That is EXACTLY what I think, Geoff. I live down here in San Bernardino County (in Fontana... better known to some as Fontucky) and only have driven by Sac on my way to visit my aunt's restaurants in Nevada City and Grass Valley (gorgeous up there BTW). I ask myself why are there so many people against the Kings, Maloofs and a new arena? What is the majority of the city afraid of? The Kings are part of the community no matter if folks in Sac believe it or not. Everytime the Kings are mentioned on tv the word Sacramento is attached to the name and the team gives the city sort of a 'promotion' or identity if you would; like 'hits' on a website. This is good for major sport cities and cities that don't have a major sports team dream of. If the Kings leave the city will suffer. Not only will some businesses suffer but that identity will no longer be there, and worse, the reputation of a city that could never get things done. Which city wants that image? It is really too bad. From what I've gathered in the last 3 or four years by reading the Bee articles it seems people up there have been treated like a red headed step child and are always bending over holding their ankles, hence, their attitudes against the arena and other proposals for the city. Anyways, I support the proponents for a new arena in Sacramento and I really hope they get it done. The Kings belong there. Hopefully the new owners of the Rail Yards lot can support this and assist with developing a new arena. Time is really running out. Go Kings!
I don't think there are many at all against the Kings staying in Sacto, nor 'afraid' of anything. Rather, it's simple economics. WHO'S PAYING FOR THIS SAID ARENA. The general Joe Blow taxpayer shouldn't be footing the bill to allow the Maloofs make 7 figure incomes, and I understand that the Maloofs Arena would be very beneficial for the region in more ways than just Kings basketball. With that said, there's gotta be a compromise between City Government and The NBA/Maloofs. That's the problem, determining the middle ground and how both come out on top. You're asking very simplistic questions to a very complex answer. It's a lot about politics, more about money and little about support for the team in the community.
Being from Sacramento and currently living in Louisville I think I have a little unique perspective about this topic. My preference is the Kings to Sacramento and be able to get a privately funded, state-of-the-art Arena. I have my doubts about the logistics of that actually happening though. However, if the Kings DID have to move Louisville would be a tremendous fit for an NBA franchise. Basketball is King here. Ignore the 'Kentucky' is a college state. It is, but that's because of circumstance more than it is about pure, genuine attitude. It's a college state based on what they have. All in all it's a BASKETBALL STATE. If they got a team that had two of it's most endeared players from the past 5-6 years in DMC and Garcia, that'd help the area to gain traction it's support for the team immediately. As the team were to become more entrenched in the state, it would be the GAME in town.
Now with all that said, I don't think it will ever happen. Louisville SHOULD get a franchise one day. It's definitely a nice place to live, with good/eclectic people and crazy sports town.
Even though I have little interest in moving back to California(mostly due to the backwards government there and elected officials) after school, I really do hope Sacramento keeps the Kings. I love Cali(the climate, the area and so much more), but I just can't afford to get taxed to death. The Kings will always be my team even if they move out of Sacramento, I just hope they don't.
