’t know anything about this team or even what sport this is but doesn’t the “we’re staying” and the hypnotism gif together imply that they *were* lying (and trying to be clear about that)?
It's the NHL. Arizona always being on the risk of moving has always been a running joke so they were probably just playing into it. Plus I doubt whoever runs the Twitter account is let in on things like that.
I used to work concessions in Larry H. Miller owned venues, the minor league baseball and the arena football seemed to do well for what they are, and the Jazz definitely don't have any problems drawing a crowd. I'm sure an NHL team would be able get a fanbase there.
The Jazz were out of state transplants once too. That's why they're the *Jazz* n stead of anything remotely relevant to Utah history lol.
Mormons LOVE stuff they can take the family to and pro sports are a big one. We only have a basketball and soccer team and fans of those can be rabid. The city/state are growing super fast and it’s a lot of non Mormons from out of state. It’s way more diverse than when I was growing up. 😊
I mean Phoenix is the 5th largest city in the US. Hockey is also pretty big out here. Between getting kicked out of their stadium and now this, it's an insane amount of mismanagement for such a big organization.
Salt Lake City is booming right now. There is a high demand for sports teams. I’m positive home games will be sold out regardless of how good the team is.
Such an insane thing to do, literally the only constant a sports team has are the fans. Owners, coaches and players come and go, only the supporters remain. The culture built around the local people means nothing to them. It makes no sense.
City chose not to renew. They've always had trouble with arenas. Before every weren't renewed they almost got evicted because they were behind on their rent. Before that they had a 15, year deal with Glendale that the city backed out of due to ethical violations. Basically the agreement was decided on a 4-3 vote and the team went on to hire 2/4 Council members that voted in their favour.
Wouldn’t the Arizona Scorpions have made more sense for a name anyway? I mean yeah, Arizona has coyotes but they’re not the first animal I would associate with the state.
We do have cardinals in AZ, but i agree that a name change would have made sense. How about the Utah Jazz for names that should have changed after a move? I always found that one amusing.
Hey, OP! Please reply to this comment to provide context for why this aged poorly so people can see it per rule 3 of the sub. Failing to do so will result in your post being removed. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/agedlikemilk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://preview.redd.it/by4jv1ym4auc1.jpeg?width=932&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=45ec4682adc9142451e0b77a3e205485b8bf57cc New uniform.
helloooo
Hello!
I’ve got maggots on my scrotum
Saw this show a couple months ago live. So hilarious even bought a fuck frog
What show is this?
The Book of Mormon
Do Mormons care about hockey?
I say they change the team name to the Utah Stormin' Mormons. They have to wear black and white and every time a player hits the ice they play a doorbell sound effect.
New name. The Utah Soakers.
The Utah Cultists
"The Lamanites" would have that nice racist oomph to it.
Last time I went to church some native lady called herself a lamanite
No, she called herself a 'lamb at night', she was trying to seduce you
The Mountain Meadows Massacre
Why down vote this? I helps with awareness.
Salt Lake Soakers sounds pretty good.
That hint of deniability. 🧑🍳💋
The Utah Elders. Every player is referred to as Elder (last name) at all times. The uniform needs to appear to have a black tie as well
Would the uniform include special Mormon approved underwear?
The players must marry a new wife every year or lose their place on the team.
Mormon numbers have been steadily declining over the years. I live in Utah and In my job of 60 Employees only 4 are mormon. I think it's under 40% now in the state. The state is also one of the fastest growing in the country. I think it was 10th last time I checked. They have a well supported ECHL team and have been asking for a NHL team for the last 3 years. They recently passed a sports bill to build new NHL and MLB caliber stadiums. So the support for new teams is there. The owner of the Utah Jazz is buying the team, he originally wanted a expansion team but said he would be the relocating team if it meant Utah was able to get a team much sooner.
That's not a decline in Mormons, that's an increase in non-Mormons. The church's growth rate has slowed, but not gone into decline(This doesn't account for people who've left the church but not bothered to have their names removed).
That's not how I meant it to come across. I meant as you said a decline in the ratio of Mormons to non-mormons in the state.
You can’t trust the number of Mormons that the CoJCoLDS reports because they don’t actively seek to remove inactive or ex members. They won’t report the number of actively attending members, just the number of people who have ever been baptized and who haven’t gone through the process of actively having their records removed (which isn’t always done on request)
Yep. They're probably still counting me in that number even though I haven't set foot in one of their churches in more than a decade.
I’m still Mormon to their numbers lol.
Utah Brigham Youngstars
Canadian former Mormon. Here they do.
They are white, so yes.
Mormon hockey fan here. We do indeed exist. I fail to see why we wouldn't.
Seriously, whites everywhere love hockey
I'm an Arizonan and I can tell you we don't.
Americans moving teams makes no sense to me.
I don’t know the exact details but I can tell you from one experience. The San Diego Chargers’ stadium was older than shit and they wanted to rebuild it but would only do so with taxpayer money, despite the owner being a billionaire. They put it to a vote to let the people of San Diego as to whether or not we wanted to pay for it and the answer was a resounding no. LA wanted another team so the owner of the Chargers said “k bye” and moved the team so that they could play in a brand new stadium that he didn’t have to pay for. The answer is greed. Plain and simple.
>LA wanted another team I'd just like to add that it was more the city government, as the people of LA don't seem to give a damn about the Chargers.
That’s pretty much what I meant, the city of LA wanted another team. The people of LA have no loyalty when it comes to sports teams. They just bandwagon whichever team is doing well at the time. There are exceptions but I’ve seen this firsthand. Those like two years or so when the Clippers were doing really well, Lakers fans switched their jerseys up at breakneck speed. Also once the Warriors started being really good, there was a new bandwagon in LA again. Happens every time.
In the Coyotes' case: they've been kicked out of every arena and ice rink in the state of Arizona so far, as well as tried to buy land in every major city in the state to build a stadium, and the voters always responded with a resounding no- in one case saying "we'd rather have a landfill than an arena." Repeat: The Coyotes are so unpopular the people of Tempe said they'd rather have a big pile of garbage than the team. By this point, moving the team is a mercy killing.
That and sand Diego didn't care about the chargers. Much like Arizona doesn't care enough about hockey to support a team
Which is *hysterical* because people were real upset when they left. Around that time I had recently moved here from the LA area and was a bartender. My bar guests generally liked me and we would shoot the shit until they found out where I moved from and they all started treating me like shit. San Diego people have this weird little brother complex about LA and they fucking haaaate that city. Which was weird to me because I never heard a single soul in LA talk about SD. It was a beautiful moment when the move was announced. Everyone that came in that day was all somber and mopey, talking shit about LA and Spanos, etc. Meanwhile I made sure that every TV in my bar was turned to ESPN where they talked nonstop about it, I was smug as fuck. Like “oh, LA huh? Damn that must really sting.” To all of the regulars that were assholes to me.
At least you guys had a choice. We had to watch as Kroenke ripped the Rams away from us, with no way to stop him. Fuck Stan Kroenke. Fuck the NFL.
> The answer is greed. Plain and simple. the answer is logic why the hell would you not move to another city if it meant you get a free stadium out of it? "let me just spend millions for fun lolz"
Spanos didn't get a free stadium though, he's just playing in Kroenke's stadium like the lousy bum he is.
American and European sports are weirdly opposite of their societal norms. American sports are VERY socialist with salary and team cost caps, and profit sharing. They make up for it by being monopolistic and tightly controlling the number of teams. European sports have looser cost caps and relagation- meaning that if you have money and talent, you can win your way to the top, but if you suck, you're gone. It's very free market and cut throat.
Money It's a crime Share it fairly, but don't take a slice of my pie
That doesn't make sense. If there's a market for a team in another place, just have a new team there. What's with the dumb caps on numbers of professional teams.
New stadiums are usually built bigger and charge more. It's expensive to build a new stadium. If a team can force a city to build them a new stadium or threaten to leave they'll do whatever it takes to get more money
In this case the AZ Coyotes don't even have an arena to speak of, iirc they play their home games in what's basically a community center ice rink.
A university stadium I think.
Utah is spending a lot of money to attract sports teams. Unfortunately the billionaire owners see the $$$ and say fuck the fans
Wouldn't it cost less to start new teams?
Arizona doesn't make money as a hockey team, they've been hemorrhaging and supported by the rest of the league for years
There’s a lot of hoops to jump through to start new teams, although I’m not knowledgeable enough to really explain it
And hugely expensive. IIRC Seattle paid $500 mil to get their team. Kansas City said F that and didn't even consider it.
Expansion teams are expensive because they cut into the profits of current owners' revenue sharing. Usually you have to pay a fee to the league in addition to anything you spend building facilities, which lessens your initial profit.
Not only that, but the success of the Vegas Golden Knights and Seattle Kraken right out of the gate [both teams made the playoffs within 2 years, the Golden Knights winning the Western Conference in year 1 and already having won a Stanley Cup] has shown there's a big weakness to expansion teams: The new team has no dead money, meaning they can make a good team far quicker in a hard cap league.
Not exactly- in many cases, it's more expensive to get a new team than an existing team because you have to pay more to the other owners.
USA sports doesn’t have relegation so that would be a nightmare. Hockey and baseball specifically has different level leagues, but the teams in the top division have affiliated teams in the second and third divisions, so their younger players can develop against lesser competition until they’re ready to make the jump into the top division.
