Honestly I've never understood it?

I didn't even know there was a rivalry between the cities until I got to college and some friends from Tulsa would dog on OKC as a manure factory every chance they got.

Now with the Devon tower going up, the Thunder, the MAPS 3 projects it seems like the hate is at an all time high. I read through some comments in the Tulsa papers from the bombing anniversary, some of the commenters where trying to tie Oklahoma City's success to the bombing, and said we'd still be a cow town if not for the tragedy.

Today I read comments from Tulsans about the Thunder and some of the comments were like this: "The 'Oklahoma Thunder' I would love to support. The 'okc thunder' I could care less."

Like they live in another state of something...Bizarre stuff. Seems OKC citizens are pretty supportive of Tulsa, I actually tried doing some research to see if there was some kind of historical event that catapulted this anger, but I haven't found anything.

Anyone have any clue?

Just your typical city rivalry. It was not that long ago when Tulsa was progressing at a much faster rate and now their upset that OKC has seen more progress the past decade. If the shoe was on the other foot, OKC residents would be the bitter ones.

Tulsans are just retards, unless they are transplants that used to live here, or really old like my Grandma who loves the Thunder! As far as the bombing being tied to our success or whatever that's all about, MAPS started in 1993 and the bombing happened in 1995. I doubt some city official paid Timothy McVeigh to kill innocents. Tulsans saying that is like conspiracy nuts saying that Bush actually set up the World Trade Center bombing so that he'd have a reason to go after Saddam Hussein. This morning I was listening to ESPN Radio and Dari Noka was talking about the top 3 match ups tonight. Not once did he mention the Thunder vs. the Nuggets. I don't know if he's actually from Tulsa but he sure acted like it this morning.

The only reason they don't like us is because we're more Western than they are and obviously they're more Eastern. They were a city with culture and we're just finding ours. We're getting all the love and they're living off the rich history of them being an oil capitol of the world in the early 1900's. It's our time, not theirs. That's why...

Envy. Plain and simple.

Like they live in another state of something...Bizarre stuff. Seems OKC citizens are pretty supportive of Tulsa, I actually tried doing some research to see if there was some kind of historical event that catapulted this anger, but I haven't found anything.

Anyone have any clue?

It goes back to statehood. Eastern Oklahoma wanted to form the State of Sequoyah instead of joining with the rest of the area to form present day Oklahoma. It would have happened if eastern states were not opposed to forming two new western states.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Sequoyah

Tulsans are just retards, unless they are transplants that used to live here, or really old like my Grandma who loves the Thunder! As far as the bombing being tied to our success or whatever that's all about, MAPS started in 1993 and the bombing happened in 1995. I doubt some city official paid Timothy McVeigh to kill innocents. Tulsans saying that is like conspiracy nuts saying that Bush actually set up the World Trade Center bombing so that he'd have a reason to go after Saddam Hussein. This morning I was listening to ESPN Radio and Dari Noka was talking about the top 3 match ups tonight. Not once did he mention the Thunder vs. the Nuggets. I don't know if he's actually from Tulsa but he sure acted like it this morning.

The only reason they don't like us is because we're more Western than they are and obviously they're more Eastern. They were a city with culture and we're just finding ours. We're getting all the love and they're living off the rich history of them being an oil capitol of the world in the early 1900's. It's our time, not theirs. That's why...

What an idiot. Most Tulsan's love Oklahoma City. We think it is a great city and we're cheering it on. And no, we're not bitter we don't have the Thunder. I love the Thunder. All my friends love the Thunder. I am glad it is in Oklahoma. I would like for it to be in Tulsa, but its not. Big deal.

And "It's our time, not theirs"........are you kidding????? Need I provide you with a list of development and other things going on in Tulsa?

Overall, I don't think the majority from either city hate the other. It's just a few angry idiots that stir the pot.

True, ZYX. In fact, I hear more OKCitians talking about how much Tulsans bad-mouth OKC than I actually hear from Tulsans themselves.

That's not to say that I don't make the occasional jab at OKC. But no-more-so than I do about any other regional city. My complaints usually reflect why I chose to live in Tulsa as opposed to any other city. But hatred from myself and Tulsans in general toward OKC? I think that's just projecting the voice of a few over the region as a whole...

This thread is stupid. C'mon, give me a break...OKC is incredibly easy to make fun of. Also, this thread presupposes that Tulsans just sit around complaining about OKC stuff happening because they don't have any of their own stuff happening in their area. Just in toto, as Sean Hannity would say, this thread is a big ignorant baloney sandwich.

Why are some thread starters so butt hurt? If some of the OKC jokes are pretty sharp, it's okay to laugh, I know I do...

Overall, I don't think the majority from either city hate the other. It's just a few angry idiots that stir the pot.

This. For God sake don't take the Tulsa World comment section as what the vast majority of Tulsans think. Same for NewsOK and their comment section and OKC.

There will always be a rivalry just as there is in every state with two similarly sized cities, and especially in Oklahoma where it's basically just OKC and Tulsa (and their suburbs) while the rest of the state is rural and poor. Both cities are also very different for being in the same state only 95 miles apart. The people themselves are not different but the cities are..

I'm not saying "all" Tulsans.

