Sign in to follow this  
rams80

Was letting the Hornets go back to New Orleans a good idea?

Recommended Posts

What about Memphis to Louisville, with the new arena in L'ville opening in Fall 2010?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisville_arena

800px-Laa1.jpg

So like they are in Memphis (2nd to a college team), they'll be second again in Louisville to another college team. LOL!

Just fold the damn franchise. Frankly, there aren't enough markets anymore to sufficiently support pro hoops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a few years the NBA could have:

Brooklyn Nets

Oklahoma Sonics

Kansas City Hornets

Las Vegas Kings

Louisville Grizzlies

sounds like a bunch of bad minor league teams. I'm sure nicknames would be changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NBA basketball failed in Vancouver already, why try again especially with the same team that originated in Vancouver?

I've brought this up before, but basketball could be successful in Vancouver if done right. Basketball never had a chance really, they started out with ok attendance but the team struggled and by only their fourth year the talk of moving came up. Look at the Nashville Predators, they struggled to put a good team on the ice, but were given the time and eventually had a competitive team, but they didn't get great attendance, yet the when the talk of moving came up the commissioner fought to keep the team in Nashville. David Stern never did that. The Vancouver Grizzlies in their final season averaged 13,737, while Memphis is averaging 13,752 this year. The Memphis Grizzlies best attendance average was 16,862, while the Vancouver Grizzlies best attendance average was 17,183. In my high school more people are basketballs fans than hockey fans, you never see people in hockey jerseys, yet you regularly see people in Nash, Lebron and Bryant jerseys. That?s due to a large number of Asian people who don?t know anything about hockey but are familiar with basketball. Also A large number of people can't afford to go to Canucks games any more, especially families, they go to Giants game because it?s more affordable, and I think if there was a basketball team, they would go to that to since Vancouver thinks of it self as a pro town. Vancouver is a world class city and deserves another professional team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baltimore is supposed to approve a plan for a new arena this spring. Right now its unsure how big it will be. Ed Hale, the owner of First Mariner Bank and the Baltimore Blast minor league indoor soccer team (current tenants of the Baltimore Arena), claims that we will never be able to attract a NBA and/or NHL team so we should just build an arena with a capacity of 15,000 (I think he may just be saying that so his soccer team will be the main tenants of a new arena). There is also a concern that not enough luxury suites will be sold to local business if a "major league" arena is built. Anyway, I would think we'd move pretty high up the list if we had a place big enough for a team to play.

Except Baltimore has a big problem in trying to lure a NHL and NBA. Both leagues have teams just 40 miles south that will block any attempt to move to a team to Baltimore. With the NBA and NHL it's harder to make the argument that two teams can exist like in MLB and the NFL. Given that both teams used to play in Maryland before moving into downtown DC that they both draw a significant amount from the Baltimore area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm...

a crazy idea just popped into my head?

crazy enough to work!

how about...sonics leave, thats a given. and maybe a few year into the future, the Memphis Grizzlies become the "Northwest Grizzlies" (only maybe with a different name), and play half their home games in Seattle (assuming a new stadium is built), and half in GM Place in Vancouver.

From what I hear, the Grizz were popular in Vancouver, and the Sonics have had overall success the last 40 years in Seattle

weird idea i know. but maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hmm...

a crazy idea just popped into my head?

crazy enough to work!

how about...sonics leave, thats a given. and maybe a few year into the future, the Memphis Grizzlies become the "Northwest Grizzlies" (only maybe with a different name), and play half their home games in Seattle (assuming a new stadium is built), and half in GM Place in Vancouver.

From what I hear, the Grizz were popular in Vancouver, and the Sonics have had overall success the last 40 years in Seattle

weird idea i know. but maybe?

Interesting thought, although I am not sure it'll work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hmm...

a crazy idea just popped into my head?

crazy enough to work!

how about...sonics leave, thats a given. and maybe a few year into the future, the Memphis Grizzlies become the "Northwest Grizzlies" (only maybe with a different name), and play half their home games in Seattle (assuming a new stadium is built), and half in GM Place in Vancouver.

From what I hear, the Grizz were popular in Vancouver, and the Sonics have had overall success the last 40 years in Seattle

weird idea i know. but maybe?

