FOT Forum
FOT Community => General Discussion => Topic started by: namethebats on July 02, 2008, 10:27:05 PM
-
I see three options:
1) Keep rooting for the team now that they're in Oklahoma City;
2) Switch to the next-closest team (the Blazers);
3) Switch to the primary team of where I'm living now (the Pistons).
There's also rooting for the team I live closest to (the Timberwolves), but their games aren't televised here, and they're even sorrier than the OKC team.
What do you guys think?
-
Wait a couple years until you get an expansion team (worked for Cleveland and Houston in the NFL).
-
I would choose #1. Jeff Green will get Oklahoma City to at least the 2nd round within, uh, I don't know I just like Jeff Green.
-
Timberwolves!
Nah, just kidding. Pistons man. Unless you're planning on moving soon, there's nothing better than rooting for the home team when it comes to sports.
-
I'd swear off the NBA until Seattle gets a new team, especially after Stern's shady dealings. I'm glad that they at least can't use the Sonics name when they move to OKC. Either way, I'm going to miss the Sonics, they have a special place in my heart as a Bulls fan as the only team that could've actually beaten them in the Finals.
-
just bite the bullet and root for the OKC Tornado-bombs.
I might have to actually start watching the NBA.
also, the way it loks, the city of seattle is now asking the state to pony up for the improvements to key arena that the residents of seattle weren't willing to pay for? and seattle getting an expansion team or the second half of the money from clay b. is contingent on the state paying for the improvements?
-
Pretty stupid that Stern allowed him to buy the team seeing that he had no intention of keeping them there. At least he'll always have the local newspaper patting him on the back! (His wife's family owns it)
-
The last thing the league needs is more teams. The less teams there are, the more good players will be on each team and make the game exciting.
I say they need to move the Grizzlies out of Memphis up to Seattle. Memphis averaged 69% attendance last year at home (second worst in the league behind the Pacers). The Sonics had a horrible turn out too (third worst) but relocation from a market that doesn't care for the franchise to a bigger NBA market is much better than creating more franchises.
-
Wait for a new team.
Ugh that's such a frustrating situation though.
-
just bite the bullet and root for the OKC Tornado-bombs.
I might have to actually start watching the NBA.
also, the way it loks, the city of seattle is now asking the state to pony up for the improvements to key arena that the residents of seattle weren't willing to pay for? and seattle getting an expansion team or the second half of the money from clay b. is contingent on the state paying for the improvements?
It looks like they'll have to do $300 million in renovations to Key Arena before they get another team in there. If the legislature approves funding and they don't get a team within five years, Bennett has to pay another $30 million.
I don't know if the legislature's going to approve the money - they already shot down funding earlier this year.
-
I say they need to move the Grizzlies out of Memphis up to Seattle. Memphis averaged 69% attendance last year at home (second worst in the league behind the Pacers). The Sonics had a horrible turn out too (third worst) but relocation from a market that doesn't care for the franchise to a bigger NBA market is much better than creating more franchises.
If Seattle was going to get any existing team, I'd hope for the Grizzlies; they haven't been in Memphis that long, so it wouldn't be as hypocritical to celebrate their arrival.
-
Seattle aint a big sports town I think. In an era of 5 dollar petrol....
Hard to make a working man care about that nonsense. It's increasingly becoming a luxury of the shrinking middle class, attending games anyway.
-
Honestly, this is the first I've heard that the Sonics have actually left. (And I'm a Seattleite.)
Those dollars would be better spent on building mass transit, imo.
-
Sports are an important part of community. It's as important as music, books, plays.... It's another way of bringing communities together, and just like we fund all of those arts we should fund sports. It may not be as high brow but people gather around their hometown team and that is very important. Are rich people making money off the public? Yeah. But, rich people who own museums and theaters do the same thing and a lot more people care about the local teams. You can gripe about that all you want but it's the truth.
-
I don't think anyone gets rich from museums. The already rich get involved in museums.
Also, lots of popular entertainment gets no public support- rock music, movies.
I agree that some amount of public funding for stadiums is probably a good idea, I'm just not sure that "popular or worthwhile=needs support" holds up.
edit: To get a bit more nerdy, I think that the kinds of things that need public support are the kinds of things where the benefits to society or a region are widespread, but those benefits don't necessarily accrue to investors. Situations with positive externalities. Sports franchises might be one of those things.
