It's been a while since this issue has been addressed, but I was wondering if anyone knows anything about our chances of getting a team now that the NHL labor contract has been resolved? From what I remember, the city was waiting on the agreement to be reached before moving forward. We've had the Ford Center for three years now. I hope it isn't too late to get a team interested in coming to OKC with our new facility in place. If Tulsa gets their's done before we land a team, it could make it harder to secure one since Tulsa will be trying to attract one as well.

One thing to keep in mind is size. Oklahoma City is approaching 1.5 million metro and Tulsa has less than one million. Plus the television market in Oklahoma City is larger, and our arena has a positive national reputation. Plus, we should be able to lure national sponsors. (both cities may have this one locked, however).

If Oklahoma City and Tulsa both applied, the edge would be Oklahoma City. One additional reason... Oklahoma City has applied for NHL before. Tulsa has not. Tulsa's only edge would be NBA development and I think that is a stretch.

To answer the question. I do not know, however I hope the city leaders still have it in mind.

The size of the arena also plays a role. I think Tulsa is making a huge mistake by going with a smaller arena for the sake of architecture. Simply put, professional teams and music artists could careless what the architecture of the arena looks like....they simply want to sell tickets. They can sell more tickets at our arena than they can at Tulsa's proposed arena.

One also has to look at the health of the NHL right now. It might be a smart move to wait and see what happens to the NHL before we pursue a team.

I think NBA is out of the question, considering the failure with the OKC Cavs several years ago.

Of course, we also need to take into consideration the fact the Cavalry tanked themselves by not promoting the team, including advertising.

There is not enough financial (or true fan) support in this state to sustain a professional franchise. And, if there were enough interest, it would pull money from our two main collegiate programs.

Why do you think it would pull money from the college programs?

I'm not sure the NHL is really something worth pursuing. They did get the agreement settled, but it's not a very big deal to begin with. I think they go into retraction before an expansion occurs. But if we could show real demand, then we might get one moved here from a city that has too many other competeing professional sports.

In a state our size, there is a finite well of financial resources. A professional team requires a massive amount of corporate sponsorship to sustain itself. It is doubtful that there will be much additional financial resources able to be found to fulfill this need, so a sizable portion of the current sponsorships of our collegiate sports programs would likely shift toward the pro team.

I believe one reason our state has been so successful in the NCAA has been that our state universities (primarily OU and OSU) are heavily supported by corporate sponsorship, dollars that may not be available in the same degree if there were a major league franchise located in OKC or Tulsa.

I seriously doubt the CBA franchise folding would have any effect on future NBA propects. The CBA did not have very good attendance overall. The league itself went into the tank, mainly due to high operating costs combined with poor attendance.

Believe it or not, Oklahoma City actually led the league in attendance for several seasons. (Before the Blazers came along.)


I actually think an NBA franchise is most likely. The league is very stable, and has a good track record of locating in smaller markets where they are the only show in town. (Salt Lake City, Sacramento, Vancouver, etc.)

As far as the NHL is concerned, time will tell if the league will recover enough to even look at expansion anytime in the near future.

If you said OKC Is approching 1.5 million you added 200,000 people to the metro area......so you should add 200,000 to Tulsa as well.

OKC-1.5 MIL
TULSA 1.1 MIL

I do belive Tulsa is making a mistake by making a slightly smaller arena but the archatecture plan also says that they can add and additional 2,000-3,000 seats if needed.....but seriously i dont think hockey or basketball would work in Oklahoma. We need to aim for an NFL franchise.

I cannot speak for OU, but I do not believe that OSU would be hurt much financially by a pro team. Oklahoma State's biggest financial backer, Boone Pickens, is from Texas. Many of their other financial backers are from Texas. There is not a lot of big Oklahoma money going into OSU athletics.

Actually Chrisok,

the NBA was NOT the only game in town in Vancouver. I think you meant Portland OR.

Vancouver had the CFL BC Lions and the NHL Canucks - two major league teams that were there before the NBA and are still there!

I do agree that the NBA tends to do well in smaller markets though, where they are the only team in town. This however does not explain why the NBA failed in Vancouver; a large market with 3 major league teams but no interest in NBA whatsoever!

__________________
Oklahoma City, RENAISSANCE CITY!

I was referring not to donors and benefactors but to corporate sponsors. Both schools depend heavily on corporate sponsorship dollars. Part of the compensation packages for coaches include big endorsement deals with big hitters like Nike.

