Agreement for new Seattle arena reached

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • 12
    Banned
    • Feb 2010
    • 4458

    #586
    I know that as a whole, Seattle fans are not like this, but I've been disgusted with how many act on blogs and message boards; ripping Sacramento as a city and being downright nasty... These are probably the same people that cried when OKC fans acted the same way in 2008... Hypocrites.

    I'm genuinely happy for the true Kings fans who didn't have to go through the same BS that we went through...

    The only way I support the NBA returning to my home state is expansion and David Stern having no involvement or influence anymore... If that takes five or more years, so be it.
    Last edited by 12; 05-17-2013, 08:55 AM.

    Comment

    • 12
      Banned
      • Feb 2010
      • 4458

      #587
      Originally posted by jWILL253
      My own vested interest aside... the NBA is getting away with murder here. They tortiously interfered with a business transaction, and nobody in the mix wants to do anything about that. They also just guaranteed that the City of Sacramento will be bankrupt within the next decade, and everybody seems to be okay with that.

      This is just gross to me. I'm at the point where I won't watch an NBA game ever again, even if Seattle does eventually get a team. I mean, what kind of organization supports the outright rape of public coffers?
      It's none of our business on whether Sacramento goes bankrupt or not.
      Last edited by 12; 05-17-2013, 09:14 AM.

      Comment

      • 12
        Banned
        • Feb 2010
        • 4458

        #588
        I don't really believe in karma, but the thought of the Kings staying put and not bringing that baggage to Seattle is refreshing to me.

        Maybe the older I get, the more I realize how ridiculous building these $400-500 million dollar buildings really is.

        Comment

        • Taer
          MVP
          • Sep 2011
          • 1432

          #589
          Re: Agreement for new Seattle arena reached

          Originally posted by Coug00
          Definite 'Yes' votes were Lakers, Kings, and Blazers. Rumors are Pacers and Spurs were yes votes as well....
          The above named teams seem to be the most independent minded teams and those that try to solve their issues by their own efforts instead of relying on "the league" to solve everything for them. (Exception being the Kings here).

          For example, the Spurs resting their players despite Stern's wishes and the Lakers making the Chris Paul trade despite pressure from the BoG.

          I would like to know how the Clippers voted, since Sterling moved his team to LA on the sly over the wishes of the NBA at the time. It would seem that would support a positive vote, but Sterling is anything but consistent.

          Comment

          • Taer
            MVP
            • Sep 2011
            • 1432

            #590
            Re: Agreement for new Seattle arena reached

            Originally posted by 12
            I don't really believe in karma, but the thought of the Kings staying put and not bringing that baggage to Seattle is refreshing to me. ...
            An expansion team would be the better solution in my book as well. The trouble I have is that unless their is an ironclad formal agreement to bring an expansion team to Seattle in place, then the best thing to do is to start litigation.

            The way the Seattle Pilots/Mariners was handled would be the roadmap; don't take the promise of a "possible" franchise as an actual promise but once the league fully commits to bringing a team to Seattle, cooperate fully on getting it done.

            Originally posted by 12
            I know that as a whole, Seattle fans are not like this, but I've been disgusted with how many act on blogs and message boards; ripping Sacramento as a city and being downright nasty...
            I think both Sacramento and Seattle fans on this forum have been civil. It is a far cry from what I read on ESPN or SI and I am thankful people here are mature enough to act like adults.
            Last edited by Taer; 05-17-2013, 12:30 PM. Reason: to add quote

            Comment

            • Coug00
              LOB
              • Jul 2002
              • 3476

              #591
              Sounds like the NBA and Hansen/Ballmer are negotiating expansion. H/B has agreed not to go to litigation and told the NBA to keep the $30M as a sign of good faith.
              Member of The OS Baseball Rocket Scientists Association