I'm talking about a significant portion though. Like I said, I didn't even know there was a rivalry until I heard a significant amount of people from there, in my life, talk about the vast superiority of Tulsa. Just yesterday a guy I know made a snide comment about having to live in OKC and went on to say that Tulsa University was a superior school academically, culturally, and geographically to OU, my alma mater. I quote: "The only thing OU has on TU is a football team." The Tulsa World comment section was just an example.

I honestly dont understand it.

I personally much prefer the geography of Oklahoma City, seriously.

I'm not saying "all" Tulsans.
Just yesterday a guy I know made a snide comment about having to live in OKC and went on to say that Tulsa University was a superior school academically, culturally, and geographically to OU, my alma mater.

Not to be a killjoy, but TU does tend to rank higher than any other university in Oklahoma in academics. But there's nothing wrong with most of the other state schools. As for "culturally", I'm on the fence. TU's arts programs are okay, but if I wanted to go for school for performing arts, OCU would win hands-down with OU following closely behind.

What an idiot. Most Tulsan's love Oklahoma City. We think it is a great city and we're cheering it on. And no, we're not bitter we don't have the Thunder. I love the Thunder. All my friends love the Thunder. I am glad it is in Oklahoma. I would like for it to be in Tulsa, but its not. Big deal.

And "It's our time, not theirs"........are you kidding????? Need I provide you with a list of development and other things going on in Tulsa?

Overall, I don't think the majority from either city hate the other. It's just a few angry idiots that stir the pot.

Talk about butt hurt, LOL. First off, my grandma lives in Tulsa. If you read the post you might have made that connection. Second, I actually like Tulsa. I haven't spent much time there as a plus 21 year old and I'm 33, but I have loved the city of Tulsa since I can remember. It looks better cause its in Green Country, actually has a real river that needs real bridges to span it & your bike path along the Creek Turnpike is longer than all those combined in OKC! I don't know about the streets on the northside but 6 lanes streets on the southside go a long way (ex. 71st and Yale). Plus, they're made of concrete and not cheap asphalt like OKC likes to do it. Thank God we have project 180
I know other newer streets here locally are being widened using concrete but the Tulsa area is far more pleasing to the eye and to the car. Glad Tulsa has development. Please feel free to post about it in the Tulsa forum. And if I said, all Tulsans then that's my bad.

This. For God sake don't take the Tulsa World comment section as what the vast majority of Tulsans think. Same for NewsOK and their comment section and OKC.

There will always be a rivalry just as there is in every state with two similarly sized cities, and especially in Oklahoma where it's basically just OKC and Tulsa (and their suburbs) while the rest of the state is rural and poor. Both cities are also very different for being in the same state only 95 miles apart. The people themselves are not different but the cities are..

The problem is that the infamous Paul from Yukon really does represent the views of an incredible amount of people in the OKC region.

Michael Bates
"Evidently a team in Oklahoma City (happy to take tax money from the whole state but not take the whole state's name) won a big game tonight."

http://twitter.com/#!/BatesLine


Wow....

Michael Bates
"Evidently a team in Oklahoma City (happy to take tax money from the whole state but not take the whole state's name) won a big game tonight."

http://twitter.com/#!/BatesLine


Wow....

Wow is right. What a douchebag.

I'm not sure Bates is the d bag here. Why do you guys feel he is compelled to root for our team?? I do not understand that logic, or lack thereof, more likely.

I think what we have here is a failure to see things from other people's perspective, on both sides of the turnpike. Good to see my fellow OKCers holding up their end of the tradition... (that's a sarcasm, for those of you on here who don't get that sort of thing)

Wow is right. What a douchebag.

Even Tulsans don't like him. He is also highly opposed to the BOK Center, among other things...

Spartan does bring up a good point though, but I think in this case, Mr. Bates is just finding another thing to complain about.

I like both cities a lot and both cities have a lot to poke fun at, so I don't go along with one being "better" than the other at all. For instance, I am envious that Tulsa has all those great lakes around it, but I wouldn't trade having my beloved OU sports just down the road. I love spending time in both cities.

Can we just do away with this idiotic thread altogether? Make it so! lol

I'm not sure Bates is the d bag here. Why do you guys feel he is compelled to root for our team?? I do not understand that logic, or lack thereof, more likely.

I think what we have here is a failure to see things from other people's perspective, on both sides of the turnpike. Good to see my fellow OKCers holding up their end of the tradition... (that's a sarcasm, for those of you on here who don't get that sort of thing)

It's pretty obviously a snide remark. The fact that he (falsely) claims the entire state is paying taxes to have the thunder here is indicative of the butt-hurtness. He calls it "a team in Oklahoma City".

I mean....c'mon...

You can delete it. I don't care.

Just trying to understand the disconnect.

You can delete it. I don't care.

Just trying to understand the disconnect.

You ever notice how here in OKCTalk there is a Tulsa sub-section,but there is no section at all for OKC subjects on TulsaNow!I noticed when posting anything OKC in The TulsaNow forum you will get bashed,but it's even worse if you try to defend OKC after being bashed,then labled a Troll and banned!OKShi**y this and wasteland down the turnpike and so on...... Just sayin!

