The NBA in OKC Megathread

[HOT ROD]

NewsOK: Sonics given June trial date

Tue January 29, 2008
Sonics given June trial date
By Darnell Mayberry
Staff Writer

The court battle between the city of Seattle and the Sonics has been scheduled to go to trial in June, a halfway point between the parties’ preferences which was settled on by U.S. District Court Judge Marsha Pechman today.

Pechman set the trial date of June 16 during a 10 a.m. scheduling conference in a Washington court that brought together attorneys from both sides. Pechman also issued a trial calendar which contains every pertinent date and deadline leading up to the trial.

Attorneys for the Sonics had requested a March 24 trial date, the earliest possible date that likely would have concluded the case in time for the Sonics to relocate to Oklahoma City for the start of next season.

The city of Seattle’s legal team sought an Oct. 27 trial date in order to have more time to prepare and present its case. With the 2008-09 NBA season likely starting on or around Halloween, the Sonics would not have been allowed to move in time for next season.

It’s unclear how a June trial will impact a potential relocation by the Sonics, whose Oklahoma-based ownership group submitted relocation paperwork with the NBA in November to move to Oklahoma.

The NBA typically works on the league-wide schedule from the end of February through its announcement in August, so the league office would need to know where the Sonics will be based.

The NBA board of governors is also scheduled to vote on the move in April at league meetings in New York. But the city of Seattle, according to legal documents, has threatened to add the NBA to its current suit against the Sonics if a move is approved before the court case is determined.

[HOT ROD]

Doug, that is a very nice table.

I was trying to do some calculating and I thought I had come up with by April, the NBA should know if NOLA could meet the attendance.

My thinking was based on if they sold out all of last year, then what minimum would have to be met between Dec 1 and April for the Attendance Metric to still be met. I had calculated something like 10,500 avg would be necessary.

I think your table probably confirms my thinking, but you used the current avg to see how far into next year before they dont make it. I agree that end-of-year is reasonable based on the near 13,000 metric.

One thing's for sure, there is NO WAY they will be able to sell out all or even any of next year, so the metric will likely not be met. They will have more 8,000 games, (especially if the team takes on some IL).

I think the metric should have been set to the highest year that was in N.O. instead of the average though but I suppose they were trying to be somewhat fair to the market (and I think it would only have added 1000 or so anyways).

Nevertheless, like I said the NBA will know before the next relocation deadline whether the metric could be met and surely this bodes will for OKC.

I honestly don't think it is fair for the tickets that are given away to count. That just doesn't sound like 'paid attendance' to me but instead sounds like just what N.O. posters were accusing OKC of doing (you know, padding the books).

[HOT ROD]

Darnell's take.

Wed January 30, 2008
Sonics get June trial; enough time for OKC move?
By Darnell Mayberry
Staff Writer

The Seattle SuperSonics have a realistic chance of relocating to Oklahoma City next season thanks to a mid-June trial date scheduled Tuesday by U.S. District Court Judge Marsha Pechman in the court case between the team and the city of Seattle.

Pechman ordered a six-day trail to begin June 16 on Tuesday morning during a scheduling conference between the two parties in a Washington court. The date is a halfway point between the requested trial dates sought by the two sides.

At the heart of the legal dispute is the question of whether the Oklahoma-based ownership group of the Sonics should be allowed to buy out the remaining two years of their arena contact and leave Seattle or can only fulfill the use agreement by playing in KeyArena until 2010.

Sonics chairman Clay Bennett formally applied with the NBA in November to move the franchise to Oklahoma City for the 2008-09 season.

After Tuesday's ruling, that goal appears alive.

That wouldn't be the case if the city of Seattle's legal team was granted an Oct. 27 trial date as it requested, arguing for more time to prepare and present its case. With the 2008-09 NBA season likely starting on or around Halloween, and the NBA preseason beginning in early October, it would have been nearly impossible for the Sonics to move in time for next season.

