Kings Please Move
#61
Posted 20 February 2011 - 08:01 AM
#62
Posted 20 February 2011 - 09:02 AM
As for comparing Chicago and Sac, I didn't. I compared two losing teams. You are the only one who did.
I go back to fair-weather fans ruining sports. It's supposed to be SO much more than just a business. Why don't you just move to LA where you can root on Kobe and USC? Methinks you'd fit in really well down there judging people by what they drive, the brands they wear and the surgically possible lack of physical imperfections.
#63
Posted 20 February 2011 - 09:22 AM
You might want to not embarrass yourself by talking about things of which you know. Losing teams can be worth lots Of money AND make lots of money, which is the only thing people like you care about. Speaking from experience, win or lose, tickets to Cubs, Bears and Blackhawks games are hard to come by.
We've talked about the Bears and Cubs, now the Hawks they've won a total of four Stanley Cups with 50 yeas between the last two. That time enough to raise a whole generation of people who think they suck and should leave town.
Buy you know what? Instead, these teams have REAL fans supporting them. These are the people who purchase the tickets, merchandise and the like that makes them successful in the way you think matters-in the pocketbook. It's not the shallow fair-weather fans who do.
Basing a team's success and location upon a legion of shallow fans is akin to watering your lawn five minutes every evening in the blazing hot summer. It might be green, but by being wet in the evening it's the perfect environment for fungus and skip just a couple waterlings or have a couple scortching days and it dies because you encouraged shallow roots instead of deep roots that can survive imperfect conditions.
Ugh. Fair-weather fans.
#64
Posted 20 February 2011 - 10:15 AM
If there wasn't a chance of the arena being a money loser, I would have to think private financing would be all over this one. When in the past have you seen Billionaires offering to "share" their money with us public folks? Never, unless there is a pretty big chance the deal might be a loser.
#65 (The Dude)
Posted 20 February 2011 - 11:48 AM
Fair weather and PROUD of it too. BTW, I am also a Bears and Bulls fan (when they had Micheal and Scottie). I met MJ before the eve of his 1st championship against LA and told him that I am so proud and no one deserves it more than him.
Great points, but two MAJOR deficiencies. We live in 2011 and NOT in 1991. One cannot escape that sports is a HUUUUUGe muti billion $$ PRODUCT . (That also applies in College sports and if you dont believe me look at all the video game revenue and the bowl game revenues and the huge TV contracts, etc).
Second, to compare Chi town (Chicago) to Sac Town (Sacramento) has to be one of the most laughable and insane arguments I have ever heard. I wont even compare Real Estate, Jobs, and HUGE business center, bu if you strictly look at SPORTS and CHAMPIONSHIPS, Chi Town has how many NBA championships?? Da Bears have been great how many years and they DO have a championshio and even the White Sox have Championships.
As far as the Cubs are concerned (even though I am NOT that big of a baseball fan), this is what RESEARCH (maybe you need to do some reveals):
Been around since 1876; The SACRAMENTO Kings since? 1985 ( I am NOt counting BEFORE they were in Sac Town)
Cubs have over 40 players in the Hall of Fame and How many does Sac Town Have????
One final point.... It IS a Business and PLEASE do your RESEARCH before you completely embarrass yourself with your EMOTIONAL rah rah speech:
Dude, you're the only one here who's seriously embarrassing yourself.
You're not a fan of any sports and you're definitely not a fan of the Bears or the Bulls - you're one of those typical couch mooches who latches onto the coattails of winning players and somehow you think that makes you a better sports fan. Here's you - "Oh yeaaaah I'm a huge fan of the Bulls (when they win), other then that they suck and I know all about basketball because I watch the game on tv once a year during the playoffs"
Got news for ya dude, you're not a fan of anything because that would require loyalty and you have none. You should give up talking about sports because you keep looking more and more foolish with all the fair weather fan baloney.
