Sonics officially going to OKC

MUpacersSIC · Post #1 » by **MUpacersSIC** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 1:31 am

It's a sad day to see a franchise of 40 years having to pack their bags to OKC. Seattle fans did everything they could, but it wasn't enough for the greedy owner. I really hope Seattle gets a new franchise within the next five years, and that the "Sonics" will again be an NBA franchise.

by the way, OKC will NOT be allowed to use the name or colors of the Seattle SuperSonics.

Post #2 » by **Grang33r** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 2:10 am

Very sad day but it's a business. Seattle didn't exactly support it's team with all it had. They are going to a good market, state of the art arena and a area that is rapid about basketball. I think in the long run, this is best for the NBA.

MUpacersSIC · Post #3 » by **MUpacersSIC** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 2:14 am

I'm always excited to see something new in the NBA (new franchise), but not at the expense of the Seattle Sonics. Maybe Memphis, but not Seattle.

cdash · Post #4 » by **cdash** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 2:17 am

I think it sucks for the NBA. Seattle is a much, much bigger market than Oklahoma City. Yeah, OKC supported the Hornets very well for a year or so, but I am not sure that it wasnt the novelty of the situation. "Oh, we have a pro sports team here now! Cool!" I'm sure attendance will continue to sparkle there for the next few years, but I'll be curious to see if it doesnt wane 4 or 5 years from now, especially if the team isnt winning. I hate to see a team that was such a fixture in a city uprooted like that, but business is business. I dont think we have seen the last of the Sonics in Seattle though. Whether it be an expansion team or some other team relocating there...I believe the NBA will return.

What do you guys think they are going to call the team now? What colors will they wear?

FreeRon · Post #5 » by **FreeRon** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 2:41 am

I don't really blame the guy. I'd be ticked if I was a Seattle fan, but the guy had no ties to Seattle and he's a businessman. They're supposed to be greedy...it's their jobs.

cdash · Post #6 » by **cdash** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 2:50 am

Oh, I understand where he is coming from. He saw how his hometown responded to the NBA, he had the means to acquire an NBA team with potential to move, and he set about getting the team in his hometown. It just sucks for all the Sonics fans.

Orlock78 · Post #7 » by **Orlock78** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 2:52 am

I live in OKC, so I love this. it means I'll get to see the Pacers a couple times a year, and I'll have a local team as my second fav. I really don't feel bad for Seattle as a whole, they just didn't seem to care, and the fans here in OKC will really support the team. When the Hornets were here I was amazed how much the people here supported the team, despite knowing they wouldn't be staying. So you can really bank on OKC bending over backwards for this team. Which is exactly what Bennet is doing.

MUpacersSIC · Post #8 » by **MUpacersSIC** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:13 am

It seems like OKC has already had some thoughts on a new name and team color. They cut it down to 4 names (by popular vote from a newspaper, oh and I don't know how credible this actually is):

Thunderbirds
Outlaws
Barons
Thunder

and a pic

http://bumpshack.com/wp-content/uploads ... okcnba.jpg

cdash · Post #9 » by **cdash** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:18 am

That link doesnt work MUpacers. I hate the name Thunderbirds. Lame. Thunder and Barons are my two favorites out of that group. I'm surprised they dont have some variation of "Tornadoes" up there.

MUpacersSIC · Post #10 » by **MUpacersSIC** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:27 am

The link works for me. just search OKC Barons and you will find something along the lines of a black jersey with gold and white lettering. Basically the Saints colors. But, again, I have NO idea if this is even credible.

FreeRon · Post #11 » by **FreeRon** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:41 am

Wonder if they considered Hurricanes. That's probably in bad taste. If they want to be the outlaws their first move could be acquiring Jamaal Tinsley....do I come up with the best ideas or what?

cdash · Post #12 » by **cdash** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:50 am

FreeRon wrote:Wonder if they considered Hurricanes. That's probably in bad taste. If they want to be the outlaws their first move could be acquiring Jamaal Tinsley....do I come up with the best ideas or what?

Hahaha, I like that.

Post #13 » by **PR07** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:51 am

You have to feel for the fans of Seattle. They deserve another team whether it be the Grizz or an expansion.

