I can understand David Stern getting Booed but why was Boston fans to enfatic?
My Theories:
1) The Tim Donahey scandal: This after all is the most embarrassing moment for he NBA and it's Sterns face is on the cover of it.
2) SeattIe to OKC: I would like to think Boston fans are empathetic.
3) Game-time 9 PM: Okay, its understandable for some games to be on this late but I have to get up at 6 AM! Throw me a bone here, no Friday or Saturday and no early start Sunday. Boston fans were tired and grumpy
Agree/Disagree do you have anything you'd like to add?
http://newsok.com/article/3260306/
I am not empathetic at all toward Seattle, and the conspiracy related in the above story is reprehensible and civilly actionable, in my opinion.
That city deserves to lose that franchise, and it's going to lose that franchise.
As opposed to the owner who had no intention of make a good faith effort to keep the franchise in Seattle. If you just look at half the facts it can be incriminating.
The only reason they tried a poison well was because the new owner tried to weasel his way out of town.
and why would a city deserve to lose it's team based on the actions of a a few anyway?
David stern has thumbed his nose at the fans of Seattle. It's obvious his only allegiance is to the owners.
I would say that some more homework is in order. fact is that the new owners were willing to pony up 3/4 of the amount to build a new facility, asked for a front of the other 25% to be paid back over 7 years by adding a 1% revenue tax and a couple of other things. The city of Seattle voted overwhelmingly to not allow the bonds to happen.
Meanwhile Seattle had no problem ponying up 350 million for the Seahawks and Mariners to build new facilities, with very limited ownership responsibilities.
Seattle is getting exactly what they voted for, The Sonics to move to OKC.
So I took up your offer to do some homework. In all my research I couldn't find anything to back your numbers. What I did find is that in the mid 90's Seattle ponied up 74 million for improvements to key arena. 13 years later Bennett was asking for 300 million from the state and an untold amount from the city of Renton. The total cost of the Arena was to be about 500 million. In one email Bennett describes that the team's financial contribution will be "negligible".
But don't take my word. Here is an article from USA Today regarding Bennett's testimony.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/2008-06-18-668048252_x.htm"Bennett suggested he misunderstood the region's political climate. But he also testified he simply wasn't willing to commit to the things his local advisers told him would be necessary to win government support for a new arena and keep the Sonics in town: make an out-of-pocket contribution toward the construction, and agree to cover cost overruns."
"The city argues that Bennett's demand for a new $500 million arena -- presented late in the 2007 legislative session -- was so unreasonable as to have been designed to fail. The team offered $100 million from future revenue, such as ticket surcharges and parking fees, but nothing out-of-pocket."
"In e-mails to his lobbyists, advisers and others, Bennett said any Sonics' contribution would be "nominal" or "negligible," and suggested the amount could be offset by a credit for the team's ongoing financial losses."
and here is ESPN's account of the testimony
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3448537"But in one e-mail exhibit, Bennett wrote that the team's financial contribution to the proposed building would be "negligible."
He testified that the Sonics agreed to pay $100 million out of future revenue from the arena, such as admissions surcharges. Lawrence emphasized that the contributions would not come from the pockets of Bennett and his partners and called their only arena proposal "a gold-plated deal" for them."
Topic: Why Stern got Booed during post-game in Boston (Read 10671 times)