I have, all of the sudden, become the biggest supporter of the Titans. Not because I miss the Oilers or Bud himself. But for a more selfish reason: If the Titans win the Super Bowl, Houstonians will feel the pain of letting a team dissapper without much of a fight. I am hoping that this hurt feeling will carryover to the voters when the new referndum comes up in November. WE NEED TO FEEL THIS PAIN!!. This is the only way we keep the Rockets, I believe. This is serious business, if this city loses another professional team in 5 plus years, that will look very backward in the minds of those companies that would normally like to relocate here with our so-called thriving economy. This I believe will be a domino effect. Once the rest of America sees this city for what it really is(in the minds of people whom enjoy recreational activities). Our hope is lost as being progessive like the rest of our state. If George Bush really gives a damn about Texas, he should do more to put pressure on our city govt. to step up our collective effort to keep a professional franchise in Texas. I guarentee you, no team will want to relocate here. The Oilers were more understandable, they had broken our hearts way too many times. The Rockets, on the other hand, had won back to back championships . In the ninties no less. It is not like they won these championships twenty years ago or something. Please get out and spread the word to vote for the referandum... Akeem [This message has been edited by akeem (edited January 26, 2000).]
It's not his opinion... you're being absurd. A corporation will certainly not make decisions based on the status of Houston's (or lack thereof) possession of a pro basketball team. Instead, the corporation will make its decision based on the port, demand for services, and Houston's tax situation. The economic value of professional sports teams is ridiculously exxagerated by the owners in an attempt to gain public support. Independent studies show little or no economic value to such franchises... they're certainly not worth the value of stadium costs. Now, if you believe that that having a pro sports team is important to you for personal reasons... that's fine. But the arguement that Houston would be more than nominally affected detrimentally by the Rockets relocation is ludicrous.
has the quality of life in houston diminished because the oilers left - i think not...l.a. seems to be handling the rams/raiders exit just fine...while it is always true that a number of low-wage jobs will leave if a franchise moves, it generally does not affect others...for example, how many folks are paying more in taxes or goods/services because the oilers left? conversely, do things get cheaper when a franchise moves in...face it, a professional sports franchise is good for city morale (if they're winning) and they are good for those DIRECTLY affected by the move (business owners in close proximity to the stadium, low wage workers in the concession business, retailers who sell their merchandise)...i would hate to see the rockets leave but it won't change my way of life...some of the more expensive restaurants are generally closer to an arena/stadium so the patrons certainly aren't benefiting...
While it's nice to hear statements made with such authority as those above, which at least makes them sound true, I really can't place any creedence in them unless you back them up. What "Independent studies" are you referring to. I conducted an independent study at the water cooler this morning that showed the opposite Haven - I'm not saying that you're wrong, you may well be right, but someone else (I think it was Popeye) posted some data yesterday that sports franchises returned THREE TIMES as much revenue to a city as an average business does. I'd really like to know who's right and where there info comes from.
Are we poorer for the Oilers Leaving not too much I guess. . [I still hate the titans] I mean look at our city officials. they behave like they still there .. . they want the monorail to go from down town to the Astrodome . .. Which is a Pretty useless route to a pretty useless building. If our city officials can act like the oilers etc are still here and make plans based on it . . . why not all of us. . . Rocket River See ya at the Oiler Game this sunday. [I know it maybe off topic but. . . then again . . look at the topic]
Considering it goes from downtown, through the medical center, to the new football stadium, I wouldn't say that the route is that useless. While I agree with y'all regarding akeem's statements, I can see his point. Many people in today's world look at sports as a marker for a city. I'm not saying that Houston would lose any business over losing two teams, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't. However, it still doesn't reflect very well on the city, whatever that matters. Plus, if it takes George W. Bush to help build a stadium, I want none of it. He ripped off the citizens of Arlington with the Ballpark up there, I want him to keep his paws out of Houston. Considering all his other business "accomplishments", I don't know if I want him any where near my money. Sorry Kagy! [This message has been edited by Rocketman95 (edited January 26, 2000).]
