Oh my gosh great question. The answer, of course, is "Yes". "Adequacy" is defined as whatever David Stern and the owners say it means, based on perpetually shifting metrics that have precisely zero to do with watching basketball. Your job as a fan is to simply accept this at face value. I'm so glad I could clear that up for you."Quote of the week, from Seattle hoops blogger M. Haubs in a review of the new documentary Sonicsgate:
Many fans have difficulty accepting that Key Arena is an inadequate venue, given that it's a great place to watch a game and is less than 15 years old in its current incarnation.These fans are mistaken, continues Haub, because they fail to recognize that Key Arena can't "maximize the varied revenue streams" that newer arenas can offer. Which is true enough as far as it goes — but is "doesn't generate as much profit as the tenant would like" really the new definition of "inadequate"?"
Posts
3 comments:
For the record, I posted this on Field of Schemes:
I may not have chosen my words precisely enough, but I was not trying to make a value judgment one way or another. I don't believe I suggested that the fans were "mistaken"; I did not intend to.
I was just trying to point out that the reality is that Key Arena became one of the hardest buildings in which to generate revenue in the NBA, given the way the landscape shifted, and *even the president of the fan group trying the save the team*, as well as a journalist, conceded that point.
Don't worry Haubs, only about 5 people read this blog any more. Seeing as how the Thunder are succeeding in OKC, and Seattle has... soccer.
Post a Comment