On calling the team Oklahoma City (?)

[Laramie]

I heard on the Morning Animal: the lease agreement with the Supersonics calls for the team to be called Oklahoma City, Mick Cornett stressed that since OKC is footing most of the bill with the recent sales tax that this team will promote Oklahoma City.

There is a possibility that the team will farm out some games to Tulsa; therefore, if a game was telecasted in Tulsa, he wanted no doubt that this was Oklahoma City's team.


The BOK Center will rival the Fabulous Ford Center; however, it will seat about
1,000 least and have 30 less luxury suites.

BOK Center progress link:

BOK Center progress



Mick made that apart of the lease agreement.

[Kerry]

No games are going to be played in Tulsa unless they are exhibition games. The NBA experimented with sharing franchises between cities a long time ago and it fail miserably. If there was even a doubt about OKC being able to support the NBA on its own then Stern would have never floated the idea. All we want from Tulsa is some season ticket holders and TV viewers. The closest BOK will ever get to a regular season NBA game is a simulcast on the jumbo-tron.

[SouthsideSooner]

No games are going to be played in Tulsa unless they are exhibition games. The NBA experimented with sharing franchises between cities a long time ago and it fail miserably. If there was even a doubt about OKC being able to support the NBA on its own then Stern would have never floated the idea. All we want from Tulsa is some season ticket holders and TV viewers. The closest BOK will ever get to a regular season NBA game is a simulcast on the jumbo-tron.

That's my understanding as well. I'm sure I read that the lease with the Ford Center specifies that all regular season and playoff games will be played in the Ford Center.

[BDP]

Why would they want to play any games in Tulsa? They will basically have a hand in what kind of improvements are made to the Ford Center and how they're made. They will have the option to practice there and all their season ticket holders will have seats there. Why would they want to give up all those advantages for a few games to maybe gain a few ticket holders In Tulsa? Tulsa is not that far and it's easy to move between the cities. It takes less time than some commutes in major markets across the country. They certainly won't sell any more season tickets by playing a game or two in Tulsa, as the people who are willing to buy season tickets and drive to OKC are going to buy them anyway.

I'm not saying that Tulsa won't play a part in the team's success, but the part it will play would only be marginally increased by playing there a couple of times and much of that would be offset by the revenue they'd lose by not playing those games in Oklahoma City, mainly because they will not have the cushy agreement and the increased value of more suites in OKC.

[sgt. pepper]

I heard on the Morning Animal: the lease agreement with the Supersonics calls for the team to be called Oklahoma City,

Yes Laramie, but what about all this talk abour Stern saying he wanted the team to be named "Oklahoma_____" to include all of Oklahoma? What are the people saying on the radio about that?

[SouthsideSooner]

Yes Laramie, but what about all this talk abour Stern saying he wanted the team to be named "Oklahoma_____" to include all of Oklahoma? What are the people saying on the radio about that?

It doesn't matter. Mayor Cornett has said the lease specifies that the team will be named the "Oklahoma City ______"

[Doug Loudenback]

The lease and related agreements are at Okc's website, here: City of Oklahoma City | Public Information & Marketing


I've not read, but have only skimmed over the pages of the principal agreement ... so far, I've found nothing relating to the team's name being anything in particular ... maybe it's there but I didn't see it on a quick skim.

About where games are played, a part of Article XX is shown below:



At first glance, this seems contradictory to the City Manager's summary which precedes the actual lease itself ...

Page 3
2. Scheduling.
..... a. City retains control of calendar of events at the Arena, except the Team has scheduling priority for all Home Games.
......b. Team to play at least one NBA Pre-Season, all Regular Season and all Post-Season Home Games during the Initial Term and any Renewal Terms at the Arena.

Perhaps a closer read will clarify the matter.

[soonerfever]

On the BOK Center website they have an exhibition games with Houston and Orlando in October. You guys are right, there is no way that Tulsa will get a regular season game from OKC. The first time this happens everybody will start saying, "See I told you OKC couldn't support a NBA team." Tulsa is a great place and BOK is going to be a very impressive arena but I don't think Bennett or Cornett will let them play a regular season game in Tulsa for a long time, if ever. Preseason, yes because it could help draw more ticket holders from Tulsa.

