Could Seattle support an NHL team and what would be a good name for the team if so? (Pacific: price, metro)

[Harrier]

Originally Posted by Ira500

...But they'd have to use the image of Martin Luther King on the uniforms.

Yep - instead of President Franklin Pierce's Vice President, William King.

[green_mariner]

How about the Tritons or the Neptunes.

[Ira500]

Originally Posted by green_mariner

How about the Tritons or the Neptunes.

Was it a Triton on the original Seattle Mariner uniforms?

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by Ira500

Was it a Triton on the original Seattle Mariner uniforms?

Trident was the original Seattle Mariners logo.

[Count David]

Originally Posted by Ira500

...But they'd have to use the image of Martin Luther King on the uniforms.

LOL, I'm surprised they haven't tried that yet (either of the Kings). Could be a great promotion on MLK Day.

[Bimmerfanboy]

I've lived in metro Seattle for 6-7 years now and have seen absolutely zero hockey knowledge/passion/acknowledgement of ice hockey from people here. High school teams are non-existent, youth leagues are sparse, and collegiate level hockey (UW) has very little support. Matter of fact I attend the UW and many people don't even know we have a hockey team (it's not Division 1).

With the Seahawks and Sounders playing the same months as the NHL season, combined with the lack of knowledge about hockey in the area, I think NHL here is a bad idea. Ice hockey tickets are very, very expensive; in Vancouver, average seats cost nearly $200. If Seattle got the Coyotes they would have played at the Key for at least 2-3 years, which seats 6000-7000 fewer people than the smallest NHL arena right now (Winnipeg). That sends ticket prices even higher.

That being said, Seattle is definitely on the NHL's list for a future team, so it's bound to happen. The Eastern Conference is already loaded with teams, so Quebec will get a team after Seattle. People here definitely have the money to attend games.

I grew up in Michigan which is a hockey-crazed state. It is 2nd in the nation after Minnesota when it comes to youth leagues and the number of NHL players it produces. High school teams and youth leagues are well-supported and everybody loves the Red Wings. Michigan State University and University of Michigan both have well-establish Division 1 hockey programs that have produced NHL players. University of Michigan is actually known as the best collegiate hockey program in the country, like what Duke/UNC are to college basketball. Seattle just isn't a place for hockey IMO.

[DevanXL]

Originally Posted by Seatown1

I've lived in metro Seattle for 6-7 years now and have seen absolutely zero hockey knowledge/passion/acknowledgement of ice hockey from people here. High school teams are non-existent, youth leagues are sparse, and collegiate level hockey (UW) has very little support. Matter of fact I attend the UW and many people don't even know we have a hockey team (it's not Division 1).

With the Seahawks and Sounders playing the same months as the NHL season, combined with the lack of knowledge about hockey in the area, I think NHL here is a bad idea. Ice hockey tickets are very, very expensive; in Vancouver, average seats cost nearly $200. If Seattle got the Coyotes they would have played at the Key for at least 2-3 years, which seats 6000-7000 fewer people than the smallest NHL arena right now (Winnipeg). That sends ticket prices even higher.

That being said, Seattle is definitely on the NHL's list for a future team, so it's bound to happen. The Eastern Conference is already loaded with teams, so Quebec will get a team after Seattle. People here definitely have the money to attend games.

I grew up in Michigan which is a hockey-crazed state. It is 2nd in the nation after Minnesota when it comes to youth leagues and the number of NHL players it produces. High school teams and youth leagues are well-supported and everybody loves the Red Wings. Michigan State University and University of Michigan both have well-establish Division 1 hockey programs that have produced NHL players. University of Michigan is actually known as the best collegiate hockey program in the country, like what Duke/UNC are to college basketball. Seattle just isn't a place for hockey IMO.

Answer this question then, why do you think Seattle doesn't have a hockey culture? I mean LA hasn't always had a strong hockey fan base, even if alot are transplants. Soccer is popular here because it's what we grow up playing, from age 4-10 Soccer is what the youth of Seattle first get into. That passion continues to high school where alot of great track athletes opt-out to pursue a career in soccer. We have American soccer greats constantly in the media from this area, A great Pro-Team, and people who always support the home town team. So Ofcourse Hockey isn't popular in Seattle, it has no true culturally background in the city. What's to say that wont change if the city gets a team and people start embracing the game, learning it, and support anything that has Seattle on it. Seattle is a Gamble worth taking for the NHL because the Rewards out way the risk. Yes this is not a hockey town, but to say it never will be would just be wrong.

[Adrian71]

Originally Posted by Andy

Thunderbirds is already taken. Hate the name sasquatch. Sasquatch is a local northwest term for idiots getting lost in the woods looking for unicorns and other silly mythical creatures.

