Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Tuesday, September 2, 2014

Pipe Dream 2010 Update – Nets Won’t Be In Brooklyn in 2010

Due to a recent court decision, the earliest the Nets can be in Brooklyn will be 2011.

That’s assuming Bruce Ratner can raise the money to build the Atlantic Yards development period, which, due to the current credit crisis, is far from a sure bet.

14 comments on “Pipe Dream 2010 Update – Nets Won’t Be In Brooklyn in 2010

  1. daaarn

    I hope the move eventually fails and the Nets stay in Jersey and just move in with the Devils or something. A cool thing about the Knicks has been the fact that they’re the only bball team in town/state. You got team loyalty lines drawn in baseball, football, and hockey, but (generally) not with the Knicks. I want to keep it like that.

    Plus, outside of the Brooklynites, who would jump ship to the Nets if they were to move? Who could without looking like a bandwagoner? As bad as the Knicks have been this decade, I’d never trade in my fan loyalties, esp. not for a relocated Nets team.

  2. Dan Panorama

    “Outside of the Brooklynites…”

    That’s a pretty big chunk of New Yorkers right there.

    I don’t think they’d be able to compete with the Knicks’ fan base much. When the Mets arrived they already had all the Yankee-hating Dodger fans to soak up. There’s never been a competitor to the Knicks, though. My guess is the Brooklyn Nets would be a fun backup team to root for and a cheaper alternative to the Garden. I definitely plan on going to games if they come to the city.

    The only way I see that dynamic changing is if Jay-Z snags Lebron and the Knicks still stink. Then you’ll start seeing some conversions.

  3. daaarn

    From a personal standpoint, I just always liked the idea that the Knicks never really had any fan competition. I had friends who rooted for the other NY teams, but we could always agree on the Knicks at least. Guess I’m just being sentimental.

    But yeah, if the Nets were to move, would they be relegated to “Clippers status,” or do you all think they’d be slightly higher up there (since they could potentially have a sizable fan base drawn from both the city and NJ)?

  4. Moses

    Or would the Knicks (in their current, woeful state) be the team relegated to “Clippers status”?

  5. nero

    I said this so many times and nobody believed me. Just because an NBA owner made an announcement that the Nets would be in Brooklyn by 2010 doesn’t make it true.

    They still have to deal with all the legal challenges plus building a huge complex in NYC with all the zoning laws, construction delays and community objections.

    Now who wants to take the bet that they won’t be in NJ by 2011 either?

    I said it here first: 2015 at the earliest

    Wasn’t 2010 the date the freedom tower was supposed to be built by also? and ground zero has not made any progress in 7 years

  6. Danisrob

    How much of a % does Jay Z actually own, and would he have any say into any of the doings of the Nets? He always gets talked about like it is his team.

  7. s.bucketz

    i dont get y the nets are moving anyway???ther building that huge complex right next door so wouldn’t that bring in more people???i duno i dont really care im from jersey but hav always hated the nets..if they do move i see a lot more jersey heads jumpin on the knicks bandwagon because of mistrust with the nets plus i dont see a lot of the nets fan base bein too into brooklyn

  8. s.bucketz

    goin bak to the mistrust thing,im talkin about how even tho the thunder are the sonics, from all the seattle heads ive heard from they are not on board with the thunder…gary payton said he wont even let them retire his number given the opportunity and that he’d rather wait for another team to come to seattle

  9. DS

    “i dont get y the nets are moving anyway???”

    Brooklyn is a HUGE market. If it were its own city it would be the fourth largest in the U.S. and its infrastructure seems to be growing (at least before the economic downturn it did). The Barclays would be nicer and infinitely more transit accessible. Also, the Nets are part of a giant Ratner project to make over downtown Brooklyn [for the record, I'm personally not in love w/ the idea of the downtown Brooklyn project]. Finally, I think including a sports arena (to allegedly benefit the public) in his project, strengthened Ratner’s argument for eminent domain over people’s homes so that he could make his project expansive.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooklyn
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest_U.S._cities

  10. jon abbey

    and the fan base here in NJ has always sucked. even when the Nets made the Finals in consecutive years, no one cared. this is largely their own fault, they put the Nets (and Devils) on a pay TV channel for years while the Knicks/Rangers were free, but it is still the case.

  11. kp

    As a Knicks fan, I think the Nets coming to Brooklyn would be positive. Dolan has been able to run the Knicks into the ground and still turn a big profit with no competition for the fan base in NYC. With a contending team in Brooklyn, and an arena that is easily accessible by subway, the Knicks will be forced to put a better team on the floor or face losing part of their fan base.

    Competition is good.

  12. Ben

    I live in Brooklyn and would *love* to see the Nets play here. Three factors:

    1) That site has incredible transit access and would be great for a stadium.
    2) It was depressing as hell to see the Nets in their Jason Kidd heyday playing in the playoffs and even once for a championship and the arenas were perhaps 1/3rd full. Nobody lives there.
    3) I think EVERY BOROUGH in NYC should have its own basketball team. (Perhaps not Staten Island.) Seriously, this town is hoops central. Can you believe there are teams in Oklahoma and Portland that barely anyone attends and yet no team playing in the Bronx or Queens? Ghastly!

    The only problem is Ratner’s total destruction of the borough through high-rise luxury condos in order to build the stadium. They should scrap the entire project, leave only the stadium, and bring the Nets in ASAP.

    I’ll always be a Knicks fan. But that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t love to pay half the price to see a team managed by Rod Thorn instead of the Dolans. Bring ‘em in!

  13. griphook2008

    I live in Brooklyn and would *love* to see the Nets play here. Three factors:
    1) That site has incredible transit access and would be great for a stadium.
    2) It was depressing as hell to see the Nets in their Jason Kidd heyday playing in the playoffs and even once for a championship and the arenas were perhaps 1/3rd full. Nobody lives there.
    3) I think EVERY BOROUGH in NYC should have its own basketball team. (Perhaps not Staten Island.) Seriously, this town is hoops central. Can you believe there are teams in Oklahoma and Portland that barely anyone attends and yet no team playing in the Bronx or Queens? Ghastly!
    The only problem is Ratner’s total destruction of the borough through high-rise luxury condos in order to build the stadium. They should scrap the entire project, leave only the stadium, and bring the Nets in ASAP.
    I’ll always be a Knicks fan. But that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t love to pay half the price to see a team managed by Rod Thorn instead of the Dolans. Bring ‘em in!

    aw hell no, keep the Nets and their crappy real estate empire outta brooklyn. i dont think none of the other boroughs need a team neither. one city, one team. knicks forever

Comments are closed.