It's just irritating when teams go to state and local governments for special favors year after year, but then when they're not happy all of a sudden they act like the team is their property in the same way your lawnmower is. At lot of the value of the team comes from civic support to begin with.
-
There's a lot of economic scholarship written for noneconomists on these issues if you're interested.
The Sports Economist (http://thesportseconomist.com/)
Sports Law Blog (http://sports-law.blogspot.com/)
Good & Plenty: The Creative Successes of American Arts Funding (http://books.google.com/books?id=6ZFSpc_P6hcC&printsec=frontcover) by Tyler Cowen (http://www.marginalrevolution.com/)
etc.
-
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=adande_ja&page=sonicsmove_080702
J.A. Adande had a nice column regarding all this on ESPN.com today.
-
When I read the title for this post I thought maybe it would be about whether or not to skip the three Christmas songs at the end of The Sonics' Here are the Sonics (especially "Villiage Idiot") if it's not December.
-
It looks like they'll have to do $300 million in renovations to Key Arena before they get another team in there. If the legislature approves funding and they don't get a team within five years, Bennett has to pay another $30 million.
I don't know if the legislature's going to approve the money - they already shot down funding earlier this year.
The sonics will be playing in an $87million arena next season. The $120 mil that's being thrown around was the total package that was approved by voters that includes all the infrastructure upgrades, a $20mil practice facility that will be used by multiple entities and (by my companies estimation) about $17mil in upgrades to the actual arena itself.
-
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=adande_ja&page=sonicsmove_080702
J.A. Adande had a nice column regarding all this on ESPN.com today.
Good column. I'm also looking forward to seeing what Bill Simmons has to say - he's been a pretty vocal supporter of the Seattle fans through all this.
-
Also, lots of popular entertainment gets no public support- rock music, movies.
Rock clubs in Seattle have closed and opened with startling regularity for years. First Avenue & 7th St Entry in your neck of the woods Gilly, has barely scraped by on the strength of it's own ingenuity for over 30 years - even though it's regarded as of "historic significance" to MN, it receives no money from the state.
The business certainly isn't easy, but I'd never want it to be any other way. Which is a big part of why I appreciate and support WFMU.
I do not doubt the importance of sports to a community, but I do believe their relationships with local communities have steadily become abusive and problematic to say the least. Every time these stadium arguments come up, you feel like you're getting mugged.
-
I agree that owners take advantage of the communities. Most owners are scumbags milking their respective states for every dollar they can get whether that be through public funding, cable TV packages, or raising ticket prices because they opened a new stadium bought with public money. But, how do you fight it? By refusing to deal with these scumbags and leaving the citizens without something they all had as common ground? That's important and you don't realize how important it is until it's gone. Everybody in Minnesota said good riddance to Norm Green and the North Stars but it left a huge void and everybody realized how important a pro hockey team was to Minnesota. Luckily, the league saw that too and we got another team fairly quickly but that's only because we're a huge hockey state. Most cities losing a pro sports team probably won't get one for a long time, if ever. Seattle doesn't have a hockey team so they essentially have no pro sports team from December-March.
-
I agree that owners take advantage of the communities. Most owners are scumbags milking their respective states for every dollar they can get whether that be through public funding, cable TV packages, or raising ticket prices because they opened a new stadium bought with public money. But, how do you fight it? By refusing to deal with these scumbags and leaving the citizens without something they all had as common ground? That's important and you don't realize how important it is until it's gone. Everybody in Minnesota said good riddance to Norm Green and the North Stars but it left a huge void and everybody realized how important a pro hockey team was to Minnesota. Luckily, the league saw that too and we got another team fairly quickly but that's only because we're a huge hockey state. Most cities losing a pro sports team probably won't get one for a long time, if ever. Seattle doesn't have a hockey team so they essentially have no pro sports team from December-March.
Again I may be off base but I don't think the average person cares. I admit I'm biased because I don't care.
BTW I live in the area.
-
Again I may be off base but I don't think the average person cares. I admit I'm biased because I don't care.
BTW I live in the area.
Depends on the region and the team.
-
Root for the Clippers. No one here does. Unlike, say, the Sox/Cubs rivalry, the Clippers have no polarity with anyone. You can make them your own.
