Seattle given OK for new basketball, hockey arena - NBA - CBSSports.com News, Scores, Stats, Fantasy Advice (http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/20569269/seattle-given-ok-for-new-basketball-hockey-arena)

I am happy for their fans but the question is that will the Sacramento Kings move to Seattle?

However I think Seattle should just have a expansion team instead of moving a team to Seattle but then again it would uneven in the division with 6 teams while the others have 5 teams in the divison

Just guesstimating cause I don't skim articles... We're still looking at 2+ years, right? Technically, it'll never be the Supersonics cause they still will be without KD, lol, and that will be their biggest gripe cause they see what this team down here is doing. Not to say that it would have gone the exact same way there but they're hard up for dreams in the Pacific NW and harp on the "what ifs"...

Just guesstimating cause I don't skim articles... We're still looking at 2+ years, right? Technically, it'll never be the Supersonics cause they still will be without KD, lol, and that will be their biggest gripe cause they see what this team down here is doing. Not to say that it would have gone the exact same way there but they're hard up for dreams in the Pacific NW and harp on the "what ifs"...

Yeah but the Thunder-Sonics is going to be a great rivalry for sure.....

Oh, no doubt. It'll be like an intercontinental, USA vs. the USRR post Cold War who's gonna push the button first reaction battle series...

Seattle wouldn't receive an expansion team without another one being added with them. To make an even 32 teams.

Oh, no doubt. It'll be like an intercontinental, USA vs. the USRR post Cold War who's gonna push the button first reaction battle series...

Yeah, exactly!

Seattle wouldn't receive an expansion team without another one being added with them. To make an even 32 teams.

Kansas City, word up!! If Mark Cuban couldn't hold back a team settling in here, then there's no way Chicago can do anything about Missouri. KC could handle the task...

Kansas City, word up!!

That's exactly what I was thinking. The Sprint Center would hold a team nicely.

Add one team to the Eastern Conference (Kansas City) one to the Western Conference (Seattle)

That's exactly what I was thinking. The Sprint Center would hold a team nicely.

Add one team to the Eastern Conference (Kansas City) one to the Western Conference (Seattle)

Correct me if I am wrong, did Kansas used to have a basketball team before they moved to Sacramento? If so, it would be nice to bring back the old name and colors back in Kansas where they belong, what was the team name?

Yeah, KC shared it initially with Omaha, and then got it in their own right. As far as I know, it was a pretty clear failure, which is why they moved to Sacramento.

Yeah, KC shared it initially with Omaha, and then got it in their own right. As far as I know, it was a pretty clear failure, which is why they moved to Sacramento.

Hmm....thinking that is a failure, maybe they should not move back, I mean look at Los Angeles, there was the Los Angeles Raiders and Los Angles Rams, they both moved out of Los Angles since it did not work out and now since Los Angeles is getting a new football stadium, the Raiders or Rams might move back to Los Angeles and it might not work out again although I would like to see the Rams move back where they belong but this is probably a bad example though....

It probably won't happen by the recently elected Jacksonville Mayor has put an NBA team at the top of his wish list, and he doesn't seem too interested in keeping the Jags around. He actually sent them a lease termination notice awhile back. Meanwhile, the Jags will be playing 4 home games in London over the next 4 years.

Seattle wouldn't receive an expansion team without another one being added with them. To make an even 32 teams.

Most everything that has been said is that there is no way the league is expanding anytime soon, if they get a team it is moving from somewhere else.

It probably won't happen by the recently elected Jacksonville Mayor has put an NBA team at the top of his wish list, and he doesn't seem too interested in keeping the Jags around. He actually sent them a lease termination notice awhile back. Meanwhile, the Jags will be playing 4 home games in London over the next 4 years.

I do not see the Jaguars moving for some reason

First, as was said, there will be no NBA expansion any time soon. So, Seattle has to get a team from somewhere else. There's a possibility that their arena could not have a tenant for a while so welcomming the Sonics back is jumping the gun. It could be 10-15 years before there's an opportunity to get an NBA team (or they could the Sonics in 2 years). Second, Kansas City is one of the most oversaturated sports markets in the country. That would be a terrible place to start a team with significant chance of failure. Third, Thunder up!

It probably won't happen by the recently elected Jacksonville Mayor has put an NBA team at the top of his wish list, and he doesn't seem too interested in keeping the Jags around. He actually sent them a lease termination notice awhile back. Meanwhile, the Jags will be playing 4 home games in London over the next 4 years.

he did not send them a lease termination notice ... they have an iron clad lease until 2030 ..

Sure seems like everything I read indicates the Jags aren't happy in Jacksonville, and Jacksonville isn't just doing handsprings over the Jags. Very much a case, I think, of a city that just wasn't a right fit for the NFL from the get-go. Really a good cautionary tale for folks in OKC that think an NFL team should be our next pro sports objective...

On the NBA in KC: KC is a really good football town (with a lousy team), a decent but somewhat struggling baseball town, and I'm not at all sure how well the NBA would fit there, especially given that it has already failed there once before (granted it was a while back).

If they did expand the NBA, which I think is really unlikely right now, I'd bet dollars to donuts they're realign the conferences and put OKC in a better geographic fit than having to traverse the west coast teams. Heck, they may opt to do that anyway :)

This isn't a done deal, the Seattle Longshore union is threatening lawsuits against the buildings location. Also, there are environmental issues. This could take years to resolve before they could break ground, then it's another two years of construction. The only viable team that is in trouble at the moment is the Kings. And they could end up in Anaheim at the Honda Center.

he did not send them a lease termination notice ... they have an iron clad lease until 2030 ..

Yes he (the City) did. It is only 'iron clad' if both sides abide by the lease.

Jacksonville mayor to Shahid Khan: City has no intention of terminating Jaguars' lease | firstcoastnews.com (http://www.firstcoastnews.com/rss/article/258332/3/Mayor-City-has-no-intention-of-terminating-Jaguars-lease)


JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- After receiving a letter from the City of Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shad Khan on Thursday asking the city to withdraw a lease default letter, Mayor Alvin Brown promptly wrote back and said the city does not want to terminate the Jaguars' lease.

"Let me be crystal clear: the City of Jacksonville has absolutely no intention whatsoever of terminating its lease with the Jacksonville Jaguars," Brown wrote in a response to Khan.
...

"Immediately upon our advising the City of our recommended selection, your lawyer delivered to the Jaguars organization a default letter putting in motion a termination of our lease," Khan wrote.



...

Khan had said if the lease default letter was not withdrawn, it could put the Jaguars future in Jacksonville in jeopardy.

"If the default letter is indeed only the sentiment of your lawyer and not your thoughts toward the continued activities of the Jaguars in Jacksonville, I would request that the default letter of May 25, 2012, be withdrawn immediately," Khan wrote in the letter.

"Failing withdrawal of the default letter I must assume the City intends to proceed with the default and termination of our lease. As previously stated we are not in a position to take any action to "cure" a nonexistent default."

Kansas City, word up!! If Mark Cuban couldn't hold back a team settling in here, then there's no way Chicago can do anything about Missouri. KC could handle the task...

KC is the most over-saturated sports market ever

KC is the most over-saturated sports market ever

Denver is also, the Nuggets and Rockies rarely sell out.

According to pro-sports market data KC is the most over saturated city.

Study: Kansas City saturated with professional sports - Kansas City Business Journal (http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/stories/2009/12/07/daily21.html?page=all)


Existing professional teams have exhausted Kansas City’s economic capacity to add sports franchises, according to a study by American City Business Journals.

The Kansas City region’s total personal income falls short by $57 billion of what’s needed to support the city’s existing teams, the study said.

“It’s another reason you’re going to have an uphill battle filling the Sprint Center,” sports business analyst Neil deMause, author of “Field of Schemes,” said Tuesday.

...

... if they get a team it is moving from somewhere else.

If there is a fan base and group of city officials out there that care less about supporting their current team than Seattle would be willing to support bringing in that team to become the resurrection of the Sonics brand ... so be it, and best wishes to both of those cities.

KC is the most over-saturated sports market ever

I can't help their unemployment rate. They have 2 major league teams..and IM not gonna include MLS in that. With their MSA there is no reason they can't handle the task. Then again...what do I know? Wishful thinking I guess!

I can't help their unemployment rate. They have 2 major league teams..and IM not gonna include MLS in that. With their MSA there is no reason they can't handle the task. Then again...what do I know? Wishful thinking I guess!

Did you read the study above? Yes, it's wishful thinking and there's a detailed study to prove it.

Sorry, I guess my overall notion of having spent plenty of time in Kansas City and the surrounding metros is weaker than the above study.

Yes he (the City) did. It is only 'iron clad' if both sides abide by the lease.