MUpacersSIC · Post #14 » by **MUpacersSIC** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:56 am

I agree PacersRule07. The fans did everything they could and not only Bennett but the City sold them out, literally. I don't see Memphis sticking around much longer, and Seattle could definitely replace them.

FreeRon · Post #15 » by **FreeRon** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 5:12 am

Memphis does seem a good cantidate to move, but remember they moved from Vancouver fairly recently (they've been in Memphis less years than a good majority of teams have been in their cities), so the people of Memphis may not be so willing to give them up. I would think that if a current team were to move to Seattle it will be in 4-5 years minimum, which really sucks for Seattle because with 30 teams the NBA is unlikely to add another. Personally, I'd like to see a team move from California (Warriors, Clippers, Lakers, Kings) or Texas (Spurs, Rockets, Mavericks). I know that populations in those cities are much higher, but it just seems unfair to make Seattle fans drive out of state to watch an NBA game (the closest team being Portland, who they were somewhat rivals with) when people living in LA could hypothetically go to 82 home games a year without leaving their city.

glasket · Post #16 » by **glasket** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 6:31 am

Its very sad for Seattle I think.

They were my favorite team in the west and now with Green, Durant and Westbrook I am excited about their future, although unfotunately it will not be in Seattle or in the Green and Gold.

I am not sure if I will have to choose a new favortie team in the west or continue to go for the new OKC team. At this moment I will probably stick with OKC

Orlock78 · Post #17 » by **Orlock78** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 12:45 pm

Yeah the Sonics Fans did everything except uhh.. go to games, and vote to build a replacement arena for one of the oldest crappiest arenas in the league.

Post #18 » by **mizzoupacers** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:20 pm

How the hell can a big-time professional sports league have teams in Oklahoma City and Memphis, but not in St. Louis?!? Come on, Stern, St. Louis is a big-league town. Oklahoma City is the middle of nowhere.

There will probably be NBA teams in Sioux Falls and Laredo before there is another one in St. Louis.

And yeah, Seattle definitely deserves to get another chance.

Post #19 » by **count55** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:31 pm

Well, the Sonics/Thunderbirds/Barons/Whatever the Hell they're going to be called won't be competing with anything in Oklahoma City and, apparently, they had an ownership group interested in putting a team there.

I'm not saying there shouldn't be a team in St. Louis, but it is a baseball town, and the Rams and their SB ring will have huge advantages over an incoming NBA team while competing for the sports entertainment buck.

On a separate tangent, I could also argue that cities like Nashville, Indianapolis, St. Louis, and Jacksonville are all far more deserving of NFL franchises than the vastly larger Los Angeles is because they will be firm supporters of the franchise, whereas LA is far more fickle. That may be the case in St. Louis (as it pertains to the NBA, only). It's not a commentary on the quality of the fans, merely on the relative attitude towards a certain sport/league.

Post #20 » by **mizzoupacers** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 4:04 pm

^ Oh stop making sense. I want an NBA team that I don't have to drive six hours to see, dammit. :wink:

I do think that St. Louis would successfully support an NBA basketball team. It's known as a "baseball" town because the Cardinals are by far the oldest and most storied local team, but 3 million plus people can support a variety of sports teams, as the Rams and Blues can attest. There really should not be any major professional sport that is not represented by a St. Louis team.

Orlock78 wrote:Yeah the Sonics Fans did everything except uhh.. go to games, and vote to build a replacement arena for one of the oldest crappiest arenas in the league.

I think Sonics fans did a good job of supporting the team for forty years, up until recently when the team's ownership tried to extort a free stadium out of them while simultaneously trotting out sucky teams. I actually respect Seattle fans and residents for refusing to give in on paying for a new stadium. Way to give 'em the "Bidwill Treatment"...Just Say No to incompetent owners! Incompetent owners should not feel entitled to suck at the public trough as compensation for their business ineptitude. Let the Sonics owners go suck in Oklahoma City for years to come, just like St. Louis let the Bidwill Cardinals go suck in Arizona...then bring in a better team a few years later and win a championship, that's the ticket. :wink: