the media push has started for this project .... column from tram about the need for new arena

the media push has started for this project .... column from tram about the need for new arena

Saw one in the Oklahoman & Journal Records pieces, well written pieces by both outlets. We'll see how this plays out.

This is where you valve having media.

We've got land and parking...

maybe and maybe

Before the new convention center, there were a lot of complaints (from myself included) that we couldn't do a successful convention center (like Nashville) without spending nearly double what we had allocated in MAPS3. But we did it and I certainly don't have any complaints about the outcome, and I haven't heard many complaints about it once it opened.

Hoping we can do something like that with an arena product. Something quite good and not appalling to look at, but not something we'll still be paying for 30 years after it's built when a replacement is again called for.

maybe and maybe

There are so many unknown variables at this stage. Glad we are having this conversation--will be nice to see what the city comes up with in vision, terms and scope for a new arena. Doubt if it will be built on the cheap; also feel they will look at the Cox site's enormous potential--with and near parking and Bricktown Entertainment District.

I believe, somebody on this forum, suggested, years ago, to swap the future Arena with the Ballpark as this one will need a re do too.

I thought it was an excellent idea. Probably too much to have a newer ( but smaller) baseball stadium in the core and replace the Bricktown ball park by the new arena but hey !

Going to throw my hat in the ring to support the idea of a multi-purpose development anchored by a new arena, especially if it’s going to be on the current Prairie Surf location. I saw it mentioned earlier but I’d be happy to see the Chase Center development in San Francisco be a point of reference.

The Cox site is HUGE. Here is the Chase Center Development overlaid on the Cox site at the same exact scale. Second picture I removed some background and just placed a few shapes for structure.

I bet you could fund a huge portion of the construction cost just from land sales of excess land around a future arena, and sale or development of the Paycom Center. I didn't fully grasp the scale of the Cox superblock until I measured it out for this.

https://i.gyazo.com/65ea83a25dc76b406bd8fc7a8f482f28.png

https://i.gyazo.com/ea263c91a4dc14a144f5e20afe4e15fb.jpg

As Pete mentioned earlier, it would be a fantastic site for a mixed use development as you could have rooftop lounges overlooking just about any direction from here with great views. North: CBD, East: Bricktown, South: Omni/Park, West: Myriad CBD.

This is exciting stuff to think about really.

With a portion of the MAPS 4 money allocated to arena upgrades paused, do we know exactly what parts of the project is still going forward? I think it has been mentioned that the seats will still be replaced and that Thunder Alley is one aspect that is on hold / cancelled. But there are a lot of other projects that were proposed that I haven't seen mentioned. For example, new scoreboard, loud city improvements, etc. I assume anything that adds square footage is off, but there are some cosmetic, technical, and maintenace items listed that the arena could use in the interim.

I don't think it will actually take this long, but if the proposal is finalized near towards the end of the Mayor's "end of the decade" timeline and the MAPS (pay as you go) model is used to fund it, that could push opening to 15-20 years out. While I personally don't mind Paycom, I do understand the long term need for a new arena. However, if it does take 15-20 years, and they don't spend money on things like the maintenance and technical upgrades in the MAPS 4 proposal, Paycom most certainly will age poorly during that time.

(Forgive me if this has been covered. There were a lot of posts in a short period of time and it's very possible I missed it.

+1 we can have both.

I'm sure someone can put a "value" on it, but being a major league city is priceless in so many ways. Tramel hits it out of the park. Loved this line.

"Does it stink that the city needs a new arena? Yes.

Does the city need a new arena? Yes.

Welcome to the second generation of being a Big League City. Remember that slogan? We thought it was cool and it was. But being a major-league city, in both sports and in the American consciousness, comes at a cost.

And while not everyone is a Thunder fan and not everyone believes the NBA is essential to OKC’s elevated status among American cities, I know of no one who wishes the city was its sleepy, tired, dead-downtown-after-5-p.m. of the mid-1980s....

But we were fortunate. That Ford Center was built for $80 million. Dallas’ American Airlines Center opened that same year, with construction costs at $420 million. San Antonio’s new arena opened a year later, with a $186 million price tag....

NBA economics have exploded. The NBA is a high-rent district. You want to live in this neighborhood, this exclusive club of major-league cities that includes New York and Chicago but does not include Austin or Providence or Birmingham or Virginia Beach/Norfolk or Louisville or Hartford? There’s a cost. "

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/sports/nba/thunder/2022/07/17/okc-thunder-needs-to-replace-paycom-center-says-mayor-david-holt/65375066007/

This was truly one of the best columns Berry has written in a long while. He is kind of a weathervane in my opinion, also. He's probably about as middle of the road as possible, perhaps even a little on the lib side, but he is prone to being somewhat unpredictable at times.

