Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

18
Letters
Thursday, June 12, 2008 12:00 AM

Sonics to Seattle: Screw us? Screw you!

Owners argue that poor attendance means city doesn't care about team -- which owners have destroyed and tried to move.

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Thursday, June 12, 2008 02:11 PM

This sounds familiar

The owners of the Montreal Expos, and later the Commissioner's office, argued the same thing in stripping the city of its franchise and relocating it to Washington, D.C. This after years (actually more than a decade) of terrible management, cheap ownership policies, and later vilifying both the local fans and business community for their lack of support.

This kind of behavior, in the case of both the Sonics and the Expos, is roughly equivalent to a restaurant owner serving vomit flambee as its signature dish, encouraging rats to take over the kitchen and kicking his customers in the nuts every time they walk in, then wondering why no one comes in to eat anymore.

Thursday, June 12, 2008 02:24 PM

Stern

It is the story of the the Sonics that disgusts me about Stern. This has been a story of outright lying and looking the other way. Every one knew what was going to happen to Seattle in 2006 and Stern pretended otherwise when he approved the sale.

He's every bit as complicit in this as the new ownership group.

Thursday, June 12, 2008 02:37 PM

Not-so-super Sonics

The Sonics didn't help themselves by achieving their worst ever record: 20 wins, 62 losses. I say, if Oklahoma City wants them, let them go!

Seattle's WNBA team, the Storm (7-3) is in third place in the western conference and on the way up. The Storm's new Force10 ownership, four local women, aren't selling out to anybody.

Thursday, June 12, 2008 02:52 PM

Rich bastards!

That pretty well sums it up.

(I realize the danger of trying to isolate certain groups of rich bastards in large corporate enterprises where many may be present, on and off the field, but it seems pretty easy here. When they say things like, "the public's 'interests are legally irrelevant'"--this being the same public that routinely coughs up gargantuan tax subsidies to these fat-cat owners--any sympathy goes out the window.)

Nice comment above on the Storm. I wouldn't doubt that moves like this will provide fuel for the rise of such other (more worthy?) ventures.

Thursday, June 12, 2008 02:57 PM

@ Carol Anne

Actually, ownership did help themselves by going 20-62. They wanted a bad team so that they could move the team. The story of the Sonics is similar to that of the movie Major League, except without the happy ending.

They destroyed the team the last few years so they can move them to Oklahoma City. I don't think this is coincidental.

Thursday, June 12, 2008 03:18 PM

Seattle loves the Sonics

For years I'd get the 7 game package and supplement it with a couple of games that I wanted to see but weren't in the package. As soon as this new group took over, I lost interest. Went to only 2 games in 06-07. This year I didn't go to any. Barely watched them on tv. I watched a few games just to check out Durant. In a few years Seattle will have a great team. Or maybe Oklahoma City will have a great team.

Gotta hope one or all of the lawsuits work and get that ballsack Bennett to sell the team.

I'm heading to the rally this coming Monday in front of the courthouse in Seattle. Any other Seattle readers of King should do the same!

Thanks, King! I've been waiting for your perspective on this.

Thursday, June 12, 2008 03:47 PM

Sonics

The Seattle metro area is 3 to 4 times larger than Oklahoma City's.

I am surprized that the Sonic's owner believes that he would be able to mine more profits out of a smaller population base -- that is unless he has total destroyed the fan base in Seattle.

But then again, why would a sports fan like me know more than a megalomaniac owner like him?

Thursday, June 12, 2008 03:56 PM

Enough is enough

To put it bluntly, I am sick and tired of billionaire pro sports owners expecting the public to pay for their arenas or stadiums. If these people can afford to buy a major league franchise, how can they not afford the building for the team to play in? I love the NFL, but it disgusts me the way Paul Tagliabozo played the corporate welfare card in the 1990s, extorting cities into building new stadiums for several teams under the veiled threat of "staying viable" by moving. I'll bet most of these clowns also vote Republican and argue, "The government needs to stop giving people free handouts", then turn around and demand a whopper of a handout for their private businesses.

Thursday, June 12, 2008 03:57 PM

Anyone remember the Hornets?

Didn't the New Orleans Hornets had one of the worst attendance rates on record until they had to be relocated to Oklahoma City because of Katrina? Oklahomans supported this team, selling out the arena they played in as I recall. I live in Norman, where support is pretty much given to the University teams first, and even then you could still hear people in the bars talking about the Hornets, watching Hornets games, and thrilled that an NBA team had come to town. This was a major factor in OKC getting an NBA team.

So if Seattle doesn't want them, let them come on to Oklahoma. They want a team.

Thursday, June 12, 2008 04:54 PM

@ Ladysapphire

Thing is, Lady, that Seattle does want the Sonics(few voices here aside). Simply not what the current ownership has offered to field as a team. Lots of talent and promise in the team itself, but a lackluster coaching staff will keep them mediocre for the time being.

I'm not against OKC getting a team, just not mine, that's all.

The most galling aspect of this case is the "Major League baseball and football got their [new stadiums], so where's ours?" line of crap being uttered by the NBA and the current ownership.

What's ignored is that the NBA/Sonics got their new arena before either the Seahawks or the Mariners got theirs. Key Arena wasn't even ten years old (and the bill not 3/4 paid)when the NBA started making their noises about a new arena.

Talk about ingrates.

Is there any way for cities to include a 20-year moratorium on new stadiums once one has been given to the franchise(s)?

Thursday, June 12, 2008 05:54 PM

@Carol Anne

The Storm has succeeded on the court where the Sonics have failed precisely because, unlike the Sonics, the Storm were sold to an ownership group that wanted to keep them in Seattle and is ensuring that they have a quality team. King's analysis of Clay Bennett and company is spot on. They have destroyed the team's prosects in order to create a case for moving them, self-fulfilling prophesy style.

Incidentally, when the Storm was successfully sold to a separate group a member of the Clay Bennett gang was quoted as saying, "Good. I don't think we need those kind of people in Oklahoma City." One guess what he meant by that.

Personally I'm hoping one of Howard Shultz's lawsuits succeeds and the Sonics stay in Seattle and cost Bennett et al a fortune. The ensuing symbolic castration of David Stern would be a nice side bonus.

Most Active Letters Threads

740

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
420

Do Obama officials know what his Afghanistan plan is?

What explains the completely contradictory statements from key aides on a central plank of the war strategy?
408

America's regression

It's almost impossible to find a nation with as many torture advocates as the U.S. has.
332

Palin: Birthers have "fair question" about Obama

Of Obama birth, the ex-governor says, "the public is still, rightfully, making it an issue" (Updated)
211

The poster boy for progressive self-delusion

Read Hayden's 2008 Obama endorsement to remember the way the left sold our centrist president to itself

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon