Thread: Winnipeg in talks to acquire Thrashers

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

Just got an Espn text alert that Gary Bettman expects the rest of the league to play a more 'balanced' shedule this season to accomodate the Winnipeg Whatevers. I don't have a link, sorry.
So,the NHL drops the ball and expects all the teams to just cover for them. That's just swell. This has been handled in typical 'we'll fix it afters' fashion. No move should have been considered until realignment was also sorted out. PERIOD. Winnipeg should have to play a lameduck season in Atlanta or be prepared to adjust their travel plans. No team in the league should sign off on this. Are the Winnipeg fans being asked to commit to their season seats during a work stoppage that will occur one season after they get hockey back. Theres the in the room.

He was referring to 2012-13. After the realignment.

Originally Posted by ianmonsta

The history and archives didn't move to Baltimore though, their owner basically just left town and started a new team. When the Jets became the Coyotes all the team history went with 'em, they have retired #'s for christ sake hanging of former Jets in Phoenix. For that reason they shouldn't be the Jets.

That's crazy talk.

If you drag your team to a new city and change the name and the colors of the team you shouldn't be allowed to claim all the history that you left behind.

Teams like the San Francisco Giants, Los Angeles Dodgers and Los Angeles Lakers BARELY get a pass because they at least attempted to keep some kind of "culture" alive.

The Winnipeg Jets died the day that they were sold to the Colangelo group. There may have been a few players and front office personnel who made the trip from Winnipeg to Phoenix but the team playing in Phoenix is not now and was not then the Winnipeg Jets.

You're crazy talk. It's the same franchise, they have retired Jets #'s, same with the Hurricanes/Whalers, Northstars/Stars & Nordiques/Avalanche. The new team is the Thrashers franchise not the Jets. It happens all the time in sports with the Browns being one of the few exceptions.

Should the Minnesota Wild have taken the Stars/Northstars history when they started? Should they be able to retire Modanos #? No, absolutely not. Just because a team moves to a city where a team used to exist it doesn't make them the same team.

Sometimes i think you just argue to argue and don't even believe your own arguments.

Originally Posted by ianmonsta

You're crazy talk. It's the same franchise, they have retired Jets #'s, same with the Hurricanes/Whalers, Northstars/Stars & Nordiques/Avalanche. The new team is the Thrashers franchise not the Jets. It happens all the time in sports with the Browns being one of the few exceptions.

Should the Minnesota Wild have taken the Stars/Northstars history when they started? Should they be able to retire Modanos #? No, absolutely not. Just because a team moves to a city where a team used to exist it doesn't make them the same team.

Sometimes i think you just argue to argue and don't even believe your own arguments.

I absolutely believe this argument.

The Phoenix Coyotes have nothing to do with the Winnipeg Jets. Maybe the Hurricans still have Whalers blood in them but the Coyotes are a different animal.

If the fans in Winnipeg want their Jets then they should absolutely get them regardless of what some fans in California think about the team in Phoenix.

Originally Posted by Dr. Naysay

I absolutely believe this argument.

The Phoenix Coyotes have nothing to do with the Winnipeg Jets. Maybe the Hurricans still have Whalers blood in them but the Coyotes are a different animal.

If the fans in Winnipeg want their Jets then they should absolutely get them regardless of what some fans in California think about the team in Phoenix.

so, if the kings move to kansas city, and 10 years later the florida panthers move to la, should the florida panthers become the la kings, even though the la kings would be the kansas city monarchs?

Originally Posted by p. Diddy

so, when kings move to kansas city, and 10 years later the florida panthers move to la, should the florida panthers become the la kings, even though the la kings would be the kansas city monarchs?

ftfy

Originally Posted by P. Diddy

so, if the kings move to kansas city, and 10 years later the florida panthers move to la, should the florida panthers become the la kings, even though the la kings would be the kansas city monarchs?

Why not?

Originally Posted by Dr. Naysay

Why not?

because it's not the la kings franchise?

Originally Posted by P. Diddy

because it's not the la kings franchise?

Would you expect the fans of the Kansas City Monarchs to get confused when a new Los Angeles Kings turned up? Would they not be sure of who to root for?

Let's say the Kings DID move to Kansas City and then 15 years later a new Kings team started playing in Los Angeles.... let's say that new Kings team made it to the Conference Finals against the Kansas City Monarchs and there was only one remaining player from the old Kings team... would you root for the Monarchs because it was the Kings franchise?