I dont think Tulsa is Butthurt I just think they want to feel included in the States first pro team!

You ever notice how here in OKCTalk there is a Tulsa sub-section,but there is no section at all for OKC subjects on TulsaNow!I noticed when posting anything OKC in The TulsaNow forum you will get bashed,but it's even worse if you try to defend OKC after being bashed,then labled a Troll and banned!OKShi**y this and wasteland down the turnpike and so on...... Just sayin!

Couple of your Tulsa Now postings:


Quote from: dmoor82 on August 28, 2010, 06:29:34 am

Sounds like your a troll in your own forum YOU CHIT HOLE! GET A LIFE YOU JEALOUS donkey TROLL!


Quote from: dmoor82 on August 28, 2010, 07:52:56 pm

How's The WNBA buzz in Tulsa?is it electrifying or is it SHOCKING?LOL!I invite you to OKC to take a stroll thru Bricktown,watch The Devon Tower rise before you and then take in an NBA game or you could take in some Olympic rowing,canoeing,kayacking events on Boathouse row, this is just a few of things you can do!There has been about 5 billion $ investment in OKC since MAPS1 and OKC still has MAPS3(vote passed) projects to build!Sorry Tulsa your WNBA occupied arena with its "great concerts"and your nice DOUBLE A baseball stadium does NOT COMPARE to what is going on in OKC!YOU have NO let me repeat NO chance in hell of getting the olympics NO CHANCE of landing The NBA!Landing The NHL is a possibility in The future!

Couple of your Tulsa Now postings:

If your gonna post my responses then you need to post what prompted those post!GOT IT

I also started a thread for Russian Sam on The TulsaNow forum so he could post his model updates there!You forgot to show that Thread and posts'!Did you get butthurt by my post?LOL

Here are the two post by an unamed TulsaNow forumer who prompted my response---------Yep...my analogy for what OKC is going through right now?

"You can bronze a turd, but it's still a turd" (bronze=pro sports franchise, turd=OKC). Agreed.

OKC is a 'chit' hole..

LOL! both posts' can be seen on TulsaNow in The NBA in Tulsa thread page two!

If your gonna post my responses then you need to post what prompted those post!GOT IT

Sir, yes sir! http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/8697/lolr.gif


I also started a thread for Russian Sam on The TulsaNow forum so he could post his model updates there!You forgot to show that Thread and posts'!Did you get butthurt by my post?LOL

No. I only wanted to show what a wonderful ambassador you are for our city, is all. I don't understand why they banned you, either.

Back to topic!!!! I don't think Tulsan's are butthurt,I just think they wanted to be included in the States first pro team and they felt a little shafted!

Sounds like your a troll in your own forum YOU CHIT HOLE! GET A LIFE YOU JEALOUS donkey TROLL!

This thread has become so epically stupid it's funny. Come on dmoor, I think you're a cool poster, but this is embarrassing, no offense.


It's pretty obviously a snide remark. The fact that he (falsely) claims the entire state is paying taxes to have the thunder here is indicative of the butt-hurtness. He calls it "a team in Oklahoma City".

I mean....c'mon...

Um..yeah. Obviously it's a snide remark. I have an appreciation for things like sarcasm and snide remarks, even if they're about me or my team. Oh, and actually it's true that the state is paying for the Thunder. In case you are unaware, they somehow magically qualified for the state's economic development tax rebate program.

I am a huge Thunder fan, and I've been to at least 20-30 Thunder games, which should say a lot because I am only in OKC for a few months here and there, anymore. And I also have an economic development way of looking at things, but even I can admit that the argument of an NBA team as economic development is baloney. It relates to other things, and it's worth a tax rebate if that's what it takes, although I don't think the tax rebate made a difference in us getting the team honestly. Perhaps I am even against that, just because come on, let's admit that they're just professional athletes at the end of the day, and we've all had enough of society's special treatment of professional athletes, and I say that as a huge sports buff. Played 3 different sports in high school and have always been a huge OU fb and bb nut, to go along with the Hornets for a while, and now the Thunder.

Oh, and it also is "a team in Oklahoma City." Or, at least I suspect that is where the Oklahoma City Arena is.

Typical sibling rivalry, but in tough times Tulsa never comes around to support big brother...

[QUOTE=Spartan;425503]This thread has become so epically stupid it's funny. Come on dmoor, I think you're a cool poster, but this is embarrassing, no offense.



No offense taken!They have their fair share of embarrassing forumers also,and I'm sure you have made posts' in the past you werent proud of either!This is all in The past and like I said earlier I will not stand by and let some idiot put down OKC and not get an ear full,childish and stupid as it may be we all have are not so bright moments!

It honestly reminds me of the constant bickering between OU and OSU fans. OU is OKC and OSU is Tulsa. Some may argue it's the other way around. One always wants what the other doesn't have...

poor tulsa, is the big bad okc picking on ya again :( oh yeah and for the one who said okc is a bronze terd, ya so okc is the poo, take yourself a big long wiffffff

Looks like there is enough insecurity to fill both cities. Jeeezus, give it a break!

It's pretty obviously a snide remark. The fact that he (falsely) claims the entire state is paying taxes to have the thunder here is indicative of the butt-hurtness. He calls it "a team in Oklahoma City".

