You know guys, I had a revelation this morning:

I think. .... that perhaps this has a very big chance of happening, that OKC would "share" the Sonics for 2007 and then move permanently to OKC in 2008+.

My theory is, the Sonics funding package for Seattle will not be approved by Bennett's deadline (if at all to his liking). Therefore, Bennett will proceed with plans to move - but he may chose to do so the New Orleans Hornet's way - making a Seattle/Oklahoma City Sonics for a year then on to full-blown Oklahoma City Supersonics for 2008.

The reason I think this is true? Nobody is buying Season Tickets here because EVERYBODY knows the Sonics are leaving. Regardless of the Muckelshoots or whoever, nothing is making a dent on ticket sales. Personally, I think these "announcements" are JUST attempts to spur support first THEN if it comes they might move forward (sort of a shock, see who reacts, then if they do maybe we'll do it) sort of scenario. So far, regardless of the plan - ticket sales have been flat.

Furthermore, supporting my hypothesis - Bennett will want to move the Sonics as soon as possible to OKC, given the profitability that he would achieve in the city. However, he may want to do so in such a way as to not piss-off Seattleites or the NBA. Sharing the Sonics for their last season in Seattle does this while also preventing a "lame-duck" team status, since they would play some games in their new home city.

Im almost completely positive that OKC fans would come through on ticket sales, say if the Sonics played all 2007 games in Seattle but split the 2008 games in OKC, giving them a gradual then accelerated move out of Seattle. Bennett may not make any profit overall with this idea, but he surely would not lose as much than if he were to stay in Seattle for the full 2007 season either.

And, it would ease the league and OKC into the NBA schedule as well. OKC needs to upgrade the Ford Center, I think 6-9 months would be enough time for interiour suites and luxury amenities to be added (if not shorter, who knows). Exteriour upgrades might take longer, who knows about the practice facility (but with them split in Seattle, they could still use the one up here until the OKC facility is completed).

Plus we need to capitalize (and continue) the recent flux of retail downtown - I think we need double the current level of restaurants and clubs, spreading out to the other districts NOT JUST Bricktown. And, of course, we need Bricktown to mature - well, this shared year would accomplish this and would definitely benefit OKC from not having to take on a full year IMMEDIATELY!!! We could FINISH up a few things and get some new things underway!!!

Like I said all, this is JUST a hypothesis - an idea, that I think has a very high chance of being successful. Who knows, he might even decide to do the Seattle/Oklahoma City split through the 2010 lease at Key Arena (with OKC taking on more share through time). It would certainly justify at least twice weekly non-stop flights OKC-SEA on at least one airline and could improve some business relations between the two cities.

However, I think a one year split is MUCH more likely - with outright full schedule in OKC for 2008 with the Key lease buyout. Perhaps, Bennett could have a grand-finale for a Seattle game in 2008 with sort of a retirement in Seattle and then a birth ceremony in OKC at the next game. That would sort of "pay respects" to Seattle yet also give OKC some enthusiasm and credit for its team and city as well.

And I think the split 2007 idea, relying on the New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets model, could definitely be successful and a win/win scenario for OKC, the NBA, and Seattle (at least in the very short term).

Any comments??? Does Clay read this forum? :gossip:

Hot Rod, sounds like a good plan. Would the Key Arena lease allow that though? I am just having a very difficult time imagining CB filing for relocation on Nov. 1 after the deadline and then losing so much money for the entire season. I know he is a smart business man and knows what he is doing, but I just don't understand how that will work. Maybe I just reeally want the 07/08 OKC Sonics!

I seriously doubt Clay reads this forum, when you have that much money and create news headlines, you don't need to read it. You have a highly capable and professional paid staff to do it for you.

Then again, maybe he's smart enough to realize he doesn't need to pay anyone when he can get it here for free. :)

Seriously, if he really does have a paid staff, I'm sure at least one of them is reading the forums just to get a pulse on the public's reaction to his moves. I know a lot of people downplay the internet as not good enough for traditional business or media, but it really is kind of stupid for them to ignore it. I mean they probably read editorials, right? Well, most of the stuff on the forums is no less valid than what some jag off lackey writes in the local paper...

I'm sure people here would be thrilled to have a split season if we knew the Sonics were moving here. We'd be thrilled to have a preseason game if we knew the Sonics were moving here. Heck, open a few stores across the state and sell gear with Oklahoma City Sonics on it and you could probably make up for all the unsold season tickets in Seattle:bright_id

if we do get them think of the potential super star we would have. talk is they will
get kevin durant.

as far as the lease is concerned, there are many in the SOS organization who point to it as a no-escape from the Key type of situation. It was even posted on one of the Seattle forums (I believe the PI newspaper forum), but

I reminded/informed them that what was posted ONLY showed things from the city of Seattle's point-of-view. In legal proceedings, there are always two sides and each must be given equitable consideration. While the SOS folks (Save Our Sonics, by the way) point to the lease and say - see, the lease stipulates this and that about playing here (Seattle); I've read nothing in it that provides any consideration for the Sonics.

