PDA

View Full Version : Other Sports Would the OKC Thunder had been as successful if they were in KC?


Deberg_1990
06-06-2012, 06:45 AM
Re-reading the below thread and their recent success got me thinking about this.......could it have been the same in KC? IM gonna say no. OKC was lightening in a bottle.......They had no pro sports and the city has really rallied behind them. But who knows.....whats your take?




http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=226727&highlight=thunder

blaise
06-06-2012, 06:53 AM
Well, if they had Durant and Westbrook and Harden, I'll say yes.
But I think OKC is better for them if they're not as good, because they're the only show in town and people would probably still support them. I don't think people in KC would keep going downtown on a Tuesday to see a crummy team play the T-Wolves they same way they probably would in OKC.

suds79
06-06-2012, 06:53 AM
Would they still get Kevin Durant?

My answer rests on that.

BigChiefFan
06-06-2012, 07:03 AM
NO. They didn't support the team when they had one.

DMAC
06-06-2012, 07:25 AM
No. Bad karma bro.

Mile High Mania
06-06-2012, 07:40 AM
Well, if they had Durant and Westbrook and Harden, I'll say yes.
But I think OKC is better for them if they're not as good, because they're the only show in town and people would probably still support them. I don't think people in KC would keep going downtown on a Tuesday to see a crummy team play the T-Wolves they same way they probably would in OKC.

Chiefs fans don't watch the NBA? :Poke:

Bambi
06-06-2012, 07:40 AM
Unfortunately I would say no. Between the Chiefs, Royals and KU there really isn't much more room to spread this few number of fans.

I think Sporting is the perfect size for Kansas City. An NBA team would simply have been too big. 41 home games a year is more difficult to fill than one would think.

58-4ever
06-06-2012, 07:51 AM
Yes. A winner is a winner. You go to the Finals, people will show.

58-4ever
06-06-2012, 07:51 AM
Would they still get Kevin Durant?

My answer rests on that.

They already had Kevin Durant.

Saul Good
06-06-2012, 07:52 AM
NO. They didn't support the team when they had one.

Untrue. The Kings didn't leave because of lack of support.

Saulbadguy
06-06-2012, 07:53 AM
Unfortunately I would say no. Between the Chiefs, Royals and KU there really isn't much more room to spread this few number of fans.

I think Sporting is the perfect size for Kansas City. An NBA team would simply have been too big. 41 home games a year is more difficult to fill than one would think.

The casual KU fans would flock to a successful NBA team pretty quickly.

The people that don't care about the Chiefs and Royals because they suck would also flock to a successful NBA team.

BigChiefFan
06-06-2012, 07:54 AM
Yes. A winner is a winner. You go to the Finals, people will show.

That's just it. They weren't winners before arriving in OKC. OKC supported them before waiting until they made a conference championship.

Waiting until they make a conference championship, isn't support. It's band-wagon.

BigChiefFan
06-06-2012, 07:54 AM
Untrue. The Kings didn't leave because of lack of support.

That's why they split between TWO CITIES???

Saulbadguy
06-06-2012, 07:56 AM
23k people attended the Royals game last night.

A marginally successful NBA team would have no problems packing the Sprint Center.

Brock
06-06-2012, 07:57 AM
23k people attended the Royals game last night.

A marginally successful NBA team would have no problems packing the Sprint Center.

yep.

BigChiefFan
06-06-2012, 08:00 AM
KANSAS CITY-OMAHA KINGS
Season GP Total Avg.
1972-73 41 261,860 6,387
1973-74 41 232,692 5,675
1974-75 41 308,906 7,534

KANSAS CITY KINGS
Season GP Total Avg.
1975-76 41 272,675 6,651
1976-77 41 330,526 8,062
1977-78 41 315,722 7,701
1978-79 41 442,354 10,789
1979-80 41 375,387 9,156
1980-81 41 336,585 8,209
1981-82 41 280,564 6,843
1982-83 41 340,359 8,301
1983-84 41 370,270 9,031
1984-85 41 262,812 6,410


ONLY ONE SEASON did they even do an avg of over 10,000



They clearly didn't support the team.

Saulbadguy
06-06-2012, 08:01 AM
KANSAS CITY-OMAHA KINGS
Season GP Total Avg.
1972-73 41 261,860 6,387
1973-74 41 232,692 5,675
1974-75 41 308,906 7,534

KANSAS CITY KINGS
Season GP Total Avg.
1975-76 41 272,675 6,651
1976-77 41 330,526 8,062
1977-78 41 315,722 7,701
1978-79 41 442,354 10,789
1979-80 41 375,387 9,156
1980-81 41 336,585 8,209
1981-82 41 280,564 6,843
1982-83 41 340,359 8,301
1983-84 41 370,270 9,031
1984-85 41 262,812 6,410


ONLY ONE SEASON did they even do an avg of over 10,000



They clearly didn't support the team.

Yes, because those figures are clearly relevant 30 years later.

You might want to check what players the Kings drafted and signed over those years as well. The management might have well been actively trying to run the franchise in to the ground.

BigChiefFan
06-06-2012, 08:03 AM
Yes, because those figures are clearly relevant 30 years later.

You might want to check what players the Kings drafted and signed over those years as well. The management might have well been actively trying to run the franchise in to the ground.

Dude, all I'm saying is they didn't support the team, when they had a chance.

I'm not saying they wouldn't support them NOW, but I was clearly right when I said they DIDN'T support the team in the PAST. Admit it and move on.

Deberg_1990
06-06-2012, 08:05 AM
The casual KU fans would flock to a successful NBA team pretty quickly.

The people that don't care about the Chiefs and Royals because they suck would also flock to a successful NBA team.

Im not sure there are enough Non Chiefs and Royals sportsfans in KC to support a pro basketball team?

I do believe there are a lot Chiefs fans who are anti-NBA fans in KC if this board is any indication. Small sample size I know.....

Sporting News have become pretty successful, but im willing to bet thatís a different fan entirely than NBA fan.

OKC has been sort of unique. They were obviously an underserved market and starving for a Pro team. KC just isnít in that boat.

Brock
06-06-2012, 08:07 AM
Sporting News have become pretty successful, but im willing to bet thatís a different fan entirely than NBA fan.

There isn't a facepalm big enough.

Saulbadguy
06-06-2012, 08:08 AM
Im not sure there are enough Non Chiefs and Royals sportsfans in KC to support a pro basketball team?

I do believe there are a lot Chiefs fans who are anti-NBA fans in KC if this board is any indication. Small sample size I know.....

Sporting News have become pretty successful, but im willing to bet that’s a different fan entirely than NBA fan.

OKC has been sort of unique. They were obviously an underserved market and starving for a Pro team. KC just isn’t in that boat.

There are quite a few Yankees/Steelers/KU fans that live in Johnson County that would love to hitch their wagon to a winning NBA team.

-King-
06-06-2012, 08:10 AM
NO. They didn't support the team when they had one.