If you met MJ now would you call him a total loser because he it not involved with any winning teams in the past 10 years? I bet not, you'd still kiss his behind because of his prior championships.
You're a sports celebrity groupie, not a fan.
You've obviously never been to Chicago either, but since you saw a basketball game played on tv there in 1991 that makes you an expert on Chicago
One last point - it IS all about the sport, but you wouldn't know that because you know nothing about sports except for the occasional headlines you read.
#66
Posted 20 February 2011 - 11:52 AM
I think if the maloofs get a good offer they will move this year, cause folks with that much money are smarter than the kid who didn't understand his teacher.
#67
Posted 20 February 2011 - 02:08 PM
I believe that we have our priorities so screwed up that an academic decathlon or academic championships (like lego or science super faires, etc) always take a back seat to athletics. I guess business ALWAYS wins.
As far as ME embarrassing myself, have you people have the BALLS to back up your trash with ACTUAL research??????
didn't think so.........
Either BACK it up or shut it up........
It IS a Business and PLEASE do your RESEARCH before you completely embarrass yourself with your EMOTIONAL rah rah speech:
Forbes magazine has come out with what your sports team is worth, profit wise.This is your teams bottom line.
Baseball;
1, New York Yankees, 1.026 billion
2, Boston Red Sox, 617 million
3, New York Mets, 604 million
4, Los Angeles Dodgers, 482 million
5, Chicago Cubs, 448 million
Football;
1, Washington Redskins, 1.3 billion
2, Dallas Cowboys, 1.06 billion
3, New England Patriots, 1.04 billion
4, Philadelphia Eagles, 952 million
5, Houston Texans, 946 million
Basketball;
1, New York Knicks, 543 million
2, Los Angeles Lakers, 529 million
3, Houston Rockets, 422 million
4, Chicago Bulls, 409 million
5, Dallas Mavericks 403 million
#68
Posted 21 February 2011 - 02:50 PM
How is the greater Sacramento area better without the Kings?
The rest doesn't matter. We don't own the Kings. Their value, earnings, profit, win-loss record, etc., have ZERO importance when you remove the emotional aspect, as you keep claiming you are doing. Only the Maloofs should care about that stuff.
If you don't have the BALLS and ACTUAL research to answer that question, your initial statement that the Kings need to leave is just emotional blathering, which would make you a hypocrite as well as a lonely troll.
#69
Posted 21 February 2011 - 02:54 PM
I miss the Vladi-era! It was fun back then. We haven't watched for the last six years at least. Just isn't the same any more.
#70
Posted 21 February 2011 - 03:12 PM
I fail to see how them having a poor record and team value negates all these benefits to the community and am really waiting to hear how we are better off if all that goes away.
#71
Posted 21 February 2011 - 03:48 PM
Points have already been made about the 1,000+ jobs created, tax revenues received (their property tax alone is based on a nearly $50 Million property value, then you have sales tax, payroll tax on all those millionaire salaries, etc.), the countless Sacramento area charitable offerings provided by the Maloofs, and just the soft-benefit to the citizens of simply having a team to support and an arena that attracts other events. Those of us that remember Sacramento before the Kings arrived really don't want to see Sacramento without a team and major arena.
I fail to see how them having a poor record and team value negates all these benefits to the community and am really waiting to hear how we are better off if all that goes away.
okay, you sold me. maybe they'll improve! it would be nice to have someone to root for again. and now that I think about it, if we do lose them, we're going to look like losers in the national media, "Sacramento Fails to Hold Their Kings" Makes us look like a failing economy. not good.
#72
Posted 07 March 2011 - 11:30 AM
It requires a subscription, but if you can get your hands on a print copy and are interested in the topic, it is a good read.
http://www.bizjourna...leave-town.html
And for the umpteenth time, I'm still waiting for palango to answer the simple question: How is the greater Sacramento area better without the Kings?
#73
Posted 07 March 2011 - 12:02 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users