Attorneys for the Sonics, on the other hand, had requested a March 24 trial date, which likely would have enabled the case's conclusion in time for the Sonics to relocate to Oklahoma City for the start of next season.

Pechman, however, scoffed at both the city of Seattle's request for such a distant start date and the Sonics' request to begin trial so soon despite the team's arguments of the timeliness involved in the NBA's scheduling process.

The NBA typically compiles the league-wide schedule from the end of February through its announcement in August, attempting to provide teams the most sensible road trips and back-to-back games according to location.

"We respect and appreciate the judge's decision,” said Sonics attorney Brad Keller in a statement. "We will be fully prepared to present our case on June 16.”

Seattle City Attorney Tom Carr was unavailable for comment Tuesday, but a spokeswoman for Carr referred to the June 16 trial date as a "compromise” that is satisfactory.

With the trial scheduled for completion June 22, Pechman could make an immediate ruling or take up to a few weeks to decide the outcome. Either way, a decision likely would be known sometime by July. Both sides, however, would have the opportunity to appeal the ruling, which would further delay the franchise's relocation plans.

The NBA board of governors is scheduled to vote on the move in April at league meetings in New York. Although the city of Seattle, according to legal documents, has threatened to add the NBA to its current suit against the Sonics if a move is approved before the court case is determined, the NBA will carry out the relocation process as outlined in its bylaws.

"The relocation committee will proceed with its deliberations and will make a recommendation to the Board of Governors when it meets in April,” said NBA spokesman Tim Frank. "If the board votes to approve the relocation, that approval will, of course, be subject to a legal determination that the team is free to relocate.”

If the Sonics receive a favorable ruling in July, and no appeals are made, that likely would leave the franchise enough time to relocate in time for next season. The NBA board of governors approved the relocation of the Memphis Grizzlies from Vancouver on July 3, 2001 for the Grizzlies to begin the 2001-02 season in Tennessee.

The New Orleans Hornets, the only other NBA franchise to relocate since 1985, received approval from the league on May 10, 2002 to move from Charlotte, N.C. and play the 2002-03 season in Louisiana

[Doug Loudenback]

I bet the Judge set it then in Seattle's favor. This case is clearly going to be biased as long as it's held in the Pac NW. Hopefully the BOG will approve the move in April anyways and it will be leverage for the trial in Bennett's favor.

Metro, I wouldn't make any such assumption. Federal judges are appointed for life and are generally more independent than locally elected judges might be inclined to be. I think that the trial decision has all appearances of being even handed and fair to both sides. Federal judges have less of a need to be "politically correct."

[Doug Loudenback]

Doug, that is a very nice table.

Thanks. I really did think, and do so more now than when I made my January 1 attendance guesses, that attendance will pick up:

My January 1 Guesses


Those guesses were made way before the current Hornets winning streak had developed and anticipated that Nola attendance would improve somewhat in the 2nd half of the current season, consistent with prior Nola 2nd half-of-season averages. As history has already proved, I guessed badly for the last 3 games ...

Game..........Guess......Actual PDA
Portland.....9,000......11,006
Clippers....11,000......13,538
Denver......10,000......15,601

The win v. San Antonio AT San Antonio should, probably did and will, have a significant effect on Nola attitudes and attendance. Nola still has a way to go to be able to mathematically meet the benchmark, but I wouldn't rule out that they would not actually come together as a community and do it. Tonight's game v. Golden State (on 1/1 I guessed only 9,000 but I now think that guess was much too low ... probably will be 11,000-12,000, maybe even more ...) may be an indicator whether or not Monday's game v. Denver was a fluke. My guess is that it was not a fluke. We shall see.

[CCOKC]

I really hope NOLA comes together for this team. I would love to see the Hornets come back here but I just want the people of NOLA to understand what a great thing they have in this team. As of right now they are tied for Phoenix for lead of the West. What a tremendous acheivement for a group with no true Superstar. I know CP2 is a superstar but the regular fans have not caught on yet or he may have been voted a starter on the West's All-Star team. He's on most expert's short list of MVP of the league so go figure.