A lot of cities that have teams now have lost one in the past. This is the dumbest reasoning against an NBA team I hear. So what if kc lost a basketball team 40 years ago? A lot has changed since then.

KC would have supported the thunder likely more than OKC would.
Posted via Mobile Device

BigChiefFan
06-06-2012, 08:20 AM
A lot of cities that have teams now have lost one in the past. This is the dumbest reasoning against an NBA team I hear. So what if kc lost a basketball team 40 years ago? A lot has changed since then.

KC would have supported the thunder likely more than OKC would.
Posted via Mobile Device

What I did say is, when they had a team they didn't support them. Nothing more, nothing less.

It's my OPINION, that KC wouldn't have supported the Thunder as much as OKC has. I base the opinion on something tangiable like past attendance records, not on "Things change."

No shit, things change, but that isn't something tangiable like attendence records. That's just a guess on your part.

58-4ever
06-06-2012, 08:21 AM
That's just it. They weren't winners before arriving in OKC. OKC supported them before waiting until they made a conference championship.

Waiting until they make a conference championship, isn't support. It's band-wagon.

They only had one losing season in OKC, which was the inaugural season. I'm sure KC would have waited one year.

I'm not sure what your point is. If your saying the jury is still out on whether OKC will "support" the team after the KD and Westbrook years, then I agree. However, KD is only 23 years old. :p

58-4ever
06-06-2012, 08:22 AM
Im not sure there are enough Non Chiefs and Royals sportsfans in KC to support a pro basketball team?

I do believe there are a lot Chiefs fans who are anti-NBA fans in KC if this board is any indication. Small sample size I know.....

Sporting News have become pretty successful, but im willing to bet thatís a different fan entirely than NBA fan.

OKC has been sort of unique. They were obviously an underserved market and starving for a Pro team. KC just isnít in that boat.

There are anti-NBA fans because you don't have a team. I met plenty of those people in OKC before the Hornets.

Brock
06-06-2012, 08:22 AM
What I did say is, when they had a team they didn't support them. Nothing more, nothing less.

It's my OPINION, that KC wouldn't have supported the Thunder as much as OKC has. I base the opinion on something tangiable like past attendance records, not on "Things change."

No shit, things change, but that isn't something tangiable like attendence records. That's just a guess on your part.

Because the NBA of today compares readily with the NBA of the 70s.

58-4ever
06-06-2012, 08:24 AM
KC would have supported the thunder likely more than OKC would.
Posted via Mobile Device

I agree KC would have supported the Thunder, but not more than OKC. My grandmother watches these games on the edge of her seat, and she has never watched sports in her life.

BigChiefFan
06-06-2012, 08:24 AM
They only had one losing season in OKC, which was the inaugural season. I'm sure KC would have waited one year.

I'm not sure what your point is. If your saying the jury is still out on whether OKC will "support" the team after the KD and Westbrook years, then I agree. However, KD is only 23 years old. :p

OKC also supported the New Orleans Hornets, during Katrina and that's what got the NBA's attention.

The Thunder was the Seattle Super Sonics and they were hardly a contender in recent years.

blaise
06-06-2012, 08:26 AM
OKC also supported the New Orleans Hornets, during Katrina and that's what got the NBA's attention.

The Thunder was the Seattle Super Sonics and they were hardly a contender in recent years.

When they drafted Durant the expectations instantly rose.

58-4ever
06-06-2012, 08:26 AM
OKC also supported the New Orleans Hornets, during Katrina and that's what got the NBA's attention.

The Thunder was the Seattle Super Sonics and they were hardly a contender in recent years.

I'm still not sure what your point is. I was there during the Hornets years and attended many games. When you transition from Chris Paul to Kevin Durant, it's easy to stay excited about the NBA.

-King-
06-06-2012, 08:27 AM
OKC also supported the New Orleans Hornets, during Katrina and that's what got the NBA's attention.

The Thunder was the Seattle Super Sonics and they were hardly a contender in recent years.

I don't get what your point is. They'd still have the same players they have now. It's not like they would have lost Durant or not gotten Westbrook and Harden if they would have came to KC.
Posted via Mobile Device

Bearcat
06-06-2012, 08:29 AM
That's just it. They weren't winners before arriving in OKC. OKC supported them before waiting until they made a conference championship.

Waiting until they make a conference championship, isn't support. It's band-wagon.

They suffered through one season. LMAO

Saul Good
06-06-2012, 08:34 AM
KANSAS CITY-OMAHA KINGS
Season GP Total Avg.
1972-73 41 261,860 6,387
1973-74 41 232,692 5,675
1974-75 41 308,906 7,534

KANSAS CITY KINGS
Season GP Total Avg.
1975-76 41 272,675 6,651
1976-77 41 330,526 8,062
1977-78 41 315,722 7,701
1978-79 41 442,354 10,789
1979-80 41 375,387 9,156
1980-81 41 336,585 8,209
1981-82 41 280,564 6,843
1982-83 41 340,359 8,301
1983-84 41 370,270 9,031
1984-85 41 262,812 6,410


ONLY ONE SEASON did they even do an avg of over 10,000



They clearly didn't support the team.

The NBA barely averaged 10,000 fans per game back then.

1983-84 was the last season we had a team that wasn't a lame duck, and we averaged over 9,000 in attendance for one of the worst franchises in the sport. Here are some other attendance figures from that year for reference.

Atlanta: 7312
Boston: 14801
Chicago: 6365
Cleveland: 5075
New York: 12096
Washington: 7920

League Average: 10620

Kansas City has grown in population by 50% since then.

-King-
06-06-2012, 08:36 AM
The Kings had the same attendance numbers as the bulls
Posted via Mobile Device

BigChiefFan
06-06-2012, 08:38 AM
The NBA barely averaged 10,000 fans per game back then.

1983-84 was the last season we had a team that wasn't a lame duck, and we averaged over 9,000 in attendance for one of the worst franchises in the sport. Here are some other attendance figures from that year for reference.

Atlanta: 7312
Boston: 14801
Chicago: 6365
Cleveland: 5075
New York: 12096
Washington: 7920

League Average: 10620

Kansas City has grown in population by 50% since then.

Even then, it's still below league average.

Saul Good
06-06-2012, 08:39 AM
The Kings had the same attendance numbers as the bulls
Posted via Mobile Device

Yep. The Bulls exploded in popularity when Jordan showed up kind of like how the Thunder are popular with Durant.

-King-
06-06-2012, 08:40 AM
Even then, it's still below league average.

So were the Bulls before they got MJ. You're nuts if you don't think kc would support a team with some of the best talent in the league.
Posted via Mobile Device

Bearcat
06-06-2012, 08:42 AM
Even then, it's still below league average.

I guess we can wait until the Thunder have 9 losing seasons in 13 years to see if they're still interested in supporting them... :shrug:

Saul Good
06-06-2012, 08:45 AM
Even then, it's still below league average.

Holy shit. One of the smallest markets in the league with one of the worst franchises in professional sports only averaged 90% as many fans as the league average! That must be why the team moved!

You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. The team owners were hell-bent on moving the team to Sacramento.

milkman
06-06-2012, 08:48 AM
Even then, it's still below league average.

You, my friend, are a fucking moron.

58-4ever
06-06-2012, 09:06 AM
I guess we can wait until the Thunder have 9 losing seasons in 13 years to see if they're still interested in supporting them... :shrug:

I suspect you'll have to wait at least ten years before their next losing season. :thumb:

(homer speak)

Pasta Giant Meatball
06-06-2012, 09:13 AM
With Durant, absolutely. Star power and winning brings in fans.

okcchief
06-06-2012, 09:19 AM
Seeing I've split my life between the cities I'll weigh in.

The answer is yes.

Presti was already in place. Durant was already on the team.

I don't know that KC would have supported them as much in the 23 win season, but just as much after. These kids are winners and KC would have embraced that. There were a lot of people here who didn't care much at first, but pretty much everyone is on the bandwagon now.

This team has already been the their conference finals more in 4 years than the Chiefs have been in my life time. The Royals haven't been to the playoffs in 27 years. The NBA would be huge there with this team. I don't know if KC would have as many sell outs with more things to do there, but it would be close. KC and OKC are sports towns and get behind a winner.

Honestly, I've been looking for a NBA team to fully get behind since the Kings left so I would have been happy either way. Though, KC never really had a chance. Bennett and his group wanted to buy the Hornets and keep them here as well. When he bought the Sonics he would have kept them there and been fine I think, but he wanted a State of the art arena. If he couldn't do that then he was going home period. The people of Seattle can paint him the villain, but he's a business man. If he could make more money in Seattle he would. The real villain is Schultz because he knew there was a chance he was moving the team.

I'm glad they came here since I live here. However, if they were the KC Whatevers I'd be a huge fan too.

okcchief
06-06-2012, 09:29 AM
I agree KC would have supported the Thunder, but not more than OKC. My grandmother watches these games on the edge of her seat, and she has never watched sports in her life.

That's the funny thing about it. Women and kids get in to the NBA more than anything I've seen. I'm really surprised by how much the casual sports fan loves it.

The live experience is a lot of it. Especially once people go to a playoff game. The energy in the building is so amazing. They also cater to the fans. They are building future fans. My daughter has meet all the players and has run drills with them on the court. All the players treat the kids great. I would have killed to play with George Brett when I was a kid. Even my 4 month old has a picture with Russell Westbrook. That strategy is what I believe will make it work long term.

okcchief
06-06-2012, 09:36 AM
I've been a sports fan my whole life. I've been to Royals and Chiefs playoff games. I went to the SuperBowl last year and all I could think the whole time is this doesn't match a Thunder playoff game. I recommend anyone to come down for a playoff game sometime. You won't be disappointed. I like the NFL better, but I like the NBA in game experience better. Tailgating is the funnest part of the NFL game to me. Other than that I'd just as soon watch on TV.

Bearcat
06-06-2012, 09:40 AM
Yeah, I went to a Hawks/Heat playoff game in Atlanta a few years ago and was really impressed with the energy inside the building... and it was freakin' Atlanta. That's one thing the NBA does really well.

58-4ever
06-06-2012, 09:42 AM
That's the funny thing about it. Women and kids get in to the NBA more than anything I've seen. I'm really surprised by how much the casual sports fan loves it.

The live experience is a lot of it. Especially once people go to a playoff game. The energy in the building is so amazing. They also cater to the fans. They are building future fans. My daughter has meet all the players and has run drills with them on the court. All the players treat the kids great. I would have killed to play with George Brett when I was a kid. Even my 4 month old has a picture with Russell Westbrook. That strategy is what I believe will make it work long term.

Yep, my two year old woke up this morning saying "Thunder Up, Fear Beard!" Haha. It was the best thing I've ever heard.

milkman
06-06-2012, 09:47 AM
I've been a sports fan my whole life. I've been to Royals and Chiefs playoff games. I went to the SuperBowl last year and all I could think the whole time is this doesn't match a Thunder playoff game. I recommend anyone to come down for a playoff game sometime. You won't be disappointed. I like the NFL better, but I like the NBA in game experience better. Tailgating is the funnest part of the NFL game to me. Other than that I'd just as soon watch on TV.

This is why the NFL will always be king in this country.

Basketball and baseball are great sporting events to aattend live, for different reasons.

But football is, far and away, the best TV sport.

Since average fan can only afford to attend live sporting events a limited number of times, the game that is most entertaining on TV wins.

Deberg_1990
06-06-2012, 09:49 AM
Seeing I've split my life between the cities I'll weigh in.

The answer is yes.

Presti was already in place. Durant was already on the team.

I don't know that KC would have supported them as much in the 23 win season, but just as much after. These kids are winners and KC would have embraced that. There were a lot of people here who didn't care much at first, but pretty much everyone is on the bandwagon now.

This team has already been the their conference finals more in 4 years than the Chiefs have been in my life time. The Royals haven't been to the playoffs in 27 years. The NBA would be huge there with this team. I don't know if KC would have as many sell outs with more things to do there, but it would be close. KC and OKC are sports towns and get behind a winner.

Honestly, I've been looking for a NBA team to fully get behind since the Kings left so I would have been happy either way. Though, KC never really had a chance. Bennett and his group wanted to buy the Hornets and keep them here as well. When he bought the Sonics he would have kept them there and been fine I think, but he wanted a State of the art arena. If he couldn't do that then he was going home period. The people of Seattle can paint him the villain, but he's a business man. If he could make more money in Seattle he would. The real villain is Schultz because he knew there was a chance he was moving the team.

I'm glad they came here since I live here. However, if they were the KC Whatevers I'd be a huge fan too.

That's the funny thing about it. Women and kids get in to the NBA more than anything I've seen. I'm really surprised by how much the casual sports fan loves it.

The live experience is a lot of it. Especially once people go to a playoff game. The energy in the building is so amazing. They also cater to the fans. They are building future fans. My daughter has meet all the players and has run drills with them on the court. All the players treat the kids great. I would have killed to play with George Brett when I was a kid. Even my 4 month old has a picture with Russell Westbrook. That strategy is what I believe will make it work long term.

Great posts. I still think the Thunder really benefited from a perfect storm of things. Starved pro sports market, great drafts, etc......but they have done a great job. Good luck tonight, I think the Thunder take it, but the Spurs put up a decent fight.

Dr. Facebook Fever
06-06-2012, 09:56 AM
They'd be looking up at the Charlotte Bobcats if they were in KC because KC is a cursed sports town.

ChiefsCountry
06-06-2012, 09:56 AM
Kings left Kansas City because they were purchased by a group from Sacramento who wanted a team in Sacramento. Not much KC could do there.

Also the reason they were known as the Kansas City-Omaha Kings was because at the time Municipal Auditorum was their home and it was booked solid all the time, thus not enough prime open dates were available. Thus they played several games in Omaha each year. This all changed in 1975 when Kemper Arena was opened.

I think Kansas City can support a NBA/NHL team, mainly due to our vast regional appeal, but the biggest concern would be corporate sponsorship dollars. The suites at Sprint Center are already sold out, its just sponsorship dollars that are the kicker IMO.

Chocolate Hog
06-06-2012, 10:02 AM
Of course the thunder would have been successful here or anywhere else for that matter.

Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2

Valiant
06-06-2012, 10:17 AM
What I did say is, when they had a team they didn't support them. Nothing more, nothing less.

It's my OPINION, that KC wouldn't have supported the Thunder as much as OKC has. I base the opinion on something tangiable like past attendance records, not on "Things change."

No shit, things change, but that isn't something tangiable like attendence records. That's just a guess on your part.

What are attendence figures for the other small markets that had teams then and have on now? 9-10k is 20ish today..

For all we know, that is decent support for the facility they had then.

Saulbadguy
06-06-2012, 10:23 AM
What are attendence figures for the other small markets that had teams then and have on now? 9-10k is 20ish today..

For all we know, that is decent support for the facility they had then.

There is also close to 1 million more people in the KC Metro Area than there was in the 70's.

morphius
06-06-2012, 10:24 AM
Support a winner, sure. Support another losing franchise, I think we've had enough of that. It really comes down to local ownership, if we had that I'd expect support for the team. But these remote ownerships just don't seem to be doing much to help us out.

58-4ever
06-06-2012, 10:28 AM
.

I think Kansas City can support a NBA/NHL team, mainly due to our vast regional appeal, but the biggest concern would be corporate sponsorship dollars. The suites at Sprint Center are already sold out, its just sponsorship dollars that are the kicker IMO.

Exactly. This has helped the Thunder thrive in OKC. Chesapeake, Devon, Sand Ridge... Lots of oil money in OKC that help drive tons of Corporate Revenue.

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2012, 10:36 AM
Could KC support an NBA team? Sure.

But it's going to come at the expense of the Chiefs and/or Royals - who are already struggling for support without having to fight another franchise for the sports fan entertainment dollar.

Have any of you seen what the Thunder (and NBA teams in general) charge for tickets?

A lot of people in KC hate paying for 10 Chiefs games a year - can't imagine they'll be lining up to pay the same prices (or higher) for 40+ home games.

Lower level seating: $60-275

Club level seating: $85-$170

Upper level seating: $10-$70

Just not seeing it, without it having a huge impact on the Chiefs and/or Royals.

suds79
06-06-2012, 10:39 AM
Just not seeing it, without it having a huge impact on the Chiefs and/or Royals.

I could cut the Royals lose in an instant. They've been wasting our time for 90% of my life.

If they wanted to leave, fine by me. Open the door for another franchise that matters.

Bearcat
06-06-2012, 10:47 AM
Could KC support an NBA team? Sure.

But it's going to come at the expense of the Chiefs and/or Royals - who are already struggling for support without having to fight another franchise for the sports fan entertainment dollar.

Have any of you seen what the Thunder (and NBA teams in general) charge for tickets?

A lot of people in KC hate paying for 10 Chiefs games a year - can't imagine they'll be lining up to pay the same prices (or higher) for 40+ home games.

Lower level seating: $60-275

Club level seating: $85-$170

Upper level seating: $10-$70

Just not seeing it, without it having a huge impact on the Chiefs and/or Royals.

Looks similar to hockey... KC is supposedly already one of the most over-extended sports markets in the country. I doubt the Royals could have 25-30,000+ show up on a Saturday night (like they've done several times this season) along with 15,000+ at the Sprint Center and possibly another 18,000 at a Sporting KC game on the same weekend. It would definitely put pressure on the Royals and Chiefs to put a winning team on the field... or uh, move to LA.

Agent V
06-06-2012, 10:48 AM
Unrealistic scenario: If KC could host another professional team (basketball OR hockey... hell, I love hockey), but it had to come at the expense of another team, I'd tell the Royals to fuck themselves in a second.

Fish
06-06-2012, 10:50 AM
http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/277139_174628385939442_1096265_n.jpg

Chocolate Hog
06-06-2012, 10:50 AM
Unrealistic scenario: If KC could host another professional team (basketball OR hockey... hell, I love hockey), but it had to come at the expense of another team, I'd tell the Royals to fuck themselves in a second.

This.

Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2

58-4ever
06-06-2012, 11:55 AM
Could KC support an NBA team? Sure.

But it's going to come at the expense of the Chiefs and/or Royals - who are already struggling for support without having to fight another franchise for the sports fan entertainment dollar.

Have any of you seen what the Thunder (and NBA teams in general) charge for tickets?

A lot of people in KC hate paying for 10 Chiefs games a year - can't imagine they'll be lining up to pay the same prices (or higher) for 40+ home games.

Lower level seating: $60-275

Club level seating: $85-$170

Upper level seating: $10-$70

Just not seeing it, without it having a huge impact on the Chiefs and/or Royals.

Thunder tickets can get quite expensive, but they are not the bottom dollar you speak of. You can get into Loud City during the Regular Season for around 20 dollars. EDIT: Did not see your ten dollar upper level price.

suzzer99
06-06-2012, 12:00 PM
No, because KC suffers from a malady known as Shottenheimeritis. This condition prevents all winning during and after the time coach Marty Shottenheimer has been coaching in your city. While in active-mode Shottenheimeritis can extend as much as 200 miles in all directions, but does eventually fade at long distances (see Lawrence, KS).

How long it remains at ground zero is unknown, as no city that Marty Shottenheimer has been a head coach in has ever won a championship in anything since.

For some unknown reason, Shottenheimeritis also seems to have infected Seattle. There is speculation that this has something to do with thousands of mid-westerners flocking there for the grunge craze in the mid-90s.

58-4ever
06-06-2012, 12:03 PM
No, because KC suffers from a malady known as Shottenheimeritis. This condition prevents all winning during and after the time coach Marty Shottenheimer has been coaching in your city. While in active-mode Shottenheimeritis can extend as much as 200 miles in all directions, but does eventually fade at long distances (see Lawrence, KS).

How long it remains at ground zero is unknown, as no city that Marty Shottenheimer has been a head coach in has ever won a championship in anything since.

Marty won a championship just last year. In fact, Marty may be the most unlucky NFL coach in the history of the game.

L.A. Chieffan
06-06-2012, 12:06 PM
you might be able to get the kings back

qabbaan
06-06-2012, 12:12 PM
What I did say is, when they had a team they didn't support them. Nothing more, nothing less.

It's my OPINION, that KC wouldn't have supported the Thunder as much as OKC has. I base the opinion on something tangiable like past attendance records, not on "Things change."

No shit, things change, but that isn't something tangiable like attendence records. That's just a guess on your part.

When you are wrong you should give up, instead of digging in.

Speaking of digging in, pass the gold 'plated' babies.

Buck
06-06-2012, 12:17 PM
No, because KC suffers from a malady known as Shottenheimeritis. This condition prevents all winning during and after the time coach Marty Shottenheimer has been coaching in your city. While in active-mode Shottenheimeritis can extend as much as 200 miles in all directions, but does eventually fade at long distances (see Lawrence, KS).

