IBC

I really don't want to say, "I told you so," - eh, fuck it, I do - told you so...

I'm thinking about my last post - and realize that I'm not too thrilled by it...

I hope people do understand that when it comes to the sports business world, especially in the NBA, I do know people who know what's going on. The whole thread kind of felt like an attack on me actually knowing what I was talking about - when it comes to the player side of the sports world, I often times do not know what I'm talking about. When it comes to the business side of the house, I'm pretty in-tune. After the BOG vote, there wasn't a chance in hell the move wasn't happening - for all the reasons I mentioned.

This isn't a good day for basketball - all the financial indicators show Seattle to be a better market then OKC. Who knows how long OKC can support a team once the initial fun wears off - but for the next 5 years it is a market that would support a team better than Seattle was. And, as always, the bottom line is the most important one.

Apologies for coming off insensitive - losing Seattle isn't something I'm happy about.

Definitely an insightful post, I think that what got you in trouble earlier in the thread was giving the impression that you saw the move to OKC as a good thing for the league. All in all it's a damn shame. Vindictively I hope OKC falls flat on its face and Clay Bennett loses a shitload of money, but everyone knows he'll come out of it OK.

Alright, what do you think the OKC team should be named since it can't be the Sonics? If you're going with something related to Oklahoma you can go with something Indian related that's not intolerant, or you could go with something like Roughnecks in homage to the oil industry. Or like most things NBA, go with something that makes no sense and have them be the Salamanders or something stupid like that

My bigger question is will the Oklahoma City team somehow manage to be less relevant than the Charlotte Bobcats. Do you realize that this team is run by MJ and coached by Larry Brown and still no one cares? They should engineer a swap where they become the Hornets, since the fans got attached there anyway, New Orleans can become the Jazz, and Utah can become something else.

When you say it is run by Jordan, do you mean that Jordan is paid by the team, they get to throw his name around and he doesn't do shit?

Based on the seeming incompetence and lack of direction of the front office moves recently I would argue that they probably are letting him do some things.

FUCK STERN AND FUCK THE N.B.A.! -Sonics Fan

I'm very proud that I did not watch a single minute of the finals, and that is after "calling" the Celts in preseason to BZ in a chat after they got KG and the bum Ray Allen.

I really don't want to get into this again - but this was not Stern and/or the NBA's fault. There isn't any logic behind that statement.

Here's the Stupidity Timeline:
1. Howard Schulz (guy vomiting money on the team) agrees to sell to Clay Bennett (guy who clearly wants to move to OKC).
2. Owners (not the NBA, the owners) ratify the sale.
3. Clay Bennett makes good faith (only by its loosest definition) gesture for new arena.
4. City of Seattle shoots it down (surprising absolutely no one).
5. Clay Bennett (surprising absolutely no one, cuz he's an asshole) says team can't make money w/ stadium, I tried for new stadium, team can't work in Seattle.
6. Owners (not the NBA, the owners) ratify move to OKC.
7. He files to get out of lease.
8. City, Schulz, and like 7 zillion other people file suit against Bennett. People of Seattle are duped into thinking that they have a chance to keep the team, when, in fact, there's not a snowball's chance in hell.
9. Bennett's lawyers abuse Seattle's. Seattle takes beating like a man, agrees on settlement.

Post-Script: Once the owners agree to do something, Stern literally can't do anything but support their decision. They owners own basketball - not Stern. He's the CEO to their Board of Directors. He can do things - but if the BOD says they want to do something, he f'ing does it with a smile. The situation in Seattle was horrible - but the facts were that, without a new stadium, and with escalating costs and salaries, the team was doomed to hemmorhage money.

With a proper stadium, basketball in Seattle can definitely work. It's a huge market, and one the NBA should be in. Unfortunately Seattle got nailed with a double whammy. The team was sold to an owner from OKC, and OKC has proven that, in the near-term, they can support a team better than Seattle. My opinion? In 5 years people will start to question the relevance of OKC as a market - and wish we were back in Seattle. But as long as owners own the team's, wishing is pretty much all we can do.

Hey Brett - FUCK YOU! No, I'm kidding buddy, but really, coming from you means 100% absolutely nothing, it might as well be coming from the front office.

You can say anything you want, bottom line - FUCK STERN AND FUCK THE N.B.A.!

P.S. I will keep saying it, and keep saying what a lame product the NBA is as long as I live.

I didn't think it was possible to come up a lamer name than Thunder for a professional basketball team, but check out the other names they filed for:

Barons, Bison, Energy, Marshalls, Thunder and Wind.

First of all, you can't call a team the Barons while Baron Davis is still playing unless he's actually on the team (like when the Cleveland Spiders became the Naps in honor of Napolean Lajoie). Second of all, Marshalls is spelled incorrectly, a law enforcement type spells it Marshal (maybe they are naming the team after Thurgood Marshall?), Then we have the Wind? The fast break of the Wind jokes are just too easy to make. Energy isn't even a WNBA name, Energy is what you would name a girls 10U softball team. Finally we have Thunder, which is a WNBA name and is also already the name of the Warriors mascot. Bison is the best of the bunch, but really they all suck balls.

Athletics wrote:I didn't think it was possible to come up a lamer name than Thunder for a professional basketball team, but check out the other names they filed for:

Barons, Bison, Energy, Marshalls, Thunder and Wind.

First of all, you can't call a team the Barons while Baron Davis is still playing unless he's actually on the team (like when the Cleveland Spiders became the Naps in honor of Napolean Lajoie). Second of all, Marshalls is spelled incorrectly, a law enforcement type spells it Marshal (maybe they are naming the team after Thurgood Marshall?), Then we have the Wind? The fast break of the Wind jokes are just too easy to make. Energy isn't even a WNBA name, Energy is what you would name a girls 10U softball team. Finally we have Thunder, which is a WNBA name and is also already the name of the Warriors mascot. Bison is the best of the bunch, but really they all suck balls.

Oklahoma City, in general, sucks. So it makes perfect sense that the team name options would also suck. However, I am surprised they didn't try for the name Bombers

OK Wind.

Love it.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3560276

Well, that should pretty much tie up any loose ends.

That's really a shame, mostly because I was really curious how it was gonna turn out, it was an interesting legal question.