[thecabin.net] Seattle's heartbreak is everyone's loss

What annoys me about articles like this one is that they're selective. By that, I mean that there were very few similar articles about the Oilers when they were packing up to leave.

I don't recall a bunch of similar articles about the Grizzlies, and the press was practically celebrating the Expos finally pulling up stakes and heading for D.C.

While there may have been one or two articles or columns that expressed some sort of regret or sadness for the people of Houston, Vancouver, Montreal, etc. they sure seemed to be few and far between. Unlike with the Sonics (or the Browns) where we've practically been bombarded with such stories.

These articles also seem like the authors just noticed that sports teams move sometimes (in this one in particular talking about how the Sonics situation is setting a bad precedent, as if the precedent isn't already out there with the dozens of stadiums and arenas that have been built in the past 15 years or so and the number of teams that have moved to greener pastures).

Hi there. I'm 1995. You might remember me as the year that our elected congressional officials investigated the effective form of blackmail that sports owners use to get the public to build new stadiums and arenas for teams.

Of course, I guess I can't expect much from the newspaper of relatively tiny Conway, Arkansas (though one of my cousins who now works at the New York Times started out at the Log Cabin Democrat many years ago). I look forward to what the Arkadelphia Daily Siftings Herald has to say on the matter of franchise relocation.

 

If Seattle wanted to keep the team, they could've worked it out with the Schults. Obviously they were going to be financially conservative after giving into the Seahawks and the Mariners. But that also sends a message to Stern (who actually actively helped push this through). It sent a clear signal that the Sonics were the #3 in the city while OKC will put them number one.

They were our main nemesis in the 90's, so it's a little sad to see this happen to a historic team. But from Schultz and Sterns perspective, it made logical sense.

 

My response to mrpaige is that this situation was such a unique one; the Sonics had been there for 40 years. Whereas the Grizzlies had a .220 winning percentage in six seasons.

The Expos were ****ed over big time by Brochu and subsequently Loria to the point where fans were essentially prevented from seeing the team play (no TV deal).

What strong connection is a city fan base going to have with a team that has no history, a history of losing, or no way to even watch the games?

I just find it difficult to compare what occurred in Seattle (people across the country cared) versus Vancouver/Montréal (regionally secluded; lack of fan base).

In any event it's a shame what happened in each city (well, at least Seattle, Houston, Cleveland, and Montréal).

 

I don't think the situation was unique. I just think people get a perception of a team or its fan base and make judgments accordingly.

Houston was seen as a city that didn't support the Oilers (largely based on the fact that people stopped going to games when it became clear that the team was going to move), so the overwhelming perception was that we deserved to lose our team despite the history. Same with the Rams and with the Raiders when they returned to L.A.

The Browns and the Hornets (and now the Sonics) had a reputation for having a strong fan base, so they get the "How could this happen?" columns and stories.

The reality of the situation is never really studied in depth in these stories and columns. That would be too difficult.

 

When I look at this situation, I don't see the Sonics as the ones who dicked over the town. It's easy to paint it that way when the multimillionaire/multibillionaire owners pack up and move for the newer arena and greener corporate money. That's not really the case here.

The Sonics were in an ANCIENT arena during the Payton/Kemp era and needed to get a new arena to remain competitive financially when the Jordan-fueled NBA boom took place. They compromised with the city and instead of a new arena, agreed on a near-rebuild of Key Arena with revenue splits that would help pay it off.

Because of the lease agreement, mainly the revenue splits, the Sonics ended up only slightly better off than they were before and were in financial trouble again after only a couple of years. The Rockets tried the same halfway approach when they renovated the Summit (expanded food court) and also found that there was no way around a new Arena.

Sonics tried a second round of renovations that got shot down by the city. They asked for a new arena that was shot down. They looked into moving to Tacoma to stay nearby and nothing came about.

I'm fairly sure Schultz did everything he could to find a manageable solution to keep the team in town. But as it was, they had to work on a (relatively) minor budget and couldn't afford to give anyone max contracts. In the end, Schultz didn't want to leave town or at least didn't want to take the heat (as a local businessman) for moving the team. So he sold to Bennett, knowing full well that the team was going to go to OKC. If he didn't know, he's the most naive and foolish man to ever run such a successful company (Starbucks). His lawsuit to buy back the team is nothing more than a sham and a show to protect his goodwill in Seattle.

Where I'm going with all this is the city, in particular the elected officials, should shoulder the vast bulk of the responsibility for the Sonics leaving. I've kept an eye on this situation for a good decade: the Sonics have been rebuffed every time they try to make something happen and the city has been daring them to walk for years.

Seattle set up the Mariners and Seahawks, but weren't willing to even set up a plan for a new arena to follow the current lease. They weren't willing to discuss or negotiate item 1 with the team. They made their decision. We would have lost the Rockets if we took that same stance.

The only other thing I'll add is that it's a shame that the Hornets couldn't stay in OKC, considering how massive a hit they were there. Pre-Katrina New Orleans was a terrible home from the start, fixing figures and double-counting tickets and STILL sitting in the basement with league attendance. It's a shame the league keeps putting teams in the wrong locations (Memphis) and burning bridges with others (Charlotte).

Evan

 

Why didn't the city get together with the fans and buy the team ala Green Bay?

Sell shares etc.....

DD

 

its raining truth.