Im sure Bennett and his lawyers will point to the facts that, Key Arena is the worst in the league, the Sonics have failed to make a profit at Key Arena in XX years, that the city of Seattle refuses to upgrade the facility to make it profitable, that I-91 passed by the voters of Seattle severely limit the profitability of the Sonics AND given a study the city did which showed the city would have negligable impact if the Sonics stayed or left Seattle economically;

Im sure a buyout of the lease will happen and wont be that expensive. It would probably consist of the rent payments for the duration plus some sort of relief on the arena debt. I seriously doubt there would be requirements for the Sonics to reimburse local restaurants or stupid stuff like SOS and others keep saying. And surely, the lease does not require the Sonics to be in a losing position by playing at Key Arena either - this is what Bennett will have to exploit and he should be very successful regardless of the court of law he choses.

One concession could be a split schedule with OKC. I think this is feasible for 2007 and could be possible for the remainder of the contract with Seattle (meaning through 2010). My preference would be first for the Sonics to go ahead and just move for the 2007 but second would be for a split in 2007 to possibly begin in January; Seattle would get the full schedule until then, then there would be a gradual ramp-up of games in OKC with OKC getting full time in 2008, along with the WNBA Storm.

My third preference would be just getting the teams full time in 2008, but this will be a losing proposition for Bennett, the NBA, and the city of Seattle. Sure the Seattle fans would get one more year (their last) but Seattle would have a lame-duck team and considering it probably will have a lackluster record again - those seats wont be filled in 2007 either.

I think a split schedule is a great compromise, to gradually ween (sp) the Sonics from Seattle and introduce them into Oklahoma City. They might even break even under this scenario. And surely a split schedule benefits OKC, because the city could upgrade the Ford Center (interiour wise) and be ready by Jan to accept more games (approaching full-time). And from the league prospective, there would be no lame-duck status as it would be similar to the New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets - which was one of the most successful franchises this decade if not ever.

I think it is possible, which is why I asked if Bennett or an associate read this forum. It is a great idea and provides consideration for everyone; Seattle fans could still have games, the city of Seattle could still have revenue for the year despite dwindling attendance, Bennett could break even, the NBA could avoid having a lame-duck team in a top 15 market, Oklahoma City could have some time to get ready for full-time permanent relocation, the OKC fanbase could get some games which would ensure support.

One thing many in Seattle don't realize that I had to inform them of, when they said why would Okies support Durant. I reminded them that Durant is from this area and OKC is well aware of him and his presence would guarantee support of the team. Every game should be a sellout, esp if OKC were to also land CP3 and Desmond Mason, the Paris twins for the WNBA Storm and other OKC/Oklahoma talent.

One things for sure, the end is near and OKC is poised to be a very successful franchise - ala Salt Lake City, very similar are both cities and very similar markets. Given the wonderful OKC ownership, corporate support, a local talent roster, a great fanbase, and an expanded OKC market (not JUST the OKC Metro area, as defined by Neilson)

the Oklahoma City Supersonics and Storm should be a wonderful story in the history of the NBA/WNBA. And certainly OKC will benefit economically and politically/marketing with the teams playing year round!!

Well, hopefully we'll see some sort of announcement soon on the Sonics. Hopefully before the draft. As you may know, thanks to the San Antonio spurs sweeping out 4 of 4 games of the NBA Finals Championship last night, the NBA season is now over quicker than probably predicted!

Do we have reason to think there could be an announcement that early? I know now they can start working in earnest on finding a coach, but would David Stern let Clay throw in the towel on Seattle before October 31st?

I don't think we're going to see any ground breaking news anytime soon. Maybe rumors or suttle hints, but I think Bennett will stay true to his word and wait until October 31 for any big news...

Fuel for the fire... from the Seattle paper

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
CBA team owner: Oklahoma City has sights set on NBA team (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/6420AP_BKO_CBA_Oklahoma_City.html)


Last updated June 15, 2007 5:15 p.m. PT

CBA team owner: Oklahoma City has sights set on NBA team
By JEFF LATZKE
AP SPORTS WRITER

OKLAHOMA CITY -- The owner of the CBA team awarded to Oklahoma City said Friday that an agreement could not be reached on a venue to play in the city, which has its sights set instead on attracting an NBA team such as the Seattle SuperSonics.

Oklahoma City recently ended a two-year stint hosting the NBA's New Orleans Hornets, who were temporarily relocated following Hurricane Katrina. Now the city's five-year-old Ford Center is considered a likely home for the Sonics. Sonics owner Clay Bennett and his seven team co-investors who are all from Oklahoma have set a deadline of Oct. 31 to secure an agreement on a new arena in the Seattle area. If Bennett doesn't, he's said he will begin the process of relocating the team.

