Whoa. That seems outrageous for any coach, let alone one who hasn’t exactly been terribly successful (as a coach).

I will share a couple of observations that I made over on HFBoards (a few of which were subsequently noted by the Globe – scooped you guys, James!):

1. As of yesterday, the NHL has received four formal Background Applications from non-JB parties seeking to purchase the Phoenix Coyotes AND KEEP THEM IN PHOENIX:

a. Reinsdorf and a gentleman named John Kaites (who is apparently Reinsdorf’s attorney and thus may or may not actually have a financial stake);
b. Breslow;
c. Howard Sokolowski and David Cynamon, current owners of the Toronto Argos (!!!!);
d. A Phoenix businessman who has requested anonymity pending due diligence.

2. When Colorado relocated to NJ, Quebec relocated to Colorado and Hartford relocated to Carolina, each time they paid the league a relocation fee which was shared collectively by the other clubs (these are in addition to the well known indemnity payments made by Colo/NJ and Anaheim).

3. The JB bid is really only $165 million per the NHL’s review of the bid: $212.5 mil, less the $22.5 mil (as I have previously noted), less the $25 mil advanced by the NHL against the revenue sharing payments that will be otherwise made in October 2009.).

4. Moyes himself, in his lawyer’s (Scudder) sworn declaration actually took a conservative stab at the value of an NHL team in southern ONT. The NHL has noted that this effectively sets a floor for the value of a relocation fee (the values have been redacted from the court documents – arrrghh).

(i) Creating and enhancing spectator interest by preserving traditional rivalries and fostering the development of new ones.
(ii) encouraging investment by private parties in arena construction and related infrastructure
(iii) respecting the investment made by private parties in the supply of refreshments, parking, transportation, and team and league related paraphernalia.
(iv) attracting spectators and corporate sponsors by showing a strong commitment to a local market and the league as a whole.
(v) ensuring that the sport is being appropriately promoted and that the reputation and goodwill of the league and its individual teams are not being compromised\
(vi) maximizing revenues generated by the league in the form of tv and media coverage rights by promoting the overall stability of the franchises that constitute the league and creating appropriate regional balance to ensure that the greatest number of spectators is reached.

Summary of a Canadian Bureau of Competition report

The NHL’s arguments would look very compelling if someone did not know the leagues history:

Point 10 – scheduling ripple effects. So explain to me how Detroit is in the Western Conference?

Point 12 – scheduling and coordination. Hmmm. This is the same league that was going to take 10 days off from the end of the conference finals until the Stanley Cup Finals began because they have this terrific agreement with NBC in the US that pays them multi-millions?

Point 15 – the clubs have to work together off the ice. Gave me a good laugh given the history of not working together unless a gun was put to the owners heads. The year lost to a lockout owes much to a history of teams that refused to work together for a common good as a desire to destroy the union.

Point 16 – background checks. Bettman has a lot of nerve offering that arguement given the history while he’s been commissioner (besides Bellagio who remembers John Spano and the New York Islanders?).

What I just can’t see here is how a court can force someone to continue to lose enormous sums of money. I’m still not sure the Balsillie wins this one because of his self imposed deadline to move the team and the appellate process but this seems more and more to me like a pyrrhic victory for a commissioner who’s embarrassing the league.