Verro

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_p...p_restrictions


As I understand it, "other NFL cities" applies to the city in which the NFL team is owned as well.

Blazed

Other as in not Seattle. Paul Allen can't move the Blazers to a city that already has an NFL team not owned by him. He could move the Blazers to Seattle, but he couldn't move them to say Minnesota because it's an NFL city.

Blazer Freak

No, he's a majority owner of the Seahawk's, and that means Seattle has an NFL team, which means they are an NFL city, which means, according to this that they can't have a NBA team owned by the same Owner.

__________________

The Sebastian Express

Then how did George Shinn move the Hornets to New Orleans? He doesn't own the Saints.

Schilly

An NFL Owner can't own a MLB, NHL or NBA team in a market that holds another NFL team.

George Shinn doesn't own an NFL team so he can own an NBA team in New Orleans.

Paul ALlen wouldn't own a NBA team in a different NFL market, he would own one in his own NFL market. He couldn't own for example the Dallas Mavericks, since it would be a conflict of interest from a community standpoint.

ebott

Sorry dude, that particular thing won't stop Allen from moving the team to Seattle.

I'm sticking with the "Iron clad contract with Portland" theory that keeps the team in the city for the next 30 years.

danred7

Didn't the same group of owners own the Nets and Devils for a long time?
I also thought The Met's and Islanders where the same owners too.

I could be wrong.

Verro

I vaguely recall a similar situation where the NFL prohibited an MLB purchase within the same city, which lead me to believe the use of "other" was a semantic mistake on Wikipedia's part.

Does anyone know with any certainty whether or not two teams can be owned in the same market? Or are these inferences based on the use of the term "other" in the article?

e_blazer1

If Paul Allen were obsessing over wanting to own an NBA franchise in Seattle and thought he could get out of the arena deal with Portland, why wouldn't he simply have sold the Blazers to the Oklahoma group and bought the Sonics? The Sonics fans would have loved him for it and he'd become a hero in Seattle. He'd be getting a franchise that already has one certified All-Star and is closer to being competetive than the Blazers. Why would he risk trying to reconnect the Sonics fans with another team and convincing them that they should help pay for a new arena, or an upgrade to Key, instead of simply doing it with the Sonics?

I think people are worrying about this for nothing.

__________________
Blazermania is BACK!!!

mediocre man

The person in all this that makes me the most nervous is Whitsitt. I imagine he would love to stick it to everyone here by buying the team and moving it to Seattle.

__________________
"SHOW ME THE BUFFET!!!"


Former Blazer Alaa Abdelnaby on being a student athlete at Duke. "The only way I could get 5 A's at Duke was to spell my name"


I'm Mediocre Man, and I approve this message.

tlong

Because he has emotional ties with the Blazers. Remember, this is basically a hobby for him.

It's_GO_Time

Great thought. PA certainly has the financial resources to pull off something like that. (Personally I was wondering why the OK group bought the Sonics instead of the Blazers.)

I guess one theory is basketball was such a success in OK last year, that the group is looking to bring an organization to OK. If that is the case (which I think it is) then the OK group probabaly wouldn't be as interested in the Blazer organization given the legal battles likely to occur with the city and PAM. So maybe the OK group had no interest in buying the Blazers becuse Sonics are a lot easier organization to move.

Perfection

My reaction to this is that he can't move a franchise to a city where someone else owns an NFL team. For example, he couldn't move the Blazers to Pittsburgh becuase they have an NFL team that is owned by a different owner. However, since Allen owns the Seattle NFL team, it wouldn't be owning " a franchise in another NFL city" but rather the city that he owns the team in.

Sorry if this is getting confusing, but I'm pretty sure that he'll be able to do it...especially since there has been an NBA and NFL presence coexisting in Seattle before.

__________________
Check Out My New Site!!! http://charismaproject.com

Blazed

Exactly. Owning an NFL team in one city and an NBA team in another city of a competing NFL team would be a major conflict of interest which is why this rule is in place.

For example, Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor was considering purchasing the Vikings and was the owner the NFL wanted.