How long it remains at ground zero is unknown, as no city that Marty Shottenheimer has been a head coach in has ever won a championship in anything since.

For some unknown reason, Shottenheimeritis also seems to have infected Seattle. There is speculation that this has something to do with thousands of mid-westerners flocking there for the grunge craze in the mid-90s.

Fuck.

Indians, Browns, Cavs, Chiefs, Royals, Redskins, Wizards, Caps, Nats, Chargers, Padres.

Your theory holds true, except I think Marty won a title with a minor league football team this year.

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2012, 01:16 PM
Thunder tickets can get quite expensive, but they are not the bottom dollar you speak of. You can get into Loud City during the Regular Season for around 20 dollars. EDIT: Did not see your ten dollar upper level price.

Great, you can get into a small fraction of the seats for a reasonable amount.

That still leaves a lot of arena to fill at pretty high prices.

To get a NBA or NHL team here, you're going to need a commitment to a full building 40+ times a season - not just select seats in the upper deck.

58-4ever
06-06-2012, 01:18 PM
Great, you can get into a small fraction of the seats for a reasonable amount.

That still leaves a lot of arena to fill at pretty high prices.

To get a NBA or NHL team here, you're going to need a commitment to a full building 40+ times a season - not just select seats in the upper deck.

Actually, the affordable seats stretch pretty far. You can go for under 50 dollars and go almost anywhere in the upper bowl. Have you been to a Thunder game?

okcchief
06-06-2012, 01:18 PM
Thunder tickets can get quite expensive, but they are not the bottom dollar you speak of. You can get into Loud City during the Regular Season for around 20 dollars. EDIT: Did not see your ten dollar upper level price.

You can get them for $10. We had a baby this year so I had to pass on several regular season games. I found out during that time the resell value is insane right now. I made money by being a season ticket holder which has covered the expense of my playoff tickets.

It won't last forever, but we are set to succeed for a while. I'm enjoying rooting for a franchise that has a clue which Royals/Chiefs fans can understand.

This current franchise would have worked anywhere, but there are very few markets that would as hungry for it as OKC. I think KC would be one.

okcchief
06-06-2012, 01:19 PM
Great, you can get into a small fraction of the seats for a reasonable amount.

That still leaves a lot of arena to fill at pretty high prices.

To get a NBA or NHL team here, you're going to need a commitment to a full building 40+ times a season - not just select seats in the upper deck.

Any game in the upper level are less than $30. Half of those are $10 seats.

Reaper16
06-06-2012, 01:20 PM
Kansas Citians are notorious front-runners. They will support any and all successful, winning teams.

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2012, 01:20 PM
Actually, the affordable seats stretch pretty far. You can go for under 50 dollars and go almost anywhere in the upper bowl. Have you been to a Thunder game?

So for two full season tickets you're looking at spending $3000-$4500.

To sit in the upper deck at an NBA game.

Sorry, I don't see many folks in KC making that commitment.

Plus, you still need to fill the lower bowl and club seats.

okcchief
06-06-2012, 01:21 PM
Any game in the upper level are less than $30. Half of those are $10 seats.

I think there are some seats front row mid court up there that are $40 or $50 but very few.

okcchief
06-06-2012, 01:25 PM
For for two full season tickets you're looking at spending $3000-$4500.

To sit in the upper deck at an NBA game.

Sorry, I don't see many folks in KC making that commitment.

Wrong.

I pay $880 for 2 seats that are on the corner and about 6 rows up. At least half of the seats are that price. Then you have $20 seats that would be $1760 and $30 seats that are like $2600. The upper deck is very affordable. I tried to upgrade this year and I couldn't. Season tickets are sold out and there is a waiting list. I think it would be fine there, but it might crush the Royals.

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2012, 01:30 PM
Wrong.

I pay $880 for 2 seats that are on the corner and about 6 rows up. At least half of the seats are that price. Then you have $20 seats that would be $1760 and $30 seats that are like $2600. The upper deck is very affordable. I tried to upgrade this year and I couldn't. Season tickets are sold out and there is a waiting list. I think it would be fine there, but it might crush the Royals.

You're missing the point.

Yes, there are some sections of affordable seats.

But there are a lot of sections of not-so-affordable seats.

Sure, you can go to the Chiefs game for $25 and sit in Row 45 in the corners - but people still have to spend $100-$250 to fill the lower bowl and club areas.

If they were the only game in town, I could absolutely see Kansas Citians shelling out that kind of cash.

But they wouldn't be, and I don't see average KC fan giving up completely on the Chiefs and/or Royals over a transplanted basketball or hockey team.

DeezNutz
06-06-2012, 01:34 PM
Kansas Citians are notorious front-runners. They will support any and all successful, winning teams.

Would entirely depend upon the ownership group, IMO. While you're right--winners will automatically attract followers--I believe Sporting KC is popular not only because of their on-field success but also because of the commitment of local ownership.

In fact, I believe the latter is the most important here, as KC residents are desperate for passionate, viable local ownership.

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2012, 01:38 PM
Would entirely depend upon the ownership group, IMO. While you're right--winners will automatically attract followers--I believe Sporting KC is popular not only because of their on-field success but also because of the commitment of local ownership.

In fact, I believe the latter is the most important here, as KC residents are desperate for passionate, viable local ownership.

Agree completely, although I think something would have to give if the Chiefs, Royals, Sporting and -insert NBA team here- were all successful at the same time.

IYO, if KC were to attract a NHL or NBA franchise - who loses support financially - Chiefs or Royals?

Or both?

dirk digler
06-06-2012, 01:39 PM
But they wouldn't be, and I don't see average KC fan giving up completely on the Chiefs and/or Royals over a transplanted basketball or hockey team.

I do as long as they are winning like they have been. I guarantee you that people would abandon the shitty ass Royals and go watch the Thunder. That would be no contest, probably the Chiefs too.

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2012, 01:42 PM
I do as long as they are winning like they have been. I guarantee you that people would abandon the shitty ass Royals and go watch the Thunder. That would be no contest, probably the Chiefs too.

You're telling me that Kansas Citians would give up 40+ years of history over a few seasons of successful basketball? That's sad.

Fuck, I'm not even from KC, and there's no way I choose a transplanted basketball team over the Royals or Chiefs, no matter how bad they've been.

dirk digler
06-06-2012, 01:45 PM
You're telling me that Kansas Citians would give up 40+ years of history over a few seasons of successful basketball? That's sad.

Fuck, I'm not even from KC, and there's no way I choose a transplanted basketball team over the Royals or Chiefs, no matter how bad they've been.

No question. I would be first in line of course I am big NBA fan though.

Let's look at this realistically. Would you rather pay money to watch the Royals lose 100 games every season or watch your NBA team win championships?

Would you pay high ticket prices to watch Matt Cassel throw 5 yd duck passes or would you rather watch Kevin Durant?

Reaper16
06-06-2012, 01:47 PM
Agree completely, although I think something would have to give if the Chiefs, Royals, Sporting and -insert NBA team here- were all successful at the same time.


Aahahhahahahahaha. What if the sky turned into cows? What thirst become contagious? What if the Earth switched places with Neptune?

It makes no sense to plan for the impossible is what I'm getting at.

DeezNutz
06-06-2012, 01:47 PM
Agree completely, although I think something would have to give if the Chiefs, Royals, Sporting and -insert NBA team here- were all successful at the same time.

IYO, if KC were to attract a NHL or NBA franchise - who loses support financially - Chiefs or Royals?

Or both?

It's tough, but KC is probably coming quickly to a crossroads with the Royals under Glass's ownership. He can no longer just sink a shit ton of money into the draft, and thus he'll either have to make large financial commitments to home-grown talent or in FA. No matter what, the latter will have to be more important in coming years.

Will he do it? I doubt it. And the franchise will continue to muddle in mediocrity (or it will quickly return to this status as we lose our talented young core).

At this point, I think the fans will break because there reaches a point where you just have to realize that you're supporting a pointless cause. Sad? Of course, but it's impossible to blame Kansas Citians if it reaches this point. I'm hopeful that Glass will sell before this would happen.

Cap floor/ceiling will mitigate this problem in the NFL.

-King-
06-06-2012, 01:50 PM
You're telling me that Kansas Citians would give up 40+ years of history over a few seasons of successful basketball? That's sad.

Fuck, I'm not even from KC, and there's no way I choose a transplanted basketball team over the Royals or Chiefs, no matter how bad they've been.

Yes people would sacrifice a team that hasn't been in the playoffs since the 80s for a team that is a perennial finals contender. Especially when that team plays in a much more exciting sport.
Posted via Mobile Device

qabbaan
06-06-2012, 01:51 PM
I do as long as they are winning like they have been. I guarantee you that people would abandon the shitty ass Royals and go watch the Thunder. That would be no contest, probably the Chiefs too.

Thunder are not a typical case for a small market in the NBA.

dirk digler
06-06-2012, 01:53 PM
Thunder are not a typical case for a small market in the NBA.

I know but that wasn't the question.

If the Milwaukee Bucks moved here they would probably struggle attendance wise.

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2012, 01:56 PM
No question.

Let's look at this realistically. Would you rather pay money to watch the Royals lose 100 games every season or watch your NBA team win championships?

Would you pay high ticket prices to watch Matt Cassel throw 5 yd duck passes or would you rather watch Kevin Durant?

Again, I don't live in KC, but I root for the franchises.

Can only speak for myself, but give me bad football or baseball over a few years of good basketball.

Example: I'm given $100 to spend on two tickets to a sporting event in KC.

For that $100, I can sit in the upper deck for either the Chiefs or Thunder, or I can sit a handful of rows from the dugout at a Royals game.

I'm going to pick the Chiefs or Royals every time. Regardless of record.

Then again, I appreciate other teams' players more than the average fan - so I don't necessarily need to see a win to enjoy a sporting event. The wife and I might be in Dallas next month, and if so, we're going to try to hit a Rangers game - even though we have no rooting interest.

Why?

Because we enjoy the game, and the atmosphere of being at the ballpark.

ChiefsCountry
06-06-2012, 01:59 PM
Actually Milwaukee would be the target market of intrest for Kansas City since they are similar in size and would have the same Big 3 sports teams. (I know the Packers are in Green Bay but Milwaukee is their market) Bucks average around 15k to their games.

BWillie
06-06-2012, 02:05 PM
Unfortunately I would say no. Between the Chiefs, Royals and KU there really isn't much more room to spread this few number of fans.

I think Sporting is the perfect size for Kansas City. An NBA team would simply have been too big. 41 home games a year is more difficult to fill than one would think.

Contrary to popular belief, additional pro teams does not take away from other pro teams. Many times it actually drives the pro-sports culture in the city and more and more ppl join in on the fun. There is absolutely no way that KC would not support the Thunder if they were having the success they are having now. No city would. Kansas City has shown over and over again they will support a winner whoever it is. I mean they support Soccer in Kansas for god sakes.

Bearcat
06-06-2012, 02:06 PM
You're telling me that Kansas Citians would give up 40+ years of history over a few seasons of successful basketball? That's sad.

****, I'm not even from KC, and there's no way I choose a transplanted basketball team over the Royals or Chiefs, no matter how bad they've been.

Assuming Joe Fan enjoyed baseball, football, and basketball equally, I don't really see the problem with choosing a new basketball team over the Chiefs or Royals. Sure, I love tailgating at Arrowhead, but I could also spend a few hours at Flying Saucer before heading to Sprint Center. Meeting specific people at one event or the other might make a difference. It's just entertainment. Fan loyalty to the Chiefs just means more $$$ for them.

whoman69
06-06-2012, 02:12 PM
NO. They didn't support the team when they had one.

They never really had one. They shared games with Omaha until 79/80 when the roof was damaged on the Kemper Arena and had to play in a place with less than 10K seats. Despite this their average attendance that year was a franchise best. They were a mediocre team that somehow made it to the conference finals the next year. The year after they broke the team apart and the year after they played under the specter of the team moving to Sacramento.

The Kings never tried to assemble a team around their few stars, trading them both off when the team couldn't get over the mediocre bump. The Kings were a franchise much like the Jazz. The Jazz decided to put talent in the lineup and took off as a franchise, the Kings just took off.

dirk digler
06-06-2012, 02:16 PM
Again, I don't live in KC, but I root for the franchises.

Can only speak for myself, but give me bad football or baseball over a few years of good basketball.

Example: I'm given $100 to spend on two tickets to a sporting event in KC.

For that $100, I can sit in the upper deck for either the Chiefs or Thunder, or I can sit a handful of rows from the dugout at a Royals game.

I'm going to pick the Chiefs or Royals every time. Regardless of record.

Then again, I appreciate other teams' players more than the average fan - so I don't necessarily need to see a win to enjoy a sporting event. The wife and I might be in Dallas next month, and if so, we're going to try to hit a Rangers game - even though we have no rooting interest.

Why?

Because we enjoy the game, and the atmosphere of being at the ballpark.

I like going to baseball games as well and enjoy being at the park but I only do that a couple of times a year. I certainly wouldn't spend big money on season tickets to watch a perennial loser if I could spend that money watching Durant dunk on Lebron..oh wait Garnett in the NBA Finals.

But I admit I am biased I love the NBA...

I would also add I think what Reaper said was spot on KC like most towns are front runners and as long as the NBA team was winning and competing for championships and the other teams aren't the NBA team would have zero problem selling out every night.

qabbaan
06-06-2012, 02:19 PM
I would also add I think what Reaper said was spot on KC like most towns are front runners and as long as the NBA team was winning and competing for championships and the other teams aren't the NBA team would have zero problem selling out every night.