Jacksonville mayor to Shahid Khan: City has no intention of terminating Jaguars' lease | firstcoastnews.com (http://www.firstcoastnews.com/rss/article/258332/3/Mayor-City-has-no-intention-of-terminating-Jaguars-lease)

First, that story's opening paragraph is a nightmare of bad English (or, hopefully, just bad cutting and pasting, followed by shabby editing.) I had to read the thing four times to realize what it meant.

The Jags organization picked a management company to handle the operations of the stadium per a modification to the selection process in their lease with the city. Apparently, the city attorney was unaware of the change in the selection process, and decided the Jags hadn't given proper notice or involvement per their original lease terms. So, apparently in a fit of legal snittery, the city attorney fired off an ill-advised letter back to the team telling them their selection was tantamount to a lease default. The Jags owner told them to withdraw the default letter, or they'd infer the city wasn't serious about the Jags long-term, and the mayor as well as the city attorney realized they were both unaware of the lease change that precipitated the Jags picking a new management company. The major forwarded a fairly abject apology and the attorney withdrew the default letter. So, in reality, neither side has issued any ultimatums to the other.

The whole thing, if you read all the letters, appears to have been a monumental communication goof (and an embarrassing dropping of the ball by the City's general counsel for not being up to speed on everything) that became a mushroom cloud of nothing. But it sure highlights the fact that there are edgy feelings between the team and the city as they struggle with attendance issues and waning fan support.

SoonerDave - that is a pretty good summation of the article but the story does go a little deeper than that. The City Attorney just doesn't fire off a letter to the Jags (an NFL team) telling them the City is breaking the lease without anyone else knowing about it. That just isn't going to happen, and if it did, that person would be fired. The attorney didn't get fired.

Several days had passed between the letter being sent and the Mayor saying it was an error, even though the news article I linked to indicated it was an immediate response from the Mayor. Not long after this the Jags agreed to have 4 homes games in London, something the previous own refused to do because he didn't want speculation the team was moving.

So in summation, the Jacksonville Mayor wants an NBA team, we can't have one and an NFL team, the city send a lease break letter to the Jags, Mayor has a meeting with the owner, rescinds the letter calling it a mistake, and the Jags move 4 homes game to London. Are those events all related or just coincidence? Time will tell.

I know this though, the Jags could make a lot more money calling London home and Jacksonville would need some coin to build an NBA arena considering the taxpayers just built Jax Veterans Memorial Arena which is not up to NBA standards.

SoonerDave - that is a pretty good summation of the article but the story does go a little deeper than that. The City Attorney just doesn't fire off a letter to the Jags (an NFL team) telling them the City is breaking the lease without anyone else knowing about it. That just isn't going to happen, and if it did, that person would be fired. The attorney didn't get fired.

Several days had passed between the letter being sent and the Mayor saying it was an error, even though the news article I linked to indicated it was an immediate response from the Mayor. Not long after this the Jags agreed to have 4 homes games in London, something the previous own refused to do because he didn't want speculation the team was moving.

So in summation, the Jacksonville Mayor wants an NBA team, we can't have one and an NFL team, the city send a lease break letter to the Jags, Mayor has a meeting with the owner, rescinds the letter calling it a mistake, and the Jags move 4 homes game to London. Are those events all related or just coincidence? Time will tell.

I know this though, the Jags could make a lot more money calling London home and Jacksonville would need some coin to build an NBA arena considering the taxpayers just built Jax Veterans Memorial Arena which is not up to NBA standards.

Ahhh, okay, so if I'm understanding you right, the city was telegraphing its "unstated" (officially) desire not to have the Jags anymore, sent the default notice to the Jags, and the Jags organization promptly moved four home games (and four games' worth of local revenue) to London. Only THEN did the city suddenly get its act together and withdraw the default letter, with the "misunderstanding" about the terms of the RFP for the facility manager as a guise for plausible deniability.

I guess my question is what does the city of Jacksonville gain from alienating the Jags ownership, if in reality they'd like to see them leave in favor of an NBA team anyway? Surely the city isn't prepared to have an empty NFL stadium sitting there unused, generating zero revenue for years to come...?