[metro]

Metro, I wouldn't make any such assumption. Federal judges are appointed for life and are generally more independent than locally elected judges might be inclined to be. I think that the trial decision has all appearances of being even handed and fair to both sides. Federal judges have less of a need to be "politically correct."

I agree, but if you read most of the message boards in both Seattle and OKC, all seem to agree that they feel it will still be biased as long as it is held in the Pac NW. That's saying alot from Seattlites. The judges so far haven't exactly been neutral. This new one we don't know much about yet, but you're the attorney not me so for our sake, I hope you're right.

[betts]

Here's the most hopeful piece of information I've seen about her honor:

"Pechman claimed to be a neophyte when it comes to professional sports.

"I have almost no knowledge or no interest in professional sports, so if there is something I need to know, you ought to tell me," Pechman said.

Pechman later clarified her statement, saying it was intended to show she has no personal stake in pro sports locally, and the two sides need to explain to her why it is important."

It also sounds like she was chiding Seattle for asking for such a late court date, implying they were deliberately stalling. Of course she also told the Sonics' counsel it was unreasonable to expect a date as early as March.

[HOT ROD]

I ask, why is it so early for a March date?

didn't the city of Seattle drag the Sonics into lawsuit back in Sept 2007 originally? And didn't the feds take over in October 2007?

I think between then and March is plenty of time (6 months) to get all of the ducks in a row and have a speedy trial. So, in many respects - I think the June trial is biased in favor of the city since they've ALREADY been allowed to drag this thing on unnecessarily.

Also, if you consider their "list" of people they wish to question (mostly OKC people on the stand, with 'dispositions' to come from the Seattle folks). YES, the city wishes to call Clay Bennett, Aubrey McClendon, Howard Schultz, certain unidentified NBA officials, OKC Mayor Mick Cornett and this guy who was a member of the PBC from OKC but backed out.

So, they're essentially requiring four prominent OKC people to travel here to TESTIFY for Im not sure what or why. And yet they are letting Seattle people give a disposition.

I hope the Sonics get Mayor Nickels, deputy mayor Ceis, and the other Seattle people who the city wants to just sit COZY on the sidelines.

Oh, and the city wanted October when they already have the list of people they wish to question???? Like I said, this has been going on already for 4 months - I dont see why it can't or shouldn't go to trial in March like the Sonics wanted. It's fair. It's equitable.

But we know the reason for the June trial. And it is the SAME reason that despite the Sonics winning the case the team still probably won't move to OKC next season.

[Kerry]

It is pretty clear to me that the City of Seattle does not have any plans to keep the Sonics after 2010. All they are trying to do is delay the move. I wish our court system could see through this and sto[p the non-sense. Seattle wants to turn this trial into some kind of inquistion. Why would they want to call Schultz to the stand unless they were trying to nullify the purchase of the Sonics. If the judge allows any questioning outside of lease clauses related to early termination she will lose control of her court.

It is clear from the Seattle Times forum that most people don't even know what this case is about. It is not about Bennett making a good faith effort to keep the team in Seattle. It is about determining if the "specific performance" clause is valid if the team abandons Key Arena. I read the lease and as it is written, specific performance does not apply, period. The lease clearly states which parts of the lease are enforceable in the case of abandonment and the not only is the "specific performance" clasue left out, there is another line that says the City of Seattle as limited judicial relief. According to the letter of the contract all the Sonics would owe for leaving early is 2 years of rent.

[betts]

It is pretty clear to me that the City of Seattle does not have any plans to keep the Sonics after 2010. All they are trying to do is delay the move. I wish our court system could see through this and sto[p the non-sense. Seattle wants to turn this trial into some kind of inquistion. Why would they want to call Schultz to the stand unless they were trying to nullify the purchase of the Sonics. If the judge allows any questioning outside of lease clauses related to early termination she will lose control of her court.