It wouldn't be the first time (Carolina Cougars, Floridians, Kansas City-Omaha Kings, and I'm sure I'm forgetting at least one more) but I wouldn't dismiss it as a concept that wouldn't work. Maybe a little desperate for a modern-day NBA franchise, (and about 0.003% chance of happening) but you could even have a few scattered dates in Spokane or Boise as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In a few years the NBA could have:

Brooklyn Nets

Oklahoma Sonics

Kansas City Hornets

Las Vegas Kings

Louisville Grizzlies

sounds like a bunch of bad minor league teams. I'm sure nicknames would be changed.

IDK...all those names work for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, wow, a lot of interesting points. As far as New Orleans, I believe they rushed into things too quickly. The NBA wanted to re-stimulate their economy... It's the same reason why Chris Paul is on the cover of NBA 2K8 and the All-Star Game is in New Orleans. However, Oklahoma City was a more than adequate substitute or "fill-in," and if I'm in NBA management, I'd want them to fill-in permanently, or until New Orleans proves that they are a viable market again.

A couple of loose points that I found interesting:

I think the team should stay, even if it might be bad for business. The city has gone through too much and are not deserving to lose their NBA as well. If the hornets go, wouldnt NO be one of the biggest cities with only one pro sports team?

Portland, Sacramento, Orlando, and San Antonio all have roughly a million more in their statistical metro area.

For some weird reason San Jose gets it's own metro area, and is larger. Columbus, Jacksonville, Memphis, OKC (for the purposes of this thread), and Salt Lake City (barely, but still) is bigger. Shoot....Birmingham's bigger.

Indeed, only Raleigh and Green Bay (duh) are smaller markets.

So in other words....no.

Yes they only have 100,000 fewer people than Buffalo-but there are rumors that the Bills may just move to Toronto or someplace else once Ralph Wilson dies.

The Green Bay market (for the Packers, at least; probably not the minor league hockey Gamblers or anything) should really be extended in market analyses. The Packers had four "Gold Package" games that were sold primarily to Milwaukee County residents. You're liable to find Packers fans all over the state of Wisconsin. I'm 150 miles from Green Bay, but I get all of the games, including the NFL Network game that was picked up by Wisconsin broadcast and ABC affiliate WISN. I know a number of people that live down here and have go to at least one Packers game every year. "Green Bay Packers" may suggest a market as small as Green Bay, but tickets, merchandise, team stock (the only professional team that is publicly owned), and TV shares are bought and sold all throughout Wisconsin.

What about Memphis to Louisville, with the new arena in L'ville opening in Fall 2010?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisville_arena

That is an impressive arena, and I believe Louisville could support a team, but that's definitely college town down there. UK and Louisville Cardinals, the SEC and the Big East... the NBA would be an afterthought.

hmm...

a crazy idea just popped into my head?

crazy enough to work!

how about...sonics leave, thats a given. and maybe a few year into the future, the Memphis Grizzlies become the "Northwest Grizzlies" (only maybe with a different name), and play half their home games in Seattle (assuming a new stadium is built), and half in GM Place in Vancouver.

From what I hear, the Grizz were popular in Vancouver, and the Sonics have had overall success the last 40 years in Seattle

weird idea i know. but maybe?

That is a very good idea. I have also engaged the possibility of, after the Sonics bolt in 2010, a franchise to return in 2012 or whenever they get an arena. Granted that Seattle is doing well with that beautiful football stadium they have (Qwest?) for the Seahawks, as well as the Mariners franchise, but it is a large market with a good contingency of sports fans, as well as a lot of money and potential sponsors. Starbucks Arena? Microsoft Center? And I have never been adverse to Canadian teams in the NBA. I support the Raptors, as they make it work, and Vancouver could make it work with less of a burden. It may have been overly stimulating to have two Canadian teams enter the league at the same time (1997) that they weren't ready for it.

In a few years the NBA could have:

Brooklyn Nets

Oklahoma Sonics

Kansas City Hornets

Las Vegas Kings

Louisville Grizzlies

sounds like a bunch of bad minor league teams. I'm sure nicknames would be changed.

IDK...all those names work for me.

Las Vegas Kings concept would be a playing card. I guarantee it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how about...sonics leave, thats a given. and maybe a few year into the future, the Memphis Grizzlies become the "Northwest Grizzlies" (only maybe with a different name), and play half their home games in Seattle (assuming a new stadium is built), and half in GM Place in Vancouver.

From what I hear, the Grizz were popular in Vancouver, and the Sonics have had overall success the last 40 years in Seattle

Firstly, if the Grizz were so popular in Vancouver, why did they move? Oh, right... low attendance.

Secondly, remember the Kansas City-Omaha Kings? Remember how awesome that was?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So like they are in Memphis (2nd to a college team), they'll be second again in Louisville to another college team. LOL!

Just fold the damn franchise. Frankly, there aren't enough markets anymore to sufficiently support pro hoops.

Exactly what I was thinking. The NBA doesn't have enough credibility to compete with major collegiate programs.

I think the Tidewater area of Virginia could support a team if they had an adequate arena. But outside of there, OKC and MAYBE Vegas I can't really think of anywhere else that any NBA team would be better off than where they are right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, wow, a lot of interesting points. As far as New Orleans, I believe they rushed into things too quickly. The NBA wanted to re-stimulate their economy... It's the same reason why Chris Paul is on the cover of NBA 2K8 and the All-Star Game is in New Orleans. However, Oklahoma City was a more than adequate substitute or "fill-in," and if I'm in NBA management, I'd want them to fill-in permanently, or until New Orleans proves that they are a viable market again.

A couple of loose points that I found interesting:

I think the team should stay, even if it might be bad for business. The city has gone through too much and are not deserving to lose their NBA as well. If the hornets go, wouldnt NO be one of the biggest cities with only one pro sports team?

Portland, Sacramento, Orlando, and San Antonio all have roughly a million more in their statistical metro area.

For some weird reason San Jose gets it's own metro area, and is larger. Columbus, Jacksonville, Memphis, OKC (for the purposes of this thread), and Salt Lake City (barely, but still) is bigger. Shoot....Birmingham's bigger.

Indeed, only Raleigh and Green Bay (duh) are smaller markets.

So in other words....no.

Yes they only have 100,000 fewer people than Buffalo-but there are rumors that the Bills may just move to Toronto or someplace else once Ralph Wilson dies.

The Green Bay market (for the Packers, at least; probably not the minor league hockey Gamblers or anything) should really be extended in market analyses. The Packers had four "Gold Package" games that were sold primarily to Milwaukee County residents. You're liable to find Packers fans all over the state of Wisconsin. I'm 150 miles from Green Bay, but I get all of the games, including the NFL Network game that was picked up by Wisconsin broadcast and ABC affiliate WISN. I know a number of people that live down here and have go to at least one Packers game every year. "Green Bay Packers" may suggest a market as small as Green Bay, but tickets, merchandise, team stock (the only professional team that is publicly owned), and TV shares are bought and sold all throughout Wisconsin.

Both the Milwaukee and Madison TV markets have more Packers fans than Green Bay's. In fact, if you were to add the three together, you'd end up with one the size of Minneapolis-St. Paul. Not huge, but definetly not small by any means. And then you have to factor in the Packers unique ownership structure that makes it not just damn near impossible to move the team, but financially crippling to do so (there's a legal obligation to donate all of the teams assets to charity if it is moved).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I may clarify....if we were to include the Packers with the Milwaukee market (and I am familiar with the dynamics of that franchise's support and survival) they would then be part of a multi-team market, and not eligible for consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baltimore is supposed to approve a plan for a new arena this spring. Right now its unsure how big it will be. Ed Hale, the owner of First Mariner Bank and the Baltimore Blast minor league indoor soccer team (current tenants of the Baltimore Arena), claims that we will never be able to attract a NBA and/or NHL team so we should just build an arena with a capacity of 15,000 (I think he may just be saying that so his soccer team will be the main tenants of a new arena). There is also a concern that not enough luxury suites will be sold to local business if a "major league" arena is built. Anyway, I would think we'd move pretty high up the list if we had a place big enough for a team to play.

Except Baltimore has a big problem in trying to lure a NHL and NBA. Both leagues have teams just 40 miles south that will block any attempt to move to a team to Baltimore. With the NBA and NHL it's harder to make the argument that two teams can exist like in MLB and the NFL. Given that both teams used to play in Maryland before moving into downtown DC that they both draw a significant amount from the Baltimore area.

That would be a problem, as it has been brought up anytime a professional team is moving to the area. But I really don't think it would be a problem. I don't know very many people in the Baltimore area that actually care about the Wizards or Capitals. They hardly get any coverage in local news and media. They really are seperate markets. I've tried to get into the Wizards a few time, but just can't because they don't feel like a local team. In fact, last Friday was the first time I ever went to a Wizards game. Only because my friend called me up last minute and had an extra ticket (He's kinda strange because he was born in Baltimore and has live in the area nearly his whole life, but roots for all the Washington teams for some reason). Chances are I'm not going again anytime soon.