[BDP]

That looks like they can play in Tulsa, although I have no idea what the advantage would be and, imo, is a bad move on the city's part, considering how much the city will be putting into the arena.

[metro]

and losing in sales taxes the 2 nights the supposive team could potentially play in Tulsa. I say leave 1-2 pre-season games for Tulsa and maybe one for Wichita.

[Laramie]

Thanks Doug:

As I read it, they can play up to two games and be designated as home. Correct me if I wrong?

Tulsa and Wichita wouldn't be bad. Wichita's arena isn't ready; however, it would be better than playing in the Myriad which seats 14,005 for basketball or Lloyd Noble which seats under 12,000. That would be 17,000 plus seats in Tulsa if the Ford Center is overbooked.

Are we worried about Tulsa trying to take our team or half the dates?

NO!

Stern says there will never be a situation like the Kansas City-Omaha Kings where 10 of the 40 dates were played in Omaha's 10,500-seat Minicipal Auditorium.

With the uncertainty of when the team relocates to Oklahoma City, I think a game or two in Tulsa might be a viable option since many of the choice dates are being taken right now at the Ford Center. SMG is not holding any dates open in anticipation of the Sonics possible arrival for 2008-09.

Maybe in year two of the Sonic being in OKC--especially if they come next year, they will have first rights on booking dates at the Fabulous Ford Center.

SMG also manages the BOK Center in Tulsa, so using Tulsa as a back up wouldn't be a problem.

[BDP]

It's definitely a good back up plan and may actually be needed during renovations one time. I just think that the city should have told them they have to play every game in the city and then they could negotiate a couple of games elsewhere if needed. As it is now, they don't have to ask, they can just move them. But, honestly, I think it is written more from the standpoint of if the NBA wants a game in another country to promote the league or something like that. I doubt the team is looking to play games in another regional market on a regular basis.

[Doug Loudenback]

I've OCR'ed the PDF file containing the lease so that I could search better, and I've found no mention discussing the team's name in any way. I know that the Mayor was clear about about the name in his press conference, but I couldn't find it in the lease.

[sgt. pepper]

Too bad ther mayor is not in charge of naming the team.

[solitude]

Well, I have been the one here certain that we were on track for an "Oklahoma" branded team versus "Oklahoma City." However, if Clay Bennett actually said what this article says he said, then it's going to be "Oklahoma City." In that same thread, I ordered my #3 plate of Crow with cheese and, if true, I will more than happily eat it with a smile.

After Cornett saying all that's important to him about the name is that it say, "Oklahoma City.".....the important quote in that article, as far as I am concerned, is this:

Sonics chairman Clay Bennett agreed.

"Our view is that the team should be named Oklahoma City. But it will be an Oklahoma asset. It will be marketed statewide and we believe it will be supported statewide."

Bennett said there is no pressure on ownership group to make the team Oklahoma as opposed to OKlahoma City.

That's as cut and dried as Bennett has been on the subject. And as I said, I am more than happy to be wrong on this subject.

[mmonroe]

It's gonna be nothing but NETT... be it corNETT or benNETT... haha pun.

[kevinpate]

and yet there he is, mr. in charge of most things, and his statement is
"... the team SHOULD be named Oklahoma City."

However things do turn out, simply stated, should does not equal will.
me, i wish they'd get born fast and be doen with all the speculation

[Doug Loudenback]

Well, I have been the one here certain that we were on track for an "Oklahoma" branded team versus "Oklahoma City." However, if Clay Bennett actually said what this article says he said, then it's going to be "Oklahoma City." In that same thread, I ordered my #3 plate of Crow with cheese and, if true, I will more than happily eat it with a smile.

After Cornett saying all that's important to him about the name is that it say, "Oklahoma City.".....the important quote in that article, as far as I am concerned, is this:

Sonics chairman Clay Bennett agreed.

"Our view is that the team should be named Oklahoma City. But it will be an Oklahoma asset. It will be marketed statewide and we believe it will be supported statewide."

Bennett said there is no pressure on ownership group to make the team Oklahoma as opposed to OKlahoma City.

That's as cut and dried as Bennett has been on the subject. And as I said, I am more than happy to be wrong on this subject.

Excellent! Although the linked article is wrong when it says,

Stern brought up the idea that the team could be called just Oklahoma, because of the inclusion of Tulsa in the market size and the fact it would be considered a "state franchise."

... Stern didn't bring it up. It was brought up by an Oklahoma City reporter who queried Stern about the "state" or "city" element of the name and Stern merely responded to what the reporter had brought up. After a pregnant pause, he said that it would be best to leave the name issue to Oklahoma politics ... although his subsequent comments did lean to the "Oklahoma" name.

[the_Mont]

But what about the companies that will put down a ton of money for luxury suites? If the BOK Center has 30 less luxury suites, what happens to those 30 companies that put down deposits at the beginning of the year? I have a hard time believing they'll distribute tickets, then tell their employees or clients that they have to travel to Tulsa for the game. Somebody is going to be the odd man out, and that can only create a bad taste in some CEOs mouth...

[Blazerfan11]

This whole thing originated as one of that Doug Glover guys conspiracy theories.

[Doug Loudenback]

But what about the companies that will put down a ton of money for luxury suites? If the BOK Center has 30 less luxury suites, what happens to those 30 companies that put down deposits at the beginning of the year? I have a hard time believing they'll distribute tickets, then tell their employees or clients that they have to travel to Tulsa for the game. Somebody is going to be the odd man out, and that can only create a bad taste in some CEOs mouth...

I kinda understand, but, when it gets down to the bottom line, where was Tulsa when Okc funded and soley paid for the initial MAPS Ford Center ... did Tulsa help? Okc is funding and paying for the arena's expansion/improvement, not Tulsa. Okc established itself as a market with the Hornets, not Tulsa. What Tulsa leaders put their necks on the line to accomplish any of the above?

No disrespect at all, but the pioneering here has been altogether done by Okc, not Tulsa. And, as a stupid and small point, it is Okc that has been ridiculed over this venture, not Tulsa -- Tulsa is "clean" and out of and above the fray. Sure, I want all in the region (not only Oklahoma, including Tulsa, Lawton, Ada, Stillwater, wherever, but also southern Kansas ... Wichita particularly) ... to feel that that they are are part of this team ...

... but, that said, ... where is "Ft. Worth" name in "Dallas Mavericks" (no disrespect to Ft. Worth which I think is a very nice city).

[Doug Loudenback]

This whole thing originated as one of that Doug Glover guys conspiracy theories.

Puhleeese ... he's not "Doug," he's DAVID Glover!

[Blazerfan11]

Puhleeese ... he's not "Doug," he's DAVID Glover!

gotcha!!!!

[the_Mont]

I kinda understand, but, when it gets down to the bottom line, where was Tulsa when Okc funded and soley paid for the initial MAPS Ford Center ... did Tulsa help? Okc is funding and paying for the arena's expansion/improvement, not Tulsa. Okc established itself as a market with the Hornets, not Tulsa. What Tulsa leaders put their necks on the line to accomplish any of the above?

No disrespect at all, but the pioneering here has been altogether done by Okc, not Tulsa. And, as a stupid and small point, it is Okc that has been ridiculed over this venture, not Tulsa -- Tulsa is "clean" and out of and above the fray. Sure, I want all in the region (not only Oklahoma, including Tulsa, Lawton, Ada, Stillwater, wherever, but also southern Kansas ... Wichita particularly) ... to feel that that they are are part of this team ...

... but, that said, ... where is "Ft. Worth" name in "Dallas Mavericks" (no disrespect to Ft. Worth which I think is a very nice city).

I'm actually against playing games in Tulsa. No other team in the NBA does this, and I think it would seem minor league. Let them have some pre-season games.

[adaniel]

I'm actually against playing games in Tulsa. No other team in the NBA does this, and I think it would seem minor league. Let them have some pre-season games.

It seems the good folks in Tulsa are having this same argument....

TulsaNow Forum - Tulsa tax payers to fund Hornets

....And someone should tell them this fight is over the Sonics not Hornets.