His logic flow is very good. People will argue against public financing of arenas and stadia; it's an argument that is predictable, reasonable, and happens all of the time. But, and this is a big "but," this is how professional sports franchises are secured and kept. OKC had a long history of not keeping things, such as the National Finals Rodeo and many others. Having an NBA franchise is gaudy and expensive, but OKC has proven it can make it work -- even through the blah seasons.

Simply put, the PR value and profile raising value of having the Thunder in OKC is insane. Let's start with Sam Anderson's cover story on the New York Times magazine, leading to a best-selling book, and now a thriving film industry, more than 100,000 new residents in a decade, and much, much more. Is that all because of the Thunder, maybe not, but the NY Times press and having our skyline shown on national TV 40-some times a year is huge for our city. Only the most pedantic person would try to argue otherwise.

The Thunder has been an unmistakeable springboard for our city's growth and maturation. As Tramel points out, we have a franchise that Austin doesn't, and other very cool cities do not. Having an NBA franchise is coveted and valuable, and its value has been huge for OKC in ways it would not be for Seattle or other already world-renowned cities.

The best argument he and others have made, and that I will make, is that we got the current arena for an investment of $89 million, with another $100 million or so upgrade, and it has lasted 20 years and it has more than paid for itself. It's probably paid for itself 10 times over. And, it was built purely on spec.

Now that we have a successful and coveted franchise, does it make sense to invest more in a better arena for something that has proven value and is not being built on spec? Yes. Yes it does.

+ 100. ^^^

With a portion of the MAPS 4 money allocated to arena upgrades paused, do we know exactly what parts of the project is still going forward? I think it has been mentioned that the seats will still be replaced and that Thunder Alley is one aspect that is on hold / cancelled. But there are a lot of other projects that were proposed that I haven't seen mentioned. For example, new scoreboard, loud city improvements, etc. I assume anything that adds square footage is off, but there are some cosmetic, technical, and maintenace items listed that the arena could use in the interim.



the Peake will get new seats /mechanical and electrical updates .. (unclear if it is getting the new scoreboard ) and the Thuder practice facility upgrades are going forward ..

this will leave 70 mil +/- in Maps 4 arena money


***thunder alley was not part of MAPS 4 that was a fully separate project ..

This was truly one of the best columns Berry has written in a long while. He is kind of a weathervane in my opinion, also. He's probably about as middle of the road as possible, perhaps even a little on the lib side, but he is prone to being somewhat unpredictable at times.

His logic flow is very good. People will argue against public financing of arenas and stadia; it's an argument that is predictable, reasonable, and happens all of the time. But, and this is a big "but," this is how professional sports franchises are secured and kept. OKC had a long history of not keeping things, such as the National Finals Rodeo and many others. Having an NBA franchise is gaudy and expensive, but OKC has proven it can make it work -- even through the blah seasons.

Simply put, the PR value and profile raising value of having the Thunder in OKC is insane. Let's start with Sam Anderson's cover story on the New York Times magazine, leading to a best-selling book, and now a thriving film industry, more than 100,000 new residents in a decade, and much, much more. Is that all because of the Thunder, maybe not, but the NY Times press and having our skyline shown on national TV 40-some times a year is huge for our city. Only the most pedantic person would try to argue otherwise.

The Thunder has been an unmistakeable springboard for our city's growth and maturation. As Tramel points out, we have a franchise that Austin doesn't, and other very cool cities do not. Having an NBA franchise is coveted and valuable, and its value has been huge for OKC in ways it would not be for Seattle or other already world-renowned cities.

The best argument he and others have made, and that I will make, is that we got the current arena for an investment of $89 million, with another $100 million or so upgrade, and it has lasted 20 years and it has more than paid for itself. It's probably paid for itself 10 times over. And, it was built purely on spec.

Now that we have a successful and coveted franchise, does it make sense to invest more in a better arena for something that has proven value and is not being built on spec? Yes. Yes it does.

Exactly.
You cant remove the OKC's success from the Thunder's success, and vice versa. They are a marriage.

You wanna be a Big League City? Pay for it. We'd never get a franchise ever again, David Stern ain't walking through that door. No one should forget how influential he was in this process and the proponent he was for OKC. He also ran the league like a mafia boss, no one crossed Stern.

This was truly one of the best columns Berry has written in a long while. He is kind of a weathervane in my opinion, also. He's probably about as middle of the road as possible, perhaps even a little on the lib side, but he is prone to being somewhat unpredictable at times.