I mean....c'mon...
It isn't completely false. The State is giving the Thunder a significant amount of tax money (they rewrote the Quality Jobs Act so pro sport teams could qualify). In that since, the entire state is contributing to it. But it is primarily the taxpayers of OKC that paid for the Arena and the improvements. One could also argue that OKC as the largest population also contributes the most tax dollars into the general fund, so while certainly people outside of the area are paying some of the taxes too, most of it probably comes from here.


Typical sibling rivalry, but in tough times Tulsa never comes around to support big brother...
Not sure exactly what you meant by that but Tulsa's mayor was here as part of the State representation for the relocation committee(included Stoops, Switzer, Gov Henry and many others). She was in support and the Tulsa World was in support.

But getting back to the rivalry thing...have heard it is a Capitol Envy thing too (heavy concentration of government/State jobs are here) and with OKC being the largest metro area and the seat of government, there is a perception that OKC gets more than its fair share of government allocations.

Always thought Tulsan's did indeed think they were in a different state since they have the Tulsa State Fair (we have the State Fair of Oklahoma, NOT the Oklahoma City State Fair)...LOL

I am definitely not a Tulsa hater and used to drive up there frequently. Being closer to the Ozarks that are of the state is hillier and often greener. They were often considered the more progressive and trendier of the two. Tey would frequently get national chains in Tulsa first, and then a few years later, we might get them here in OKC.

Here is the deal. It's certainly not the average citizen who makes much of the Tulsa/OKC thing. If we are competitive, it's simply because it's pretty natural to look at a peer and evaluate how one is doing in comparison. What I think is amazing about OKC right now is not Bricktown or the Thunder, but the apparent good will and civic pride that the public has about the city. OKC has had great corporate support/boosterism from two or three of its most visible companies, and that sends a message to the community that things are good. The interesting thing to me is that both cities have enjoyed similar resiliency during the downturn, with low unemployment rates (compared to the rest of the nation), stable real estate prices, and good economic ratings from unbiased outside organizations and publications. So why the vast psychological difference? No question that Tulsa has suffered from a myopia that OKC hasn't... I think the reference to the bombing was that the event served as a benchmark, a low point in OKC's history, that caused the community to rally around a 'rebirth', and your community leaders capitalized on it.

Tulsa, on the other hand, didn't have a low point, so to speak. Our economy was diversifying, we had Tech and Telecom companies growing at exponential rates, massive growth in Southeast Tulsa, low cost of living, and an idea that downtown was something that needed some attention, but not an alarming retreat from the urban core.

Suddenly, it changed. MAPS passed. Project Tulsa failed (due to apathy). OKC's oil and gas sector grew, The telecom/Tech bubble blew up in Tulsa. 9/11 all but shut down the Aerospace industry (American Air is still Tulsa's largest employer). It was a perfect storm. Tulsa has just had a harder economic road to haul over the last decade or so. I don't see anyone here wishing Bricktown was in Tulsa rather than OKC. Tulsa has plenty of good energy in terms of midtown revitalization, and downtown. I do think people here look down the road and see Devon/Chesapeake/SandRidge and can't help recalling Tulsa's Oil glory days. But envy isn't the right word. We need good jobs, that is all.

The one major thing I envy is OKC's connection with OU. Tulsa doesn't have an established four year research institution...TU is a wonderful school, with a huge endowment (larger than OSU's) but its student population is small, and doesn't have the impact that OU does. Boren's leadership is a big part of that. The Medical Research that takes place in OKC is huge. OU-Tulsa has the edge in clinical medicine, but it's the research side that companies evolve from.

As far as the Thunder are concerned...I like the players...no reason not to. I do agree though that there were State tax incentives used to get the team here. It is a fact. It is also a fact that Kathy Taylor assured David Stern that Tulsa would support the team, and that Tulsa's proximity to OKC and that vote of support was a major part of swaying his decision to allow the move from Seattle. He is quoted left and right saying that. So, the team should be called "Oklahoma" and they should play 2-3 regular season games at the BOK. Not to mention, it's just stupid to alienate Tulsa from a marketing standpoint. NE Oklahoma has damn near half of the states population. When there are only 3.5 million people in the whole state, you can't afford to do that. There will be a time when they aren't a playoff team, and they will be needing to fill the stands. Just ask the Indiana Pacers or the Minnesota Timberwolves.

It is also a fact that Kathy Taylor assured David Stern that Tulsa would support the team, and that Tulsa's proximity to OKC and that vote of support was a major part of swaying his decision to allow the move from Seattle. He is quoted left and right saying that.

When did this happen?

When did this happen?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3361374


"It really puts Oklahoma on a national map, and that's what's important, and it continues to grow the economy of Oklahoma City, which helps Tulsa," Taylor said of the Sonics' impending move. "We are the two most significant contributors to the state economy. Anything that we can do to help Oklahoma City's economy expand is good for Tulsa."

Tulsa and Oklahoma City are connected by an 86-mile-long turnpike, but the state's two largest cities have long had what sometimes has been a not-so-friendly rivalry. Both Taylor and Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett said that 20 years ago, it would have been unlikely for leaders in one town to support a major initiative of the other.