When there was serious talk about trying to bring an NHL team in, there was much discussion and analysis by the experts on the financial impact (both positive and negative) such a major league professional sports franchise might have on the community and/or state. One of the key counterpoints on why a major league pro team might not be the best thing for Oklahoma City or Oklahoma would be the financial impact it likely would have on the collegiate sports programs because of diverted corporate sponsorship moneys.

I see...

Mayor Cornett seems confident in our ability to attract a team. I would think that they've studied the question carefully, regarding the market and the use of any public subsidy. Some questions they should be considering:

- What sport will incur the least substitution effect on other leisure spending? In other words, what sport would take the least away from spending on other sports, dining, movies, theater, restaurants, etc

- What type of sport will have the most sustainable fan base? What kind of team could earn the level of loyalty the OU/OSU teams do?

- What would be the ticket prices?

- What can attract sponsorships outside the city and state?

- What will generate the most positive spillover effects on other parts of the economy? What kind of team/sport will encourage the creation of other businesses (besides restaurants and retail, like law firms, medicine, mechanics, media, marketing, travel)?

- Could the kind of facility it might require be built in or near downtown? (Yeah, the NHL and NBA have a free pass on this one) The state fairgrounds don't count as "near" downtown.

- Can the sport win over new fans besides what the current minor league teams are attracting? Can they offer a type of entertainment that appeals to many people? Is there enough scoring to make it exiting?

- What sports offer some kind of control on player salaries or team spending, where smaller market teams can be competitive? As you guys mentioned earlier, in what sports are smaller market teams not only financially successful, but competitive with larger market teams?

- What is most likely to require the least public subsidy? What can generate the most private dollars if a new facility is required?

Of course, the answers to these questions probably point to different sports, but fan base and corporate support are probably the most important considerations.

__________________
True greatness requires many fathers.

For a good time, see http://www.okchornets.com/

Good questions, floater.

I think your last sentence sums up the biggest challenge for bringing a major league team into Oklahoma City. Sometimes we, as a city, believe we are bigger than we really are; sometimes that leads to delusions of grandeur.

I love this city, but I'm also realistic about where we rank among other cities around the nation in population, resources, etc.

Which is interesting, because it must have more to do with money and resources than population base. There are several cities comparable in size and smaller that have major league franchises. I think the key is corporate support and average disposable income. Everyone says how cheap OKC is, but when you're competing for the same services as major markets, your going to pay roughly the same prices.

As far as affecting the colleges, I think it would, but would that be a bad thing? Is having competitive college sports in our small towns more important than having major league franchises in our cities? Which would we benefit from more?

BINGO!! Yes!! I've been saying for years that a large population means squat if it isn't accompanied by a proportionately large aggregate income base! It IS about disposable income. It's said all the time that we have some of the most affordable housing in the country, but the fact is, a $19.99 product in OKC will be tougher on the wallet than the same $19.99 product in DC. Granted, those DC residents may pay a higher portion of their monthly income for housing, but some goods don't have wide regional variations in price.

But as it was found earlier, it's also the fact that OKC is so sprawled. Income concentration is too low. As reported in an earlier newspaper article, it's why restaurants locate in Tulsa before OKC.

Realistically, there really isn't an OKC MSA market. There are several submarkets instead. Even though travel times are shorter, there is still a psychological distance. That's why so few go to downtown.

__________________
True greatness requires many fathers.

For a good time, see http://www.okchornets.com/

I mention population base because we have a hard time supporting MINOR league franchises with MINOR league ticket prices. We need a larger pool to draw from to support a MAJOR league franchise with MAJOR league ticket prices.

Which cities are you citing as having major league franchises and are comparable in size or smaller?

As far as it affecting the colleges and whether or not it's a bad thing, I would say it very much would be. If there is a finite amount of resources, rather than diluting them across a wide spectrum and having several mediocre teams, why not devote those same dollars to fewer teams so that you can at least excel at some level. If you're going to do something, do it right. I doubt that OKC has the resources to compete with much larger markets; and without those resources, you have little chance of being successful.

Anyone who thinks OKC is a large enough market to support a major league franchise is kidding themselves. I'm all for dreaming big, but be realistic in the process.

The biggest reasons are apathy and image.

A large number of people are brainwashed into thinking Oklahoma City can not support major league sports because of our size, television market share, number of major corporate headquarters, and OU.

