Wow! I forgot about Anaheim.........

BritishColumbia said:
Orange county is big both population- and money-wise but this market (Orange teams + LA teams) is overcrowded. And LA/Orange fans want a football team.
Click to expand...

Yeah, right! When the Rams moved to Anaheim in 1980 the Big-A was a disaster for football as it was a baseball stadium. I know. I was a Ram's season ticket holder then and had been in the Coliseum for 14 years previous. Then when Rosenblum died and his ex-showgirl wife took over she destroyed the team and fans stayed away by the 1,000s. Then she sold the Rams to St. Louis in 1994 and the subject of football in Orange County seems to have all but disappeared. And a lot of folks from down there lost interest in football ever since.

Over the 1980's and 90's however, the idea of an NBA team kept coming up for "The Pond" where the mighty ducks play. They got the Clippers to play pre-season and a few regular games there for several years. But Donald Sterling kills any idea that can make money or be considered progress for the Clips. That demographic is ripe for an NBA team and realistically it should be the Clippers but since that won't happen and the greater LA area is some 17 million people plus the draw from San Diego area another 3-4 million it can easily support a team there. Besides the Clips are poor step children of the Lakers in Staples Arena anyway.

The Angles play up to and into October then basketball season starts until April-May when baseball starts all over again. hmmm, seems attractive to me. At some point who knows? :eek:
 
CruzDude said:
Yeah, right! When the Rams moved to Anaheim in 1980 the Big-A was a disaster for football as it was a baseball stadium. I know. I was a Ram's season ticket holder then and had been in the Coliseum for 14 years previous. Then when Rosenblum died and his ex-showgirl wife took over she destroyed the team and fans stayed away by the 1,000s. Then she sold the Rams to St. Louis in 1994 and the subject of football in Orange County seems to have all but disappeared. And a lot of folks from down there lost interest in football ever since.
Click to expand...


I was a Rams season ticket holder too (though always a Vikings fan)...for years, right up until the last game on Christmas eve 1994. Unfortunatly, Georgia didn't sell the team, she just moved it to St Louis, but do you remember seeing the banners at the Big A pleading ..."Georgia, sell the team!!" ? That always craked me up.
 
Kings fans deserve better. They need to know one way or the other whether their team will get a new arena in the foreseeable future, and where it will be located. They're tired of bond measures that fail, watching the Kings play in a dilapidated arena, and tired of empty words and promises from ownership and the league. If this can't be resolved, than the team will leave. At least Kings fans would finally get some closure.
 
Oscar said:
Kings fans deserve better. They need to know one way or the other whether their team will get a new arena in the foreseeable future, and where it will be located. They're tired of bond measures that fail, watching the Kings play in a dilapidated arena, and tired of empty words and promises from ownership and the league. If this can't be resolved, than the team will leave. At least Kings fans would finally get some closure.
Click to expand...

I think most Kings fans are very encouraged by what's happening right now. Your rhetoric is flowery but it doesn't match the facts in the situation.

I'm really surprised this thread is still even active, considering there is every indication things are going quite well with the Fairgrounds concept...
 
VF21 said:
I think most Kings fans are very encouraged by what's happening right now. Your rhetoric is flowery but it doesn't match the facts in the situation.

I'm really surprised this thread is still even active, considering there is every indication things are going quite well with the Fairgrounds concept...
Click to expand...

Its TDOS, what do you expect.....
 
Not yet - but there wasn't expected to be quite yet. If I remember they agreed to a six-month period of thorough investigation of the possibility before proceeding any further. It hasn't been six months yet.
 
The 6 months period will be up around mid-end November. At that time if a BIG developer is not on board with a plan then there is no plan. I don't want to be pessimistic, but because of the current overall economic climate it's FAR from a done deal. What a downer it would be if before end of 2008 and in middle of the Kings season this last ditch new arena and Cal Expo revitalization proposal fell apart.
 
There was a nice artist's depiction of the new arena/expo at the State Fair. While it's mere fantasy at this point, it was still interesting to see.
 
hoopsfan said:
That's the longest 4 blocks I've ever seen!! ;) (It's nearly 3 miles)
Click to expand...

You're right. I'd forgotten it was no longer just south of Disneyland but now about 2 miles east between the 5 and 57. In any case, the tie-in is there.
 
PurpleHaze said:
The 6 months period will be up around mid-end November. At that time if a BIG developer is not on board with a plan then there is no plan. I don't want to be pessimistic, but because of the current overall economic climate it's FAR from a done deal. What a downer it would be if before end of 2008 and in middle of the Kings season this last ditch new arena and Cal Expo revitalization proposal fell apart.
Click to expand...

