Sat Dec 06, 2008 3:29 pm EST
"Attendance at Jobing.com Arena was announced at 13,377, but many of those customers must have come disguised as empty seats." -- Kevin McGran, Toronto Star, Dec. 5

That factoid above was mentioned in the third paragraph of McGran's game story from the Toronto Maple Leafs' 6-3 loss to the Phoenix Coyotes; placed higher than the identity of the game-winning goal scorer.
He elaborated on Phoenix's economic and fan-support woes in an interview on Fan 590 in Toronto as well; and, a few days earlier, wrote in the Star that the "Coyotes are believed to be hanging on by a thread," before quoting an anonymous broker as saying, "I don't see how you can build long-term support for an ice hockey team when you are located in markets where your fan base can't play hockey."
Couple those with the Globe & Mail's example of Phoenix as a market with "trouble ahead" -- and the same paper's citing of the franchise's operating losses from last season ("between $30-million and $40-million") as an example of the NHL "rotting" as Gary Bettman shoots sunshine at reporters -- and there appears to be a trend.
And that trend points to a fervent, insatiable lust for the Phoenix Coyotes to fail and relocate. Hey, maybe even to Canada!
But really, why pussyfoot around when you can just cut to the chase, as the Globe and Mail did today with its article "Coyotes face potential disaster"?
The Phoenix Coyotes are expected to lose between $25- and $35-million (all currency U.S.) this year and with his primary business under financial duress, owner Jerry Moyes may not be able to cover the hockey team's losses any longer.
That leaves him three choices:
- Renegotiate the Coyotes' arena lease to effectively put the city of Glendale into the position covering some of the losses;
- Put the franchise into bankruptcy;
- Turn the keys over to the NHL, forcing commissioner Gary Bettman to find a new owner.
Shoalts even explains how the team can break its lease to relocate:
The Coyotes signed a 30-year lease with the city of Glendale, Ariz., when they moved into Jobing.com arena in December, 2003. Terms impose a large financial penalty for breaking the lease. However, if the team is placed into bankruptcy protection, or Chapter 11, the lease could be broken under U.S. law. Without the lease, the team could more easily be sold and relocated.
The paper cites sources who claim that Moyes is very eager to sell the team, despite claims that was not the case last month.
So why all this special attention on Phoenix?
For one, there's the Gretzky effect, as the coach (and defender of hockey in the desert) is hockey royalty seen wasting away in a market that doesn't appreciate him or his sport. Remember, it wasn't too long ago that Gretz was seen as the Leafs' potential savior. Canada wants its "favourite" son back.
Then there's the fact that the Canadian media generally supports more teams north of the border, and Phoenix appears to be the latest loose apple on the non-traditional market tree -- find the U.S. team struggling the most, and shake until it hopefully falls to the ground.
Atlanta, Florida and Carolina have all gone through this, too. The Nashville Predators have been in this position frequently over the last two years, depending on the stability of their ownership.
But perhaps deep down, it all comes back to Winnipeg. Perhaps the notion of "stealing one back," or simply proving that the relocation of a Canadian team to the U.S. was a mistake, is a subtle driving force behind the scrutiny, too. Not to say the Coyotes will ever become the Jets again, but there might be a measure of revenge at play in the back of some minds.
Or maybe not. Again, this is just spit-balling. The extra attention could just be a case where Phoenix is seen as a harbinger of economic doom for the NHL, and deserves to be covered as a canary in the coalmine. Just seems there's been extra attention on this franchise than on others in struggling financial times.
Of course, the easiest way for the Coyotes to make all of this disappear is to just win, baby. Make the postseason, create some buzz. Same goes for Florida, too.
One last thought on the NHL and economics. You may have heard that the WNBA's Houston Comets are folding because the league couldn't find a new owner for the team in this economy.
We've debated contraction before on this blog in regards to the NHL. So here's the question: If the League really did want to reduce its number of franchises, would the current recession provide enough "cover" for the NHL to do so without looking like a League in a death spiral? Or is there no getting around the idea that contraction means big trouble, no matter what the economy looks like?
Puck Daddy is an NHL blog edited by Greg Wyshynski. Email him, and follow him on Twitter.

Montreal 5, Columbus 3 (Nov. 24)
Posted Nov 23 2009
Posted Nov 23 2009
Top Goals of the Week: November 24
Posted Nov 23 2009
Edited by MJD
Edited by 'Duk
Edited by J.E. Skeets
Edited by Greg Wyshynski
Edited by Matt Hinton
Edited by E. Brennan
Edited by Jay Busbee
Edited by Jay Busbee
Edited by Steve Cofield
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Andy Behrens
121 Comments
1 - 24 of 121
Report Abuse
Maybe it's just the organization as a whole that's doomed regardless of where you put them. First Winnipeg, now Phoenix. You could move them to Toronto or area and they may be doomed there too-- could just be the onus.
Contraction, I think, could work and the economy could be the cover. Reduce it by Phoenix, Miami, Nashville, and Atlanta and it'd be pretty set up to keep things rolling and get things a little more stable in the league.....or not.
Report Abuse
In regards to the game on the ice contraction would be brutal for it. Despite what some people think expansion makes it easier for offense to take place, not restrict it. That is historically the case not only in hockey but most sports. The reason is because it thins out the defensive talent. As most people know a good defense beats a good offense. So thinning out the over talent ends up increasing offense as there is less a good defense. As such contraction would mean a concentration of talent and thus a consetration of defesive talent. That means you would see goal scoring plummet down to low 5 goals per game if not lower.