This is quite incorrect. We are ranked number 29 in metro and 45 in television market. If you factor in the outlining areas that are smaller markets, we can be number 25 or so in the media. Factor in the target markets (nearly all of Oklahoma and some surrounding areas outside Oklahoma) and we can have around a five million population base.

We have numerous possibilities for corporate sponsorship. Lowe's, Sonic, Express, Mackinburg-Duncan, just to name some. Three of those are based here. Lowe's is a major sponsor to two or three major league teams not located in their home state of North Carolina. So, if they have a large presence here, they are potential. A company does not need to be based here to sponsor something. Finally. If these people will pay $50.00 for a ticket to an OU game, then $25.00 or so is not out of the question for a major league game. Just look at Nashville, for example. Vanderbilt is one of the largest Universities in the nation, and Nashville has two major league franchises which are making money. There are other examples also.

Before you say anything, keep one thing in mind. Oklahoma City has money. A great deal of it. Some of the wealthiest areas in the nation are here. Nichols Hills and Chartaney, just to name two.

Image. The majority of the country thinks Oklahoma City is a cowtown full of redneck hicks, with stereotypical behavior. Yes. We have them. However, if you factor in the 1.3 million current population of the metro, a very small percentage are the stereotypes. However, since the press feels it is neccessary to put toothless Bubba on camera in front of what use to be his mobile home in the middle of a treeless five acres of land, saying "mah traylr just done blowed up. That don't happen harr," that gives the country the impression all Oklahoma Citians are like that. So, we get left out.

We CAN support major leagues. We just need to apply for them and fight for them. We did once, and would have won if the NHL had played fair and not allowed St. Paul to counter offer, or allowed us to counter offer as well. That proves we can do it.

What about San Antonio?? Their income is comparable to OKC. Plus, their housing is higher.

Population of OKC proper as of 2000: 528,042

Cities within 50k more (9.4%) in population that host major league franchises:
Seattle
Boston
Denver
DC
Nashville
Portland

Cities with less population hosting major league franchises:
New Orleans
Cleveland
Sacramento
Kansas City
Atlanta
Oakland
Minneapolis

Granted many of these markets have metro areas larger than their proper populations, but so does OKC. These numbers are not totally indicative of our relative population situation, but they do suggest that we're not out of the ballpark and that others with similar population numbers have attracted major league sports.

There always is a finite amount of resources, which was why I was asking if we are using them properly. I like college sports as much as the next guy, but what is the opportunity cost of every dollar spent to support a college team in a small town versus spending that dollar on a major league sports franchise in one of our cities? Is this the best thing to do with our corporate resources? If OU's football history wasn't what it is and we were starting from scratch, which would you choose: hundreds of millions of dollars for a world class college football team or the same for an NBA team?

I don’t think there is a right answer, but I do think Oklahomans often think that what has been successful for us in the past relative to our other ventures must be protected, even if it means risking the future. Our economy is a great example.

Trust me when I say I have no vested interest in college sports. In most cases, I prefer the professional version to the collegiate version of any sport. (However, given the choice, I would pick collegiate football over an NBA team.)

My conclusions have been based on a great deal of reading and research from when the NHL proposal was floating around most recently. I'm not saying I'm absolutely right or that I have all the answers, because I certainly don't. However, I personally don't believe there's the fan support in this state to have a successful professional team.

I suppose my biggest issue would be the typical "visionary" grandiose thinking that sounds good in the beginning but ends up falling apart in the end. It's a sickness that plagues many politicians, and it's not easily cured. The lottery, although fun for many, will prove not to be quite the windfall to the state — especially education — that the politicians (and proponents) claimed it would be. The turnpikes are a good example of pie-in-the-sky promises of well-built roads that paid for themselves and would eventually become free; that promise has been conveniently forgotten.

It's my firm belief that a city needs to take care of its more practical issues before worrying about the "luxury" issues like major league franchises. It sounds good in the beginning (think about all the potential tax revenue, they will say); but often the realities prove that there's not quite the return everyone first believed. Teams demand increasing financial support from local governments — i.e. taxpayers — in order to keep them around. Before long, you give away the store and you've gained very little.

[quote=HOT ROD]

the NBA was NOT the only game in town in Vancouver. I think you meant Portland OR.

Absolutely I meant Portland. Yeah Vancouver was a miserable failure. Pretty bad mistake considering I didn't even get the country right.

It's tough to make it in Canada. They have to pay American dollars, and the taxes are higher so it's not the ideal place for players to go. It also didn't help matters that the Grizzlies were brutal.