              Comment

              • Coug00
                LOB
                • Jul 2002
                • 3476

                #592
                The funny thing about the $30M, some people at Sonicsrising did their homework and say that is the exact combined amount that would be lost in shared tv revenue if a 31st team were to join before the current tv contract expires. With that money, the lost tv revenue per team by adding Seattle in '14-15 = $0. Hmmmmm.
                Member of The OS Baseball Rocket Scientists Association

                Comment

                • DonkeyJote
                  All Star
                  • Jul 2003
                  • 9194

                  #593
                  Re: Agreement for new Seattle arena reached

                  Yeah, Expansion makes sense. SBnation has an article up about it. Basically, right now each team gets $30 million in TV revenue. Add a team to the current deal, and it's down to $29 million. A $500 million expansion fee would equate to $16 million per team. Which means worst case scenario, no team is making less money for at least 16 years. Since Seattle is more likely to add some value rather than keep it even (since even without a team, Seattle does pretty well in national ratings), there's no significant reason to not so it.

                  And is there really a big difference between player #450 and #465 in this league? I really don't think so. I think talent dilution is negligible when you're talking about one team. If you were to contract one team today, would the talent on every team suddenly be better? Nope.

                  Comment

                  • 12
                    Banned
                    • Feb 2010
                    • 4458

                    #594
                    Re: Agreement for new Seattle arena reached

                    Who the hell are the New Orleans Pelicans?

                    Had no idea, until now, after reading that Charlotte might change their name back to the Hornets, that the New Orleans franchise changed their name.

                    Proves how little of a **** I care about the NBA now, but am mildly interested in what comes about with Seattle getting a new team.

                    Still glad it won't be the Kings... Relocation is a nasty thing and I still can't understand how so many in my state were so ready to get the Kings. How quickly our little minds and hearts forget the pain that comes with losing a team that you love, and how we're so ready to hand that pain off to someone else.

                    Comment

                    • Redacted01
                      Hall Of Fame
                      • Aug 2007
                      • 10316

                      #595
                      Re: Agreement for new Seattle arena reached

                      Yuck. 31 teams. I hope they have a 32nd following very soon after. Then again, the NBA was always pretty good with 29. Unbalanced conferences never really bothered me as much here as in football.

                      Comment

                      • OSUFan_88
                        Outback Jesus
                        • Jul 2004
                        • 25642

                        #596
                        Re: Agreement for new Seattle arena reached

                        Originally posted by DonkeyJote
                        Yeah, Expansion makes sense.


                        Nooooooooooooooo it most certainly does not.
                        Too Old To Game Club

                        Urban Meyer is lol.

                        Comment

                        • Marino
                          Moderator
                          • Jan 2008
                          • 18113

                          #597
                          Re: Agreement for new Seattle arena reached

                          I think they need to retract teams, including my beloved Bobcats. I mean, the NBA has already **** on Charlotte before, so the NBA is not very liked here anyways.

                          Comment

                          • Taer
                            MVP
                            • Sep 2011
                            • 1432

                            #598
                            Re: Agreement for new Seattle arena reached

                            Originally posted by OSUFan_88


                            Nooooooooooooooo it most certainly does not.
                            DJ was saying it makes perfect sense for Seattle.

                            Comment

                            • Coug00
                              LOB
                              • Jul 2002
                              • 3476

                              #599
                              Originally posted by Taer
                              DJ was saying it makes perfect sense for Seattle.
                              22 owners thought so. Why let the Maloofs have Ballmer's millions when the existing owners can split ~$600M thirty ways in a year or so.
                              Member of The OS Baseball Rocket Scientists Association

                              Comment

                              • DonkeyJote
                                All Star
                                • Jul 2003
                                • 9194

                                #600
                                Originally posted by OSUFan_88


                                Nooooooooooooooo it most certainly does not.
                                Explain to me why it doesn't? Teams aren't going be losing money in the deal. To the contrary, there's a chance they'll all end up making more. Adding 3% more players isn't going make anything more than a negligible impact on the talent pool.

                                What argument is there really against it? Putting a team in a top 15 market with a hefty expansion fee on top of it is more money and more fans.

                                Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

                                Comment

                                Working...