The Hornets sold out 30 of the 71 games they played in Oklahoma City over two seasons.

"We think that we're positioned for the NBA," said Tom Anderson, the city's special projects manager.

Mayor Mick Cornett has said he didn't see how a CBA team would help Oklahoma City land an NBA franchise.

Oklahoma Cavalry owner Baron Hopgood said the CBA team's representatives met with Oklahoma City officials for about two and a half hours but were unable to secure a city-owned site where the team could play. Hopgood said the team would transition to a new site near Oklahoma City.

"You want to go where you're celebrated and not where you're tolerated," Hopgood told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. "We'll transition to where we're celebrated and we'll build a long-lasting legacy there."

Hopgood, who said he shares Oklahoma City's hope for an NBA franchise, expressed gratitude to city officials who were willing to listen to the team's presentations, including the final effort to secure a venue on Friday.

"We had a great meeting today, but to no avail," Hopgood said.

Anderson said city officials "haven't closed the door on Baron, giving him the opportunity for him to present his case. If he's taken that a different way, that's his prerogative. If he wants to find another facility not operated by the city, we wish him well and we wish him success."

Anderson said the city would want to see business and marketing plans and proof that the team would be able to pay its financial obligations and be in the best interest of Oklahoma City.

"The city's position right now is we're not interested in a professional basketball product other than the NBA, but we're willing to take a look at his due diligence, his business plan and other background information and make an informed assessment based on that and see if we're wrong," Anderson said.

Hopgood had set a deadline to arrange for a venue in Oklahoma City so he could send the team's home schedule to the league office by the end of the month. The deadline allowed him time to make similar plans in the second location if plans fell through.

Kind of strange how the Seattle paper has such a large article on this.

Yep, anything to do with the sonics and the seattle papers run with it. It sure sells papers, you know - controversy. And everybody in Seattle (esp fans) want to know where OKC stands, any dirt or whatever - sells papers.

that being said, no news is good news for OKC. Bennett is pissed at Seattle and I highly doubt he will really consider anything else. I originally thought he'd make an announcement soon that he's decided to pack up and head to OKC with at least a split season (still could happen), but now Im thinking it may be to his advantage to lay low - that way, there wont be any back-door salvation plans which Seattle is infamous in coming up with. No matter what it seems here, at the very last minute somebody seems to all of sudden have the answer.

Im sure if this were to happen, Bennett would need to consider it - which if nothing else, would push or extend his self-imposed Oct 31 deadline. Doing so could - could make it so the legislature could get another shot at it in Jan, where they'd probably fast track some sort of proposal through. This is exactly what happened with the Seattle Mariners and Safeco Field, for a state with no money in the very last minute - a prominent senator named 'Slade "the blade" Gordon' got the momentum and found the funds.

Some were thinking Margarita Prentice would be the Sonic's blade but I think given time, Governer Christine Gregoire actually would do it. But she can't until the next session, which is why I think someone might try to come up with something last minute as a stall tactic to delay for the session.

Im hopeful that either 1) Bennett announces well before Oct 31 (say by Aug 1) that "no deals are on the table are feasible, so we will a) go ahead and move to OKC for the 2007 season or b) have a split season with OKC getting games beginning Jan 2008, or 2) Bennett waits until Oct 31 then announce the Sonics are headed to OKC beginning with a split season in Jan then permanently for 2008+.

I think the key for Bennett IS to have a split season for this 2007-2008 season. He needs to gradually remove the teams from Seattle and gradually introduce them to OKC - with a finale for Seattle end of season in Apr next year. That would be the classy thing to do while at the same time he could establish the fan base in OKC and come out break even as he'd avoid being the lame duck. And such a split season would allow OKC to do some quick improvements to the Ford Center - get that fast tracked in, then the real expansions could take place next summer (since the WNBA Storm would probably play in the more intimate Cox anyways). the Cox arena could get "upped" before the WNBA season 2008.

Like I said, it is in Bennett's best interest to either make some announcement about relocation WELL BEFORE or Right ON/After Oct 31. Otherwise, he risks having a lame duck season with plenty of losses which would really make him look bad not to mention the city of Seattle. Ticket sales are far from wonderful, so we'll see if the draft helps make a dent. I predict, if not - then an announcement would come shortly thereafter - to give OKC a chance!

Even if something were on the table by mid-July, there'd be a fat chance in hell that it could get public approval by Oct 31 and short of someone buying Bennett out (which he'd have to agree to sell the team which I don't think he will do), no private funding will come in time either. The Muckelshoots are the best shot and that is already pretty much Dead On Arrival due to the location and unspectacular funding plan.

