Kohl/Arena Discussion Page 71 - Study Released

Thunder Muscle · Post #841 » by **Thunder Muscle** » Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:05 pm

I know I've thrown Louisville out there many times, and others have to. The only reason I would say that Louisville may not get a team is its such a huge college basketball market that I think the NBA team would be secondary, somewhat like the Charlotte Bobcats in Carolina. In Louisville you have tons of Cardinals, UK Wildcats, and Indiana Hoosier fans. And on the Indiana side, I'm guessing the Pacers are popular. But college basketball is going to be #1 there no matter what imo.

Thunder Muscle · Post #842 » by **Thunder Muscle** » Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:05 pm

I know I've thrown Louisville out there many times, and others have too. The only reason I would say that Louisville may not get a team is its such a huge college basketball market that I think the NBA team would be secondary, somewhat like the Charlotte Bobcats in Carolina. In Louisville you have tons of Cardinals, UK Wildcats, and Indiana Hoosier fans. And on the Indiana side, I'm guessing the Pacers are popular. But college basketball is going to be #1 there no matter what imo.

A Diddy2231 · Post #843 » by **A Diddy2231** » Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:07 pm

N8Frog wrote:I know I've thrown Louisville out there many times, and others have to. The only reason I would say that Louisville may not get a team is its such a huge college basketball market that I think the NBA team would be secondary, somewhat like the Charlotte Bobcats in Carolina. In Louisville you have tons of Cardinals, UK Wildcats, and Indiana Hoosier fans. And on the Indiana side, I'm guessing the Pacers are popular. But college basketball is going to be #1 there no matter what imo.

You can say that again

Thunder Muscle · Post #844 » by **Thunder Muscle** » Sun Feb 3, 2013 4:46 pm

Michael Hunt in the Marquette Blog today on MJS Online. Talks about Milwaukee taking a cue from Louisville.

Louisville - Just outside my hotel window is the KFC Yum! Center, home of the Louisville Cardinals. In a few hours, No. 25 Marquette will play No. 12 Louisville there.

Forget the silly name insisted upon by its naming-rights sponsor. I've been to every NBA arena except two and this place seems to eclipse them all. And the thng of it is, Louisville doesn't have an NBA franchise. That could change. I'm not sure if Rick Pitino would ever want to share the spotlight as long as he's here - yeah, when's he gonna retire? - but Forbes magazine recently put Louisville at the top of the list of cities that should get the next relocated or expansion NBA team.

The building is the reason.It looks like two Bradley Centers could fit inside the thing. It connects downtown and the riverfront with hotels, shops, parking decks and restaurants along the riverfront. It seats 22,000 for basketball, has all the extra space the BC doesn't and was built three years ago for $232 million.

As Louisville is the primary tenant in this multipurpose arena - the marquee shows the The Who dragging their bones here for a Quadrophenia tour here later - I'm certain no college team in the country has a nicer place to play.

Milwaukee is trying to figure out how to provide a better home for the Bucks and Marquette about the time the Bucks' lease expires in six years. I'm pretty sure city leaders have been here to check out this place. If there were a model for how to bring new life to a downtown while providing a first-class arena for two major tenants, this would be the model.

trwi7 · Post #845 » by **trwi7** » Sun Feb 3, 2013 5:02 pm

N8Frog wrote: the marquee shows the The Who dragging their bones here for a Quadrophenia tour here later - I'm certain no college team in the country has a nicer place to play.

They may be old but The Who still kick ass.

Here's the fact sheet.

http://www.arenaauthority.com/docs/Yum% ... 202010.pdf

VooDoo7 · Post #846 » by **VooDoo7** » Sun Feb 3, 2013 5:25 pm

KFC Yum! Center? What a horrible name for an arena. Tho I suppose I wouldn't care if ours was called the Turd Fieldhouse, as long as we got a new home.

Post #847 » by **paulpressey25** » Sun Feb 3, 2013 7:34 pm

I think Louisville might have been a more serious threat ten years ago. But as the growth in the sunbelt states has continued to accelerate, I'm not sure Louisville brings enough to the table for the NBA or another team to make a move. Louisville is just a small market without a whole lot else around it.

