We have become spoiled. Houston Rockets fans are spoiled. We expect our team to win instead of hoping our team will win. That's not a bad thing, there are several other cities that have teams they expect to win. Unfortunately, it doesn't always create the best climate to run the team. Question 1: Okay, Kelvin Cato signs a huge contract extension. Why does he have to become an all-star overnight? People talk about how he's not earning his money when they don't realize he's not getting the huge money yet. Considering his lack of playing time in Portland, he is probably a rookie. All this being said, we have several people entertaining the idea of trading Cato to clear cap room. First of all, isn't 25 games a little soon to be giving up on someone? Secondly, do these people realize that the changes in the collective bargaining agreement discourage teams from building through free agency? Question 2: If Rockets fans "expect" their team to win then how is a lottery season going to effect a potential arena vote in 2000? I must admit, even as a political scientist I am not adept at analyzing this side of the political world. We know that the Spurs recent championship had a profound POSITIVE impact on their arena passing. I suppose the question is how much NEGATIVE impact will a losing season have on any impending arena vote in 2000. Personally, I can not fathom someone using a won-loss record as a gauge for whether to vote for or against an arena, but I suppose some do. In this case, do the Rockets succomb to the pressure of making a big trade to help in the short run? ------------------ Rockets When? Rockets When?
Barzilla, let me try to tackle these. 1) I think the impatience stems from the history of success that the Rockets have enjoyed. I don't have these figures in front of me, but I would bet that over the past 15 years, Houston's one of the seven or eight winningest franchises in the league. We just don't have a recent history of losing like this. Even when we've been bad lately (1992, 1998), we've not sunk to Dallas Maverick levels. Until now. To top it off, I think we all have a tendency to delude ourselves. Jeff Balke's right: we're just not that good. 2) I would hope the Rockets' current record would not be a factor in deciding whether or not to publicly fund the new arena. It certainly wasn't a factor in my (personal) opposition to the prior referendum. We need to position ourselves so that any investment of public funds brings a better return than, say, sticking it in a sock under the mattress. The now-defeated referendum wouldn't have done so. So, I wouldn't have supported it even if we'd been 82-0. I would expect that any future arena referendum will be more beneficial to the taxpayers of Houston. So, I'll likely support it even if we're 14-68. ------------------ Nothing but NET-- http://www.clutchcity.NET Don't Fight the Future
I don't think the rockets are going to consider the referendum when it comes to the next few years management. They're going to keep doing what's made them successfuly (les willing). In fact, I think the rockets are poised to do that to strengthen their position. Do you know how it feels when you go into your boss' office after being offered a better position elsewhere. Usually, it's the end of the story, you give your month or whatever (2 wks, depending on the demands of the job) and say c'est la vie. It's powerful when you're in that position, though, to give your boss a chance to match the offer; you say "I just wanted to give you the chance...", etc. etc. The rockets are in that position now... they didn't know they were until a few days before the previous referendum, but now they've done their part. If Les wants to be a shrewd businessman, all he has to do is to stand firm on his current offer. If that sides w/ the outlook of his current team in failure of yet another referendum, the Rockets are in a beautiful position. Remember their names are the Rockets and the Comets: Did you notice that Baltimore was in the group of cities coveting an NBA team. How fitting, Goddard Space Flight Facility (where the Pathfinder was made) is just outside in a suburb. What beautiful marketing. Add that to the fact that Baltimore would pay for the stadium, not with Les and things start to make a bit more sense. Oh, and one other thing... your franchise player is from Balitmore, an area he wanted to be near, b/c of his grandma. Francis' detractors aside, I was partially raised by my grandparents, it shows, I fly home so many times to visit her, I see her more than the other grandkids that live in the same city... that bond is permanent. If the rockets are the slightest bit apprehensive about renewing Francis after 3, well... there's another premise. The Rockets will be the Baltimore Rockets in a matter of years.
Barzilla I agree with your premise(s). That watching and hoping a young team wins through superior effort despite the odds against, them is maybe what defines a true sports fan. As a matter of fact a "big" trade is not only not needed, it probably would do more harm than good. However some effective changes by management in some supportive personnel, keeping competitive focus, staying away from lottery discussions and next year's wishes, etc ... would be real nice though. As far as the arena vote goes ... I have my personal opinion on that ... IMHO, really what it amounted to was: 1. lack of trust in any sports entity by the general population, the Bud Adams Scrooge effect. 2. the firm belief that change is never good, a condition particularly inherent in Texans. 3. the assumption that we must be going to get screwed somehow,because this deal is too good to be true. 4. the opponents camp being able to tell bigger and better lies in a last ditch advertising effort so he can hurt Les Alexander for pulling out of the lease at Compaq. 5. the fact that (now this will cause some contoversy) basketball is primarily percieved as a black athletic display of talent. Where as baseball and football are percieved as white man's games. 6. the marketing of yet "another" sports arena in the downtown area was done very poorly. This mindset was completely missed by the profilers and R & D marketing people. Most white middle-class non sports voters felt that the new baseball arena or the old astrodome could be used for basketball. "Why do we need another one?" Frankly there were so many missed opportunities including the misread (I fell for this too) by the Rockets organization that the Rockets franchise was a respected member of the community and should have been afforded the respect due them. In short, they overestimated the fickleness of a society for a two time champion. Cheers.