I'm not so sure the NBA will approve of a split season model. I think it's going to have to be all or nothing - either endure a full lame duck season in Seattle or hopping the "Irsay Express" into OKC for the 07-08 campaign. It would seem to me that if Bennett is seriously considering the dump and run option, he's going to have to make that commitment by the end of next month. Let's not forget that at present the Ford Center's principal, priority tenant is the Blazers and the CHL schedule is finalized by the first week of August. I have my doubts that Bennett is going to want to plug the team into OKC this coming fall if he's not going to be able to secure prime weekend dates. Anyone out there who has good connections to the Blazers, Ford Center and/or the Cox Center might want to tap their sources to find out whether there's even any talk of contingency planning in the event the Ford Center suddenly finds itself with a major league tenant looking to bump the Blazers over to their old stomping (or skating in this instance) grounds for a few nights this coming winter. If this issue isn't even being discussed at the moment then it's probably a decent sign that the Sonics are likely committed to Seattle for at least this coming year.

I agree, I doubt the NBA would go for the split season. The only precedent for that is NOLA/OKC, and that was a very unique situation.

I don't think OKC would need to "warm up" to the team, but I can see how Seattle might benefit from a phased departure.

Forget about the split season for next year.

The Sonics will stay in Seattle for next season no matter what the circumstances. The best Okc can hope for is that Bennett holds to the Oct 31 deadline and then on Nov 1 if no arena deal is in place, Bennett will announce the relocation for the Sonics to Okc for the 08-09 season.

The Sonics will then play a lame duck season in Seattle, and Bennett then will file for relocation by March 08, and move the team after the season is complete June 08.

Let's hope that Bennett does not let Seattle come to him with an last minute arena deal after the deadline trying to keep the Sonics in Seattle.

The Sonics will then play a lame duck season in Seattle, and Bennett then will file for relocation by March 08, and move the team after the season is complete June 08.


Would that be a good business decision though by CB? Sounds like disaster for everyone....

He may have no choice.

jbrown is right, I don't think that he has a choice. The NBA will not let the Sonics leave until after at least one more season in Seattle.

I would think that CB knew that a lame duck season would be inevitable, prior to the purchase and prior to relocation.

The Nets are playing about three lame duck seasons while their new arena is being built in Brooklyn. And the Hornets had to play a lame duck season in Charlotte. I'm not sure David Stern cares if it happens. With the relocation fee charged a team and the lame duck season, it makes an owner think long and hard before relocating. There's also an 18 month period required before rebranding a team, so if Clay needs to change the name of the Sonics, he needs to be thinking about it now.

If he's telling the truth about how much money he's losing in Seattle by playing at the Key, it won't take long to make up that deficit, if he moves the team.

^^^ I think that it would be a bad idea for CB to rebrand the Supersonics, and personally I hate the idea of a new name for the team, if an when they locate to Okc.

The only way I could see him do such a thing is if it gets him out of his lease with the city of Seattle, in exchange for leaving the name Supersonics behind.

That's what I think will happen.....he will leave the name, because it could be an important negotiating tool in decreasing the buyout amount of the lease. I also think he might leave the Storm there for the same reason. There's no other great explanation for why he's not willing to sell the Storm, IMO. This is all speculation of my part, however. No insider news.

I agree that the Sonics name would be great here, but if they move, the problem I see is the negative press associated with moving their name and history. Do we really want an NBA Champion banner hanging in our arena, when the team won it in Seattle? And, I think there's consistently been a lot more negative press for the Indianapolis Colts than the team that was the Cleveland Browns (does everyone know who that is?) Leaving the name behind would be a smart move from the negotiation standpoint, but it would also allow the people in Oklahoma City to embrace the team as their own, without as much baggage. Again, this is all predicated on them moving, which is still not a done deal.

. . . the team that was the Cleveland Browns (does everyone know who that is?) Leaving the name behind would be a smart move from the negotiation standpoint, but it would also allow the people in Oklahoma City to embrace the team as their own, without as much baggage. Again, this is all predicated on them moving, which is still not a done deal.

Betts, you bring up an outstanding example by invoking Baltimore in your post. Here's a city that's never actually been awarded a franchise by any of the three major leagues in which it has fielded teams. The Baltimore Orioles were the transplanted St. Louis Browns, the Ravens were the aforementioned Cleveland Browns and the NBA's Baltimore Bullets (now Washington Wizards) began as the Chicago Stags. Notwithstanding the generic, non-geographically-specific nature of each of the incoming teams' names, ownership chose to utilize a new name to make the team truly Baltimore's. I have to believe that if and when the Sonics move to OKC, the owners will want to rebrand and make the team truly Oklahoma City's. The city served admirably as a temporary host to the Hornets for two years but if and when a team decides to perch permanently in OKC it would be most appropriate to make a move that will signify the city is now an established NBA town and not simply a way-station for some other city's team.

