• Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Sacramento Kings moving franchise to the OC, CA.

Oh, I agree. The Maloofs are foofs.

But the league should've made a more concerted effort to keep Seattle in the fold.
 
wicked said:
Oh, I agree. The Maloofs are foofs.

But the league should've made a more concerted effort to keep Seattle in the fold.

Maybe this is Stern's way of apologizing to the Kings for what he did to them in 2002. :D
 
Whatever happens, this will be remembered as a unique chapter in the decades-long history of mobile franchises.

- Seattle's grassroots' campaign (exemplified by the "Zombie Sonics") is unique, and it found a willing/well-heeled partner in Hansen. The remaining support in the Northwest offers a reminder of how bizarre it was the club moved in the first place. Sure, it was the city's fourth-favorite team. But there was a solid, 40-year foundation in place.

- Then you have Sacramento. I can think of only a handful of recent examples where a team came so close to moving before staying put. An-11th hour State Senate vote provided funding for the new Comiskey Park and kept the White Sox from going to Tampa Bay...The T-Wolves looked headed for New Orleans, but the prospective new owners' finances -- not a fan-driven campaign -- led to the NBA nixing that deal...And of course, the SF Giants' saga from '92.

- Think of all the teams who've provided a lift to an economically depressed area (Pittsburgh in the '70s, the Kardiac Kids Browns, the Jim Kelly Bills). With the Kings, you have a franchise whose misfortunes -- owners doomed by the Housing Market Collapse -- mirror those of its fanbase.

An area whose ecomomy relies on state jobs and property taxes/home prices, Sacramento's economy really got hit hard starting in '07. The Maloofs' bottom line hasn't recovered since their stake in the Palms went belly-up around the same time. That the team hasn't been to the playoffs since 2006 is no coincidence.
 
Governors vote 22-8 in favor of staying in Sacramento.

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/15/5422295/sacramento-kings-nba-dallas.html
 
"We will talk to the Maloofs and seek in the next 24 to 48 hours whether we can help facilities a deal between the Ranadive group and the Maloofs for the sale of the franchise in Sacramento," Stern said.

Arrgh, the saga continues.
 
RubberSoul1979 said:
Whatever happens, this will be remembered as a unique chapter in the decades-long history of mobile franchises.

- Seattle's grassroots' campaign (exemplified by the "Zombie Sonics") is unique, and it found a willing/well-heeled partner in Hansen. The remaining support in the Northwest offers a reminder of how bizarre it was the club moved in the first place. Sure, it was the city's fourth-favorite team. But there was a solid, 40-year foundation in place.

- Then you have Sacramento. I can think of only a handful of recent examples where a team came so close to moving before staying put. An-11th hour State Senate vote provided funding for the new Comiskey Park and kept the White Sox from going to Tampa Bay...The T-Wolves looked headed for New Orleans, but the prospective new owners' finances -- not a fan-driven campaign -- led to the NBA nixing that deal...And of course, the SF Giants' saga from '92.

- Think of all the teams who've provided a lift to an economically depressed area (Pittsburgh in the '70s, the Kardiac Kids Browns, the Jim Kelly Bills). With the Kings, you have a franchise whose misfortunes -- owners doomed by the Housing Market Collapse -- mirror those of its fanbase.

An area whose ecomomy relies on state jobs and property taxes/home prices, Sacramento's economy really got hit hard starting in '07. The Maloofs' bottom line hasn't recovered since their stake in the Palms went belly-up around the same time. That the team hasn't been to the playoffs since 2006 is no coincidence.

Size of the fanbase is only one factor in a pro sports franchise's profitability. The value of the local television and radio contracts, luxury box revenue, club seat revenue, sponsorships and advertising are also factors.

The Winnipeg Jets had a far larger and more rabid fanbase in Winnipeg than it ever has had since moving to Phoenix in the mid 90s. It didn't keep them from moving.
 
suburbia said:
RubberSoul1979 said:
Whatever happens, this will be remembered as a unique chapter in the decades-long history of mobile franchises.

