The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I saw a thing where their lease wasn't renewed, so they're playing in a bobo place, tried to get public funding for an arena, that failed.  Now they're kind of out of options.

Does anyone feel anything about this?

Contract them and give the Winnipeg Jets their franchise history back.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/966425361872384000/suH4OC_B_400x400.jpg)

And erase the glorious history of the Atlanta Thrashers? Remember that one time they made the playoffs and got swept in the 1st round?

Shame they went under, but anything CT and up is Bruins country.

No need.  Right now, the NHL history books read:

Winnipeg Jets (1972-1996)
Phoenix Coyotes (1996-2014)
Arizona Coyotes (2014-present)

Atlanta Thrashers (1999-2011)
Winnipeg Jets (2011-present)

Here's the way that it should read:

Winnipeg Jets (1972-1996)
(suspended operations, 1996-1999)
Atlanta Thrashers (1999-2011)
Winnipeg Jets (2011-present)

Phoenix Coyotes (1996-2014)
Arizona Coyotes (2014-present)

As an example of how to do this properly, this is how the NBA history books record the history of the Charlotte Hornets and New Orleans Pelicans:

Charlotte Hornets (1988-2002)
(suspended operations, 2002-2004)
Charlotte Bobcats, (2004-2014)
Charlotte Hornets (2014-present)

New Orleans Hornets (2002-2013)
New Orleans Pelicans (2013-present)

---

To me, the worst part about losing a team is losing your history.  As I've mentioned before, when I was a kid, I was originally an LA Rams fan; when the Rams moved to St. Louis in 1995, not only did the team move, but the Rams history moved with them.  I'm also a Seattle Supersonics fan, and the fan experience after that move is completely different: I can still be a Sonics fan while despising the OKC Thunder, and I always have the hope that if/when Seattle gets another NBA team, the Sonics' history will be restored.  If you were a fan of the the Kansas City Kings, the San Diego Chargers, or the Vancouver Grizzlies, you have no such hope.

No team should ever have public funding for a stadium or arena, it's a giant money laundering scam. The owners are all billionaires, let them pay for it.

While I wish this could be true, it doesn't work if the owner can go get a deal from the next city over.

Arenas cost money, but they bring money too.  And what you "give them" is usually tax breaks that you wouldn't get if they leave anyway, so it's not REALLY costing you anything.

From what I understand anyway, the Phoenix Coyotes weren't asking for a publicly funded stadium.  It was privately funded. 

Too bad New Orleans didn't get their Jazz history back.  It would be nice going forward if teams had to leave their mascots/logos behind if they changed cities.  Cleveland got to keep the "Browns"  not that it was such an iconic logo, but the fans loved it.

This should actually be a condition of receiving any public funding OR tax breaks for a stadium.
I initially posted the above, but then what do you do if the Dallas Cowboys move from Irving to Arlington, or the Golden State Warriors move from Oakland to San Francisco?

Maybe if you move within the state, nothing changes.  Or there can be mutual agreements between the state and team.

WTF?  ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

The owner of the Coyotes is committed to staying in Arizona, they released a statement regarding the future of the franchise.  I don't see them giving up or moving out of Arizona unless they absolutely have no other choice...

This has been ongoing for years.

Maybe another city in Arizona will host them.

Now that the Oakland A's are moving to Las Vegas should they leave the "A's" name behind?  I don't see Oakland getting another major league franchise from any sport; heck they are only getting 2,500 people to show up for games.  In this case I'd be alright with them taking their name with them, especially since the Raiders moved to Las Vegas already.  But it really should be up to the people in Oakland to decide.

Late response, but the people in Philadelphia and Kansas City didn't get a choice when the A's left them.

I am much less concerned with preserving the history of a team that previously existed in a different city with the "same" name.  So fans of the Oakland A's, the San Diego Chargers, or yes, even the LA Rams do not have the strongest claim to holding on to the team history in a move.  However, in the case of the Phoenix/Arizona Coyotes, although they were previously the Winnipeg Jets, if they were moved from AZ they should leave the Coyotes' history behind (and return the Jets' history to the current team, while they're at it).  I would say the same thing if the Chiefs moved, despite them originally being the Dallas Texans.

That make sense.  A's is actually a team name that moves well.  It makes no sense that LA has a team named for the 10,000 lakes of Minnesota and another named for the pedestrians of Brooklyn.  Likewise San Fran shouldn't have a team named after the tall buildings of Manhattan.  I am glad Carolina has hurricanes instead of whalers and there are no Tennessee Oilers.