I wonder what the new name could be. Nothing ever really seems to stand out. I think we should revive the 89er name and attach it to the franchise. The land run made our city and we owe that date some dignity. The Oklahoma City 89ers!

Yeah, I like the name 89ers, it gives it some nostalgia and is not too hickish. Philly has the 76ers and the NFL has the San Francisco 49ers.

Notwithstanding the generic, non-geographically-specific nature of each of the incoming teams' names, ownership chose to utilize a new name to make the team truly Baltimore's.
Actually, the franchise was forced to give up the "Browns" franchise name as part of the settlement with the city of Cleveland during the move to Baltimore.
The franchise did not choose to change the name. They were forced to.

I cringe everytime I hear people talk about a name change, if and when we get a franchise team for Okc.

I cringe everytime I hear people talk about a name change, if and when we get a franchise team for Okc.

That's the darn truth.

I cringe everytime I hear people talk about a name change, if and when we get a franchise team for Okc.

Amen. The whole topic of a name change just strikes me as being incredibly silly.

I cringe everytime I hear people talk about a name change, if and when we get a franchise team for Okc.

What, are you worried they might call it something like the Oklahoma Yee-Haws!? Or maybe the Oklahoma! Surries with Fringes On Top. How about the Oil thing: They could be the Oklahoma Slickers, Ruff-Neckers, Gushers, Derricks, Busts, Volatile econonmic modelers, etc.. Or they simply could be the Oklahoma Oklahomans, since the play in Oklahoma City, in Oklahoma County, next to the Oklahoma! river... or, wait, I got it: The OKC Bricktowns!

:)

Or they simply could be the Oklahoma Oklahomans, since the play in Oklahoma City, in Oklahoma County, next to the Oklahoma! river...:)


Ding ding ding!!! That would be the winner. And be sure to include an exclamation point at the end. Oklahoma! Oklahomans.

Since everything around here seems to be named either "Sooner", "Bricktown", or "Centennial", how about Oklahoma City Centennial Sooners of Bricktown?

^ ^ I love the name calling, I too cringe on the idea of a team name; since it seems NOTHING would really fit or be far from sounding hickish.

but I want to digress back a bit to this. .....


I agree, I doubt the NBA would go for the split season. The only precedent for that is NOLA/OKC, and that was a very unique situation.

I don't think OKC would need to "warm up" to the team, but I can see how Seattle might benefit from a phased departure.

Didn't Kansas City have a split team agreement with Omaha where both had the Royals? Im not saying it is a go, Im saying splitting half of the year might be an option.

You never know, and I do know that the NBA would prefer NOT to have a lame duck year in a top 15 market. It would do WAY better to split it with or move it to a ravid OKC market. And Im almost positive Bennett would rather split and at least break even than go with a losing proposition and continue to lose millions.

Now as for the Blazers, we shouldn't forget that the city owns all major arenas in OKC and that the Blazers would play second fiddle to the NBA should any time they decide to come to the city.

So, no matter what schedule the Blazers make - they will either have to play their game at the Cox on a night(s) the NBA wants OR they will have to change their schedule. This was true with the Hornets and Im sure it will be true with the Sonics.

So, Im sure this pretty much negates the scheduling conflicts of the CHL and the NBA.

Betts, you bring up an outstanding example by invoking Baltimore in your post. Here's a city that's never actually been awarded a franchise by any of the three major leagues in which it has fielded teams. The Baltimore Orioles were the transplanted St. Louis Browns, the Ravens were the aforementioned Cleveland Browns and the NBA's Baltimore Bullets (now Washington Wizards) began as the Chicago Stags. Notwithstanding the generic, non-geographically-specific nature of each of the incoming teams' names, ownership chose to utilize a new name to make the team truly Baltimore's. I have to believe that if and when the Sonics move to OKC, the owners will want to rebrand and make the team truly Oklahoma City's. The city served admirably as a temporary host to the Hornets for two years but if and when a team decides to perch permanently in OKC it would be most appropriate to make a move that will signify the city is now an established NBA town and not simply a way-station for some other city's team.

I agree. Renaming the team is more about making a statement that this is a new team 100% OKC's.
As far as the name goes, the ones that identify some local flavor usually tend to be the best, ie Dallas cowboys, houston astros, pheonix suns....

I like the 89ers idea. Philly already has the 76ers which might be a little confusing though.
How about the mustangs as a tribute to the horse industry. I know people on here are anti-oil-everything but I personally like the rufnecks as well. Sports names aren't about sophistication. Oil/gas, whether anybody likes it or not has alot to do with our cities success and without it I am confident the NBA would have never been in our grasp. Why turn your back on something that has made this place largely what it is today just because you now think you are somehow above it.

