JS
08-28-2006, 03:08 PM
Does this city need the Bucks?
Posted: Aug. 27, 2006
Mayor Tom Barrett probably said it best a couple of weeks ago when he mentioned the need for "the different communities in southeast Wisconsin to start talking about the Bucks and how important they are to the future."
Take away the rhetoric and emotion that always accompanies such a contentious issue, and it boils down to exactly that.
How important is a big-league franchise to a city? Good for its self-image? Good for business? Good for its ability to provide one more high-profile entertainment option in a town already blessed with a world-class symphony and art museum, as well as baseball, opera, ballet and theater?
Or have the economics of the National Basketball Association grown so insane - the Bucks' $60 million payroll for 15 players, for example, ranks 15th among the 30 teams - that pro basketball no longer has a place in a city like Milwaukee?
These are the kinds of questions we need to be asking ourselves right now, because before you know it this thing is going to be right up in our grill, kind of like Gary Payton when he was still Gary Payton.
Advertisement
Unlike in Seattle, where they've got 11 months to decide if the SuperSonics are a worthwhile civic concern, Milwaukee is on the clock only to the extent that the Bucks now have a lease with the Bradley Center through at least 2008.
A change is inevitable
The Bucks have issued no ultimatum, such as declaring they will not play in the Bradley Center beyond '08. To the contrary, the team has said it is optimistic that a longer lease extension can be reached, the most likely short-term solution. But even if they agree to stay in the arena for another five or six years, they cannot remain economically viable in that building for very much longer.
That is a hard concept for a number of Milwaukeeans, who see a clean, well-maintained arena and are outraged that a facility built in 1988 is already obsolete by NBA standards. But that is fact, not spin or fanciful thinking from Herb Kohl, business people or delusional sportswriters. It happened in Miami and Charlotte. It happened because NBA salaries spiraled out of control, because the Bradley Center does not have space for revenue-producing amenities, because times change, because of a thousand reasons. Sad to say, it happened.
Private funding a must
So we are left with the unimpeachable reality that the Bucks will eventually need a new place to play, here or elsewhere, sooner than later. And if it's here, the financing must somehow be largely private because there would be almost no will for a tax-supported arena, especially in these times, especially in a city that was spoiled by the stroke of the Pettits' pen at the bottom of a check 18 years ago.
As long as Kohl owns the team, there will be no threats to move. The senator will also be in office for six more years, a period that should provide a little breathing room to rationally debate the issues. As a man who kept the team in town 21 years ago, Kohl has been a very good owner, one who has proved lately that he is willing to spend to win. As such, has he done enough? Or as a multi-millionaire, does he have a further responsibility toward a building that would ensure the Bucks' future in Milwaukee?
These are among the questions that need to be discussed now, but more than anything ask yourself:
How important are the Bucks to Milwaukee?
Send e-mail to mhunt@journalsentinel.com
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=488484
Posted: Aug. 27, 2006
Mayor Tom Barrett probably said it best a couple of weeks ago when he mentioned the need for "the different communities in southeast Wisconsin to start talking about the Bucks and how important they are to the future."
Take away the rhetoric and emotion that always accompanies such a contentious issue, and it boils down to exactly that.
How important is a big-league franchise to a city? Good for its self-image? Good for business? Good for its ability to provide one more high-profile entertainment option in a town already blessed with a world-class symphony and art museum, as well as baseball, opera, ballet and theater?
Or have the economics of the National Basketball Association grown so insane - the Bucks' $60 million payroll for 15 players, for example, ranks 15th among the 30 teams - that pro basketball no longer has a place in a city like Milwaukee?
These are the kinds of questions we need to be asking ourselves right now, because before you know it this thing is going to be right up in our grill, kind of like Gary Payton when he was still Gary Payton.
Advertisement
Unlike in Seattle, where they've got 11 months to decide if the SuperSonics are a worthwhile civic concern, Milwaukee is on the clock only to the extent that the Bucks now have a lease with the Bradley Center through at least 2008.
A change is inevitable
The Bucks have issued no ultimatum, such as declaring they will not play in the Bradley Center beyond '08. To the contrary, the team has said it is optimistic that a longer lease extension can be reached, the most likely short-term solution. But even if they agree to stay in the arena for another five or six years, they cannot remain economically viable in that building for very much longer.
That is a hard concept for a number of Milwaukeeans, who see a clean, well-maintained arena and are outraged that a facility built in 1988 is already obsolete by NBA standards. But that is fact, not spin or fanciful thinking from Herb Kohl, business people or delusional sportswriters. It happened in Miami and Charlotte. It happened because NBA salaries spiraled out of control, because the Bradley Center does not have space for revenue-producing amenities, because times change, because of a thousand reasons. Sad to say, it happened.
Private funding a must
So we are left with the unimpeachable reality that the Bucks will eventually need a new place to play, here or elsewhere, sooner than later. And if it's here, the financing must somehow be largely private because there would be almost no will for a tax-supported arena, especially in these times, especially in a city that was spoiled by the stroke of the Pettits' pen at the bottom of a check 18 years ago.
As long as Kohl owns the team, there will be no threats to move. The senator will also be in office for six more years, a period that should provide a little breathing room to rationally debate the issues. As a man who kept the team in town 21 years ago, Kohl has been a very good owner, one who has proved lately that he is willing to spend to win. As such, has he done enough? Or as a multi-millionaire, does he have a further responsibility toward a building that would ensure the Bucks' future in Milwaukee?
These are among the questions that need to be discussed now, but more than anything ask yourself:
How important are the Bucks to Milwaukee?
Send e-mail to mhunt@journalsentinel.com
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=488484