The realism of this possibility hasn't struck anybody yet. But it's been 3-4 years now and nothing is happening that shows us any progress. Somehow an NBA arena at a state fairgrounds just seems like a weird Disney movie where the pig is the point guard and a giraffe is the center.

If it can't be done downtown, I don't think the "free" state land will get it done. No one in Sacto City or county wants to spend a penny yet they have to love the millions in sales tax revenue Arco and the Kings generates (it is in the city, isn't it???).

A grass roots city-county-counties effort just doesn't seem to be there. I understand why the Maloofs are frustrated and why they backed out a year ago or so. Sacramento is just not a professional sports town. That may be all there is to it. No passion. No "gitter done" attitude. No big thinkers. We all just may need to start sipping that sour juice of a team having to leave. Not wanting to for sure, but they may have no choice. And there are plenty of eager bridegrooms out there.
 
CruzDude - well said.

I've lived in some big cities like Los Angeles, Houston to name a couple, and several mid-sized cities like Oklahoma City, Tucson.

Sacramento is utterly, completely, absolutely, the worst so-called major city I've ever seen for total lack of vision, total failure of city/county leadership, and spawning for decades the most pathetic back stabbing old boys/gals network imaginable. If ever a place needed a grass roots revolution to over-turn an existing power structure it's this glorified cowtown - but don't ever count on it. The vast majority of comfortable suburbanites here don't really care much about the Kings as they simply want to not be bothered, live to drive out to the lake (Tahoe, Folsom, whatever), down to The City (that one called San Francisco) and seem to be just fine with their boring (but not to them) big-little city atmosphere.

In a couple more years (especially when real estate comes back to sell my free/clear home) I'll be out of here and NEVER look back. Retirement for me in South-East Asia awaits...
 
We're intentionally not hearing anything right now. Good. That's the way it should have been all along. Better to work out something that has a chance than let people scream and foam at the mouth against an idea, before there's any detail at all.

It's not just "free" land. The financing will not involve the city and county, or no more than they are willing to consider without any taxes.

Yes, Arco is within the city limits, so the city will lose a reasonably large source of revenue. Maybe they can replace it with more big box stores. :rolleyes:

I think Sacramentans will be shocked when not only does the team leave, but Arco is torn down and the city has no large entertainment venue anymore. They'll act like they didn't think that would happen, but it'll be too late.

Then we'll get the lovely option of driving to the bay area to see big arena stuff. Whoopee. :rolleyes: Think a night at Arco is expensive? Now add in a drive to the bay area, parking in the bay area and ticket prices as high or more likely higher. I won't make that drive anymore, like I used to occasionally, before Arco.

I agree Sacramento has very weak leadership. One of the main problem is the "weak mayor" system. Sacramento's mayor has no more power than any other council member. They each have one vote on all issues.

The only way a mayor has any shot is if he/she is charismatic, visionary and really has a large base of support outside of their own district. (Serna was the closest to that, in recent memory.) Whether Fargo or Johnson wins, I don't see much chance of that.

Nothing is going to be built at the railyards for some time to come. The city has to come up with the infrastructure funding, estimated right now at $1 billion for the whole site. That's $1 billion of pure public susbsidy to a private developer, by the way. (Why don't I hear the screaming against public dollars for a private enterprise?)

Anyway, it will be quite a few years before anything happens at the railyards. That's what the the Maloofs and Stern found out that caused them to back off the ballot vote. The city lead to them to believe the first part of that infrastructure money was already comitted. The Maloofs can't afford to wait years for downtown development.

Cal Expo is it. If it doesn't work, our team is gone. I choose to stay cautiously optimistic until I hear it can't be done.
 
kennadog said:
We're intentionally not hearing anything right now. Good. That's the way it should have been all along. Better to work out something that has a chance than let people scream and foam at the mouth against an idea, before there's any detail at all.
Click to expand...

Exactly. But for some it seems much more fun to continue to preach doom and gloom in the guise of "I'm just being realistic" instead of waiting to see what they actually come up with...

I'm in total agreement with DocHolliday's statement. Of course, I was actually one of those who believed in Gregg Lukenbill, too.

:)
 
But wait how long? It's been nearly 5 years now that a new arena has been discussed and 4 of those have been serious efforts. Being realistic is not preaching when it is based on the facts in hand. In this case realism is pretty factual in that, from a local fan view, nothing concrete has happened yet and there is no proposal from anyone about a solution regarding a new arena.