I'm sure it will be a brought up if Baltimore builds it's new arena big enough, but it will not be a problem. If there are attendence problems it will be due to lack of interest, not because another team is so close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I may clarify....if we were to include the Packers with the Milwaukee market (and I am familiar with the dynamics of that franchise's support and survival) they would then be part of a multi-team market, and not eligible for consideration.

That's true, but a Packers market could be taken with nearly any cities in Wisconsin. There could be one of Green Bay-Appleton-Madison, which would still be small... any market, though, could comprise cities all over Wisconsin sans Milwaukee if necessary. This is especially true because the Brewers and Bucks don't have much pull in Green Bay, other than the one preseason game the Bucks play there.

Either way, I understand what you're saying.

But then let me ask you this: Why are MLB markets never unique? That is, every city with an MLB team also has an NBA, NHL, or NFL team. Is it the money pull?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I may clarify....if we were to include the Packers with the Milwaukee market (and I am familiar with the dynamics of that franchise's support and survival) they would then be part of a multi-team market, and not eligible for consideration.

That's true, but a Packers market could be taken with nearly any cities in Wisconsin. There could be one of Green Bay-Appleton-Madison, which would still be small... any market, though, could comprise cities all over Wisconsin sans Milwaukee if necessary. This is especially true because the Brewers and Bucks don't have much pull in Green Bay, other than the one preseason game the Bucks play there.

Either way, I understand what you're saying.

But then let me ask you this: Why are MLB markets never unique? That is, every city with an MLB team also has an NBA, NHL, or NFL team. Is it the money pull?

Probably multi-use stadia. It used to be most MLB and NFL teams shared stadiums...ergo the markets get both teams. That and MLB tends to go to larger markets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I may clarify....if we were to include the Packers with the Milwaukee market (and I am familiar with the dynamics of that franchise's support and survival) they would then be part of a multi-team market, and not eligible for consideration.

That's true, but a Packers market could be taken with nearly any cities in Wisconsin. There could be one of Green Bay-Appleton-Madison, which would still be small... any market, though, could comprise cities all over Wisconsin sans Milwaukee if necessary. This is especially true because the Brewers and Bucks don't have much pull in Green Bay, other than the one preseason game the Bucks play there.

The Packers might (keyword) be able to survive if they lost the Milwaukee area today (like if, say, the Jaguars moved to town... which only happens in my Madden universe), but without Milwaukee's support over the years, the team probably would've folded sometime between Lambeau's departure and Lombardi's arrival. In other words, the Packers are no less a Milwaukee team than the Redskins are a DC team (despite playing in Maryland) or the Cowboys are a Dallas team (Irving). That's why (IIRC) ESPN.com combines Milwaukee and Green Bay (as well as Charlotte and Raleigh) for statistical purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how about...sonics leave, thats a given. and maybe a few year into the future, the Memphis Grizzlies become the "Northwest Grizzlies" (only maybe with a different name), and play half their home games in Seattle (assuming a new stadium is built), and half in GM Place in Vancouver.

From what I hear, the Grizz were popular in Vancouver, and the Sonics have had overall success the last 40 years in Seattle

Firstly, if the Grizz were so popular in Vancouver, why did they move? Oh, right... low attendance.

Secondly, remember the Kansas City-Omaha Kings? Remember how awesome that was?

Low attendance due to a poor basketball team. Vancouver is a great sports city, they could definitely support the Grizz again. Nobody is going to see a team that lost 23 straight games, the city never had a winning team. No way would Vancouver be averaging 12,000people per game with a winning record like New Orleans. They were mismanaged team in Vancouver...I mean look at their draft picks, its not all that bad, but taking 3 point guards in a row, and looking at all the players they passed up on..isn't very impressive.

Bryant Reeves 1995

Shareef Abdur-Rahim 1996

Antonio Daniels 1997

Mike Bibby 1998

Steve Francis 1999

Stromile Swift 2000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What about somewhere like Jacksonville? Jacksonville Veterans Memorial Arena has held opening rounds of the NCAA tournament, and holds 15,000-16,000 people.

1959.jpg

Given how the Jaguars have struggled in town, I believe adding a second team to the market is a non-starter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this