His logic flow is very good. People will argue against public financing of arenas and stadia; it's an argument that is predictable, reasonable, and happens all of the time. But, and this is a big "but," this is how professional sports franchises are secured and kept. OKC had a long history of not keeping things, such as the National Finals Rodeo and many others. Having an NBA franchise is gaudy and expensive, but OKC has proven it can make it work -- even through the blah seasons.

Simply put, the PR value and profile raising value of having the Thunder in OKC is insane. Let's start with Sam Anderson's cover story on the New York Times magazine, leading to a best-selling book, and now a thriving film industry, more than 100,000 new residents in a decade, and much, much more. Is that all because of the Thunder, maybe not, but the NY Times press and having our skyline shown on national TV 40-some times a year is huge for our city. Only the most pedantic person would try to argue otherwise.

The Thunder has been an unmistakeable springboard for our city's growth and maturation. As Tramel points out, we have a franchise that Austin doesn't, and other very cool cities do not. Having an NBA franchise is coveted and valuable, and its value has been huge for OKC in ways it would not be for Seattle or other already world-renowned cities.

The best argument he and others have made, and that I will make, is that we got the current arena for an investment of $89 million, with another $100 million or so upgrade, and it has lasted 20 years and it has more than paid for itself. It's probably paid for itself 10 times over. And, it was built purely on spec.

Now that we have a successful and coveted franchise, does it make sense to invest more in a better arena for something that has proven value and is not being built on spec? Yes. Yes it does.

:congrats:

Outstanding work, Catch22 & Soonerguru

the Peake will get new seats /mechanical and electrical updates .. (unclear if it is getting the new scoreboard ) and the Thuder practice facility upgrades are going forward ..

this will leave 70 mil +/- in Maps 4 arena money


***thunder alley was not part of MAPS 4 that was a fully separate project ..

Thanks. And for the reminder that thunder alley was not a maps 4 proposal.

I personally hope the new scoreboard goes in. Theoretically, it could always be moved to a new location, but I imagine they'll go for whatever new innovation there is at the time, like the recent trend towards halo boards.

The Cox site is HUGE. Here is the Chase Center Development overlaid on the Cox site at the same exact scale. Second picture I removed some background and just placed a few shapes for structure.

I bet you could fund a huge portion of the construction cost just from land sales of excess land around a future arena, and sale or development of the Paycom Center. I didn't fully grasp the scale of the Cox superblock until I measured it out for this.

https://i.gyazo.com/65ea83a25dc76b406bd8fc7a8f482f28.png

https://i.gyazo.com/ea263c91a4dc14a144f5e20afe4e15fb.jpg

As Pete mentioned earlier, it would be a fantastic site for a mixed use development as you could have rooftop lounges overlooking just about any direction from here with great views. North: CBD, East: Bricktown, South: Omni/Park, West: Myriad CBD.

This is exciting stuff to think about really.

Now imagine the unused part of what is shown as the Chase Center block, plus the removed Paycom Arena block, add in the Rehco blocks, and I think this is the general framework that Thunder ownership trying to gain as much participation in the development of as possible. I think they want input and the ability to invest in a planned community that allows them to maximize revenue using the team as an anchor. I'm okay with that.

I would think the new arena should go where the Cox Center is and then put the new soccer stadium where the arena is now. Create synergy between the two on management, parking and staff. And also in driving area development. All on land the city already owns to save on cost.

You would have 17 soccer games and 41 NBA games plus pre-season/playoffs and could hold concerts and other events at both venues. Probably 100+ events a year in a two block area.

If they are going to do this, I hope they can make it to where they can have a Thunder game one night, concert the next night and something else (hockey, big meeting, etc) the next night. I love some of the concerts we are getting in OKC, but they are in the summer or during the all star break and I would love to see us be able to do more with the new space.

As far as a new arena goes, the current arena (will forever be known as the Ford Center to me) was built as a bare bones arena with the hopes of luring a pro team (I believe they thought it would be hockey before anything else) and they only did the improvements to get it up to NBA standards. Building a brand new arena, specifically for a basketball team is a no brainer, I just think it came earlier than when I thought it would. I was thinking it would be in MAPS 5, but it will most assuredly be $500 million and that is if they build it on already city owned land. The other thing to take into consideration is if they start doing this five years down the road, hopefully, cost of supplies will correct and it won't cost as much to build as it would today because supply chain issues have been corrected. Just a couple of thoughts.

His logic flow is very good. People will argue against public financing of arenas and stadia; it's an argument that is predictable, reasonable, and happens all of the time. But, and this is a big "but," this is how professional sports franchises are secured and kept. OKC had a long history of not keeping things, such as the National Finals Rodeo and many others. Having an NBA franchise is gaudy and expensive, but OKC has proven it can make it work -- even through the blah seasons.