But Taylor, who grew up in Oklahoma City, didn't hesitate when officials from Oklahoma City and the SuperSonics asked her to be a part of the team's March 25 presentation to members of the league's relocation committee.

Her presence -- and the role Tulsa-area residents could play in supporting an Oklahoma City franchise -- was noted by NBA commissioner David Stern. During a press conference following last Friday's vote, Stern mentioned Tulsa a half-dozen times.

Stern said the owners learned "how close Tulsa is" to Oklahoma City "and how many citizens of Tulsa will consider the team to be, and did consider the [New Orleans] Hornets when they were there ... a state franchise."

Cornett said 10 to 20 percent of the Sonics' ticket sales in Oklahoma City will come from the Tulsa area, and Taylor noted that it's "90 minutes door-to-door" from Tulsa to Oklahoma City. Those numbers are why Cornett said it only made sense to include Tulsa leaders as part of Oklahoma City's presentation to the NBA.

"When you talk to NBA owners, the idea of people driving 1½ hours to an NBA game is something they're comfortable with," Cornett said. Including Tulsa as part of the team's sphere of influence meant the owners would "see a larger metropolitan area that they're more comfortable with."

I mean, it could not be more blatant. I know she said that she didn't mind the name of the team....but she did.

Also:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3353270


The rights to those could be a bargaining chip in Bennett's negotiations with the city, with Seattle possible retaining them for a future team. Stern suggested that calling the club Oklahoma, instead of Oklahoma City, might be desirable because it reflects the importance of other parts of the state such as Tulsa in the franchise's viability.

Go OKLAHOMA CITY THUNDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I do think people here look down the road and see Devon/Chesapeake/SandRidge and can't help recalling Tulsa's Oil glory days. But envy isn't the right word. We need good jobs, that is all.

The one major thing I envy is OKC's connection with OU. Tulsa doesn't have an established four year research institution...TU is a wonderful school, with a huge endowment (larger than OSU's) but its student population is small, and doesn't have the impact that OU does. Boren's leadership is a big part of that. The Medical Research that takes place in OKC is huge. OU-Tulsa has the edge in clinical medicine, but it's the research side that companies evolve from.


Tulsa has just as many large companies headquartered or with major operations in the city, but they are not as big of boosters as Devon/Chesapeake/Sandridge. Tulsa-based ONEOK is the largest Fortune 500 company in the state (#189) and Williams is the third (#257). Devon is #231 and Chesapeake #263. Both have a similar number of Fortune 1000 HQ's as well. Energy companies large and small have offices in both cities with one usually having a larger presence in one than the other; for example Halliburton has a larger OKC office than Tulsa while Tulsa has a larger Apache presence than OKC, and many other examples.

Where OKC has a distinct advantage, like you said, is that it's in close proximity to OU which is a major economic engine. It's also home to the OU Medical Complex which has spurred a growing biotech and research sector. Tulsa doesn't have the same built-in advantages in that area but could if the state better funded OSU, which has a small campus and medical center downtown. I think that's more of OU leadership doing a better job of funding its university and medical programs (due to President Boren) than OSU rather than the state screwing Tulsa. I'm an OU grad and even I think OSU should focus more of its development in Tulsa with more programs, more facilities, more students, and a better-funded medical and research center. Oklahoma (the state) needs both metros to be economic engines for growth.

Go OKLAHOMA CITY THUNDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:bow:

:bow:

OKC OKC OKC OKC!Lets go Thunder!

Tulsa has just as many large companies headquartered or with major operations in the city, but they are not as big of boosters as Devon/Chesapeake/Sandridge. Tulsa-based ONEOK is the largest Fortune 500 company in the state (#189) and Williams is the third (#257). Devon is #231 and Chesapeake #263. Both have a similar number of Fortune 1000 HQ's as well. Energy companies large and small have offices in both cities with one usually having a larger presence in one than the other; for example Halliburton has a larger OKC office than Tulsa while Tulsa has a larger Apache presence than OKC, and many other examples.

That is precisely my point. What Larry Nichols, Tom Ward and Aubrey do in terms of vocal leadership is huge. In terms of generosity, Tulsa is unparalleled. It has the largest Community Foundation in the country, George Kaiser Family Foundation, Zarrow, Schusterman... Yet, it feels different. It's more of an button down, conservative financially business sector here. In OKC, people are making 'deals'...I see it in the commercial real estate a lot. In Tulsa, it's all about who you know, where you went to school, who is your dad, etc. In OKC, it's, 'Let's make a deal". That is the best way I can describe it.




Where OKC has a distinct advantage, like you said, is that it's in close proximity to OU which is a major economic engine. It's also home to the OU Medical Complex which has spurred a growing biotech and research sector. Tulsa doesn't have the same built-in advantages in that area but could if the state better funded OSU, which has a small campus and medical center downtown. I think that's more of OU leadership doing a better job of funding its university and medical programs (due to President Boren) than OSU rather than the state screwing Tulsa. I'm an OU grad and even I think OSU should focus more of its development in Tulsa with more programs, more facilities, more students, and a better-funded medical and research center. Oklahoma (the state) needs both metros to be economic engines for growth.

Boren's leadership is enormous. As an OU grad, I don't know how Brad Henry is going to fill those shoes when DB steps down...

As far as the Thunder are concerned...I like the players...no reason not to. I do agree though that there were State tax incentives used to get the team here. It is a fact. It is also a fact that Kathy Taylor assured David Stern that Tulsa would support the team, and that Tulsa's proximity to OKC and that vote of support was a major part of swaying his decision to allow the move from Seattle. He is quoted left and right saying that. So, the team should be called "Oklahoma" and they should play 2-3 regular season games at the BOK. Not to mention, it's just stupid to alienate Tulsa from a marketing standpoint. NE Oklahoma has damn near half of the states population. When there are only 3.5 million people in the whole state, you can't afford to do that. There will be a time when they aren't a playoff team, and they will be needing to fill the stands. Just ask the Indiana Pacers or the Minnesota Timberwolves.

By this analogy, would it also be fair to say that they should play in Enid too? That'd be like saying that the Mavericks should be called the DFW Mavericks and that they should play at least 2 to 3 games in the Ft. Worth Coliseum, lol. Yes, Ft. Worth's proximity to Dallas is much closer but I don't hear them complaining. You seem like a reasonably smart fellow--except for the last paragraph. If you can't deal with it, bring your business and your family here. If you're unmovable, then just enjoy the games on FSOklahoma.

By this analogy, would it also be fair to say that they should play in Enid too? That'd be like saying that the Mavericks should be called the DFW Mavericks and that they should play at least 2 to 3 games in the Ft. Worth Coliseum, lol. Yes, Ft. Worth's proximity to Dallas is much closer but I don't hear them complaining. You seem like a reasonably smart fellow--except for the last paragraph. If you can't deal with it, bring your business and your family here. If you're unmovable, then just enjoy the games on FSOklahoma.


The Dallas Metroplex has 6.5 million people in an area the size of OKC and Tulsa combined, twice the population of the state of Oklahoma. Dallas is the economic center and the primary identifiable community of the area. Tulsa and OKC are equals in that regard, unlike Dallas and Fort Worth, so that is a terrible analogy. Furthermore, are you actually comparing Enid (population 50,000) to the Tulsa Metro (Population 989,000)? Does Enid have arena the caliber of the BOK Center? Does Fort Worth, for that matter? This appears to be the issue. In your deluded mind, Tulsa and Enid are the same. It's absurd.

Look, the owners can name the team whatever they want, but I reserve the right to think it is stupid, and not to mention poor business, to alienate a million potential fans in a state of 3 million people. And the Commissioner of the National Basketball Association agrees with me. It is hubris at it's finest.

... to alienate a million potential fans in a state of 3 million people. And the Commissioner of the National Basketball Association agrees with me. It is hubris at it's finest.


When there are only 3.5 million people in the whole state...

I'll keep this simple...

Oklahoma state population (2010 Census): 3,751,351

By now it is likely close to 3.8 million. And the state will pass the 4 million mark later this decade. Time to let go of the 20th Century estimates.

As far as sharing the team between two cities, it doesn't work. No city in the NBA practices that model. Kansas City tried it with Omaha years ago, and it was not successful. As far as calling the team the Oklahoma Thunder, that is something we are all going to have to agree to disagree. The team was bought and is sponsored by Oklahoma City's business community. It is an Oklahoma City team. I appreciate Tulsa's support.

Think about this... naming the team after the city keeps the door open for Tulsa to name it's future pro team the Tulsa xxxx.

Look, the owners can name the team whatever they want, but I reserve the right to think it is stupid, and not to mention poor business, to alienate a million potential fans in a state of 3 million people. And the Commissioner of the National Basketball Association agrees with me. It is hubris at it's finest.

I seriously doubt that a million fans are anything close to alienated because of the name. I have been a fan of the Dallas Cowboys for over 40 years. I never once thought about turning my back on them because they didn't call themselves the North Texas and Oklahoma Cowboys. LOL

I'll keep this simple...

Oklahoma state population (2010 Census): 3,751,351

By now it is likely close to 3.8 million. And the state will pass the 4 million mark later this decade. Time to let go of the 20th Century estimates.

As far as sharing the team between two cities, it doesn't work. No city in the NBA practices that model. Kansas City tried it with Omaha years ago, and it was not successful. As far as calling the team the Oklahoma Thunder, that is something we are all going to have to agree to disagree. The team was bought and is sponsored by Oklahoma City's business community. It is an Oklahoma City team. I appreciate Tulsa's support.

Think about this... naming the team after the city keeps the door open for Tulsa to name it's future pro team the Tulsa xxxx.

Agree. The whole "debate" is ridiculous. If one thing's going to change it's the logo, which I still don't like. Maybe if they changed the logo to a symbol and it didn't say OKC then people in Tulsa would be happy?

Tulsa is the only city in the entire world to whine about this. That is just the way it is done for all the NBA teams out there. The Thunder is ours, not Tulsa's, so they can whine all they want. Its fine that some Tulsans can love and support the Thunder.

I joined their TulsaNow forum, which was quite impressive that no one there attempted to take my nickname previously. This will be interesting to see what I will find over there.

