rams80 Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 My uncle who lives in the Sacramento area says one of the main problems is that its hard for the people in surrounding cities to get to the games. From his house its a 45+ min drive to a Kings game but he can get to a RiverCats game on a 20 min trolley ride. The teams fanbase is too spread out to gain support behind a new arena.Good Christ, its like people are only willing to attend a major league sporting event if its at the corner drug store. On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still MIGHTY Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 My uncle who lives in the Sacramento area says one of the main problems is that its hard for the people in surrounding cities to get to the games. From his house its a 45+ min drive to a Kings game but he can get to a RiverCats game on a 20 min trolley ride. The teams fanbase is too spread out to gain support behind a new arena.Good Christ, its like people are only willing to attend a major league sporting event if its at the corner drug store.You'd think huh?Honestly, on an average day at about 5 or 6 when I'd leave for a 7 pm Angels/Ducks game in Anaheim from my house in Laguna Hills (South OC) it's an average of 45 minutes. No traffic, about 25-30. Heavy traffic, about an hour or so.Hell, I'll get into another situation where people have complained about drive time. Here at school at ASU in Tempe, it's about 40 minutes to get to a Coyotes or Cardinals game in Glendale. Same as back home in OC, same as this Sacto reference.Seriously people, what the hell? | ANA | LAA | LAR | LAL | ASU | CSULB | USMNT | USWNT | LAFC | OCSC | MAN UTD | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 The age old question is... will the fans support a new team tossed into a market with an already established franchise? I know there's been recent flirtation with adding an NHL team in Toronto and an NBA team in Chicago, but those cities are already home to 2 of the most loved franchises in their respective sports. Would fans support a second team?How was it when the Islanders joined the league in the Rangers' town? (and the Devils for that matter?)Clippers in LA?etc, etc...How long did it take for these teams to be embraced? If the Isles and Devils hadn't won all those Cups, would they still be in town? I mean, they're barely hangin on now...Angels have done alright for themselves when they cut their "slice" of the market in LA. Clippers have done ok too. I have no doubt the Kings will do the same. I know some dismiss the SD and IE markets, but fact is, they're there. And fact is they're more willing to drive to Anaheim than they would to LA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 The Angels came in just a few years after the Dodgers and didn't really do that well until the last ten years or so. The Clippers do okay because the world is an unjust place. Those aren't valid comparisons to what the Maloofs, no greengrocer's apostrophe, are trying to do. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 The Angels came in just a few years after the Dodgers and didn't really do that well until the last ten years or so. The Clippers do okay because the world is an unjust place. Those aren't valid comparisons to what the Maloofs, no greengrocer's apostrophe, are trying to do.AND the Angels only have to compete with the Dodgers. The Kings have to come in and try and compete with 2 established franchises, one of which is one the biggest franchises in sports. People can bring up how LA is the 2nd biggest market all they want. That doesn't mean they'll be successful. That's just where they'll be located. San Diego, Inland Empire? Yeah they don't have teams to cheer for necessarily, but by now they've pretty much formed their allegiances. The Kings coming in isn't really gonna change that. https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubsFanBudMan Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 No surprise in this blog post from Spurs Nation: Warriors would benefit from Kings movehttp://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursnation/2011/03/05/if-kings-leave-warriors-could-gobble-up-sacramento-market/Added bonus for this forum: The Warriors logo used on the post is the '80s one. Random. Don't you just hate it when blogs haven't updated their logo files in decades? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tp49 Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 My uncle who lives in the Sacramento area says one of the main problems is that its hard for the people in surrounding cities to get to the games. From his house its a 45+ min drive to a Kings game but he can get to a RiverCats game on a 20 min trolley ride. The teams fanbase is too spread out to gain support behind a new arena.I live in Sacramento and the reason they have not been able to get a new arena is because though "plans" were mentioned and conceived the groups behind them did not have the experience in arena development and building. The other major reason is because there is just no public money available to put out for an arena.Of my friends with season tickets one lives in Stockton (45 minutes to an hour away), several in Elk Grove, Roseville, Rocklin and El Dorado Hills. None of whom complain about the drive to the arena. A 20 minute light rail (not trolley) ride would either be in the south area or out near Rancho Cordova.