I'd put these cities on the concern list as it relates to the Bucks moving down the road. (Not looking at a map to see if I've missed a city or two)

The main competition
1. Seattle (hopefully Sacramento takes care of this

2. Las Vegas (their growth took a big hit in the recession the past four years. If that growth resumes, they'll be a logical candidate)

3. Kansas City (They have a lot more going for them as it relates to market size and scope than Louisville, plus they too already have the new arena)

The second tier

4. Austin, Texas (They just keep growing. Hi-tech wealth will also provide plenty of potential owners willing to pay some major money)

5. Tampa-St. Pete (Orlando is only 90 minutes away and will fight this, but the west coast will resume growth as the economy improves)

6. Anaheim (LA is just a massive market. So even though the fans for an Anaheim team will be transient dingbats who will buy foam #1 fingers, there are millions for an Anaheim team to draw from and draw TV viewers.)

Longer shots
7. Louisville (arena ready)

8. Birmingham (Haven't heard them ever linked to an NBA team but they could support a pro club ala OKC as a one-sport town. Plenty of newer money there)

WEFFPIM · Post #848 » by **WEFFPIM** » Sun Feb 3, 2013 9:07 pm

That is one strange second tier. What does Austin bring to the table that Louisville doesn't aside from less of a basketball fanbase?

Post #849 » by **paulpressey25** » Sun Feb 3, 2013 9:16 pm

WEFFPIM wrote:That is one strange second tier. What does Austin bring to the table that Louisville doesn't aside from less of a basketball fanbase?

Austin has for years been one of the fastest growing metro areas in the country. Add in all sorts of new major millionaire types from Silicon Valley that have been relocating and the fact their closest pro sports teams are all two-four hour drives away. They've got the corporate base down there for major sponsorships and potential owners that a lot of other places don't have.

A some point a rich shooter down there is going to get tired of Dallas/SA/Houston having the pro teams and he'll put up some big cash.

trwi7 · Post #850 » by **trwi7** » Mon Feb 4, 2013 1:41 pm

Donovan proposes a new arena while keeping the Bradley Center to play second fiddle (bad idea) while tearing down the Cell for a new convention hotel or expanding the convention center (good idea).

Of course they had to get Gimbel's opinion. Why, I don't know. Everybody knew what he was going to say about it before he said it.

http://fox6now.com/2013/02/03/alderman- ... milwaukee/

Thunder Muscle · Post #851 » by **Thunder Muscle** » Mon Feb 4, 2013 1:50 pm

trwi7 wrote:Donovan proposes a new arena while keeping the Bradley Center to play second fiddle (bad idea) while tearing down the Cell for a new convention hotel or expanding the convention center (good idea).

Of course they had to get Gimbel's opinion. Why, I don't know. Everybody knew what he was going to say about it before he said it.

http://fox6now.com/2013/02/03/alderman- ... milwaukee/

Yeah I don't see any scenario where keeping the BC is a good idea. Its too big of a building for all of the secondary tenants, and Marquette would move into the new building. Most major concerts would go to the new building. I'd rather use money to use to put towards, maintain one new building than anything towards an old BC.

trwi7 · Post #852 » by **trwi7** » Mon Feb 4, 2013 1:59 pm

I'm a musician and I have the chance to play at a new arena or the chance to play at an arena that's 25 years older that's presumably right across the street. Which one will I choose? Same thing for any show. The Bradley Center would be completely useless if a new arena is built.

Post #853 » by **MickeyDavis** » Mon Feb 4, 2013 2:39 pm

I saw the piece last night on 6. Kudos for Donovan for bringing it up but yeah keeping the BC would be dumb. Absolutely no need for two 18,000 seat buildings. None.

GImbel.... I won't even waste time on him.

Badgerlander · Post #854 » by **Badgerlander** » Mon Feb 4, 2013 2:40 pm

The Cell should be torn down before it falls down and all of the events currently at the Cell could be held at the BC. The BC is such an awful basketball arena, keep it for hockey and smaller events and make the new arena more basketball centric.

Badgerlander · Post #855 » by **Badgerlander** » Mon Feb 4, 2013 2:43 pm

trwi7 wrote:I'm a musician

so many comments, so little time...where the hell is jerrod?