One of my life-goals is to find a Clippers bar. If you walk in wearing a Kobe jersey, you get stomped. Hasn't happened yet. And even Lakers fans despise Kobe.
-
Root for the Clippers. No one here does. Unlike, say, the Sox/Cubs rivalry, the Clippers have no polarity with anyone. You can make them your own.
One of my life-goals is to find a Clippers bar. If you walk in wearing a Kobe jersey, you get stomped. Hasn't happened yet. And even Lakers fans despise Kobe.
The Clippers look like they could be pretty good this year with Baron Davis (if they manage to keep Maggette and Elton Brand) but they also have arguably the worst owner in NBA, Donald Sterling. The guy's such a cheapskate and could care less about his franchise.
-
The Clippers look like they could be pretty good this year with Baron Davis (if they manage to keep Maggette and Elton Brand) but they also have arguably the worst owner in NBA, Donald Sterling. The guy's such a cheapskate and could care less about his franchise.
That's the misery of it. The Clippers have a lot of promise right now, and LA could easily support another good team, but Sterling keeps forgetting that they exist.
Buy the team, Hinterlands, and move them to Seattle. America needs a change.
-
Personally I'd be all for the Grizzlies moving to Seattle. Memphis clearly shouldn't have an NBA team.
-
Again I may be off base but I don't think the average person cares. I admit I'm biased because I don't care.
BTW I live in the area.
Are you a sports fan? You may be right that the average person doesn't care, but I think the opinion of the average sports fan is what matters in this discussion.
-
Again I may be off base but I don't think the average person cares. I admit I'm biased because I don't care.
BTW I live in the area.
Are you a sports fan? You may be right that the average person doesn't care, but I think the opinion of the average sports fan is what matters in this discussion.
Exactly. Just like the average person doesn't care about theater. But, theater fans rally around their art being funded... and I agree with them, but sports need to be funded too because they are important as well. They just get a bad rap because of how high paid the athletes are and the scumbag owners. It doesn't take away from the fact that they are important to communities.
-
Again I may be off base but I don't think the average person cares. I admit I'm biased because I don't care.
BTW I live in the area.
Are you a sports fan? You may be right that the average person doesn't care, but I think the opinion of the average sports fan is what matters in this discussion.
Exactly. Just like the average person doesn't care about theater. But, theater fans rally around their art being funded... and I agree with them, but sports need to be funded too because they are important as well. They just get a bad rap because of how high paid the athletes are and the scumbag owners. It doesn't take away from the fact that they are important to communities.
What are some of the ways pro sports benefit communities would you say?
I have no problem with athletes making as much money as they can, the more the better. But I have a hard time understanding why pro sports can't fund themselves with their own revenue.
Why should my tax dollars go toward funding them and their arenas? Make a gigantic park in the middle of the city instead where kids can play ball.
-
From an economic standpoint, they stimulate commerce near the stadium/arena and are generally considered to contribute to "quality of life" which can influence property values, etc.
If you don't think there are some benefit to be had, you may not be looking at it entirely objectively. If there wasn't value, it wouldn't exist.
Visit Green Bay once. I think you'd change your mind.
-
From an economic standpoint, they stimulate commerce near the stadium/arena and are generally considered to contribute to "quality of life" which can influence property values, etc.
If you don't think there are some benefit to be had, you may not be looking at it entirely objectively. If there wasn't value, it wouldn't exist.
Visit Green Bay once. I think you'd change your mind.
I think sports teams do add to the sense of community in an area. Just look at how so many newer Sun Belt cities got franchises in the 80s and 90s. People love sports as entertainment and cities with sports teams are considered almost more legitimate in the eyes of average Americans.
Green Bay is pretty awesome since it's like the only non-profit, community owned American sports team and the only sports team remaining in a small town, yet they still might be one of the most famous and popular teams.
-
From an economic standpoint, they stimulate commerce near the stadium/arena and are generally considered to contribute to "quality of life" which can influence property values, etc.
If you don't think there are some benefit to be had, you may not be looking at it entirely objectively. If there wasn't value, it wouldn't exist.
Visit Green Bay once. I think you'd change your mind.
No, I'm open enough to know there must be some benefit but why can't they pay for themselves if they're so popular?