Based on this situation now being 4+ years down the road, how much longer should we wait until getting worried that nothing is happening and no arena deal can have only one consequence? If there is something anyone knows about the Arena situation that can even remotely be considered positive, lets hear it. I think we are near unanimous in all wanting a new arena. But in this case, no news is not good news.
 
CruzDude said:
But in this case, no news is not good news.
Click to expand...

Absolutely true - unfortunately.

The sad truth is this huge sprawling project at Cal Expo is so much more than just a new arena, which as we've seen was way too much for Sacramento City to deal with. Again, I don't want to be a pessimist, but I'm being mugged now by cold hard reality - made desperate by a bad economy. I have it from well informed sources that the problem is so daunting (not that many did not realize long ago) it simply can't go forward as it now stands - NOT ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE.

I received this analysis which I'm editing a bit on the BIG PROBLEM:

In simple terms they can only ground lease perhaps 200 acres for offices, retail, residential. If you value the property at $1M/acre x 7% yearly lease payment you get $14M/yr at full buildout. What developer on earth would stick his neck out on this $1B project with so much risk and a sure losing return. Just as pathetic the current "6 month period" was said to encourage all possible arena development scenarios - encourage other big thinking ideas that might pencil out. Guess what? It's not happening according to my source as they may now need another 6 months of paying Pete Wilson $400/hr to drag their flawed process forward. They don't have a clue what they're doing according to my source who says the old boy/gal network in charge is not capable of pulling this off as it currently stands.

Like I said earlier, we need a revolution (I choose that word as a last resort) to completely topple the entrenched power structure in this city/ county and start over with smarter, fresher, motivated leadership - OR ELSE THE SACRAMENTO KINGS ARE GONE FOREVER - FOR DAMN SURE.
 
The Malloofs still owe a small bit of money to sacramento in the eyes of some council members. That is why they are trying the Cal Expo plan. It doesn't require sanctioning public land, and repaying some small debt in the process. The arena is going to be a profit sharing plan, and sacramento is slowly being excluded in that profit sharing. If Sacramento wants to be a part of it, it needs to open up some old doors, like the railyard, and increasing taxes to support this project. Otherwise, 10 years from now, kingsfans will be forced to pay premium prices for tickets, like in LA.
 
CruzDude said:
You mean premium as in seats and airfare?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the optimism Cruzy. I haven't been staying on top of this situation, and its hard to do living in baja. I do think that Stern and the NBA have a stake in this and will do everything they can to make it happen. I think Stern would look at it as a failure for the NBA if the King's were forced to move.

I thought that Cal Expo was owned by the state and the city had nothing to do with the negotiations. As much as I love Sacramento, I hate the city council. Its like an old boys club that still thinks its living in the 1940's. All the progressive thinkers live in the suburbs, and have no say in this. Its too bad they can't build an arena in Roseville or Rocklin, or anywhere else except the damm city. How about west sacramento, at least they think big over there. Hey, while were at it, lets move the A's to west sacramento too. Maybe I'll move there.;)
 
Why can't one of the indian casinos step up and build a new arena next to one of their casinos? The tribe that owns Thunder Valley is swimming in cash and there is plenty of land out there. A new arena alla the pallace in Auburn Hills. That arena is pretty far from Detroit.
 
CruzDude said:
But wait how long? It's been nearly 5 years now that a new arena has been discussed and 4 of those have been serious efforts. Being realistic is not preaching when it is based on the facts in hand. In this case realism is pretty factual in that, from a local fan view, nothing concrete has happened yet and there is no proposal from anyone about a solution regarding a new arena.

Based on this situation now being 4+ years down the road, how much longer should we wait until getting worried that nothing is happening and no arena deal can have only one consequence? If there is something anyone knows about the Arena situation that can even remotely be considered positive, lets hear it. I think we are near unanimous in all wanting a new arena. But in this case, no news is not good news.
Click to expand...

Sorry, Dude, but I think you're wrong.

This current proposal is the FIRST proposal the city/county haven't had their fingers in, giving it a much better chance of success.

You keep harping on the "nothing is happening," when I think what you really mean is you don't hear about anything. BIG and SIGNIFICANT difference. There ARE things happening, they just aren't being done in the media to try and curry political favor.

You're making an assumption that simply is not supported by facts.
 
VF21 said:
Sorry, Dude, but I think you're wrong.

This current proposal is the FIRST proposal the city/county haven't had their fingers in, giving it a much better chance of success.

You keep harping on the "nothing is happening," when I think what you really mean is you don't hear about anything. BIG and SIGNIFICANT difference. There ARE things happening, they just aren't being done in the media to try and curry political favor.

You're making an assumption that simply is not supported by facts.
Click to expand...

But from a fans perspective, what IS the difference? If progress is being made but no one knows about it, how can that be called facts much less progress? If you say things ARE happening but no one else knows, while it may be true, how can the rest of us have any confidence in forward movement? If not for the media sharing knowledge how are we going to find out anything?

I've gotten bids from sub-contractors and contractors alike for small and large projects in many places in the world and quite a few of those never went anywhere usually do to financing. But information was always published about the politics of the project and its financing. Getting the contractor bids for pricing exercises is gathering data that is always necessary for making decisions but never have I had a supposed valid project drag on for 4+ years with no information that it will proceed. And I'm talking projects in the $100M+ range.

Who are the inside folks who are now pushing for a new arena? The City, the Maloofs, the NBA? nope, they are all on the sidelines from what we hear and read in the media. Sure they want it but others seem to be making (or not making) decisions that affect whether we fans will have a Sacramento Kings team in 2-3 years.

If there is no media information for us then how can any of us say for sure something is or is not making progress? What little has come out on the Arena issue is not at all positive. So what else are we to think? A little marketing and spin control would go a long way here.
 
Again, just because progress isn't being made public, doesn't mean it isn't being made. You and I will simply have to agree to disagree. When it's time for something to be announced, it will be announced. This project hasn't dragged on for 4+ years. That's the key error in your reasoning. THIS project, with CalExpo and NOT the city/county, may have the same end result in mind - a new state-of-the-art facility - but pretty much everything else is different.

From a fan's perspective, I guess it's a matter of how much importance you place on the NBA itself being involved - which it now is - and Mayor Fargo and her cronies being out of the loop - which they are.

Information was LEAKED about the PREVIOUS projects as a matter of grist for the political mill. That was one of the biggest problems.
 
hoopsfan said:
The Clippers didn't play at The Pond, except for a few games each year and the preseason. The hockey Kings also played a few games there for some charity events.
Prior to Staples opening the Clippers played at the Sports Arena in LA, the Pond was never their arena, though there has been talk for years about them moving there.
Click to expand...

Well, it's not getting much support from ESPN

Summer Forecast: Where will NBA expand?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=Expansion-080918
Anaheim (1 vote)
Pros: The Honda Center (17,600) wants a tenant. Could be a home if the Clippers, who played games there from 1994-98, were ever to set sail from Staples.

Cons: The Los Angeles Clippers of Anaheim? D'oh!
 
Last edited:
fansinceday1 said:
Why can't one of the indian casinos step up and build a new arena next to one of their casinos? The tribe that owns Thunder Valley is swimming in cash and there is plenty of land out there. A new arena alla the palace in Auburn Hills. That arena is pretty far from Detroit.
Click to expand...
That was mentioned at one point. However, the Indian tribe could not figure out a way to get that large a debt repaid, so no go. That's exactly why some public/private partnership is required. No arena can be financed entirely with convetional market rate debt. There's very few places where that's possible for this type of project. It's even more difficult in a small market city with an near zero corporate base.

Actually there's a lot of deals that make sense for the good of a city that can't be developed solely with private money. The railyards is supposed to receive $1 billion dollars of pure public subsidy. The remodeling of the downtown plaza will require public subsidy. The Hyatt, Sheraton and Embassy Suite all required public subsidy.

Unfortunately, when public money is inviolved it can take years for deals to get off the ground. And a whole lot of negotiating can go on behind closed doors for a long time, in some cases, before a deal to vote on can be reached. I'm just glad the city and county will have little, if anything to do with a Cal Expo project. This is the same city and county that couldn't manage to help build a AAA baseball stadium.:rolleyes:
 
Don't let the Kings go to Anaheim. There are already two teams in So-Cal, no use adding a third. Keep the Kings in Sacramento!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
[Rumor] Kings Land Defensive Specialist in NBA Trade Idea with Nuggets
Replies
3
Views
331
QWERTYLICIOUS
QWERTYLICIOUS
S
[Rumor] Ex-Kings, Lakers Coaches Linked to Knicks Job After Tom Thibodeau Firing
Replies
2
Views
215
kingsboi
kingsboi
S
Top NBA Free Agent Reveals Five Potential Landing Spots
Replies
3
Views
258
Tetsujin
Tetsujin
pdxKingsFan
Greg Lukenbill talks to Sacramento Historical Society
Replies
4
Views
2K
pdxKingsFan
pdxKingsFan
QWERTYLICIOUS
  • Locked
[Game] 65/82 Kings @ Warriors 13 MAR 2025, 7p PST/10p EST (TNT)
8 9 10
Replies
293
Views
9K
The_Jamal
T
Back
Top