It is clear from the Seattle Times forum that most people don't even know what this case is about. It is not about Bennett making a good faith effort to keep the team in Seattle. It is about determining if the "specific performance" clause is valid if the team abandons Key Arena. I read the lease and as it is written, specific performance does not apply, period. The lease clearly states which parts of the lease are enforceable in the case of abandonment and the not only is the "specific performance" clasue left out, there is another line that says the City of Seattle as limited judicial relief. According to the letter of the contract all the Sonics would owe for leaving early is 2 years of rent.

I was wondering the same thing, Kerry. Why would it matter what the intentions of the owners were if this lawsuit is about the lease? Wouldn't they need to file a separate lawsuit, completely unrelated to lease issues, if they wanted to argue that Bennett and McClendon, etc, had not made a "good faith effort" to get a venue built? And wouldn't that be a civil case? Actually, if they want to complain about good faith efforts, they'd better make their case to David Stern and stay out of court.

[Doug Loudenback]

Here's the most hopeful piece of information I've seen about her honor:

"Pechman claimed to be a neophyte when it comes to professional sports.

"I have almost no knowledge or no interest in professional sports, so if there is something I need to know, you ought to tell me," Pechman said.

Pechman later clarified her statement, saying it was intended to show she has no personal stake in pro sports locally, and the two sides need to explain to her why it is important."

It also sounds like she was chiding Seattle for asking for such a late court date, implying they were deliberately stalling. Of course she also told the Sonics' counsel it was unreasonable to expect a date as early as March.

I think that she was correct on both counts.

Hot Rod, you queried,

I ask, why is it so early for a March date?

didn't the city of Seattle drag the Sonics into lawsuit back in Sept 2007 originally? And didn't the feds take over in October 2007?

I can't speak about Seattle/Washington courts, but to get a 6 day trial date that (either March OR June) quickly would be quite an accomplishment here. Courts have existing trial dockets that are booked well in advance. For example, in the work that I do (divorce, etc.), were I getting a trial date TODAY for an upcoming trial that would last only one day, to get a "1st up" setting on the typical Ok County divorce judge trial docket, we'd be looking at this summer sometime, at the earliest, and quite possibly later than that.

[HOT ROD]

I agree Doug.

At the time I wrote that, I was not aware of the 6 day trial.

I think this actually is a benefit for the Sonics and OKC moreso than Seattle, who could ONLY win with a long, drawn-out trial of dispositions and people testifying on the stand. And, certainly having a judge rendered decision ALSO plays into OKC's favor.

The ONLY reason why Bennett could lose is if 1) he forgets to remind the city that they were the ones who said the Sonics were no value to SEATTLE (and not the other way around - sort of putting their own foot in their mouths) or 2) Bennett fails to argue that the lease required a NEW SEATTLE CENTER ARENA and that this ownership group has NEVER accepted Key Arena as fulfillment nor is there any written record or otherwise legal documentation indicating acceptance from prior ownership or that which should preclude current ownership into acceptance.

Just saying, hey - you're here doesn't mean squat as far as acceptance. The sonics could argue that there were no other alternatives until now - with OKC.

but, it could all go down to the impartiality of the judge; which I see holds in OKC's favor as well because she is not a sports fan (and being a federal judge, doesn't have to worry about political ramifications should she run not in the city's favor).

I totally agree, the trial date bodes in OKC's favor because it is 'speedy.' I also agree that the trial duration bodes in OKC's favor because it also is 'speedy' and doesn't drag on (which would favor Seattle). I think the way the lease is written favors Bennett because one should argue whether the terms were EVER satisfied and agreed upon. I also think the FISHING EXPEDITION the Seattle Attorneys are trying with getting dispositions and/or testimonials from EVERY HIGH RANKING OFFICIAL IN OKC AND THE NBA is going to backfire in Seattle's face because it will show a community in OKC who values the NBA and is willing to do what it takes to secure a team (in a legal, legit, and ethical manner) wheras it will show Seattle as the EXACT opposite based on their inaction and past comments/behaviour.