- Seattle's grassroots' campaign (exemplified by the "Zombie Sonics") is unique, and it found a willing/well-heeled partner in Hansen. The remaining support in the Northwest offers a reminder of how bizarre it was the club moved in the first place. Sure, it was the city's fourth-favorite team. But there was a solid, 40-year foundation in place.

- Then you have Sacramento. I can think of only a handful of recent examples where a team came so close to moving before staying put. An-11th hour State Senate vote provided funding for the new Comiskey Park and kept the White Sox from going to Tampa Bay...The T-Wolves looked headed for New Orleans, but the prospective new owners' finances -- not a fan-driven campaign -- led to the NBA nixing that deal...And of course, the SF Giants' saga from '92.

- Think of all the teams who've provided a lift to an economically depressed area (Pittsburgh in the '70s, the Kardiac Kids Browns, the Jim Kelly Bills). With the Kings, you have a franchise whose misfortunes -- owners doomed by the Housing Market Collapse -- mirror those of its fanbase.

An area whose ecomomy relies on state jobs and property taxes/home prices, Sacramento's economy really got hit hard starting in '07. The Maloofs' bottom line hasn't recovered since their stake in the Palms went belly-up around the same time. That the team hasn't been to the playoffs since 2006 is no coincidence.

Size of the fanbase is only one factor in a pro sports franchise's profitability. The value of the local television and radio contracts, luxury box revenue, club seat revenue, sponsorships and advertising are also factors.

The Winnipeg Jets had a far larger and more rabid fanbase in Winnipeg than it ever has had since moving to Phoenix in the mid 90s. It didn't keep them from moving.

The biggest thing working against the original Jets was a weak loonie.
 
RubberSoul1979 said:
Whatever happens, this will be remembered as a unique chapter in the decades-long history of mobile franchises.

- Seattle's grassroots' campaign (exemplified by the "Zombie Sonics") is unique, and it found a willing/well-heeled partner in Hansen. The remaining support in the Northwest offers a reminder of how bizarre it was the club moved in the first place. Sure, it was the city's fourth-favorite team. But there was a solid, 40-year foundation in place.

- Then you have Sacramento. I can think of only a handful of recent examples where a team came so close to moving before staying put. An-11th hour State Senate vote provided funding for the new Comiskey Park and kept the White Sox from going to Tampa Bay...The T-Wolves looked headed for New Orleans, but the prospective new owners' finances -- not a fan-driven campaign -- led to the NBA nixing that deal...And of course, the SF Giants' saga from '92.

- Think of all the teams who've provided a lift to an economically depressed area (Pittsburgh in the '70s, the Kardiac Kids Browns, the Jim Kelly Bills). With the Kings, you have a franchise whose misfortunes -- owners doomed by the Housing Market Collapse -- mirror those of its fanbase.

An area whose ecomomy relies on state jobs and property taxes/home prices, Sacramento's economy really got hit hard starting in '07. The Maloofs' bottom line hasn't recovered since their stake in the Palms went belly-up around the same time. That the team hasn't been to the playoffs since 2006 is no coincidence.


Fourth most popular?

Okay, I'll give you the Seahawks that's easy, maybe the Mariners when they win, but are you telling me that the entire time they were in Seattle the Sonics were behind the Sounders? That's nuts.

UW Football is bigger but not the Sounders.
 
RubberSoul1979 said:
"We will talk to the Maloofs and seek in the next 24 to 48 hours whether we can help facilities a deal between the Ranadive group and the Maloofs for the sale of the franchise in Sacramento," Stern said.

Arrgh, the saga continues.

Which means will the Ranadive group come up with the 100M that Hansen bid? I just don't see the Maloof's leaving that much money on the table. I also am guessing that the two Maloofs that "run" the team don't want to sell but are being pressured by other family members. I jsut don't see the Maloofs going quietly.
 
Bodie_Broadus said:
YankeeFan said:
University of Washington football?

Yes? Are you asking a question?

Are they the third team he was referencing, as opposed to the Sounders?

Could you really not figure out what I was saying?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top