Crap... someone wants me to be industrious, and find my sources. Davo: I'll try to locate the study I was referring to in the next couple of days, but I think I can tell you where to find it. If you're an espn.com insider, I believe they let you access the archives (I'm not). Sometime last year, when all of the stadium deals were attracting so much press, espn.com posted an article about it... basically taking the side of fans against the owners... and referred to several studies that had shown that economic benefits of teams are negligible... good luck finding it.
Let's all agree on the following. 1. Pro sports leagues are a racket. Depending on your philosophy, the players, the owners, or both make way too much money. 2. All of us who post at clutchcity.net are addicts. The NBA has us hooked. 3. We all want our team to be the best. The surest way to be the best is to buy the best talent. And the surest way to buy the best talent is to circumvent the salary cap through the Bird exception, lavish hotel rooms for the players, and other perks and accounting tricks. All of which means forking over as much money as we can get away with. And the surest way to make sure our team can fork over more money than the other teams is to let it tap into public revenue. The other teams are already tapping into public revenue. We have to do the same if we want to be as good as them or better. 4. We all know deep down that our city should not be spending money on a pro sports team. If you're conservative, be honest and admit that the government has no right to tax people to pay for a sports franchise that most people don't care about. If you're liberal, be honest and admit that the government shouldn't spend any money on sports until it has made sure all the poor folks have sufficient food, clothing, and shelter. 5. Let's see. Civic responsibility on the one hand, an NBA championship on the other. Hmmmm. I'll go with the championship.
that depends on who is driving the monorail, is it Homer J.? It could be useless then. Love, The Frink-in-ator
Good to know that I'm doing the right thing as a conservative. Looks like akeem needs a new BBS to post to.... tsk, tsk. {Took out the BudLight commercial joke. Not sure who would have gotten that one. I sure didn't when I re-read it). [This message has been edited by BrianKagy (edited January 26, 2000).]
I don't really follow the price of franchise licenses that closely, but I know licenses are selling for double what they were 5 years ago. That is a very good return on investment considering how low risk it is since licenses are so few in number. I'm sorry, I'm with Kagy 100%. And probably more In fact, my first post to this BBS was a blast at the referendum. I was attacked savagely by some posters. These owners know they average 10% growth per year on increased value of their franchise license alone. The numbers game of comparing revenues to operation cost is really secondary to their investment and is an attempt to confuse us. They are not investing in projected revenue growth of sales, the are investing in a sure-thing commodity...buying and selling franchise licenses. The owners do not need our help in building stadiums. I'd negotiate with them, but the referendum sucked. I'm not voting for a give-away like that. There was nothing serious about that referendum. To me, the Rockets were just floating a trial balloon to see how much negotiating room they need and which demographics voted against them, so they good target a campaign to them. 11th hour referendums like that are not serious. I'm sorry!
I do think that the city is poorer for losing the Oilers. Maybe not so much on a monetary scale, but on an emotional one. The 4th largest city in the country should be represented by ALL major sports organizations, IMO. If we get a new arena, we'll get the NHL in town. If we don't, no NHL, and no way the Olympics comes to Houston either. Everyone says public funds should not go to private sports franchises. But the fact of the matter is that if no public money goes in, we don't have a team to cheer for. I see the Rockets representing Houston, thus they represent me, therefore I have no problem with my tax money going to build them a new arena. I have no children, but do I b**** about my taxes going to local schools? No, I do not. ------------------ Proud Cheerleader 'til we move to New Orleans 302 [This message has been edited by Lynus302 (edited January 26, 2000).]