Simply put, the PR value and profile raising value of having the Thunder in OKC is insane. Let's start with Sam Anderson's cover story on the New York Times magazine, leading to a best-selling book, and now a thriving film industry, more than 100,000 new residents in a decade, and much, much more. Is that all because of the Thunder, maybe not, but the NY Times press and having our skyline shown on national TV 40-some times a year is huge for our city. Only the most pedantic person would try to argue otherwise.

The Thunder has been an unmistakeable springboard for our city's growth and maturation. As Tramel points out, we have a franchise that Austin doesn't, and other very cool cities do not. Having an NBA franchise is coveted and valuable, and its value has been huge for OKC in ways it would not be for Seattle or other already world-renowned cities.

Agree and I think this often gets lost in the analysis. I, personally, don't like the established system toward government subsidizing cash heavy organizations carte blanche, especially when it creates a competitive disadvantage as it so often does.

But it's clear that the impacts of such public investment on the community's economic situation and qualify of life is different in every community. Clearly, the damage done to Seattle due to the loss of the the Supersonics is not comparable to the benefit of OKC having an NBA team at Seattle's expense. The markets were, and still are, completely different. These sort of fabricated amenities, so to speak, do so much more for smaller markets than they do for markets with so many naturally occurring economic and quality of life factors. If we're being honest with ourselves, OKC has to monetarily invest in quality of life measures to compete for commerce. The city was told this many many times over and over again, and once the city did invest in quality of life beginning with MAPS, the proof of concept became evident. Obviously, it wasn't just the NBA. It was a lot of things, but the NBA is thing that made those ignorant of OKC take notice. That's hard to deny.


The best argument he and others have made, and that I will make, is that we got the current arena for an investment of $89 million, with another $100 million or so upgrade, and it has lasted 20 years and it has more than paid for itself. It's probably paid for itself 10 times over. And, it was built purely on spec.

There is no doubt that, relatively, OKC has gotten to be host to the NBA on the cheap. It's not even close.



Now that we have a successful and coveted franchise, does it make sense to invest more in a better arena for something that has proven value and is not being built on spec? Yes. Yes it does.

I think it makes sense, too. I think it also makes sense that a priority of this process should be that a new arena will be built as a true multi-use venue and that it will be built to be the city's largest entertainment venue, not just the Thunder's home court. It should be built as much for the Thunder fans' experience as it is for someone who doesn't care about the NBA. It should sound good (well, as good as any arena can sound), it should have good sight lines for any potential event, and be flexible enough to host any large touring event in comfort. It really does need to be the city's arena, not just the Thunder's arena.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qm9h0RP2WSQ

BTW, seat replacement for the Paycom Center IIRC is $4 million.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qm9h0RP2WSQ

It’s a lot like the area around the Fiserv Forum like the punch bowl and the Mecca

It’s really impressive what was done with that entire area

I would think the new arena should go where the Cox Center is and then put the new soccer stadium where the arena is now. Create synergy between the two on management, parking and staff. And also in driving area development. All on land the city already owns to save on cost.

You would have 17 soccer games and 41 NBA games plus pre-season/playoffs and could hold concerts and other events at both venues. Probably 100+ events a year in a two block area.

a soccer stadium would not fit where the peake is currently

a soccer stadium would not fit where the peake is currently

Sure it would, this isn't going to be a NFL stadium. Sporting Kansas City's stadium is 511'x533' vs the lot where Paycomm is located is 557'x664'.

OKC isn't building anything remotely like what Sporting Kansas City has. That stadium cost $200 million 10 years ago. The Maps 4 budget is $37 million. Hell, Union High School just spent $35 million to rebuild half their stadium. Be realistic about what is being built and don't a good chunk of the budget on land that isn't needed.

Sure it would, this isn't going to be a NFL stadium. Sporting Kansas City's stadium is 511'x533' vs the lot where Paycomm is located is 557'x664'.

OKC isn't building anything remotely like what Sporting Kansas City has. That stadium cost $200 million 10 years ago. The Maps 4 budget is $37 million. Hell, Union High School just spent $35 million to rebuild half their stadium. Be realistic about what is being built and don't a good chunk of the budget on land that isn't needed.

This is an awesome idea.