"Football is perceived as a white man's game?" I'm assuming you watch the games every weekend. Where do you watch them, in a time machine? The arena referendum didn't fail for racial reasons.
bk... I think that popeye was alluding to the fact that football is a suburban sport rather than urban... but we should probably not deviate into that topic, it would be unfair to barzilla (particularly when the post got shut down ) [This message has been edited by Achebe (edited December 21, 1999).]
Hey Barzilla... Was that a one tailed or two tailed test? Did you use SPSS or Microcase to find your results? What is the standard deviation of a lottery season's affect on an arena vote? For those of you sayin' "What the ...", Reading statistics books is fundamental! ------------------ The truth is out there... on the NET.
Achebe, although you are closer to my point than BK, the real key is the word perceived. If you would care to argue against that, I have a number of marketing friends who would support that premise. Far simpler to watch a basketball game and a football/baseball game at a regional or national level and compare the advertisers. This is not racist in intent or direction, it is smart demographic indentification and hard marketing principles. When push came to shove during the arena debate the powers that controlled public focus merely utilized these tools to their advantage.
popeye, as soon as i had pressed submit, i realized that i had left off the keyword... 'perceived'... on that note, i think you're entirely correct, but again, we should steer clear of this topic and discuss barzilla's claim as to the effects of a lottery season on the referendum. the other discussion is to much of a slippery slope, and should be put in another thread. [This message has been edited by Achebe (edited December 21, 1999).]
Agreed. I was merely trying to point out that the use (or misuse) of public funds may not have been the only factor involved in the loss of the arena referendum. This sure did escalate the subject of target though, didn't it???
Mulder, Unfortunately, at TCU we didn't have the funds to utilize that kind of technology. We were stuck with MUSIC instead. If I may, here is what I derived from the arena failures last time. 1. A look at the voting demographics shows that the outlying suburbs overwhelmingly voted down the arena. Houston proper voted overwhelmingly for the arena. I don't think this can necessarily be a result of Popeye's argument. While basketball may or may not be perceived as a sport geared towards African Americans, I think this perception is irrelevant in this case. The NBA was recently reported as the most expensive professional sport to watch, and that typically means that minorities are disenfranchised when it comes to attending games on a regular basis. I think this problem was a issue of not getting the county judges on board in the negotiations. Lee Brown took over the negotiations so he had big sway with the inner city voters, but the suburbs tended to sway with the county judges. 2. I think the Rockets ran into a situation where they were the last team to ask for an arena. I have nothing concrete to back this up, but I think some voters went to the polls with the attitude of "another sporting facility? Didn't we just do this?" 3. I think some other people distrusted the fact that this deal was thrown together overnight. This coupled with the fact that the pro arena supporters had only about month to get their message out. As a general principle, it is always easier to lie about something to the public than inform the public about something. ------------------ Rockets When? Rockets When?
Achebe and Popeye, In light of the recent comments by John Rocker and others I will not touch Popeye's premise with a ten foot pole. As much as I may agree with Popeye on this one I will have to stick to the subject as Achebe said. Popeye said something I agree with This club should not make any major trades. That's where rebuilding teams get in trouble. However, let's say this team were to engineer a trade and somehow squeak into the playoffs. I know those are two huge ifs, but it does beg the question: does a playoff appearence make an arena deal any easier to pass? And if so, would you make that trade with the knowledge that it will help the arena situation even if it means stunting our development? My gut reaction would be no, but that's simply because I have no way of knowing where the arena situation is. I will say that it would be beneficial to the Rockets if the stayed in Houston. There is really no other market that can support them like Houston can. New Orleans has already failed as an NBA market and Baltimore might prove to be a nice option when it comes to the arena, but it's smaller size and proximity to Washington D.C. makes it considerably less appealing. ------------------ Rockets When? Rockets When?
Yo Brian. I don't think the Rockets are as bad as Dallas. We've been in just about every game this year, and we've given the better teams a tough time. If we had Hakeem and his leadership, then we might have won some of those games. We might end up having as bad of a record as Dallas(although I don't think we'll do that bad), but we have positive signs to look forward to for the next upcoming years.
