Owner

[CPFCJosh]

Hey guys,

OK, so let me get this outta the way first. I currently have absolutely 0 knowledge of your team, or basketball in general really. I kinda vaguely follow the Nuggets because I love the Denver Broncos, so ya know...kinda goes.

Anyway, I'm from England, and I support the English Premier League 'soccer' team Crystal Palace, and according to many news outlets, your owner is thinking of buying our team. And my question is simple: Do you think this would be good or bad for out team? I'd be greatful if you could leave a short answer, and I'll link this thread on our teams forum. Thanks again,

Josh.

[Foshan]

I don't know anything about your team, but I'd say probably good. IMO they are in it for the money, and the team that wins the most is worth the most. So they will probably do whatever it takes to get your team good. Not sure you'll like the process, but the result should be good.

[MountainDrew]

Harris has been very good for us, he's not a guy who will try to take all the decisions himself, lets the manager do his work. Realistic, smart man. Obviously very rich, but don't expect to be the new Man City.

[roma258]

Harris has been very good for us, he's not a guy who will try to take all the decisions himself, lets the manager do his work. Realistic, smart man. Obviously very rich, but don't expect to be the new Man City.

What he said, don't expect him to splash money around. Expect a methodical, ground up approach with smart people in charge. It would be his third pro franchise, which has me a bit worried about him getting spread a bit thin, but I have no idea what his personal fortune is and how he expects to oversee the team.

[snoopdogg88]

i get the impression Hinkie has no problem spending money, but it has to be wisely.
It's hard to say for sure though, considering the Sixers aren't really in a position yet to be doing that.


If LeBron wanted to come to Philly , I imagine he would pay whatever it takes. I don't know if you can say that about every NBA team owner. But again that's just my impression. I think he's a smart guy who "gets it" better than a lot of owners do.

[SexDrugsPnR]

As a European soccer fan, I tend to find it somewhat troubling when teams get bought by some filthy rich guy from abroad who has no connection with the team or even the sport.
The mechanics of the soccer world are fundamentally different to American sports. It's actually quite interesting if you think about how inherently socialist American sports are, with revenue sharing, no promotion/relegation, creating parity through the draft, salary cap etc.
On the other hand you have varying degrees of capitalism in the rest of the sports world, especially soccer, with its ridiculous transfer fees.

[76ersfan]

Harris is patient and can commit to a plan. Let's our GM do the work. And he is filthy stinking rich. Lol.


Sent from my iPad using RealGM Forums

[Chamberlainship]

The first year he owned the sixers the team he inherited backed into the second round of the playoffs. The second season the team was really bad. In his third season, which Harris deemed a great success, the team was second worst in the league and tied the record for most consecutive losses. This season we figure to be the worst in the league. He's 0/1 in terms of making the playoffs as owner of one of our city's rival hockey teams: the NJ Devils.

I was impressed when he amnestied Brand, but we know what a mess that became. Lately, he's been historically cheap when it comes to paying players. Not sure if that's driven by Harris or the GM, but ultimately the buck stops with Harris.

Not a lot to be excited about so far.

[42uptop]

So far he's been a great owner. He has let our general manager implement a plan without interfering and is good about promoting the team. He's also been open to analytics and new ways of thinking about sport. I have no complaints.

[CPFCJosh]

Thanks for all your responses. So far I gather that: He spends money, but wisely. He isn't a man for team heritage. and he will try and get us winning big?



Thanks again for all the response so far

[Sixerscan]

As a European soccer fan, I tend to find it somewhat troubling when teams get bought by some filthy rich guy from abroad who has no connection with the team or even the sport.
The mechanics of the soccer world are fundamentally different to American sports. It's actually quite interesting if you think about how inherently socialist American sports are, with revenue sharing, no promotion/relegation, creating parity through the draft, salary cap etc.
On the other hand you have varying degrees of capitalism in the rest of the sports world, especially soccer, with its ridiculous transfer fees.

The bold describes the majority of elite teams in the EPL.

Anyway, luckily Harris didn't make his billions running a sports team. He made them running a private equity fund. I think he understands a thing or two about capitalism.

[76thBearCub]

I think ownership is pretty good so far. We are awful but have an undeniable direction.

Plus they're in the black despite horrible attendance and no marketability.

Although the CBA almost guarantees that I guess.

[SexDrugsPnR]

The bold describes the majority of elite teams in the EPL.

No question about that, but it is not a development that I can really get behind. As much as I love watching US sports, I would not want to have American type franchises in European soccer.

[Sixerscan]

The bold describes the majority of elite teams in the EPL.

No question about that, but it is not a development that I can really get behind. As much as I love watching US sports, I would not want to have American type franchises in European soccer.

Why not?