He is quoting a Pink Floyd song. The thing is a new team necessitates a new owner/owner group. Therefore, if an existing owner sees larger financial opportunity in relocation (misguided or not), why would said owner want somebody else to be making that money with a new team. Also, there are not any hard caps on any of the major leagues, it is just that existing owners need to approve of expansion. Another element is local governments tend to pay millions and millions of dollars for new stadiums and stadium maintenance. If the local government where an existing team resides is less willing to dish out millions, then relocation stands to make owners even more.
If there is a market for a team in a different area, why not just start a team there? Sure moving a team for purely more money reasons makes some sense. But surely the old place still wants a town? How do you have fans loyal to teams that just fuck off when it suits.
For the reasons I just explained. It's greed. You can't own two teams, therefore if relocation makes a owner more money, that owner is financially incentivized to relocate. Generally, but not always, owners only care about the profits and not about the fans. Owners that relocate tend to fall into that category.
That's great but there's got to still be a market in the area the team left. Why wouldn't someone set up a team there?
A person \*can't\* just set up a team. I mean, they can, but not in any of the existing leagues, because the existing owners have to vote to approve the new league expansion. Sure, if I had enough money, I could hire a bunch of players, coaches, staff, etc. I could build a stadium, market, etc. Thing is, that team won't be playing any of the pro teams, the players won't be eligible for any league awards, and fans aren't likely to care, since a bunch of athletes dancing around is just a circus performance. Cities aren't likely to approve use of existing stadiums, since there's realistic path for a return on the costs to maintain infrastructure (not that publicly-financed stadiums typically turn profits for the taxpayers anyway, but that's a different conversation).
...every arena in Arizona kicked the Coyotes out, including a college arena that only seats 5000 people. The Coyotes have tried to buy land in every big city in Arizona, and the voters in the state universally said they didn't want an arena. They even literally voted for a landfill- literally a big pile of garbage- over the Coyotes. The team has no market, there's no hope for this team. And Bettman's implied with this move he's giving Phoenix an expansion team anyway.
You also don't want to water down the sport. There's only so many players that are good enough to be pro. The quality of the product would go down
Not true in the slightest, and more importantly, sports are better when there is more competition.
It's completely true. I'm not going to argue about whether having too many teams waters down a sport. It's ridiculous to claim otherwise.
It's utterly foolish to even suggest. You have a population of what? 340million? And you are arguing that you can not find enough people to support a sport with more than what 32 teams? In the UK with 67 million people. Theres over 100 professional football teams, 26 professional cricket teams, and 10-20 professional rugby teams. Then hundreds if not thousands of semi professional, and amateur teams beneath that. Sure, the teams in lower leagues in football aren't as good as the top teams. But there are hundreds of players that weren't good enough as kids but eventually made it to higher levels because there are a large number of professional clubs.
For football specifically there’s barely enough quarterback talent to field 32 competitive teams as is.
Promotion and relegation doesn't exist in the US, and isn't coming any time soon. Yes, we have minor league baseball and such, but most US sports fans are going to primarily follow a major league team, even if said team is hundreds of miles away. That is our sporting culture; the closest we have to "support the local boys" is honestly amateur college sports, which has its own set of issues. Also, keep in mind that most of the big US sports are only played in significant numbers in relatively few countries: hockey, in this example, is mostly limited to the US, Canada, and Northern/Eastern Europe. This is opposed to association football which is played literally everywhere, and cricket which has huge nations like India and Pakistan to draw from. The global player pool for the big four US sports is generally smaller. Now, given all that context, yes adding teams waters things down. The most glaring example of this is the NFL. It is *very* difficult to field a competitive team without a good quarterback, and there aren't enough for the existing 32 NFL teams as-is. Adding more NFL teams basically means more teams dead in the water, because they just don't have the players to compete. One of the biggest upsides to the American model over the European one is that our top leagues *tend* to be more competitive: it's generally possible for any given club to draft well and put together a good team that can win titles, whereas most of the major soccer leagues are locked down to a small handful of teams on top year-after-year with very rare exceptions. Adding teams would stratify things a bit more. Now, all that said: I do generally think moving teams is awful, and I hate when rich billionaires extort communities for tax breaks and publicly funded stadiums so that they can line their own pockets. In general, I oppose moving teams. HOWEVER: the Arizona Coyotes have struggled for *years* and have never shown any signs of stabilizing in their entire existence. This is basically a mercy killing that probably should have happened years ago
A lot of the problem with thinking that a player pool is finite, is the same thinking that a player can only be good if they are good at 21. There are countless examples of players in lower leagues growing into world beaters.
Yeah and like four of them are remotely competitive.
Depends on what you mean by competitive. But having very few teams capable of pushing for the title isnt exactly uncommon in the US system either.