It was the City Leaders (and state) themselves who SOLD OUT Seattle fans! Now, they are trying to use APATHY and Diception to sway public opinion and try to get people to side with their save of face.

Good Luck SEATTLE, but it should result in OKC getting the Sonics in 2008 or the Hornets in 2009.

[HOT ROD]

Guys, you have to check this out from the Seattle Weekly.

News: Major League IV: Scripting the Sonics Movie (Seattle Weekly)

Watch the U-Tube film, it is tooooo funny!

[jbrown84]

The video no longer works. I got bored with the silly article on page 2.

[betts]

Here is the latest legal skirmish in the Sonic Wars. I simply do not understand why the "intentions" of the owners have any validity in this lawsuit. It would seem to me that the lease is either ironclad or it isn't, and whether the Sonics owners want to stay in Seattle or not is immaterial. I'm not a lawyer, though, so perhaps I am missing something.

Sonics in e-mail skirmish
Team says city's access requests excessive, illegal
By GREG JOHNS
P-I REPORTER

While the trial between Sonics owners and the city of Seattle won't start for four months, legal skirmishing between both parties is well underway. Lawyers for the Sonics filed a Rule 37 objection this week to the city's request for access to e-mail files of eight members of the Professional Basketball Club, LLC ownership group, with the city countering with an extensive explanation of why it would like to see communications among owners both before and after the team's purchase.

The Sonics have agreed to provide access to pertinent e-mails belonging to team chairman Clay Bennett and minority owner Aubrey McClendon, but contend that providing the "responsive e-mail" files of six other requested owners would be unnecessary and perhaps even illegal, given the co-owners work at various private companies and use those firms' own e-mail systems.

The NBA has also objected to the city's subpoena of some of its records in the discovery process currently underway.A 34-page document filed to Judge Marsha Pechman's court this week outlines the e-mail war, as well as providing insight into the root of the city's lawsuit seeking to bind the basketball team to its KeyArena lease through the 2009-10 season.

A magistrate, or independent judge, will likely settle the e-mail dispute so the discovery process can continue and depositions begin with the questioning of key figures in the case. While the battle over the scope of e-mail access delves into minutia of legal precedents, the big picture lays out some of the key components that figure to play out in the trial, scheduled to begin June 16 in U.S. District Court and expected to last about six days.

The city clearly intends to attack McLendon's published statement that the ownership group purchased the team in July of 2006 with the intent of moving it to Oklahoma City. Thus the city's lawyers are looking for e-mail discussions between fellow owners prior to the purchase date, as well as subsequent exchanges, that might shed further light on that topic. Bennett has said McClendon was speaking solely for himself, while the city would like to see if there is e-mail proof that other owners also discussed the matter.

The Sonics' lawyers are already responding to that issue by labeling it the "supposed Secret Plan" in this week's documents. "The sole basis for the theory is a press report of a remark made by Mr. McClendon," the Sonics state. "Despite urging the Secret Plan to the media, in pleadings and (to) anyone who will listen, the City has never squared its theory with the fact that the PBC spent millions of dollars and months of effort trying to structure an economically viable arrangement to keep the Sonics in the greater Seattle area."

Lawyers for the city are also searching for documents concerning the KeyArena lease, details of the purchase, financial performance of the team, pursuit of other arena options and whether good faith efforts were indeed made to keep the franchise in Seattle. This week's documents contain precise information on the ownership structure of the Oklahoma group, with Bennett, McClendon and Tom Ward each owning 19.23 percent of the club, with numerous other owners holding significantly smaller shares.