The reason why goal scoring dropped in the late 90's early 2000's was not do to expansion it was due to an increase of quality players coming from Europe and the States into the game.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
There are hockey fans all over Phoenix. You'd be surprised how many Canadian "snowbirds" from up north live here in the winter and spring, not to mention alot of people from hockey states like Minnesota, Michigan, and New York. I've been to several games this year including some great wins against the Capitals and the Penguins and the Job was always pretty packed. Not to mention that most of these fans are kids coming to see hockey. Many high schools in the area have hockey teams as well. So I think the Toronto media, especially Mr. McGran should research up a bit.
The problem in Phoenix isn't so much a financial problem as it is a marketing and locational problem. The Coyotes are Number 4 when it comes to sports teams here in the Desert, and that's not counting ASU football. That's not gonna change unless the Coyotes make a beyond-Cinderalla run to the Cup.
The Coyotes have done everything in their power, (Student Rush tickets, advertising in papers, TV, road signs [see Pierre], and giveaways) to try and attract the fans to come on out to Glendale to see them play. Being in Glendale is half the problem, because the main core of Phoenix's fan base come from the upper-class families living in Scottsdale on the other side of the city.
In this economy, I'm amazed that the Coyotes have kept attendance up, and while I don't know the exact figures, attendance could very well be rising. The product on the ice has certainly gotten better, and it's not like the Yotes are being lame ducks when it comes to being competitive. Acquiring Olli Jokinen was a step in the right direction to tell the Yotes fans that they want to win. The Yotes just need to keep moving forward and making the Playoffs or at least staying right in the chase til the last day of the season (Coyotes are currently 9th in the West) will put them on solid ground.
If the league contracted any team, it would be a tremendous momentum stopper for the NHL and hockey in America. If a team is struggling, the best option would be to relocate once all options were expended. I understand Canadians' frustrations in the fact that teams you love, playing a game you love, are taken away and moved to places where there isn't the same unifying passion. You have to remember the NHL is a business and they make business decisions are made that aren't always the most popular. Hopefully the economy will level and the League can expand in places like Hamilton and Winnipeg that deserve a pro hockey team in 10 or 20 years. Taking hockey away from any place is a bad thing and the NHL is starting to finally grow in places like Carolina, Anaheim, and even here in Phoenix. So let's just see how the landscape of the NHL will play out.
Report Abuse
it killed hockey
damn you bettman
Report Abuse
In the end, who knows if Winnipeg could even support a team, but IMO canada needs another team even if it is in Toronto (ugh), elsewhere in Ontario or Quebec.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
The NHL is more worried about the perception that the league is failing than it is about making the league stronger.
Too bad the league didn't care what locking out the players for a full season, in effect breaking the collective bargaining agreement and imposing a new one, would make the league look like.
Hypocrite, thy name is Bettman.
Suspend a few more people for speaking their mind.
Report Abuse
t's shortsighted to start talking contraction or relocation for these new markets. This is a prime example of short term pain, long term gain. It's easy to forget that Tampa, Florida, Carolina, Nashville, Atlanta, and Phoenix are still relatively new to the league, 10-15 years for most of them. Teams from the '67 expansion like Pittsburgh and St. Louis were facing the threat of relocation well into the 80s, because it takes time for new franchises to take root in their city. In the "nontraditional" markets, you're probably not going to convert older people that hadn't cared about hockey previously; the payoff is when the kids who grew up with that franchise become adults, people who will have had the Thrashers or Predators around their entire lives. If you truly want to grow the game, and have a footprint in these nontraditional markets, you have to take your medicine, allow for growing pains, and see what it looks like in 20-25 years. Teams like Tampa, Carolina, and Dallas who have had success are going to have an entire generation of young fans who got excited about the team when they were winning a championship. Those kids are going to grow into the adults who pay for season tickets, and take THEIR kids to games too.
Also something that shouldn't be underrated: you're going to start seeing alot more kids coming into the NHL from these cities. A city like Pittsburgh, which never had NHL caliber players coming from it, has seen 5-10 kids that grew up in the Lemieux-era enter the league. If my guess is correct, you're going to be seeing kids from Texas, the Carolinas, and Florida starting to show in prospect reports in the next 5-8 years and beyond. Don't underestimate the impact that a little success will have on these newer markets. I usually don't agree with Gary Bettman's stances, but this is one I'm firmly in his corner for. A little patience will go a long way.
Report Abuse
The only expansion process that Bettman oversaw was the 1997 expansion which saw Nashville, Atlanta, Columbus, and Minnesota added. The previous 2 occured before Bettman became commissioner. In that 1997 there were 0 Canadian applicants (Hamilton failed to file the proper paper work needed). It's pretty hard to encourage expansion to an area when there is no legitimate applicants for ownership of a team.
And let's not forget the league allowing the public group to come in and save Edmonton from moving.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
And thanks you Devil fan for picking a photo where the Yotes are celebrating a goal against the Rangers. You bitter, bitter man. ...
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Why all the attention? Why not?
Report Abuse
I just hope that if the 'Yotes make the playoffs again, they remember to do the white-out...
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/attendance?year=2009
6 lowest attendance teams:
1- NY Islanders
2- Nashville
3- Columbus
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/attendance?year=2009
Lowest attendance by teams for 2009 season:
1- NY Islanders
2- Nashville
3- Columbus
4- Atlanta
5- Phoenix
6- New Jersey
So where are the death calls for the NY/NJ area? and phoneix's avg is less than 30 ppl difference from NJ. haha!
Oh they get snow in that area. so obviously ppl play hockey nearby and love there teams more than southern teams. (this last sentence has been dipped in sarcasm)
So many canadiens and other yankees have family down south. do they forget that? ppl move? there are hockey fans ALL OVER! Canadiens need to drop the envy and support the few teams they have left.
maybe the islanders should move to orlando or jacksonville?
Report Abuse
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/attendance?year=2009
1 - 24 of 121