-
I think the argument that owners have is that they shouldn't have to front all the money and pay to field a team when it's a community asset. They'll pay to field a winning team if the public gives them money to build a stadium and make it worthwhile for them financially. I don't have a problem with that at all. I do have a problem that professional leagues have put all of their games on cable tv and that ticket prices rise sky high when stadiums open.
-
No, I'm open enough to know there must be some benefit but why can't they pay for themselves if they're so popular?
Don't get me wrong, I agree completely. People have to help pay for stadiums nowadays, but they can't even afford healthcare. Definitely some screwy priorities going around.
-
It looks like they'll have to do $300 million in renovations to Key Arena before they get another team in there. If the legislature approves funding and they don't get a team within five years, Bennett has to pay another $30 million.
I don't know if the legislature's going to approve the money - they already shot down funding earlier this year.
The sonics will be playing in an $87million arena next season. The $120 mil that's being thrown around was the total package that was approved by voters that includes all the infrastructure upgrades, a $20mil practice facility that will be used by multiple entities and (by my companies estimation) about $17mil in upgrades to the actual arena itself.
Hopefully their voters are still in a giving mood when Clay Bennett tells them how lousy the arena is 5-10 years from now.
-
I think the argument that owners have is that they shouldn't have to front all the money and pay to field a team when it's a community asset. They'll pay to field a winning team if the public gives them money to build a stadium and make it worthwhile for them financially. I don't have a problem with that at all. I do have a problem that professional leagues have put all of their games on cable tv and that ticket prices rise sky high when stadiums open.
Ok, but I don't want to pay for it. If I'm ever given a choice (via vote) whether my tax dollars will go to support a sports stadium I'll vote "no" every time.
-
Don't get me wrong, I agree completely. People have to help pay for stadiums nowadays, but they can't even afford healthcare. Definitely some screwy priorities going around.
I don't have a problem with chipping in to some extent, but there are plenty of arenas that got built mostly through private/corporate funding (The Fleet Center in Boston comes to mind).
I've been to Green Bay during Packers training camp, and it seems like the ideal relationship between a team and the community.
-
I don't have a problem with chipping in to some extent, but there are plenty of arenas that got built mostly through private/corporate funding (The Fleet Center in Boston comes to mind).
Stadiums that are privately funded are in huge markets with not only local fans but fans all across the globe. Owners of those teams don't have to worry about their team being profitable and businesses want any opportunity that can to be involved with that team.
Ok, but I don't want to pay for it. If I'm ever given a choice (via vote) whether my tax dollars will go to support a sports stadium I'll vote "no" every time.
Not that sports is more important than education, but that's like somebody without children voting no to education funding because they don't use it. Education > Stadiums. But, it's the same attitude.
-
I don't have a problem with chipping in to some extent, but there are plenty of arenas that got built mostly through private/corporate funding (The Fleet Center in Boston comes to mind).
Stadiums that are privately funded are in huge markets with not only local fans but fans all across the globe. Owners of those teams don't have to worry about their team being profitable and businesses want any opportunity that can to be involved with that team.
That's probably true of most of them. But Portland only had to contribute about 15-20 percent of the funding for the Rose Garden, and their reach is as regional as the Sonics', if not more so.
-
I've been to Green Bay during Packers training camp, and it seems like the ideal relationship between a team and the community.
Absolutely agree 100%.
-
Portland's owner is also the 42nd richest man in the world.
-
Millionaire households by county:
1. Los Angeles County (CA) 268,000
2. Cook County (IL) 171,000
3. Orange County (CA) 116,000
4. Maricopa County (AZ) 113,000
5. San Diego County (CA) 102,000
6. Harris County (TX) 99,000
7. Nassau County (NY) 79,000
8. Santa Clara County (CA) 74,000
9. Palm Beach County (FL) 71,000
10. King County (WA) 68,000
So let the millionaires pony up for it. Not like there aren't enough of them.
-
I take back everything I said in this thread. Even I can't root for a team/logo this lame:
(http://nba.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/p5174214dt.jpg)
-
That looks exactly like the Wizards logo.
-
it makes me sad.
-
When I found out Seattle was keeping the Sonics name and colors, I figured "Great!" I thought nothing would be worse than seeing the classic green and white jerseys with "Oklahoma City" on them.
I was wrong.
-
I never got "Thunder" as a team name. Everyone knows that Lightning is where it is at. Thunder is only good for scaring dogs and little kids.