How many NBA teams are regularly competing for championships?

mr. tegu
06-06-2012, 02:22 PM
I think the answer is a resounding yes. OKC doesn't have the feel of a typical NBA team. They are almost more of a college team. And we all know college basketball is huge around here. It especially helps since all the players are so young and they seem to actually listen to the coach, a novelty in the NBA right now. Also they have some KU guys on the roster and their best player, Durant who is one of the best in the league played in the Big 12 and is also very likable to average people. He is a superstar but I think people can identify with him in ways they can't with most guys.

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2012, 02:23 PM
I like going to baseball games as well and enjoy being at the park but I only do that a couple of times a year. I certainly wouldn't spend big money on season tickets to watch a perennial loser if I could spend that money watching Durant dunk on Lebron..oh wait Garnett in the NBA Finals.

But I admit I am biased I love the NBA...

I would also add I think what Reaper said was spot on KC like most towns are front runners and as long as the NBA team was winning and competing for championships and the other teams aren't the NBA team would have zero problem selling out every night.

Winning or not, how many people do you personally know that would spend $5000+ for two season tickets? And that's the LOW end (price wise) of the lower level. Sitting 40 rows off the floor and behind a backboard. You're looking at over $10K for two seats for anything low and between the baselines.

Filling the cheap seats won't be a problem. Who's got the money to fill the lover level?

mr. tegu
06-06-2012, 02:25 PM
I would also add I think what Reaper said was spot on KC like most towns are front runners and as long as the NBA team was winning and competing for championships and the other teams aren't the NBA team would have zero problem selling out every night.

The Royals and Chiefs records in combination with our support completely contradicts this. As someone said on the first page, on a Tuesday night the second to last place Royals played the last place Twins and the stadium had 23,000 people. Hardly suggestive of frontrunners.

dirk digler
06-06-2012, 02:26 PM
How many NBA teams are regularly competing for championships?

Very few but once again we are not talking about regular NBA teams were talking about OKC

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2012, 02:28 PM
Very few but once again we are not talking about regular NBA teams were talking about OKC

They aren't going to be good forever, a point many of you are missing.

You're looking at the now, and ignoring the later.

qabbaan
06-06-2012, 02:36 PM
Very few but once again we are not talking about regular NBA teams were talking about OKC

They have a unique combination that is working right now.

You said people would come out in KC to support a team that is competing for championships. Well, no kidding. KC hasn't had a team regularly competing for championships in 25 years. I bet they'd sell tickets to confused fans who want to see what competing for a championship looks like.

My question was, why would we expect a KC team to do what OKC is doing? Other than this one anomaly, are teams like Sacramento or Portland or Utah or Denver or Milwaukee or Charlotte or Atlanta or New Orleans competing for championships? No... The reality is that only a few teams have a chance. There is no reason to suspect a KC team would be like the Lakers and the Celtics and not more like the Bobcats or the Warriors.

dirk digler
06-06-2012, 02:43 PM
Winning or not, how many people do you personally know that would spend $5000+ for two season tickets? And that's the LOW end (price wise) of the lower level. Sitting 40 rows off the floor and behind a backboard. You're looking at over $10K for two seats for anything low and between the baselines.

Filling the cheap seats won't be a problem. Who's got the money to fill the lover level?

I think your prices are a little off. I went on to their website and to sit in a decent seat it is about $56-75 (not counting courtside obviously). They reduce the prices a little for season tickets. So for 41 games that is around $3500 a piece.

http://www.seats3d.com/nba/oklahoma_city_thunder/#/level_2/

Royals season tickets sitting in Field Box would be $2268

dirk digler
06-06-2012, 02:46 PM
The Royals and Chiefs records in combination with our support completely contradicts this. As someone said on the first page, on a Tuesday night the second to last place Royals played the last place Twins and the stadium had 23,000 people. Hardly suggestive of frontrunners.

That is because there is nothing else to do. Let's be honest that is about half full. Do you think 23,000 people would have shown up on the same night that the Thunder were playing in the conference Finals at Sprint Center? I don't. They would be lucky to get 5000-10,000.

mr. tegu
06-06-2012, 02:48 PM
They have a unique combination that is working right now.

You said people would come out in KC to support a team that is competing for championships. Well, no kidding. KC hasn't had a team regularly competing for championships in 25 years. I bet they'd sell tickets to confused fans who want to see what competing for a championship looks like.

My question was, why would we expect a KC team to do what OKC is doing? Other than this one anomaly, are teams like Sacramento or Portland or Utah or Denver or Milwaukee or Charlotte or Atlanta or New Orleans competing for championships? No... The reality is that only a few teams have a chance. There is no reason to suspect a KC team would be like the Lakers and the Celtics and not more like the Bobcats or the Warriors.

None of those teams have Kevin Durant. The NBA is unique in that all you need is that one guy. With that, really good support players will want to come play just like Perkins did with when he went to OKC. Portland was actually well on its way to being a viable team. They got some bad luck with Brandon Roy and Oden. With those two and Lamarcus Aldridge they would be competing for the West. And Denver was also moving up the ranks but they got rid of Anthony.

If you build that winning tradition which I suspect OKC will have as long as Durant is there, they will be filled with good players that are above average NBA guys who want to play with Durant.

dirk digler
06-06-2012, 02:50 PM
They aren't going to be good forever, a point many of you are missing.

You're looking at the now, and ignoring the later.


They have a unique combination that is working right now.

You said people would come out in KC to support a team that is competing for championships. Well, no kidding. KC hasn't had a team regularly competing for championships in 25 years. I bet they'd sell tickets to confused fans who want to see what competing for a championship looks like.

My question was, why would we expect a KC team to do what OKC is doing? Other than this one anomaly, are teams like Sacramento or Portland or Utah or Denver or Milwaukee or Charlotte or Atlanta or New Orleans competing for championships? No... The reality is that only a few teams have a chance. There is no reason to suspect a KC team would be like the Lakers and the Celtics and not more like the Bobcats or the Warriors.

I agree with both of you but the question posed was would the Thunder right now be as successful in KC as they are in OKC.

My answer is yes 100%. They are winning and competing for championships.

mr. tegu
06-06-2012, 02:51 PM
That is because there is nothing else to do. Let's be honest that is about half full. Do you think 23,000 people would have shown up on the same night that the Thunder were playing in the conference Finals at Sprint Center? I don't. They would be lucky to get 5000-10,000.

That is a few games out of the year. Half full on a Tuesday night for a second to last place team against a last place team is a good turnout. Regardless of whether you believe its because there is nothing else to do, we still support the team and are not a fairweather fanbase.

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2012, 02:58 PM
I think your prices are a little off. I went on to their website and to sit in a decent seat it is about $56-75 (not counting courtside obviously). They reduce the prices a little for season tickets. So for 41 games that is around $3500 a piece.

http://www.seats3d.com/nba/oklahoma_city_thunder/#/level_2/

Royals season tickets sitting in Field Box would be $2268

My prices aren't off at all. Directly from the Thunder's website.

Not counting courtside?

Guess what, those seats still need to be sold. Can't cherry pick here.

Again, there wouldn't be a problem filling the average to below-average seat. That still leaves a LOT of high priced lower bowl seats to fill at a premium price.