Everybody KNOWS that in keeping with the tradition of redneckery and all the statues around town...They'll name it "The Buffalos" right?

It's either that or "The Bricks", and that's just a poor choice of wording for a basketball team.

Personally, I think we should just call the team "Bob" and use the Enzyte guy as a mascot. Such a friendly wave and catchy tune.

http://members.cox.net/imawingnut/bob.jpg

Interesting article pointing to OKC being a viable candidate to host a permanent NBA team....Like that Cornett understands a new arena would be necessary within a decade even w/ upgrades to the Ford

Mick Cornett is convinced Oklahoma City can successfully support a permanent NBA franchise.

As far as the Oklahoma City mayor is concerned, it's no longer a question.

"You can always ask those questions,” Cornett said. "But I think the best way to answer them is to look at the experience the Hornets had. If we had never had the Hornets, I think those would be tough questions to answer.

"But I think if you look at the Hornets' experience and the way the community reacted, I think the vast majority of those issues should be put off the table.”

A recent study conducted by Bizjournals.com supports Cornett's stance. Oklahoma City, according to the report, is one of the country's 10 best metropolitan areas for a new sports team. The study pointed to two areas in which Oklahoma City holds an advantage: a lack of competition from any other major league sports franchise and an abundance of personal income.

The report found Greater Oklahoma City to have $51.1 billion in total personal income, or the sum of all money earned by all residents of an area in a year. Oklahoma City, which the study found was best suited for an NBA franchise, ranked sixth behind Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Hartford, Conn., Las Vegas and Portland, Ore.

"A lot of it has to do with your community's commitment to having a team here in a city like ours,” Cornett said. "I think if you look at cities like Portland and Salt Lake City and Sacramento, and you determine that those cities have what it takes to generate enough revenue to keep a team then I don't see a problem with us doing it as well.”

By all accounts, the Hornets, who played inside the Ford Center the past two seasons after Hurricane Katrina ripped through New Orleans, were a financial success during their stay. A recent report of last year's revenue filed by the Hornets with the city showed how well they fared.

The Hornets generated $24.8 million in ticket revenue for their 35-game home schedule in Oklahoma City, according to a report by SportsBusiness Journal. The Hornets ranked 15th out of the 30 league teams in home attendance, with the average attendance falling from 18,717 during the 2005-06 season to 17,954 last year.

The team also reported $9.35 million in sponsorships and media advertising revenue, which, according to the SportsBusiness Journal's report, is about $4.5 million below the league's average.

"There is some questions regarding the sponsorship market in Oklahoma City, whether it's big enough to be able to support (a franchise),” said SportsBusiness Journal NBA writer John Lombardo. "The attendance is proven. They had a lot of strong gates. But from a corporate partnership prospective, that's the real question long term.

"To be fair, companies knew it would only be a short-term investment. When you know they're going to be there for a while, it creates a different business dynamic.”

But Seattle SuperSonics chairman Clay Bennett, who could soon relocate his franchise to Oklahoma City, also questioned the city's long-term viability last month. In an interview with The Oklahoman, Bennett said Oklahoma City's lack of broadcasting revenue is the biggest drawback. Bennett also questioned whether businesses would support the NBA during an economic recession.

"It won't stay like this forever,” Bennett said on May 30. "Will companies spend dollars in down times? We're testing all that.”

Some say the two-year trial the Hornets provided was as good a test as any.

"There's no such thing as a guarantee,” said Ford Center general manager Gary Dejardins. "But you've got to look at what the track record has been. And as the city continues to grow, you'd like to think that we'll have more businesses coming in, which only helps the stability of the city and the market. Success breeds success, and I think we've seen that.”

Mayor Cornett is quick to point out that Oklahoma City's long-term viability would be closely associated with the team's product.

"It's a partnership,” Cornett said. "It's not just what the city can do or what the market can do. The team should have expectations as well. If you're asking how popular the team is going to be five or seven years in, tell me how many games they're going to win. Tell me how many times they've been to the playoffs.

"Long term, in any market, teams that win are supported to a higher level than teams that don't win. Teams with star power are supported a lot more than teams with no star power.”

On his part, Cornett said he would push for a new arena to replace the 5-year-old Ford Center if and when a franchise comes to Oklahoma.

"If we go down this road to become an NBA city, somewhere in that building's lifespan of 12 to 20 years we've got to have a new building,” Cornett said. "We ought to be working to do that and have that in our plans, whether it's short term or four or five years from now.

"As a city, you make a commitment that we're in this for the long haul, and you expect the owners to be in for the long haul as well. I don't think the NBA is something you tip-toe into. You either want to be a part of it, or you shouldn't stick your toe in the water.”

I don't know why people are so ashamed of Oklahoma's history.

I like the Oklahoma Outlaws.