MartyConlonOnTheRun · Post #856 » by **MartyConlonOnTheRun** » Mon Feb 4, 2013 3:36 pm

I get so pissed off when I watch the news and you think about where the money goes. You look at the horrible death of Ebony Young and you think about what a drain on society these gangs become. Think of the tens of thousands of dollars being spent on digging up the landfills and prosecuting these thugs who decided to take a life. Just think of how useful that money would be for parks or schools.

Post #857 » by **humanrefutation** » Mon Feb 4, 2013 4:40 pm

I'd drop Vegas way down the list. People love speculating about it, but I think the NBA is extremely hesitant to put a team there. The city is designed to lead young and wealthy individuals towards a path of destruction.

Post #858 » by **paulpressey25** » Mon Feb 4, 2013 5:02 pm

humanrefutation wrote:I'd drop Vegas way down the list. People love speculating about it, but I think the NBA is extremely hesitant to put a team there. The city is designed to lead young and wealthy individuals towards a path of destruction.

I would hope so. But I think in the end though, money talks. The bigger reason why Vegas has slipped is the economy. That city was growing like crazy and hunrdeds of thousands of people moving in for the jobs and development. But it all hit the wall and hit it hard in 2008.

For any of you that have been there the past few years, there are those abandoned projects on/off the strip that are just a mess. Billions spent and no money or demand to get them finished. Then they pushed up some of those "downtown Vegas" buildings in violation of code. Last I heard, there is a brand new 30-story building that they are ordering torn down due to code violations.

That city is experiencing major growing pains.

ibanezjp · Post #859 » by **ibanezjp** » Mon Feb 4, 2013 5:06 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:
The main competition
1. Seattle (hopefully Sacramento takes care of this

2. Las Vegas (their growth took a big hit in the recession the past four years. If that growth resumes, they'll be a logical candidate)

3. Kansas City (They have a lot more going for them as it relates to market size and scope than Louisville, plus they too already have the new arena)

The second tier

4. Austin, Texas (They just keep growing. Hi-tech wealth will also provide plenty of potential owners willing to pay some major money)

5. Tampa-St. Pete (Orlando is only 90 minutes away and will fight this, but the west coast will resume growth as the economy improves)

6. Anaheim (LA is just a massive market. So even though the fans for an Anaheim team will be transient dingbats who will buy foam #1 fingers, there are millions for an Anaheim team to draw from and draw TV viewers.)

Longer shots
7. Louisville (arena ready)

8. Birmingham (Haven't heard them ever linked to an NBA team but they could support a pro club ala OKC as a one-sport town. Plenty of newer money there)

Only concern is maybe Kansas City. Everything else no way. Seattle will get Sac like you said. Vegas will not recover and I don't think a pro sports team wants to ever mess with Vegas cause of all the gambling ties. Austin and Anaheim already have too many other teams close by. Texas already has 3 teams! Florida is the worst state of any for sports teams so Tampa the biggest no on the list. All their teams have terrible fan support. The crowds would be worse there than they are currently at the BC (if that's possible). Louisville and Birmingham are just too small.

And about the BC playing 2nd fiddle, agree that wont work. I live in Houston now and they tried to do that with the Astrodome for.a while. They would have secondary events there but really everybody wants to just use Reliant (Texan's Stadium) because it's much nicer. Now the Astrodome just sits dormant in the middle of this great complex of buildings and they can't tear it down because it's too historic yet they can't use it because no ones been using it and its not even up to code anymore. So if they hopefully build a new arena in Milwaukee please tear the BC down. I have great memories there but it would need to go.

trwi7 · Post #860 » by **trwi7** » Mon Feb 4, 2013 6:05 pm

DocHoliday wrote:The Cell should be torn down before it falls down and all of the events currently at the Cell could be held at the BC. The BC is such an awful basketball arena, keep it for hockey and smaller events and make the new arena more basketball centric.

No, don't keep the BC. What good is the 18,000+ seat BC going to do for smaller events? Tear down the BC, do a massive renovation on the Cell and make the new arena like the one in Houston or Orlando or whatever.