The club's lawyers argue that providing access to some 150,000 responsive e-mails belonging to Bennett and McClendon will cover any communications among the entire ownership group. The e-mails will be filtered through a search containing pertinent words such as "Sonics" and "basketball" in order to obtain relevant documents.

The PBC lawyers say Bennett and McClendon both use systems that trap all e-mail, even when deleted off the desktop, so that no documents will have been eliminated.

Sonics lawyers contend that some of the other owners might have exchanged e-mails either between themselves or with third parties that weren't sent to Bennett and McClendon and that such searches wouldn't be any more burdensome than those already being conducted on the archives of Bennett and McClendon.

The Sonics already have obtained city e-mail documents, as those are available via a public records request for a government agency.

[Kerry]

Betts - I must be missing something also. I just do see how the intentions of the owners can have impact on wheather or not the lease can be broken. It is not a secret the ownersip team wants to move the team to OKC. For crying out loud, it is in the PBC mission statement to bring an NBA team OKC. How can that be a secret plan? Just why do the lawers think they are trying to break the lease? So they can stay in Seattle.

The only thing I can think of they are going to try and contest the sale of the team in the first place. However, I don't see that going anywhere since trying to keep the team in Seattle was not even part of the purchase agreement. This just tells me that Seattle doesn't have a case and are searching for anything.

No money, no arena, no plan. That pretty much sums up Seattle for me. I am more optimistic than ever that the Sonics will be in OKC next year.

[jbrown84]

What confuses me most is why Seattle is dragging this out through the legal system. What's the point of making them stay through the end of the lease? After all this, they are certainly not going to want to stay beyond that, the way they've been treated by the city government. Why not settle, get your money as penalties for breaking the lease, and move on? It's nothing but vindictiveness.

[betts]

What confuses me most is why Seattle is dragging this out through the legal system. What's the point of making them stay through the end of the lease? After all this, they are certainly not going to want to stay beyond that, the way they've been treated by the city government. Why not settle, get your money as penalties for breaking the lease, and move on? It's nothing but vindictiveness.

It is vindictiveness, but the Seattle City Council voted to hold the Sonics to their lease, and so I would suppose the city's hands are tied. And, of course, they're feeling vindictive anyway.

The reason I think the March 4th vote is so important, besides the fact that we've been told we won't get an NBA team if we don't pass the proposal, is because if the Board of Governors votes in April to allow Clay Bennett to move the team when he is free of the lease, they have effectively made the Sonics a lame duck team in Seattle. The owners can then go to the city of Seattle and say, "We're leaving. It can be this year and we'll pay you money to allow us to leave, or it will be in 2010, and we can both lose a lot of money for two years." If the city of Seattle knows it's losing the Sonics regardless, they might be more willing to deal. Then, David Stern can work his magic, and tell Seattle that they'll be first in line for a team that wants to move if they let the Sonics leave nicely and they either upgrade or build a new arena, or they can be pariahs as far as the NBA is concerned. (The last is speculation.....I have no idea if David Stern would do something like that, but I wouldn't be shocked if he did. It does him no good to have a lame duck team sitting in Seattle, with miserable owners and no fans.)

[Kerry]

Stern has already gone on record as saying the NBA will NEVER return to Seattle if the Soncis leave.

[MikeLucky]

What confuses me most is why Seattle is dragging this out through the legal system. What's the point of making them stay through the end of the lease? After all this, they are certainly not going to want to stay beyond that, the way they've been treated by the city government. Why not settle, get your money as penalties for breaking the lease, and move on? It's nothing but vindictiveness.

The people of Seattle are under the impression that if the team is forced to stay until the end of the lease, somehow they will come up with an arena deal by then..... it's a bit of a stretch if you ask me but they certainly seem to assume that's it's just going to work out because they are just that special.....


I think this is spot on:

The reason I think the March 4th vote is so important, besides the fact that we've been told we won't get an NBA team if we don't pass the proposal, is because if the Board of Governors votes in April to allow Clay Bennett to move the team when he is free of the lease, they have effectively made the Sonics a lame duck team in Seattle. The owners can then go to the city of Seattle and say, "We're leaving. It can be this year and we'll pay you money to allow us to leave, or it will be in 2010, and we can both lose a lot of money for two years." If the city of Seattle knows it's losing the Sonics regardless, they might be more willing to deal.

The problem for Seattle is if the BOG approves the move and declares it can happen as soon as the litigation is complete, or the lease ends naturally, whichever occurs first..... then it won't matter what they think they can come up with, the decision will already be made...... I know the Sonics fans in Seattle think that the BOG will DEFINITELY vote against the move, but I think that's a not so safe assumption..... but what do I know....

[Kerry]

If OKC passes the Ford Center improvements then I guarentee the NBA BofG will approve the relocation. How do I know this? You have to look at what will happen to the NBA if they don't approve relocation. If OKC approves the sales tax in March, and the NBA doesn't allow relocation (or puts off the vote) then that will leave Seattle in the drivers seat. Seattle will be holding all of the cards because they will believe that the NBA needs Seattle far more than Seattle needs the NBA, and if the NBA blocks the move Seattle might be right. Once other cities see Seattle in the drivers seat the NBA BofG will forever be relegated to the back seat. For that reason the NBA will approve the move.

[betts]

If OKC passes the Ford Center improvements then I guarentee the NBA BofG will approve the relocation. How do I know this? You have to look at what will happen to the NBA if they don't approve relocation. If OKC approves the sales tax in March, and the NBA doesn't allow relocation (or puts off the vote) then that will leave Seattle in the drivers seat. Seattle will be holding all of the cards because they will believe that the NBA needs Seattle far more than Seattle needs the NBA, and if the NBA blocks the move Seattle might be right. Once other cities see Seattle in the drivers seat the NBA BofG will forever be relegated to the back seat. For that reason the NBA will approve the move.

I'm not sure I could guarantee approval, but I feel pretty certain they will, for the reasons you outline, Kerry.

However, I don't believe David Stern when he said if the Sonics leave Seattle, the NBA will never go back. First of all, one should never say never. Second of all, having a team in Seattle is actually good for the NBA. And third of all, I think it was bluster, and if he can back down a bit and gain concessions, he will do so. David Stern, from what I can tell, does like to do precisely what he says he will do, but he has backed away from statements on occasion.

[betts]

Here's an op/ed from Josh Fields in the DOK:

Sat February 16, 2008
A unique opportunity awaits

By Josh Fields

As a native Oklahoman, I built the foundation of my professional sports career in the Sooner State. I had the privilege of playing baseball and football for Oklahoma State University, and I can honestly say that the passion and support of Oklahoma sports fans rivals that of anywhere else in the country. My love for my home state is what brings me back here to live in the off-season, and my belief in the opportunities that lie ahead are what will keep me coming back in the future. Oklahoma City's ability to attract a major professional sports team is one of these opportunities.

Growing up in this state, I dreamed of becoming a pro athlete. I dreamed of playing in the biggest cities, in front of the biggest crowds. Through much hard work and commitment, I have been fortunate enough to realize my dreams, and today I play for the Chicago White Sox. Now Oklahoma City could join the likes of Chicago, New York City and Los Angeles as a big league city. But it's not going to happen without your commitment, which is why I urge you to vote yes on March 4.

I believe that improving the Ford Center and attracting an NBA team will be a tremendous asset, not just for Oklahoma City, but the entire state. By raising the profile of Oklahoma City, a pro team also raises the profile of our state. And it would give all of Oklahoma's passionate fans an exciting franchise to rally behind. It's time for Oklahoma City to get called up to the big leagues. We have a unique opportunity in front of us that we cannot let pass by. I urge you to support this proposal and vote yes on March 4.

Fields plays third base for the Chicago White Sox.

[Doug Loudenback]

Very cool, Josh Fields! Thanks for remembering your home!