My take an akeem's post is that he's concerned over the appearance of two professional sports teams leaving in such a short period of time. I agree. Who in their right mind would move their NBA team to a city that couldn't even keep the original team? In marketing, it's called target marketing. To get the most payoff, you'll want to sell your product to those who are most interested in buying it. Houston has demonstrated it's ambivalence toward professional sports twice now. Sure, fans are willing to buy the tickets to see the games, but ownership, these days, is looking for a hell of a lot more than that out of it's own city or possible relocation sites. I read a post about the possibility of the Grizzlies moving to Houston. Do you honestly think that guy (or anyone else)is going to move his team to Houston to play in the Summit? The new ownership will be looking for a city that's willing to build the team a new arena for essentially a guaranteed profit opportunity. That's the way it is these days. Take it and like it. Cities like New Orleans and Baltimore want NBA a NBA bad enough, that they'll be willing to fork over the cash for such a public works project. If the Rockets decide to bolt, I'll put good money down betting the NBA never sets foot in Houston again. Look at the precedent set in LA for the NFL. Sure, it's a different leauge and a different city, but those with ownership in professional sports should be spooked enough from what went down in that city that they'll be looking to avoid similar situations. That city had 2 NFL teams no too long ago. That's two with a capital T. With both leaving town, mostly as a result of fan apathy (I remember seeing the Coluseum more than half empty for nearly every game the Raiders played), some of the biggest players in the second largest town in this country couldn't even get their **** together to formulate a decent plan for a franchise. Even after how many second chances given by the NFL. I'll bet Stern doesn't give Houston even a first chance. Now, I'm not so sure George Dubya could have done anything to help or steer the referendum in the last go around. This is a municipal/county problem, not anything a governer should be poking his nose into. Bottom line: Akeem's worried about the Rockets leaving town. BrianKagy, haven, Will, and the countless others who rally against public funding of a new home for Les's toy/investment have yet (to my knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong) to come forward with a valid, alternative plan for keeping the Rockets in town. It sure is easy to hammer the opposition without actually creating alternatives to the current dilemma. These guys apparently seem to think this situation will work itself out by itself, as if Les will come to his senses and decide to keep the Rockets in town and pay for the new arena. For my suggested solutions on this, check the 'Arena/Support for the Rockets' string a couple days back. At the very least, akeem was/is attempting to propose action in constructively addressing this very real problem by encouraging awareness of the problem. How many of your friends who are merely casual fans or non-fans realize the scope and urgency of the possibility of the Rockets moving away? I'm sure I'll get blasted too, akeem, but you (and the Rockets) have my support.
I am sorry. I have tried to formulate a response here that isn't insulting and gives you an honest and descriptive explanation of why this statement is incorrect, but I can't do it. Instead, let me just say that this is the silliest thing I have seen on these boards in a long, long, long, long time. We are all dumber for having read it. I don't mean to be rude, but I can't help it. If you really think that a corporation is going to re-think its plans to relocate to Houston because we might lose the Rockets.... wow. That is about as misinformed as you can get, unless you start reading Rolling Stone for its political content.
"If George Bush really gives a damn about Texas, he should do more to put pressure on our city govt. to step up our collective effort to keep a professional franchise in Texas" Oh please! I'm a democrat and even I can't believe what I just read! Thanks BK...I couldn't have said it better myself. ------------------ Bring It!!
Brian Kagy: That's your opinion.. Maybe I am stretching a little bit, but I don't believe I am too way off in these comments. Akeem {Kagy's note: At least spell my name right. JEEZ. It's right there in my post). [This message has been edited by BrianKagy (edited January 26, 2000).]
"Valid" and "realistic" are not synonyms. I have already outlined my proposal. Whether it happens or not, I'll remain steadfast in my belief that I have maintained a consistent position on the issue of buying new toys for billionaires.
driver8 the solution is that Les needs to negotiate, and the damn mayor needs to not give away the farm. I don't know enough about alternative plans. Although, I was fine with the comptroller's alternative plan I read in the Chronicle. The point I'm making is: Les was looking to sneak one by the voters. He wanted the whole farm, not just the cow, the barn, and the milk...but all the chickens, pigs, crops and the parking in the driveway. That was way too greedy for me, and I took complete offense to the 11th hour tactics used. Think about how much his license would be worth with stadium ownership and all the peripheral licensing he would have owned. He does not need all that to double his investment every 5 years. Anything more is simply pitting us against other desparate cities. I have no problems with Les as a business man trying to pull this mayor coup; but I was mayorly-disappointed in my mayor not making him negotiate. At least my council member backed the comptroller. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited January 27, 2000).]