Where did you ever hear that? Sasquatch is just a name that was coined for the mythical creature, based on its phonetic similarity to what a number of indigenous peoples called it. Bigfoot is a fun part of the regional lore. I think it would be a great team name -- very quintessentially Pacific Northwest. Mascot opportunities galore, too. And it alliterates with Seattle.

As someone else said, it's a corollary to the New Jersey Devils.

No one seems to be embarrassed enough by the name to stop them from naming a major music festival after Sasquatch.

[Bad Newz]

seattle is a booming region that has a lot of transplants now so NHL wouldn't be such a bad idea, even if it doesnt have a foundation, i think a lot of people would embrace it and be excited enough to support it, even the locals are prolly open minded enough to embrace it as well
i love hockey and plan to move to seattle soon so for sure id support it

[Deezus]

Originally Posted by Seatown1

I've lived in metro Seattle for 6-7 years now and have seen absolutely zero hockey knowledge/passion/acknowledgement of ice hockey from people here. High school teams are non-existent, youth leagues are sparse, and collegiate level hockey (UW) has very little support. Matter of fact I attend the UW and many people don't even know we have a hockey team (it's not Division 1).

With the Seahawks and Sounders playing the same months as the NHL season, combined with the lack of knowledge about hockey in the area, I think NHL here is a bad idea. Ice hockey tickets are very, very expensive; in Vancouver, average seats cost nearly $200. If Seattle got the Coyotes they would have played at the Key for at least 2-3 years, which seats 6000-7000 fewer people than the smallest NHL arena right now (Winnipeg). That sends ticket prices even higher.

That being said, Seattle is definitely on the NHL's list for a future team, so it's bound to happen. The Eastern Conference is already loaded with teams, so Quebec will get a team after Seattle. People here definitely have the money to attend games.

I grew up in Michigan which is a hockey-crazed state. It is 2nd in the nation after Minnesota when it comes to youth leagues and the number of NHL players it produces. High school teams and youth leagues are well-supported and everybody loves the Red Wings. Michigan State University and University of Michigan both have well-establish Division 1 hockey programs that have produced NHL players. University of Michigan is actually known as the best collegiate hockey program in the country, like what Duke/UNC are to college basketball. Seattle just isn't a place for hockey IMO.

College hockey isn't that big to begin with though outside of say, New England and the Upper Midwest in the US. And it's a poor gauge of what's a viable NHL market considering there's plenty of successful US NHL franchises that have little in the way of youth leagues or college hockey. Just because a place doesn't produce local youth athletes doesn't have much to do with whether a pro franchise will be popular. The main key is having a team that is competitive enough to keep regional interest and having a decent enough economy where people can afford to go to the games.

Junior league hockey is where most of the top prospects in North America are drafted from--not college hockey---and the Seattle metro has two fairly well attended WHL franchises with the Thunderbirds and Everett Silvertips. In fact of the 30 players drafted in the first round of the NHL draft this year--8 of them were from the WHL--only 1 was from a US college hockey team. Sure most of those players on American WHL teams in the Northwest are Canadian--however there's a decent audience already for those teams(in person--local media coverage is weak). The CHL (which includes the WHL) is really the true top tier Division 1 of hockey below the NHL.

Though I'm not making the claim that Seattle or any other part of the US Pacific Northwest is an especially strong hockey market right now--but if you bring the NHL to Seattle(or Portland) you'll have a stronger base and more interest than any of the Sunbelt cities that got NHL teams in the last decade. The difficulty with the NHL and any relocation in the future(since there's not going to be any new teams added anytime soon) is finding a market that has the right balance. There's plenty of small Canadian metros that are fanatical about hockey--on the other hand the NHL might be wary about the small size of the media markets---Quebec City is a good place to get a franchise again, but the metro area is smaller than El Paso or Allentown, PA metros, while Hamilton or Toronto suburbs have a shot but has to pry fans away from the Maple Leafs. And if the Canadian dollar or economy weakens, a place like Winnipeg is going to be at risk again when trying to compete with US teams. On the other hand in the US, the major cities with more of a traditional hockey base all have teams already--so any relocation in the US, you're looking at up and coming metros or places with an arena and the desire to move a team there... Which leaves other big Sunbelt cities like Houston or places like Kansas City or Seattle or Portland.

The odds are that the next NHL team to move might go to Quebec City(which I'm totally for, the Nordiques were a fun team back in the day). Seattle is a strong contender, but a new stadium ASAP is going to be a must--Key Arena isn't suited for hockey, after they remodeled it for the Sonics, a lot of seats had obstructed views for hockey--hence why the Thunderbirds moved to Kent. Paul Allen has warmed up to the idea of an NHL team in Portland as well and another tenant at the Rose Garden(now Moda Center), so last month the Trailblazers ownership was interested in the Phoenix Coyotes as well. Anyhow, I'm totally in favor of a team in either Seattle or Portland just as a hockey fan.