--------Honestly though I think the Maloof family's finances are far worse off than anyone thinks. Even though they say they don't want to sell the team it might come down to them having to sell the team. Even if they do that they'd still be moving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 The Angels came in just a few years after the Dodgers and didn't really do that well until the last ten years or so. The Clippers do okay because the world is an unjust place. Those aren't valid comparisons to what the Maloofs, no greengrocer's apostrophe, are trying to do.AND the Angels only have to compete with the Dodgers. The Kings have to come in and try and compete with 2 established franchises, one of which is one the biggest franchises in sports. People can bring up how LA is the 2nd biggest market all they want. That doesn't mean they'll be successful. That's just where they'll be located. San Diego, Inland Empire? Yeah they don't have teams to cheer for necessarily, but by now they've pretty much formed their allegiances. The Kings coming in isn't really gonna change that.Precisely. Realistically the Kings' best source of fans will be the " the Lakers" demographic. Unfortunately for them the Clippers' quixotic quest to find new and spectacular ways to suck has already drawn the affections of said demographic. You're ultimately shooting for a limited goldilocks zone of those who hate the Lakers because they win too much, but think having their team win on occasion would be just fine. On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Realistically the Kings' best source of fans will be the " the Lakers" demographic. Unfortunately for them the Clippers' quixotic quest to find new and spectacular ways to suck has already drawn the affections of said demographic. You're ultimately shooting for a limited goldilocks zone of those who hate the Lakers because they win too much, but think having their team win on occasion would be just fine.The Clippers project to be better in the next few years than the Kings do, so they don't even have that. This is going to be a totally forgettable shoestring operation and a footnote in league history on par with the San Diego Rockets. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfwabel Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 No surprise in this blog post from Spurs Nation: Warriors would benefit from Kings movehttp://blog.mysanant...ramento-market/Added bonus for this forum: The Warriors logo used on the post is the '80s one. Random. Don't you just hate it when blogs haven't updated their logo files in decades? Sorry. 'bosrs1' posted that story here yesterday. Go back 24 hours before you give us news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfwabel Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 My uncle who lives in the Sacramento area says one of the main problems is that its hard for the people in surrounding cities to get to the games. From his house its a 45+ min drive to a Kings game but he can get to a RiverCats game on a 20 min trolley ride. The teams fanbase is too spread out to gain support behind a new arena.I live in Sacramento and the reason they have not been able to get a new arena is because though "plans" were mentioned and conceived the groups behind them did not have the experience in arena development and building. The other major reason is because there is just no public money available to put out for an arena.Of my friends with season tickets one lives in Stockton (45 minutes to an hour away), several in Elk Grove, Roseville, Rocklin and El Dorado Hills. None of whom complain about the drive to the arena. A 20 minute light rail (not trolley) ride would either be in the south area or out near Rancho Cordova.--------Honestly though I think the Maloof family's finances are far worse off than anyone thinks. Even though they say they don't want to sell the team it might come down to them having to sell the team. Even if they do that they'd still be moving.I said talked about the Maloof finances in post #335. The family cannot meet the conditions of their $400MM line of credit on The Palms. Private equity groups have bought in, including the private owners of Harrahs Entertainment dba Caesars Palace, Bally's, and Harrahs. They are in trouble and do not want to sell, especially the team since they owned the Rockets long ago and sold them when their father died. The kids failed to learn from the dad or did not get enough education to make a team work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 The Angels came in just a few years after the Dodgers and didn't really do that well until the last ten years or so. The Clippers do okay because the world is an unjust place. Those aren't valid comparisons to what the Maloofs, no greengrocer's apostrophe, are trying to do.AND the Angels only have to compete with the Dodgers. The Kings have to come in and try and compete with 2 established franchises, one of which is one the biggest franchises in sports. People can bring up how LA is the 2nd biggest market all they want. That doesn't mean they'll be successful. That's just where they'll be located. San Diego, Inland Empire? Yeah they don't have teams to cheer for necessarily, but by now they've pretty much formed their allegiances. The Kings coming in isn't really gonna change that.Since when were the Lakers one of the biggest franchises in sports? I hate to burst your bubble but the Lakers don't even crack