This is the quote from Mick I like and with which I agree:

"I don't think the NBA is something you tip-toe into. You either want to be a part of it, or you shouldn't stick your toe in the water.”

Hopefully the business and political communities, as well as our voting populace are on board with this concept as well. The cities that have had trouble with it are the ones who think you should get something for nothing.

I don't know why people are so ashamed of Oklahoma's history.

I like the Oklahoma Outlaws.

I think Oklahoma City Outlaws would be more appropriate...the NBA will be and Oklahoma City thing supported by fans from the Oklahoma City metro area, Oklahoma City corporations, etc. I don't see Williams and other big Tulsa companies throwing too much money our way when we get an NBA team--they certainly didn't help out with the Hornets I've always thought naming our team after our state (see: Oklahoma Redhawks) is kind of a copout--a little too politically correct for me.

I totally agree!! As much as I like Tulsa, I think OKC deserves to enjoy the fruits of its labor as a city. Tulsa didn't vote for the MAPS projects and OUR tax dollars paid for the Ford Center. The UTAH Jazz make sense because Salt Lake City is the ONLY major city in Utah. How about the OKLAHOMA CITY DRILLERS??:)

Drillers sounds great actually!! Drillers can identify our oil/gas history but also mean "drilling a basket" as well.

NBA Oklahoma City Drillers!!!

I like it!

Drillers sounds great actually!! Drillers can identify our oil/gas history but also mean "drilling a basket" as well.

NBA Oklahoma City Drillers!!!

I like it!


Of all the ones mentioned, I too like Drillers. However, Tulsa currently has that name for their minor league baseball team.

Tulsa Drillers (http://www.tulsadrillers.com/)

I would hate to see us have the same name as another in-state team, despite it being a different sport.

The name "Barons" has been mentioned before...I like that one as well. As for naming the team "Drillers" and it taking from Tulsa's minor league team, it has been done before. Just look at the Kansas City Royals and the Omaha Royals. I know they are together as a farm club, but it's possible to still use that name. Coming up with names is a lot of fun. Let's keep brainstorming for our Oklahoma City_________________!!:)

Farm clubs are a different ball of wax, IMO. They actually make sense to have the same, or similar names.

I, personally, want to get away from the hickish, oil-boom era names. I think Oklahoma is beyond that now.

With that said, I have no other ideas to offer. :) I just know what I don't like at this point. LOL

And just as I sent my last post, a name came to me.

What about the Oklahoma City Stars? Granted, that name was used for the hockey team that was here in the late 70s and early 80s, but I think that it could work.

Thunderbirds, Surge, Energy, Rattlers, Vipers.

The Oklahoma City Fiddlebacks

Oklahoma City Surge sounds good also.


Please, no Fiddlebacks or Thunderbirds!

What about the Oklahoma City Stars?

That's taken by OCU as well as Dallas' NHL team. And it's lame.


I still like Oklahoma City Outlaws.

I still like Oklahoma City Outlaws.

Seems like this would be a more appropriate name if the Portland Trailblazers were relocating to OKC, not the Sonics. :D

Besides, this state already has a team named after criminals.

Hi all.

There's been this argument over and over in Seattle (and NOLA to an extent) regarding OKC's media market being significantly smaller than other NBA cities - which would make OKC less viable.

While I admit that OKC is smaller as it is currently drawn up by Neilson, in reality OKC is quite a major draw in the region and an expanded region would have a media market quite favorably to other cities including Seattle.

I developed a poll and Im asking what you all think would be OKC's media market for its NBA team? Oklahoma as a state has many different media markets, most of which are based in other states. But I don't want to assume that these areas would immediately support the team (although I do think this) - I'd like to hear your thoughts.

Please use the link below and vote where you think OKC's media market will expand to for the NBA.

OKC's NBA Media Market Poll (http://www.okctalk.com/hornets-sonics/10516-oklahoma-citys-media-market-nba-team.html)

I think the Outlaws fit with the history of the state and its not too hickish. Also I think a color change would be in order. Like a Navy Blue and white trim or something.

Thats my personal opinion.

Farm clubs are a different ball of wax, IMO. They actually make sense to have the same, or similar names.

I, personally, want to get away from the hickish, oil-boom era names. I think Oklahoma is beyond that now.

With that said, I have no other ideas to offer. :) I just know what I don't like at this point. LOL

yeah...after all this oil boom we are in now sure did make this whole NBA thing possibile and financially viable from a corporate support standpoint. :dizzy:

yeah...after all this oil boom we are in now sure did make this whole NBA thing possibile and financially viable from a corporate support standpoint. :dizzy:


I know I am definately not trying to distance myself from Oklahoma's past. I think part of Oklahoman's problems is the fact they have some sort of inferiority complex. I am not ashamed to live here. There is a reason we are some of the nicest people you will ever meet and thats because its how we were raised and how we had to deal with adversity in the past.