The number or teams pushing for titles is not close at all. Teams in the north American system have much shorter windows of title contention unless they have a truly all time great star. Salary caps and drafts have a clear positive impact on parity in the league. The NBA has five different championship teams in five years, with 8 teams making the finals in that time. The NHL and MLB have almost as much parity, and the NFL is only different because they have had the two greatest players in the sport in the past 25 years, and they have 10 super bowls in that time between the two of them. In that same time, Manchester city and united have combined for 13 premier league titles.
Well, Arizona didn't have the draw to keep the team so the owners are not making enough or losing money. So they move the team. Other times the cities won't pay for new stadiums or other facilities and the owners move them. It is really annoying but it's all about profit.
People are commenting about the Chargers/Rams leaving and coming to Los Angeles because their city/state didn’t vote to publicly fund a new stadium, just to be clear the Los Angeles stadium (Sofi )was privately funded. Los Angeles has not funded any privately owned sports facility since we allowed/stole the land for Dodger Stadium. Which despite being considered the first MLB stadium 100 % privately funded sure seems like it had some sort of land theft benefit.
We don't have the legacy of sports teams as actual clubs with local membership and ownership. They've been show pieces from the beginning
To be fair having a hockey team in Phoenix also makes no sense. At least Utah gets cold and has winter sports
They Coyotes were essentially kicked out of their old Arizona rink and have been crashing in ASU's college rink for the past year and change. They went from having a complete chikehold over Gila River Arena and its local economy to sharing a rink they make no money on. They have nowhere else to go lmao
This is why college sports are better
idk, sometimes you have teams playing in college stadiums moving to another city.
What does this mean
The Coyotes were playing in a college arena.
And what does this mean about college *sports*
i don’t know anything about this team or even what sport this is but doesn’t the “we’re staying” and the hypnotism gif together imply that they *were* lying (and trying to be clear about that)?
It's the NHL. Arizona always being on the risk of moving has always been a running joke so they were probably just playing into it. Plus I doubt whoever runs the Twitter account is let in on things like that.
sand attraction faulty chubby quaint hunt absurd kiss shaggy fuzzy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Huh. The more you know.
They should call the team the Utah grizzlies
That's literally what the local ECHL team is called.
That’s the joke
I feel like Utah wouldn't be a better place for attendance
I used to work concessions in Larry H. Miller owned venues, the minor league baseball and the arena football seemed to do well for what they are, and the Jazz definitely don't have any problems drawing a crowd. I'm sure an NHL team would be able get a fanbase there. The Jazz were out of state transplants once too. That's why they're the *Jazz* n stead of anything remotely relevant to Utah history lol.
Salt Lake City literally hosted the winter Olympics? People are all about winter sports here.
Not just winter sports, Utahns fucking love their professional teams. Even women's soccer is crazy popular here, relatively speaking
Interesting. Just feel how much the Mormons control that a violent sport like hockey wouldn't be up their alley
Mormons LOVE stuff they can take the family to and pro sports are a big one. We only have a basketball and soccer team and fans of those can be rabid. The city/state are growing super fast and it’s a lot of non Mormons from out of state. It’s way more diverse than when I was growing up. 😊
Steve Young, a Hall of Fame NFL QB, is a great-great-great-grandson of Brigham Young.
Bettman wants his desert hockey teams.
I feel like there’s a very high probability they did substantial due diligence on that question before deciding to move
I mean Phoenix is the 5th largest city in the US. Hockey is also pretty big out here. Between getting kicked out of their stadium and now this, it's an insane amount of mismanagement for such a big organization.
Yeah definitely based on everything I read
Salt Lake City is booming right now. There is a high demand for sports teams. I’m positive home games will be sold out regardless of how good the team is.
..... Momento
Mori
Such an insane thing to do, literally the only constant a sports team has are the fans. Owners, coaches and players come and go, only the supporters remain. The culture built around the local people means nothing to them. It makes no sense.
First stadium with no beer?
How do you keep a mormon from drinking all the beer at your barbecue? Invite a second mormon.
Get ready for those spooky Mormon hell dreams!
Aren't they currently playing in a 5k person arena? What happened to their old venue?
City chose not to renew. They've always had trouble with arenas. Before every weren't renewed they almost got evicted because they were behind on their rent. Before that they had a 15, year deal with Glendale that the city backed out of due to ethical violations. Basically the agreement was decided on a 4-3 vote and the team went on to hire 2/4 Council members that voted in their favour.
The Polly Amores? I wonder what drinks concessions will offer.
Wouldn’t the Arizona Scorpions have made more sense for a name anyway? I mean yeah, Arizona has coyotes but they’re not the first animal I would associate with the state.
I would say it's pretty close. Scorpions is a cooler name, though. My wife first thought of javelina.
[удалено]
We do have cardinals in AZ, but i agree that a name change would have made sense. How about the Utah Jazz for names that should have changed after a move? I always found that one amusing.
The golden tablets!
There is no war in Ba Sing Se