the top 10 biggest sports teams. As for SD and the IE having "formed their allegiances", I'd beg to differ. Most people down here in San Diego at least don't even care that basketball exists right now and definitely don't have "allegiances" to anyone other than the teams they grew up with before they moved here or to the Padres and/or Chargers. That's all in no small part due to there being no NBA team within a reasonable driving time. Anaheim would change that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Six Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Since when were the Lakers one of the biggest franchises in sports? I hate to burst your bubble but the Lakers don't even crack the top 10 biggest sports teams. So the #1 NBA team currently and in history doesn't crack the top 10. OK then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Since when were the Lakers one of the biggest franchises in sports? I hate to burst your bubble but the Lakers don't even crack the top 10 biggest sports teams. So the #1 NBA team currently and in history doesn't crack the top 10. OK then.Well he's probably thinking of this from a world view, something many of us in America aren't used to doing. Not sure how the Lakers would measure up against the biggest soccer clubs out there, but between soccer teams, the Yankees, and maybe another American club or two, they might not crack the top 10. Actually, I'm not sure how you measure "biggest". Revenue? Number of fans? Titles? "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Six Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 I would assume the "biggest" comment was originally meant in a domestic sense, since the conversation is about how the Kings would do in Anaheim. They'd have to compete with a premier franchise. Some soccer team in England wouldn't be an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 The Angels came in just a few years after the Dodgers and didn't really do that well until the last ten years or so. The Clippers do okay because the world is an unjust place. Those aren't valid comparisons to what the Maloofs, no greengrocer's apostrophe, are trying to do.AND the Angels only have to compete with the Dodgers. The Kings have to come in and try and compete with 2 established franchises, one of which is one the biggest franchises in sports. People can bring up how LA is the 2nd biggest market all they want. That doesn't mean they'll be successful. That's just where they'll be located. San Diego, Inland Empire? Yeah they don't have teams to cheer for necessarily, but by now they've pretty much formed their allegiances. The Kings coming in isn't really gonna change that.Since when were the Lakers one of the biggest franchises in sports? I hate to burst your bubble but the Lakers don't even crack the top 10 biggest sports teams. As for SD and the IE having "formed their allegiances", I'd beg to differ. Most people down here in San Diego at least don't even care that basketball exists right now and definitely don't have "allegiances" to anyone other than the teams they grew up with before they moved here or to the Padres and/or Chargers. That's all in no small part due to there being no NBA team within a reasonable driving time. Anaheim would change that.So Anaheim is within reasonable driving distance of San Diego, but Los Angeles isn't within reasonable driving distance of Ana...OW MY HEAD!!! On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Since when were the Lakers one of the biggest franchises in sports? I hate to burst your bubble but the Lakers don't even crack the top 10 biggest sports teams. So the #1 NBA team currently and in history doesn't crack the top 10. OK then.Well he's probably thinking of this from a world view, something many of us in America aren't used to doing. Not sure how the Lakers would measure up against the biggest soccer clubs out there, but between soccer teams, the Yankees, and maybe another American club or two, they might not crack the top 10. Actually, I'm not sure how you measure "biggest". Revenue? Number of fans? Titles?I'm measuring it by the same way most people feel the Lakers have an edge, pure value of the franchise. And yes I was looking at it worldwide, but even if I were to pull Man U, Real Madrid, and Arsenal out of the top 10 and only use American teams the Lakers still wouldn't make the list.But if you have another way you think the Lakers are one of the "biggest" please share. Because franchise value, fanbase size, and number of championships they don't crack the top ten worldwide. Now if you wanted to say biggest basketball team, then you'd be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrh31584 Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 I'm pretty sure the least valuable team in the NFL is more valuable than the Lakers, but it's not really a fair comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 I can't think of anything less germane to the discussion of shoehorning a third NBA team into Los Angeles than the estimated value of Manchester United. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 I can't think of anything less germane to the discussion of shoehorning a third NBA team into Los Angeles than the estimated value of Manchester United.All I know is they better not change their colors to blue and white, because that's the Maple Leafs' thing. HOCKEY!! "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.