Yeah, but just because OK people are proud does not mean that we should pick a hick name for our team that would ONLY reinforce the negative perceptions that some still have of the region/state.

Fact is, OK is NOT hillbillies (Arkansas is) but many people around the nation think OK is. So why would we permit that in our 'chance at the big leagues' by selecting a hick name for the team?

Memphis was lucky in that they didn't change the name of Vancouver's Grizzlies or Salt Lake with New Orlean's Jazz or Sacramento with Kansas City's Kings, since it would have been just as difficult for them to pick a name.

On that note, we dont even have to pick something meaningful for Oklahoma, we could call them anything - something progressive/urban even.

:bright_id I've got it.

How about OKLAHOMA CITY BOLTS, as in Thunderbolts but dropping the thunder?

there's nothing inherently wrong with Bolts but that would definitely define OKC without being too hickish or nerdish with the fascination with weather most people have. Oklahoma City Bolts rolls off the tongue and gives many different images (a fast break team with young talented playas that BOLT down the court and score) (a quickly successful team that storms into your city and BOLTS up the scoreboard), so on.

And add to that, it flows with the WNBA Oklahoma City Storm [Seattle Storm just never flowed with Seattle Supersonics]. We could even call it Oklahoma City Thunderbolts as the official name but most of the time call them 'the Bolts', just like the Supersonics-Sonics, Trailblazers-Blazers, Cavaliers-Cavs, Mavericks-Mavs, Knickerbockers-Knicks, Wizards-Wiz, Grizzleys-Grizz.

NBA Oklahoma City Bolts, I like it a LOT!!!

[purple and white uniforms with a yellow bolt]!!!!!!! :congrats:

Bolts.......Brilliant!! Hot Rod, I notice the folks over at sonicscentral.com are freaking out about Clay being in Seattle for so long, thinking he might be negotiating a buyout. Any info?

Yeah, but just because OK people are proud does not mean that we should pick a hick name for our team that would ONLY reinforce the negative perceptions that some still have of the region/state.

Fact is, OK is NOT hillbillies (Arkansas is) but many people around the nation think OK is. So why would we permit that in our 'chance at the big leagues' by selecting a hick name for the team?

Memphis was lucky in that they didn't change the name of Vancouver's Grizzlies or Salt Lake with New Orlean's Jazz or Sacramento with Kansas City's Kings, since it would have been just as difficult for them to pick a name.

On that note, we dont even have to pick something meaningful for Oklahoma, we could call them anything - something progressive/urban even.

Are you talking about Hillbillies as in Arkansas? Or just being known as a country state like Texas?

I think Clay is doing some discussions.

He had to meet with the two draft picks but also Im sure there were attempts by the Muckleshoots and others to meet with him.

Im positive he spent some time at Sonics HQ to get with the new GM and have some discussions with them.

Im sure all other attempts were failures tho, because otherwise the Seattle Media would have been ALL OVER IT by now - as they cover ANYTHING Sonics related so quickly because it sells.

we haven't heard anything besides the usual, draft stuff, new gm, Bennett clearing the way to move to OKC kind of stuff. Even on the seattle forums people are still mudslinging at OKC a bit. Most of them are just trying to pull strings.

But I am clearly anticipating the relocation of the Seattle Supersonics and Storm to Oklahoma City, with possible name change of the Sonics. I still think a split season is possible in 2007 but probably a complete relocation in 2008 is most likely with a buyout.

I don't think Clay was here talking to the city about a buyout though - it wouldn't be in his best interest unless he REALLY wants to keep the team here. I think he was just up here to meet the draft picks (since their first year would be in Seattle) and to meet with Presti and see how the "house" is doing.

Im almost certain he has given up on Seattle but he can't do anything different (like negotiations out of lease, etc) until Oct 31; it wouldn't be prudent otherwise. ...

Unless. .... there is a possibility he might move them for the 2007 season??? But I think that is unlikely.

As for Hillbillies, Arkansas has them and I think OK has a few in far SE; but as a whole OK is more popular for hillbillies for some reason. ???

I think people think Arkansas but say Oklahoma or something like that, I mean OK has at least four metropolitan areas, two of which are large and one of which is major [OKC being major, Tulsa being large, Lawton/Ft Smith/Wichita Falls, Enid, Stillwater PSA (probably soon to be part of OKC CSA), and MacAlister being the others]. Most people in OK live in cities.

Arkansas has arguably three metros, only one of which is somewhat large and one has its boundaries in Oklahoma then other mostly in Tennesee. Not sure if NW Arkansas is a metro area. Most people in Arkansas live in the rural, hence hillbillies. But for some reason, people think of OK for some reason.

Having an NBA team will surely correct this image.