LOL - the Jags stadium is already empty. The Jags only use the stadium 8 day a year, 9 if we are lucky, but only 7 days a year for the next 4 years. They even covered 10,000 seats to try to boost demand - it didn't work. Also, the stadium was not built for the Jags, it was built for the Gator Bowl and the seating capacity was determined by the Florida/Georgia game. It was however remodeled to lure the NFL into approving the Jags in 1993 (nearly 20 years ago) and to keep the Florida/Georgia game here. Over 20 year Jacksonville only has $100 million invested in the stadium and most of it has already been paid off.

So are Jacksonville residents not interested in the NFL? Is the experience unpleasant (Bad stadium, poor access to the stadium, bad management, bad team)? It seems like if the city let them walk it would be a bad investment for the future. I've thought for a while that Oklahoma could support an NFL team, but there are far better cities without an NFL team that make more business sense. I'm not saying that these cities are better places to live or insulting Oklahoma City and Tulsa.

It really comes down to a few items here in Jax.

1) There are not enough people here.
2) There are not enough corporations here.
3) Ticket/concession prices are more than the average family can afford.
4) Most people are UF and Gerogia fans (The NFL simply can't compete in SEC country)
5) Bad teams

During spring training and the regular season the Stadium has limited uses. A lot of residents think we could get more stadium based shows during the fall if the Jags weren't tying up the stadium. They only use it 8 games a year but for those 8 games 5 months are taken off the calendar. For some reason a lot of people here want monster truck shows and stadium cross racing, but they don't want to sit in the summer heat or spring thunderstorms to do it.

Denver is also, the Nuggets and Rockies rarely sell out.
Most cities don't sell out every baseball, basketball or hockey games, there are too many home games in a season (baseball-81, basketball-41, hockey-34, football-8) compared to football. My office is two blocks from Coors Field and there is a good crowd every home game. During the World Series run in 2007 my co-workers said that it was nuts the last month of the season and playoffs. Plus in these markets outside of the northeast you have people from everywhere who brought their team allegiances from there they grew up. Most of my co-workers who grew up outside of Colorado are fans of their hometown teams, most want the Denver teams to do well but whenever "their team" plays a Denver team you know where their allegiance lies.

Even when teams do have a "sell out streak" like the Red Sox claim, in down years like this one they are getting creative with "selling" tickets and just because all of them are "sold" doesn't mean the attendance is at capacity. Many of the stadiums are overbuilt for the regular season, they are built to maximize opening day and the playoffs. UT is having to do promotions and discounted tickets now that their stadium is over 100,000 seats and the team is struggling. Most baseball stadiums would be better suited to be in the 25-30,000 range in most markets. Overbuilding and ticket prices lead to empty seats, look at how many empty seats were in Yankees Stadium during the latest playoff run. When the new stadium was built and pricing set is when everything was still flying high, since the economic meltdown all those corporate priced seats have gone empty. That leads to the problems that a market like KC faces, not enough corporations willing to foot the bill which is the model that all sports are built on now. All of pro sports are built on TV money and price inflated corporate sales and not of the everyday fan. At all these new stadiums between PSL's and ticket prices the same seat (roughly) in a new stadium costs 2-4 times more than the seat in the previous stadium. At some point that kind of increase is not sustainable. The thing that would kill the current model is if corporate sales were not tax deductible.

Most baseball stadiums would be better suited to be in the 25-30,000 range in most markets. Overbuilding and ticket prices lead to empty seats, look at how many empty seats were in Yankees Stadium during the latest playoff run.

The new Marlins Park in Miami only has 37,000 seats and it could have been 10,000 seats less because they averaged 27,000 per game.

Seattle is now going for a $ 490 million arena and yet they wouldn't vote in a $ 300 million arena
with the Sonics picking up half the tab when Clay Bennett offered it them. A little late, I'm thinking.

I'm also thinking they're not getting a lot a bang for their buck.
Does everyone realize we built the Chesapeake Arena for under $ 100 million? Actually almost
$ 20 million under. I think the return on investment has been spectacular. And the ticket prices
head scratchingly low.

Stan - A private owner is paying for 60% of the arena in Seattle and he is guaranteeing the City's debt for 20 years.


A wealthy hedge-fund manager won approval Monday for his plan to bring professional men's basketball and hockey back to Seattle, with initially skeptical City Council members agreeing to put up $200 million for a new arena after he promised to personally guarantee the city's debt.

As for bang for the buck, financing cost a lot and it is a good thing OKC didn't have to go that route or our $80 million arena (before upgrades) would have cost $200 million.

The new Marlins Park in Miami only has 37,000 seats and it could have been 10,000 seats less because they averaged 27,000 per game.

27,000 seat average is actually pretty good for hot weather baseball.
But you need a few 37,000 seat sellouts to makeup for the middle of the week
10,000 fan turnouts. A 35-40,000 seat stadium is pretty ideal. The Yankees new
stadium, with the highest ticket prices in the world, holds about 6000 less than
their old stadium. And when it first opened there was a wind problem... as per my article:

New_Yankee_Stadium (http://www.sillimanonsports.com/New_Yankee_Stadium.html)

Marlin Park has a retractable roof. I'm not sure how hot it gets in there but I think the population has adjusted to what-ever it is. Baseballs biggest attendance problem is 162 games. They should cut that in half by eliminating the weekday games.

Meanwhile, back in Seattle, the Edmonton Oiler are exploring relocation to Seattle. Wierd if the OKC Barons became the farm team for the Seattle Oilers.

Marlin Park has a retractable roof. I'm not sure how hot it gets in there but I think the population has adjusted to what-ever it is. Baseballs biggest attendance problem is 162 games. They should cut that in half by eliminating the weekday games.

Meanwhile, back in Seattle, the Edmonton Oiler are exploring relocation to Seattle. Wierd if the OKC Barons became the farm team for the Seattle Oilers.

It still sound more like it is just a threat to get money out of Edmonton for a new arena, like half the NFL teams did the same with LA over the past fifteen years.

Seattle is now going for a $ 490 million arena and yet they wouldn't vote in a $ 300 million arena
with the Sonics picking up half the tab when Clay Bennett offered it them. A little late, I'm thinking.

I'm also thinking they're not getting a lot a bang for their buck.
Does everyone realize we built the Chesapeake Arena for under $ 100 million? Actually almost
$ 20 million under. I think the return on investment has been spectacular. And the ticket prices
head scratchingly low.
The Ford Center really wasn't $84 million, that was the base price, finishing it out was about another $15 million more. That said, it was still half the cost of any arena built at the same time. The Pepsi Center in Denver was around $225 million and the AAC in Dallas was over $300 million. That price for an arena in that area of Seattle is a pretty fair price given current pricing.

Deal is off.

NBA board unanimously votes this down. Supersonics are not coming back, at least not anytime soon.

The Kings will continue to twist in the wind in Sacramento, while bitter basketball fans in Seattle will continue to fire off passive aggressive tweets at OKC.

NBA owners' committee recommends Sacramento Kings stay put - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9225104/nba-owners-committee-recommends-sacramento-kings-stay-put)

Woooooowwwww.

I think they're setting the stage for expansion soon. I'm not for expansion, but I really do think they'll go that route now with this. They don't want another OKC/Seattle situation, so franchises will only be lost if the cities really don't care about them now.

I guess the thread title should be changed to Sonics still not coming back? lol

Tesla is super pumped as well. The King's theme song is "Love Song" by Tesla.

I think they're setting the stage for expansion soon. I'm not for expansion, but I really do think they'll go that route now with this. They don't want another OKC/Seattle situation, so franchises will only be lost if the cities really don't care about them now.

Stern says expansion not on the table anytime soon. Said it again today. Why do you think they are setting the stage. Owners don't want it. Commissioner doesn't want it.

I am happy for the King fans but if the Sonics get a expansion team, I do not know that is going to work since there is 5 teams in each division

Stern says expansion not on the table anytime soon. Said it again today. Why do you think they are setting the stage. Owners don't want it. Commissioner doesn't want it.

Gut feeling more than anything. I think they're playing games while Seattle gets new facilities going because they know expansion isn't that popular and don't want to broach the subject until they're ready to pull the trigger, which would be closer to completion date of a new arena. If there's not a new option to move a team when that happens, then I think they'll give the city an expansion franchise.

Deal is off.

NBA board unanimously votes this down. Supersonics are not coming back, at least not anytime soon.

The Kings will continue to twist in the wind in Sacramento, while bitter basketball fans in Seattle will continue to fire off passive aggressive tweets at OKC.

NBA owners' committee recommends Sacramento Kings stay put - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9225104/nba-owners-committee-recommends-sacramento-kings-stay-put)

how will the kings "continue to twist in the wind" they will have new ownership and a brand new stadium in Sacramento

how will the kings "continue to twist in the wind" they will have new ownership and a brand new stadium in Sacramento

I think he's using it figuratively to express that they will remain in Sacramento. That's how I read it at least.