Someone has to do it. So I'll ask again, do you personally know anyone that has the money, time and interest to do so?

-King-
06-06-2012, 03:01 PM
They aren't going to be good forever, a point many of you are missing.

You're looking at the now, and ignoring the later.

They'll be good for longer than any other NBA team most likely. The oldest key player they have is 27(Perkins) and he's not even that key. That team will compete for years to come and I have no reason to believe their FO will let the team collapse even after KD and Westbrook are gone.

mr. tegu
06-06-2012, 03:05 PM
They'll be good for longer than any other NBA team most likely. The oldest key player they have is 27(Perkins) and he's not even that key. That team will compete for years to come and I have no reason to believe their FO will let the team collapse even after KD and Westbrook are gone.

Another important thing to remeber when contemplating whether or not the team will be allowed to fail and be bad, is that the new owner that bought the team is an OKC native and probably takes a lot of pride in his product. I imagine its for him the way it would be for any of us to own the Chiefs. He will do whatever it takes to keep winning I imagine.

-King-
06-06-2012, 03:09 PM
My prices aren't off at all. Directly from the Thunder's website.

Not counting courtside?

Guess what, those seats still need to be sold. Can't cherry pick here.

Again, there wouldn't be a problem filling the average to below-average seat. That still leaves a LOT of high priced lower bowl seats to fill at a premium price.

Someone has to do it. So I'll ask again, do you personally know anyone that has the money, time and interest to do so?

If people in OKC can afford those tickets, I have no reason to believe that people in KC wouldn't be able to either. Especially when there is about a million more people here than in the OKC metro.

The Thunder would have had no problem selling out every single seat in Sprint Center if they would have came. The two preseason NBA games in 2009 and 2010 have sold out there so I'd see no problem in selling out regular season games/playoff games.

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2012, 03:17 PM
If people in OKC can afford those tickets, I have no reason to believe that people in KC wouldn't be able to either. Especially when there is about a million more people here than in the OKC metro.

The Thunder would have had no problem selling out every single seat in Sprint Center if they would have came. The two preseason NBA games in 2009 and 2010 have sold out there so I'd see no problem in selling out regular season games/playoff games.

People in OKC have no other major league franchises to spend their entertainment dollar on. Easy to support a winner when you don't have to choose between sports. Much less three other professional franchises, as there would be in KC.

Also, selling out a PS game doesn't mean you're capable of selling out 40 home games. Not a problem to find people to spend $200 for one game. How about for 40+?

I'll ask again - does anyone here personally know anyone that has the time, interest, and upwards of $10k to spend on season tickets?

Filling the cheapest seats in the building isn't support.

So, who is going to fill these seats, night after night?

And at the cost of who - the Chiefs or the Royals?

dirk digler
06-06-2012, 03:23 PM
My prices aren't off at all. Directly from the Thunder's website.

Not counting courtside?

Guess what, those seats still need to be sold. Can't cherry pick here.

Again, there wouldn't be a problem filling the average to below-average seat. That still leaves a LOT of high priced lower bowl seats to fill at a premium price.

Someone has to do it. So I'll ask again, do you personally know anyone that has the money, time and interest to do so?

So is the link I posted. For example a $70 lower level ticket for season ticket holders is $56 dollars etc etc.

I imagine the same people that spend $11000\ticket to sit in the Royals Bats Crown Club Seats will pay $10,500\ticket to sit courtside. Meaning rich people from Johnson County. :D

OnTheWarpath58
06-06-2012, 03:26 PM
So is the link I posted. For example a $70 lower level ticket for season ticket holders is $56 dollars etc etc.

I imagine the same people that spend $11000\ticket to sit in the Royals Bats Crown Club Seats will pay $10,500\ticket to sit courtside. Meaning rich people from Johnson County. :D

Except every time I turn on a Royals game, the Crown Seats are nearly empty.

And there's only 100-150 of them.

There are a LOT of lower bowl seats between the baselines at an NBA arena.

dirk digler
06-06-2012, 03:35 PM
Except every time I turn on a Royals game, the Crown Seats are nearly empty.

And there's only 100-150 of them.

There are a LOT of lower bowl seats between the baselines at an NBA arena.

Because rich people are front runners and the Royals for the most part stink. :)

I agree that regular working class people aren't going to buy those tickets at least not for season tickets so it is going to be either rich people or corporations.

qabbaan
06-06-2012, 03:37 PM
None of those teams have Kevin Durant. The NBA is unique in that all you need is that one guy. With that, really good support players will want to come play just like Perkins did with when he went to OKC. Portland was actually well on its way to being a viable team. They got some bad luck with Brandon Roy and Oden. With those two and Lamarcus Aldridge they would be competing for the West. And Denver was also moving up the ranks but they got rid of Anthony.

If you build that winning tradition which I suspect OKC will have as long as Durant is there, they will be filled with good players that are above average NBA guys who want to play with Durant.

The problem with that is that Durant is an exception. Most of those guys in the NBA that you build around are not going to stay in a place like OKC. There is only one Durant. If KC did hit the lottery jackpot and got their franchise guy, KC would more than likely have a window before he wanted to head off to New York, LA, etc.

You can make a run with your Kevin Garnett or your LeBron, if you can find one, but eventually that guy leaves and you have a moribund franchise again.

Just being realistic.

dirk digler
06-06-2012, 03:40 PM
I realize it is only one game but all the expensive seats are sold out for the Wizards vs Heat preseason game at the Sprint Center ($125 and $250)

Contrast that with the pre-season NHL game where they are not sold out ($125 and $150)

Fish
06-06-2012, 03:48 PM
I realize it is only one game but all the expensive seats are sold out for the Wizards vs Heat preseason game at the Sprint Center ($125 and $250)

Contrast that with the pre-season NHL game where they are not sold out ($125 and $150)

The last NHL preseason hockey game at Sprint Center sold out... along with the year before that....

mr. tegu
06-06-2012, 03:58 PM
The problem with that is that Durant is an exception. Most of those guys in the NBA that you build around are not going to stay in a place like OKC. There is only one Durant. If KC did hit the lottery jackpot and got their franchise guy, KC would more than likely have a window before he wanted to head off to New York, LA, etc.

You can make a run with your Kevin Garnett or your LeBron, if you can find one, but eventually that guy leaves and you have a moribund franchise again.

Just being realistic.

What makes you think he wouldn't stay in OKC? If they are winning and he gets paid what is it about him that screams he needs to be in NY or LA? As I mentioned the owner is an OKC guy and he won't let Durant leave and I assume he will do everything he can to keep him there.

whoman69
06-06-2012, 04:06 PM
Rich people will always buy the seats for the status and only show up when the best teams are in town. Its not like those seats are going to go on stub hub.

-King-
06-06-2012, 04:22 PM
Except every time I turn on a Royals game, the Crown Seats are nearly empty.

And there's only 100-150 of them.

There are a LOT of lower bowl seats between the baselines at an NBA arena.

Well yeah... it's the Royals.