Still need to hold the champagne. This is only a temporary reprieve. If Sac doesn't "BUILD IT NOW" they're still going to lose their team. They have until March to figure something out.
It's a small step but a good one. What is at issue is a new venue for them--when that happens then the full celebration can begin. This city has had tremendous support when they were contenders back in the day. Now, they just need that "something" to keep the team long term or it's relocation for sure.
"Sacramento arena plan still vague on details" (Sacramento Bee - Friday, 9/9/11) GO SAN JOSE EARTHQUAKES!!! -G
:::sigh::: Poor Sacramento.. can we get anything done right? Just like with the Earthquakes new stadium... BUILD IT NOW!
I've been a sports fan a long time, and this post made me think of this: Maybe not all Kings fans, as some still aren't happy the team ever moved to Sacramento. And my Dad would wonder about the Rochester Royals fans, then the Cincinnati Royals fans before he wondered about the Kansas City fans. I wonder if there is a more-travelled franchise in major US sports than this one? Especially if you include the season (seasons?) KC shared its team with Omaha.
There are other sports teams that have moved just as much. Building a new arena in Sacramento is more about having a modern venue in the heart of the city than it is about keeping the Kings (though it is integral to a new arena deal). Places like KC boast 3 professional sports teams, while Sacramento is lucky to have one. The new arena deal is about making Sac a better place to live. Sadly, there are many people up here who don't see it that way, and would be content if our city was more like Modesto it seems.
I'm against any stadium plan in ANY city that involves public dollars. Its not about keeping Sacramento down, its about not subsidizing Billion Dollar industries that can afford to build their own arenas. THere are much more things Sacramento can spend their money on rather than a new Arena. New Arena's aren't always winning situations. Even "sure thing" new stadiums aren't winning situations. Veterans Stadium and the Meadowlands are now dust/parkinglots and Philly and NY/NJ are STILL paying for those stadiums. OKC foot the bill for the Ford Center and their revenues are up, but hey, so are their expenses as they have to pay to maintain the Ford Center. Meanwhile, Clay Bennett makes money hand over fist with a sweetheart deal. The 49ers sell out every game and have 66% of the Bay Area NFL market and can't afford to build their own stadium? Seriously? Who falls for this crap? Oh right.... the "hardcore" fans do.
I don't know, given the amount of time (or lack there of) that they've had to work on this particular arena plan I think they've done a decent job. The big issues they've got now is of course whittling it down, and more importantly getting the Maloofs on board. Because at this point I'm not convinced that the Maloofs are actually dedicated to staying in Sac no matter what the city does...
It's not about an arena or stadium making a profit. It's about the effects on the city's economy and quality of life. It's about being a catalyst for development, attracting businesses to put up shop here, attracting people to want to live here (and stay here), about simply making a better quality of life for all residents of the region, whether they are directly impacted or not, they all benefit . It goes far beyond what the owners of a professional sports team (who would be tenants, not owners of the arena) would get from it. This is different from the 49ers situation, where the stadium would be used far less, and mainly by the 49ers. This arena in Sacramento would be the spot for any major concert, performance or other event. It's quite different than all of the options you guys have the luxury of down in the Bay Area. A new arena would be used for like 40 days a year by the Kings, but more often than not for other things like concerts, etc. Is that not worthy of local governments at least paying some fraction of the costs of a venue? It's like agreeing that our city doesn't need public parks or festivals. I don't know how familiar you are with Sacramento, but there is a huge former industrial area known as the railyards which they want to build a new arena in. The area is literally a huge dirt lot with a few old buildings they are keeping to turn into museums and tie into a future transportation hub. At 240 acres it's the largest area of undeveloped land adjacent to a downtown district in the country. There are cities out there that would kill for this much flat, developable land next to their downtown. I see a new arena as being a catalyst for this area's development and Sacramento becoming a better place to live. If nothing gets built and the Kings move, Sacramento will surely be worse off. It's as simple as that. From what I know about the latest proposal, it's going to be paid for by private funds, user fees, a tax on hotels/taxis, selling the current arena location to developers, and possibly the sell-off of a couple of city-owned parcels which have been sitting unused for decades and not likely to be used by the city any time soon. No income tax. No sales tax. I'm not even much of a Kings fan, but I'll support a good idea for my city when I see it. Sorry for the rant, but you can tell I really want this to happen!
Yeah, I personally dislike the Maloofs. From what I understand they're not playing much of a role in the new arena plan. They'll be tenants - that's about it. If it were up to them, they would have left for Anaheim already. It's the NBA that really made them stay - mainly because moving a team into a market that already has two teams (one of which have been the league's darlings for decades) was a bad move in their eyes. But I don't blame the Maloofs. They're just looking for easy money. Just like they got easy money from the empire their parents built, only to have mismanaged it into the ground. They need to sell the team if they can't play with the big boys anymore.
"Report: Kings don't attend arena negotiations" (CSNBayArea.com - Thursday, 10/6/11) GO SAN JOSE EARTHQUAKES!!! -G
They didn't attend because they weren't invited. The city has to build the arena. The Maloofs just have to agree to live in it (which the league will force them to do if there is a new arena in place.
If the Maloofs don't agree to live in it, will they likely then sell the team off to a local owner or ownership group? GO SAN JOSE EARTHQUAKES!!! -G
Yep. Ron Burkle is waiting in the wings to buy the team from them. And he's part of the group working to get the arena built, and he WAS in Houston. So yes the Maloofs are being squeezed out, IF the arena gets built in Sac. If it doesn't they'll move the team to Anaheim and get squeezed out in a year or two by the Ducks owner Samueli when they can't afford to pay him back for the relocation fee payoff he offered to pay for them. Either way the Maloofs time as NBA owners appears like it could be coming to an end unless they play nice.
Apparently their sister is on the real housewives of something or other TV show that my girlfriend watches. I watched a recent episode where she decides to attend the last game of the season last year when everyone thought they were going to move. It was freaking hilarious. Their security staff was begging her not to come b/c of security threats. She had no idea why all these people would be so angry with her for decisions she made regarding HER team that SHE owned.
Yep you're right she is. However she seems to be more of the "silent partner" type letting the 3 stooges control everything.
Beware: The next installment, "Real Housewives of Silicon Valley," is auditioning ladies around here already .