I'll keep this simple...

Oklahoma state population (2010 Census): 3,751,351

By now it is likely close to 3.8 million. And the state will pass the 4 million mark later this decade. Time to let go of the 20th Century estimates.

As far as sharing the team between two cities, it doesn't work. No city in the NBA practices that model. Kansas City tried it with Omaha years ago, and it was not successful. As far as calling the team the Oklahoma Thunder, that is something we are all going to have to agree to disagree. The team was bought and is sponsored by Oklahoma City's business community. It is an Oklahoma City team. I appreciate Tulsa's support.

Think about this... naming the team after the city keeps the door open for Tulsa to name it's future pro team the Tulsa xxxx.

Fair enough...It's after the fact, and it is not going to change...I salute the success. At least you are smart enough to call it what it is. Oklahoma City's team. Just don't tell me that it benefits the entire state, because...it doesn't.

As far as sharing an NBA team...I don't think its that. I think it's just smart marketing. Expand your fan base. What does OKC have to lose by sacrificing 4-5 home games year? Some sales tax revenue, sure, but you could replace those dates with other non-Thunder events. You'd have an opportunity to market the team in Tulsa, sell a 5 game package to the business community...gain sponsors... hell, people might even get over the name faldera.


Tulsa is the only city in the entire world to whine about this. That is just the way it is done for all the NBA teams out there. The Thunder is ours, not Tulsa's, so they can whine all they want. Its fine that some Tulsans can love and support the Thunder.

I joined their TulsaNow forum, which was quite impressive that no one there attempted to take my nickname previously. This will be interesting to see what I will find over there.

That is absolutely not true. And it's not whining. I presented facts regarding the source of the incentive money, the documented support from Tulsa leadership, and the opinion of Commissioner Stern. All you have come back with is "mine! Get your own toy!" Whatever.

Pardon if this is already asked and answered, but is there an NBA team (or other pro sports team for that matter) out there that divides its regular season home games between two or more cities? Or is the desire for that more of a unique OK-centric populism notion?

Pardon if this is already asked and answered, but is there an NBA team (or other pro sports team for that matter) out there that divides its regular season home games between two or more cities? Or is the desire for that more of a unique OK-centric populism notion?

Not that I am aware of, but it has been suggested recently....

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/nba-can-be-saved-with-radical-plan-030111


8. I’d contract two to four teams. I’d make the remaining teams play four games per season in a satellite home city. The Lakers would partner with Las Vegas. The Clippers would partner with San Diego. The Pacers could play in Cincinnati, the Cavaliers in Columbus.

Having a "satellite" home city could take pressure off of local sales of season tickets, offer affordable prices for packages, and help expand the markets...and not just in OKC.

The suggestions of it are just ludicrous! It doesn't happen in pro sports...

The suggestions of it are just ludicrous! It doesn't happen in pro sports...

Actually it has happened before.

http://hoopedia.nba.com/index.php?title=Kansas_City-Omaha_Kings

But you can see how well that worked out. LOL

Yes, that was mentioned above, LOL. So let me specify...in the modern day era...

Yes, that was mentioned above, LOL. So let me specify...in the modern day era...

Maybe I'm a lot older than you but the 70's is not ancient history for me.

Ok, let's set all of this straight, once and for all.

1) The team is called the Oklahoma City Thunder, because Oklahoma City business men are owners, paid cash to purchase and move the team, and took all of the risk for the sole purpose to bring a major league team to Oklahoma City. The team is also called Oklahoma City Thunder because the city of Oklahoma City and it's residents took a risk on building (and retrofiting/expanding) Ford Center and practice center. No state dollars were used for the purchase or construction, and the state is only missing a small portion of the tax it would otherwise receive from the Thunder and other NBA players.

To my knowledge, Tulsa didn't give anything up nor did Tulsa participate in anything other than the final presentation ON AN INVITATION from Oklahoma City's mayor to ENHANCE the relocation request (since some people voiced concern about OKC's long term committment). We'll talk about this more in a later point. Just because Tulsa built an arena after the fact and are a NEAR million CSA doesn't somehow entitle them to home games of the Thunder.

2) You are so incorrect in your assumption that naming the team Oklahoma City somehow alienates Tulsa from having/developing a fanbase. Case in point, Wichita KS - is a satellite city of the OKC Thunder with a growing base. Are they upset at the name? Is Lawton and Enid upset at the name? Is OKC having trouble filling the arena?

Spokane and Tacoma people supported the Seattle SuperSonics (as did Vancouver BC people before they got the Grizzlies) arguably more than even the citizens of Seattle. They also heavily support the other SEATTLE named major league teams and so does Portland and the whole state of Oregon. In fact, all major teams in Washington are named for Seattle, are the other cities in that state alienated by this?. Is Colorado Springs alienated by Denver's sports teams? Is Nashville alienated that the Grizzlies are named Memphis? What about San Antonio, does Austin not support that team? I could go on, but you should get the point now - saying a smaller city in the state is alienated due to the team being named for it's home base (and largest) city doesn't hold water.

I do agree that the Thunder could do more to market the team in Tulsa, but they should do it via their D-LEAGUE team that the same OKC businessmen who own the Thunder gave to Tulsa and named them after Tulsa. The Thunder could also make packages on Tulsa's cable if they aren't already and make promotional tourist packages if they aren't filling the Ford Center for games. This is ditto for Wichita KS, which I understand the Thunder is doing some marketing and there is huge support. They could also open up a store, but all of the merch would be OKC Thunder because that is the team name.

3) Oklahoma Sooners is already synonomous (sp?) with the name 'Oklahoma'. So if we had the 'Oklahoma Thunder', it could cause problems with the Sooners - which most people outside of Oklahoma call OU as, 'Oklahoma' moreso than Sooners or OU.

4) If the team were named, Oklahoma Thunder, don't you think that might just alienate OSU fans who can't stand any reference that could be tied to OU? Im not trying to start anything with this point, other that to point out that basing the team in Oklahoma City was a wonderful idea for pulling together the state.

5) As mentioned before, Tulsa has a D-League team that is the affiliate of the Thunder. Tulsa also has the WNBA now, also owned by OKC investors if Im not mistaken (but different from Bennett and company). There is no reason to share regular season games with Tulsa and this is not done in the rest of the league. Should we also have a regular season game in Wichita KS? They have a nice new arena and a nice fanbase of the team.

I do agree we should have at least one preseason home game in Tulsa on an annual basis, and perhaps also one preseason home game in Wichita at least every other year too.

6) Like it or not, Tulsa IS part of Oklahoma City's catchment market. In fact, NBA owners had some initial reservations with the OKC relocation; not because they thought OKC was too small and not because they didn't think there was interest in OKC. The New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets was a great opportunity to showcase Oklahoma City (and the state) while also helping the NBA given what happened to N.O. OKC has 580K+ residents and well over 1.35M in the CSA and tremendous corporate support and ownership, more than enough of the needed requirements to support a major league team on its own.

Nope, the reservations came from the city's market size. OKC's market is not like other major cities where there is a huge catchment area. OKC's market is basically just the current 405 area code + Enid and some of Western Oklahoma [roughly 1.6-1.8M people/700K tv sets]. However, this team came from a market much larger and more populated - Seattle's market covers nearly all of Western Washington, only excluding Clark County (which goes to Portland for NBA) [roughly 4.2M and 1.7M tv sets iirc].

This is not the case for OKC, the centre of the state ideally shoul have most of the state outside of the 918 traditional area code as its market (basically 2.5M people and probably 1.3M tv sets), but OKC's current market definition doesnt. Ada has its own market with Sherman. Ponca City is part of Wichita, I believe. The panhandle is part of Amarillo. Ardmore is part of Dallas, iirc. Lawton is part of Wichita Falls. E Oklahoma is part of Ft Smith and SE Oklahoma is part of Texarkana iirc. Im not saying that OKC should get all of these areas, but consider that Salt Lake's market is the entire state.

If OKC had most of the traditional old 405 area code on paper for its core market, along with 918 and Wichita's 316 as its natural catchment - then the owners would have had no reservation. But the fact that OKC doesn't have most of the state for its core market, making it arguably small in comparison raised a few eyebrows. That is the reason why Tulsa was invited to the presentation, to vouch that they would participate in the cable/marketing package. It wasn't required and OKC would have been awarded the team anyways (but it was a great opportunity to show solidarity and Im sure it made it much easier for Tulsa to get WNBA approval). They could have brought Wichita officials to the presentation as well, imo.

7) The fact that Stern had supported an Oklahoma named team doesn't mean it was the best fit to actually do so. In fact, Stern mainly did this because of OKC's small market size and NOT because he thought the team would otherwise alienate Tulsa. Stern was comparing the team to Salt Lake City, which uses Utah. But there are other small market teams using their base city (Memphis, New Orleans - both smaller markets than OKC btw) that don't alienate their home state or catchment, and given OKC's position as the region's #2 city after Dallas, Stern didn't realize marketing the team as a state team isn't necessary. If anything, it might have alienated Kansas/Wichita a bit whereas OKC does not.


I hope now you and other Tulsans can see, that there is NO way the name of the Oklahoma City Thunder alienates Tulsa from being a fanbase. If there are NBA fans up in Tulsa, they can chose to support the team or be a Bulls fan, Dallas fan, or whatever. They would still fall into OKC's catchment and likely have OKC marketing (which I assume is the case).

Also - The Oklahoma City Thunder has done wonders for the city AND STATE in that the team has brought positive spotlight to the city and the CITY represents the state of Oklahoma well - as it should, being the capital and largest city/metro. Tell me that does not have a spin effect on the rest of the state, when OKC's skyline, urban offerings, and TEAM is on national tv. ... Im in China, and I get to watch Thunder games and when people ask where I am from and I say OKC - there is instant recognition now. How is that not good for Oklahoma? (particularly since Oklahoma City carries the state name in its name, there's no need to say the state when you say Oklahoma City ... ...)

I think you and others up there, might be a bit jealous at the attention that Oklahoma City is getting; you think it should be Tulsa. If anything, I believe Tulsan's feel alienated not due to the name, but due to their continued inferiority complex and competitive/hatred of Oklahoma City - but that's another discussion.