[SexDrugsPnR]

No question about that, but it is not a development that I can really get behind. As much as I love watching US sports, I would not want to have American type franchises in European soccer.

Why not?

For a lot of reasons. I feel like teams relocating, changing their name, colors, logos etc is a much bigger issue in soccer because of how the clubs are part of a city's identity. Fans also feel more as part of their teams rather than just watching an entertainment product. Not to say that there are no passionate fans in US sports. The mentality is and level of engagement is just different.
Also, no matter how insignificant your team is, they still get the chance to move up through the leagues and compete with the best, or maybe draw one of the big teams in the cup and get a chance to play a meaningful game against them.

Franchises work for a system in which there is no promotion/relegation. It really doesn't matter if the Sixers suck. Nothing will happen, except for a few butthurt journalists bitching about it. Some people might lose interest in the team, others like myself are intrigued by the potential for future success.
If you're at the bottom of the table at the end of a soccer season, it's a life or death experience for the fans.

I wouldn't want to change either system. Unfortunately, soccer is moving in the wrong direction though, and we've already seen some teams relocate.

I don't know if this makes sense to anyone. Sorry for the ramble, I feel like I'm getting too far off topic here anyway.

[42uptop]

^ No need to apologize, I liked the post. European soccer is a different system but not a bad one. There are some hardcore fans who live for their local club in Europe, to a different level than I've seen in American leagues. You won't see Crystal Palace tanking like we are. Every team is always trying to spend money and win, and everyone involved benefits.

[Sixerscan]

No question about that, but it is not a development that I can really get behind. As much as I love watching US sports, I would not want to have American type franchises in European soccer.

Why not?

For a lot of reasons. I feel like teams relocating, changing their name, colors, logos etc is a much bigger issue in soccer because of how the clubs are part of a city's identity. Fans also feel more as part of their teams rather than just watching an entertainment product. Not to say that there are no passionate fans in US sports. The mentality is and level of engagement is just different.
Also, no matter how insignificant your team is, they still get the chance to move up through the leagues and compete with the best, or maybe draw one of the big teams in the cup and get a chance to play a meaningful game against them.

Franchises work for a system in which there is no promotion/relegation. It really doesn't matter if the Sixers suck. Nothing will happen, except for a few butthurt journalists bitching about it. Some people might lose interest in the team, others like myself are intrigued by the potential for future success.
If you're at the bottom of the table at the end of a soccer season, it's a life or death experience for the fans.

I wouldn't want to change either system. Unfortunately, soccer is moving in the wrong direction though, and we've already seen some teams relocate.

I don't know if this makes sense to anyone. Sorry for the ramble, I feel like I'm getting too far off topic here anyway.

Cool thanks, was just wondering.

[sw16girl]

Hi - another CPFC fan here. I was pretty surprised by the answers on here - from looking at Wiki (probably not a good source of info) it seems you have just had one disastrous season and made a less than impressive start to this one. What is it about Harris that makes him seem like a good owner - I have seen the money mentioned but he doesn't seem to be spending it much?

are other things more important in a US franchise where you could lose your team entirely? things like stability, commitment to Philedelphia, or something else.

Also do you think that the fact you cannot get relegated to a lower league makes a difference to your attitude?

[Sixersftw]

What is it about Harris that makes him seem like a good owner - I have seen the money mentioned but he doesn't seem to be spending it much?

are other things more important in a US franchise where you could lose your team entirely? things like stability, commitment to Philedelphia, or something else.

Also do you think that the fact you cannot get relegated to a lower league makes a difference to your attitude?

He spent a lot for a mediocre team initially. The team was then stripped down when they underperformed/Bynum'd. Harris has a couple things going for him. He has put together a team of, we think, bright like minded guys to run the team. He is smart enough to know he doesn't know crap all about basketball and delegates. He is also building a practice facility, something the team desperately needed and goes back to the spending thing.

A city can't lose their team for basketball or performance reasons directly. Typically teams are moved by being sold (along w/ a board of governors vote) to a individual or group that plans to relocate them.

I guess not being relegated to a lower league colors our general brazen attitude towards the tank. Its a weird question because it doesn't exist in American sports. Players get sent down, not franchises. I mean, if the Sixers did get sent down to the D-league at least we'd probably win a championship this year.

[sw16girl]

That's a good answer - I agree that being relegated gives a chance for a club otherwise at the lower end of a league to win things once relegated and it feels nice - honest.

I like the sound of what you have said. We need a new stadium and an improved training facility pretty quickly. The stadium in particular is a problem as there is little room for growth where we are and fans get very touchy about moving distances that I suspect you would consider as being still in the same neighbourhood - something has to be done though - the main stand is wooden and dates from around 1925 and is likely to fail Health and Safety inspections soon.

One follow up question - any idea why he is doing it - does he see a profit in it or is he doing for fun and prestige do you think?