To point out a little something important.



https://i.gyazo.com/65ea83a25dc76b406bd8fc7a8f482f28.png


The thing about the Chase Center in San Fran is that it's actually smaller in bowl size (17k) than the current Paycom Center (but they made that sacrifice to cater to the number of vendors they wanted to have). If anything, the bowl size should be bigger than the current arrangement of 18k seats. 21k should be a better look if we're talking about hosting something as big as the all-star game. In fact, increasing the size of the bowl and the venue all around would give more vendors a chance to spread out more, not to mention house more vendors when dealing with large gatherings such as concerts. This also allows for larger commercial vendors to take root here, alleviating a lot of the stress that comes with the halftime rush to the food stalls.

It should also allow for some of that space to open up to the lot, which would serve as a great transitional space for both the Myriad Gardens and the originally-planned Thunder Alley. This will allow for a lot of social interaction and it opens up the city to a lot of opportunities to provide tourists who come explicitly for games to engage with the city at large. Of course, street level lighting should make a difference here, as you don't want to be too much of a distraction to some of the wildlife in the garden, but also be attractive enough to where it doesn't appear too mundane much like the current signage outside of the Paycom center. For example, using 5 large led panels outside with a 3x8 format would allow a dynamic glimpse of the usual starting lineup, run more dynamic advertising campaigns, and greet locals and guests alike to the 21st century standard. And to mitigate the amount of light flooding to the garden, there could be a line of trees planted to help shelve off how much light floods to that area, also aligning in the theme of the transfer between the park and the Paycom (Park and Peake sounds so much better, but we know why we cant use that).

But then again, I'm just sprouting ides.

So the era of growing the number seats is over. Everything is going smaller seats, more space, in every sport.

21k is basically a 0% chance. 19k maybeeeee. Most likely it's about the same.

I would think the new arena should go where the Cox Center is and then put the new soccer stadium where the arena is now. Create synergy between the two on management, parking and staff. And also in driving area development. All on land the city already owns to save on cost.

You would have 17 soccer games and 41 NBA games plus pre-season/playoffs and could hold concerts and other events at both venues. Probably 100+ events a year in a two block area.

Building the stadium just because is a massively dumb decision. With a new arena, we will build it to keep, not build it to get them to come. MLS may not want to expand here even with a stadium. So then we have then waste of space on a prime downtown lot. If they have a firm commitment, then maybe build it there. But not just because it would be a cool idea.

Building the stadium just because is a massively dumb decision. With a new arena, we will build it to keep, not build it to get them to come. MLS may not want to expand here even with a stadium. So then we have then waste of space on a prime downtown lot. If they have a firm commitment, then maybe build it there. But not just because it would be a cool idea.

USL has on occasion gotten better TV ratings on ESPN than MLS anyway.

It's not set in stone MLS is the Tier 1 league. Soccer is in it's infancy.

So the era of growing the number seats is over. Everything is going smaller seats, more space, in every sport.

21k is basically a 0% chance. 19k maybeeeee. Most likely it's about the same.Again I can't remember completely but didn't our arena replace one or two levels of seats years ago to replace small seats with larger? Because it was built with narrow seats to try to seat the most fans but they were for tiny people only.

Construction of the MAPS 4 Multipurpose Stadium would benefit from the parking and city own land already available downtown; also the $37 million budget could probably build a larger than planned 8,000 seat venue.

Most recent information on the M4 MPS location: Credit: OKCTalk.com

Right now, officials are looking at three possible locations:


Farmers Market- West of Classen and just north of I-40
Wheeler Park- Currently owned by the city
Producers Coop- Just south of Bricktown.

To point out a little something important.



The thing about the Chase Center in San Fran is that it's actually smaller in bowl size (17k) than the current Paycom Center (but they made that sacrifice to cater to the number of vendors they wanted to have). If anything, the bowl size should be bigger than the current arrangement of 18k seats. 21k should be a better look if we're talking about hosting something as big as the all-star game. In fact, increasing the size of the bowl and the venue all around would give more vendors a chance to spread out more, not to mention house more vendors when dealing with large gatherings such as concerts. This also allows for larger commercial vendors to take root here, alleviating a lot of the stress that comes with the halftime rush to the food stalls.

It should also allow for some of that space to open up to the lot, which would serve as a great transitional space for both the Myriad Gardens and the originally-planned Thunder Alley. This will allow for a lot of social interaction and it opens up the city to a lot of opportunities to provide tourists who come explicitly for games to engage with the city at large. Of course, street level lighting should make a difference here, as you don't want to be too much of a distraction to some of the wildlife in the garden, but also be attractive enough to where it doesn't appear too mundane much like the current signage outside of the Paycom center. For example, using 5 large led panels outside with a 3x8 format would allow a dynamic glimpse of the usual starting lineup, run more dynamic advertising campaigns, and greet locals and guests alike to the 21st century standard. And to mitigate the amount of light flooding to the garden, there could be a line of trees planted to help shelve off how much light floods to that area, also aligning in the theme of the transfer between the park and the Paycom (Park and Peake sounds so much better, but we know why we cant use that).

But then again, I'm just sprouting ides.

Thanks for that info. My post was more about the size of the Cox site than that specific comparison. You could fit the Chase and Paycom center on that lot with room to spare.

So the era of growing the number seats is over. Everything is going smaller seats, more space, in every sport.

21k is basically a 0% chance. 19k maybeeeee. Most likely it's about the same.

This was my initial thought in response as well. I don’t think I could pinpoint the exact reasons for it without doing some research but it has definitely shifted in some sense in recent years.

This was my initial thought in response as well. I don’t think I could pinpoint the exact reasons for it without doing some research but it has definitely shifted in some sense in recent years.

What about NCAA DI basketball regional sites; would this give us a better advantage by having an arena in the 20,000 seat range. Those sweet 16-sites now advertise the host city like the 'Kansas City Regional' etc.

Not concerned so much about Thunder sell outs or whether the arena looks full; more focus should be directed on future events a larger seating capacity arena could host. If we're going to build, focus on the multipurpose events an arena could fulfill including ice hockey.

The seating capacity cycle could shift back and forth.

USL has on occasion gotten better TV ratings on ESPN than MLS anyway.

It's not set in stone MLS is the Tier 1 league. Soccer is in it's infancy.

I want USL to become the top level for no other reason than because United Soccer League sounds better to me than Major League Soccer. They also seem to be more active in helping develop soccer at a popular level in America than the MLS. Not sure if that’s an accurate description, that’s just what it seems like.

It's not set in stone MLS is the Tier 1 league.

yes it is

I hope to be wrong but my gut tells me the Thunder will not be here long-term. I certainly hope they will be but I doubt voters will approve another arena anytime soon. As one person told me, "Nobody I know that has been to the Paycom Center said anything all that bad about it."

And it's easy to see why - it's a really nice facility, it's just not a competitive NBA facility. In terms of square feet, it's the smallest in the league, which certainly limits things. It was built barebones years before the Thunder called it home. Holt laid out a very convincing case last week why a new arena is needed. By the time an arena is approved and built, you're probably looking at 8-10 years down the road when Paycom will be approaching 30 years old.

I just fear your average taxpayer may not get all that. And while the team was not good last year, attendance took a nose dive to third worst in the league.... maybe the city has fallen out of love with the Thunder to some degree.

I want USL to become the top level for no other reason than because United Soccer League sounds better to me than Major League Soccer. They also seem to be more active in helping develop soccer at a popular level in America than the MLS. Not sure if that’s an accurate description, that’s just what it seems like.

It will never happen because MLS is locating their franchises in all of the larger TV markets with larger stadiums for sustained long-term viewership.

It will never happen because MLS is locating their franchises in all of the larger TV markets with larger stadiums for sustained long-term viewership.

also MLS teams own 4 minor league USL teams .. and partner with another ..

edit just read that those teams are leaving USL to move to the new MLS Next pro league ..

yes it is

No it's really not. Especially with MLS moving to AppleTV and their ownership model being a joke.

No it's really not. Especially with MLS moving to AppleTV and their ownership model being a joke.

mls teams cost 200 + mil and they are tier 1 soccer in the us acording to FIFA usl teams cost 10 mil they are tier 2 and losing teams to the tier 3 mls minor league ...

mls has better markets and stadiums .. and a much much better tv deal ...the apple + deal took them from 60 mil a year to 250 .. usl makes well under 10 mil a year .. total ..

mls teams cost 200 + mil and they are tier 1 soccer in the us acording to FIFA usl teams cost 10 mil they are tier 2 and losing teams to the tier 3 mls minor league ...

mls has better markets and stadiums .. and a much much better tv deal ...the apple + deal took them from 60 mil a year to 250 .. usl makes well under 10 mil a year .. total ..

No I get how it is now.

I'm saying, it's not a guarantee it stays that way. USL has a better business model. It could, not will, flip. We're very much in the NBA/ABA days for pro soccer in this country.

No I get how it is now.

I'm saying, it's not a guarantee it stays that way. USL has a better business model. It could, not will, flip. We're very much in the NBA/ABA days for pro soccer in this country.

