Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do the math. Find all the TV markets that full under each team's designated territory, multiply the # of viewers per game by the number of local television broadcasts, do this for each year since OKC stole away Seattle's NBA team, add together the TV market #s, and sort. I have a business to run, so one of you in the OKC trailer park cheer squad can crunch the numbers to try defend David "Sterling" Stern's pathetic minor league market strategy for the NBA. The Seattle area is larger than OKC, Memphis, and New Orleans combined!
Again, TOTAL VIEWERS. Not just TV ratings. 99 of 100 people in Cowpie, Wisconsin could be watching the tractor pull on the Farm Channel delivering a whopping 99% rating, but in the end that is only 99 people.
Do the math. Find all the TV markets that full under each team's designated territory, multiply the # of viewers per game by the number of local television broadcasts, do this for each year since OKC stole away Seattle's NBA team, add together the TV market #s, and sort. I have a business to run, so one of you in the OKC trailer park cheer squad can crunch the numbers to try defend David "Sterling" Stern's pathetic minor league market strategy for the NBA. The Seattle area is larger than OKC, Memphis, and New Orleans combined!
Again, TOTAL VIEWERS. Not just TV ratings. 99 of 100 people in Cowpie, Wisconsin could be watching the tractor pull on the Farm Channel delivering a whopping 99% rating, but in the end that is only 99 people.
Translation:
"I have no clue, so like most of the "facts" I've posted throughout this discussion that have been discredited via actual data and figures, I made this one up as well."
"I have no clue, so like most of the "facts" I've posted throughout this discussion that have been discredited via actual data and figures, I made this one up as well."
The #s are widely available. Just extremely time consuming to crunch.
When do you care about facts? You have been full of misinformation in this thread from the start when you claimed Seattle had weak fan support, lost a bunch of their teams, and that the 2nd most decorated college football program west of the continental divide is "terrible."
There isn't an NBA team placed in Seattle yet the league backed OK City, which has the #1 fan viewing support in the entire NBA, proving they were correct in doing so. Unless you think the league isn't driven by MONEY or there's a CONSPIRICY against the city of Seattle, this means that they have determined it's better to have a squad in OKC than Seattle; if the "fan support" were so great, teams wouldn't constantly move away, because these are FINANCIAL decisions by people who know a hell of a lot more about business than some guy in charge of a mall kiosk.
And your contention that you don't have time for a link is laughable in the extreme, considering the huge amount of false prose you've thrown down on this message board. It was a rhetorical question, anyway - what I was saying is when you make a statement that can easily be backed by looking up a report online, do so; you don't, because you just make it up as you go along, leaving other people to do the dirty work of proving you wrong (which they have done).
The lack of support for your "postition" on this thread really says it all....
There isn't an NBA team placed in Seattle yet the league backed OK City, which has the #1 fan viewing support in the entire NBA, proving they were correct in doing so.
OKC STOLE away Seattle's NBA team. The NBA let them get away with it because other greedy owners want the same power.
Mark Cuban, Peter Holt, Paul Allen, and other intelligent NBA owners are still upset that the NBA allowed a podunk trailerpark to steal away a very popular team from a very lucrative and growing market. Not only is Seattle over three times bigger than OKC, it is also richer and home to mega corporations.
The team could get a TV rating two thirds lower than OKC in Seattle, and still HAVE WAY MORE VIEWERS!
Quote:
Unless you think the league isn't driven by MONEY
The move wasn't driven by money. The pathetic, irrelevant, small you-know-what city of Oklahoma City stole away Seattle's NBA team so they could feel more important and relevant than they really are. The team would be worth significantly more in Seattle. It is why a group of Seattle area partners have bid over a half billion dollars for the Kings and Bucks.
Quote:
if the "fan support" were so great, teams wouldn't constantly move away,
The Sonics had great fan support. Only fell below 90% tickets sold twice at Key Arena: the lockout year and the last year when the team was gone for sure. The Sonics led the NBA in total attendance multiple times. Have the Thunder ever done it? Have the Bucks? The Sonics were also the first NBA team to average over 20,000 fans a game over an entire season.
Again, the team was stolen away because OKC is an irrelevant dump & desperately wanted something to make it feel less pathetic.
I ordinarily wouldn't chime in on this Troll v. Troll but I feel that I would like to agree and then point out something that hasn't been stated.
OKC has a long, long history of stealing things that aren't there's and then claiming they had the right to them all along. The territorial Capitol of Oklahoma was in Guthrie, OK and never in OKC. When Oklahoma became a state, it was still the Capitol when a bunch of cattlemen in OKC wanted the Capitol to be placed there. Because OKC had the votes, they won a referendum in 1910 to move the Capitol. There was little the town residents could do and the town shrunk to the 10,000 people it has today. Now, OKC acts like it always has been the Capitol and most important city in the state for all it's history when for a very long time, other cities like Tulsa and Guthrie very arguably were. Why should you expect a bunch of snakes to act not like snakes?
Now for a new argument. Prior to the Thunder, Oklahoma had never been much of a fan base of either the NBA or NHL. The NBA moving to Oklahoma opened up 3.8 million person market that has never cared 2 cents before. Seattle, Vancouver BC, and Portland all had teams in the area, at one time. Vancouver lost out, in hockey mad Canada, to Memphis which may yet again be relocated soon. Howard Schultz bought the team in 2002 and was rejected by numerous people as nieve thinking that the Sonics were a business, rather than a plaything. Feeling unwelcome and getting a top dollar offer from OKC after being spurned by Seattle, he took the deal. Seattle, getting lumped into being called a "bad market" like Vancouver, was allowed to lose their team to an area that was virgin territory for pro franchises. The arena is not nearly as nice as Key Arena and lacks the number of corporate boxes to make the team finances work.
The only reason Cuban is mad is because he could legitimately have called OKC in his territory and lost a small fan base because of it. Not certain why Holt is mad. Allen is mad because he would have rather traded his Portland club for Seattle as Portland isn't nearly as profitable.
What about Vegas, Austin, Honolulu, Norfolk/Virginia Beach?
Quote:
Originally Posted by IShootNikon
Vegas would be the only one. The others aren't
Vegas is sort of unique as a major tourist destination. Also, the metro area has gone from like about 850,000 in 1990(like the size of the Omaha or Bakersfield metros today) to above 2 million today--that's a very high growth rate that's very recent.
Is Vegas itself a major city? Sort of, but really the whole area and only because of tourism. The Las Vegas Strip and the airport and UNLV are all in Paradise, a piece of unincorporated Clark County. The City of Las Vegas itself, barely has much to offer overall outside the downtown core. I'll wager that eventually--maybe in the next 10 years, Vegas will land some sort of pro franchise(gambling isn't as big a deal or as touchy a subject as it used to be since there's casinos all over the US at this point).
Vegas doesn't have a pro sports team because of gambling. It has nothing to do with the size, demographics, or any other market make-up of the city.
In some ways yes gambling would've made any potential Vegas team controversial, but the Vegas metro was fairly small until recently, so they wouldn't have even been considered a viable candidate for a team until the last 10 years.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
OKC is the devil 