I do think Pro/Rel would allow for more investment in the lower tiers, very much as is the case in the UK where some of the investments made to Championship clubs can be absurd just to get them into the Premier League. With a closed system there is no "dream" or "hope" that any team could ascend and get bigger/ better TV deals for some initial investment. The current model is trying to be akin to the NFL model, but soccer doesn't have the history or the market share in the US for it to make sense. I do see the USL model adopting Pro/Rel in a move to flip or compete with the MLS head on, and yes one day there will be a point where they will have to join in order to be in the good graces of FIFA and to be taken seriously on the world trading market. I am a USL fan, not just because OKC and Tulsa have teams, but I did think the USL business model is better for the fans and better for the development of the sport than what the MLS/ US Soccer is doing.

I do think Pro/Rel would allow for more investment in the lower tiers, very much as is the case in the UK where some of the investments made to Championship clubs can be absurd just to get them into the Premier League. With a closed system there is no "dream" or "hope" that any team could ascend and get bigger/ better TV deals for some initial investment. The current model is trying to be akin to the NFL model, but soccer doesn't have the history or the market share in the US for it to make sense. I do see the USL model adopting Pro/Rel in a move to flip or compete with the MLS head on, and yes one day there will be a point where they will have to join in order to be in the good graces of FIFA and to be taken seriously on the world trading market. I am a USL fan, not just because OKC and Tulsa have teams, but I did think the USL business model is better for the fans and better for the development of the sport than what the MLS/ US Soccer is doing.

the owners that paid 200 mil are not going to create a possibility of their team getting send down to a different league .... .. the only hope for Pro / Reg is for the MLS to continue to grow (every good USL team wants to be in the MLS) to 40 teams and create their own tier 1 and 2 with pro/reg .

I agree with everyone who think we should repurpose the COX site for the new arena. I was originally wanting the CBD to expand on the lands, but you just can not argue against the positives of using it for the arena. I like the idea of using part of the site for the arena and selling part of the superblock for private development - which would extend the CBD.

I also like the idea of keeping Paycomm for a long time, having the twin arena thing would mean that the upgrades invested would not be wasted. We could remove Paycomm much much later when the twin arena vibe rubs off and OKC is ready for the next major league sport. Until then, it owuld be nice to have twin major league arenas, downtown: One being state-of-the-art and the other being AAA top tier (Paycomm). This is something unique to OKC in a lot of ways, and I think the Cox site makes the replacement as inexpensive as possible (say between $500-$700M for a Chase Center) and perhaps even less expensive if 1/2 of the land is availble for an LA Live type co-development that would surely tie everything (Dream, Boulevard, Omni, MGB, the REICO lands, CBD extension) all-together. IMO would surely put OKC on the map for good and make Dallas and KC quite jealous. lol

The CBD could easily expand west.

The entire area west of Myriad Gardens could be redeveloped, apart from John Rex School. And then north of there as well. The police union still owns a ton of surface lots in that area; the old Holiday Inn is sitting vacant, tons of lots or low-density uses. Plus, BOK Park Plaza is still mostly empty after years of opening, so it's not like we don't already have huge blocks of office space. Once the jail comes down, spreading west will only accelerate.


The Cox Center is an eyesore, especially those massive concrete walls fronting the gardens and EK Gaylord. The arena could be put in the middle and then all around would be an entertainment district which would also bridge into Bricktown. Plus, of course, the city already owns that property.

The building on the NW corner of Reno/Hudson is wholly occupied by the offices of the Myriad Gardens/Scissortail Park, so they'd have to have a new place to move to before that could go, not that I think it should, there's a nice historic building under the stucco.

Eventually the Scissortail staffers will move to Union Station, but I don't think the garden foundation folks will move.

^

That building was going to be sacrificed in favor of the OG&E Energy Center. In fact, there were already plans being made to vacate all those buildings and that redevelopment was the main motivator to move the Festival of the Arts.

Vivint Smart Home Arena in SLC is considered the best arena among the small market NBA cities with less than 2 million MSA population:

Memphis, Milwaukee, New Orleans, Oklahoma City & Salt Lake City.


https://customercarecontacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/vivint-arena-1024x592.jpg

https://kslsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Vivint-Arena.jpg

Broke ground: 1990 - $93 million - capacity 19,511 - Delta Center ($218 million investment)
Renovations: 2016 - $125 million - capacity 18,306 - Vivint Arena (Vivint Smart Home Arena)

Several renovations to the arena since 2016
Suite prices range from $2,500-$8,000 per game.

Beat Oklahoma City and don't call her cheap. :wink:

Source: 2022 Stadium Journey NBA Arena Rankings - https://stadiumjourney.com/news/2022-stadium-journey-nba-arena-rankings/

.

Nah bro. FitServ is the best.

https://www.fiservforum.com/plan-your-visit/tours

Nah bro. FitServ is the best.

https://www.fiservforum.com/plan-your-visit/tours

Capacity 17,385 - NBA 28th of 30 arenas by seating capacity. Start out with a larger capacity that you can shrink if needed.

The CBD could easily expand west.

The entire area west of Myriad Gardens could be redeveloped, apart from John Rex School. And then north of there as well. The police union still owns a ton of surface lots in that area; the old Holiday Inn is sitting vacant, tons of lots or low-density uses. Plus, BOK Park Plaza is still mostly empty after years of opening, so it's not like we don't already have huge blocks of office space. Once the jail comes down, spreading west will only accelerate.


The Cox Center is an eyesore, especially those massive concrete walls fronting the gardens and EK Gaylord. The arena could be put in the middle and then all around would be an entertainment district which would also bridge into Bricktown. Plus, of course, the city already owns that property.

A potential better connection to Bricktown from Myriad Gardens is part of what is really selling me on this plan. Would be nice if we could finally get the Santa Fe station tunnel to the canal opened up, too.

A potential better connection to Bricktown from Myriad Gardens is part of what is really selling me on this plan. Would be nice if we could finally get the Santa Fe station tunnel to the canal opened up, too.

I'm sure the Omni is reliant on that proximity as well, especially with the upper floors being catered to NBA player height.

Good article in this morning Oklahoman by Barry Tramel:

On most any issue, New York can tell the Knickerbockers to jump in the East River, knowing the Knicks are not leaving Madison Square Garden. But if Salt Lake City ever plays hardball with the Jazz, Utah could be out of the major-league business. The Seattle Jazz, anyone?.--Oklahoman, July 20, 2022

Thunder still has the leverage on the city. Bennett rarely has used it; I actually can’t think of a single example. And maybe he never would. Still, when Holt announced last week that the city was beginning to make plans to replace Paycom Center with a new downtown arena for the Thunder and major concerts and major conventions, some were shellshocked.--Oklahoman, July 20, 2022


# # #

Memphis Grizzlies, MSA: 1.33 million
FedExForum (Investment: $250 million) Capacity 17,794

Milwaukee Bucks, MSA: 1.56 million
Fiserv Forum (Investment: $1.2 billion) Capacity 17,385

New Orleans Pelicans, MSA: 1.26 million
Smoothie King Center (Investment: $114 million) Capacity 16,867

Utah Jazz: MSA: 1.26 million
Vivint Arena (Investment: $218 million) Capacity 18,307

Oklahoma City Thunder, MSA 1.44 million
Paycom Center (Investment: $192 million Capacity 18,203

What should we consider in planning a new arena for Thunder, major concerts & conventions?

Oklahoma City should consider a new arena $600 million price tag on the Cox site with an NBA basketball seating capacity of 19,200.

NHL ice hockey seating capacity 18,400. Footage: 800 total square feet range.

Equipped to handle concerts: 15,000 - 20,000 configuration.

Access connection to the Oklahoma City Convention Center & Omni Hotel via skywalk.

Financed by bonds and an extension of MAPS 4: Completion Target: 2027

Oklahoma City should consider a new arena $600 million price tag on the Cox site with an NBA basketball seating capacity of 19,200.

NHL ice hockey seating capacity 18,400. Footage: 800 total square feet range.

Equipped to handle concerts: 15,000 - 20,000 configuration.

Access connection to the Oklahoma City Convention Center & Omni Hotel via skywalk.

Financed by bonds and an extension of MAPS 4: Completion Target: 2027

Skywalk connections are no longer looked on favorably because they take away from street interaction. If you remember, they were originally considering a skywalk between the Omni and the convention center but decided against it.

Skywalk connections are no longer looked on favorably because they take away from street interaction. If you remember, they were originally considering a skywalk between the Omni and the convention center but decided against it.

Agree with your emphasis on street interaction, the metro underground concourse killed street interaction so critical to the life of a downtown and central business district. Closing off Main Street was the final dagger.

Keep in mind Oklahoma City's sometimes unpredictable weather that skywalk connections or underground concourse would be a welcome sight for conventioneers; especially like the weather we've been having last week and this week.

Surprised to see the numbers of the 5 smallest markets (arenas) with an average capacity of 17,747. Gopokes88 mentioned this trend...

Do recall that the skywalk connections were decided against.

The reason there is no skywalk between the Omni and the convention Center is that the Omni did not want it. It is a way to expose convention goers to the ground floor retail as they travel between the convention Center and hotel.

The 76ers have plan in place for a new arena slated 10 years from now. OKC needs to get on the ball:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/34274259/philadelphia-76ers-13-billion-project-calls-downtown-arena-2031-32