Nickels Bites Back

Greg Nickels, with finger planted firmly in the air to sense the direction of public opinion, has responded to Clay Bennett's response to his .... oh, who can keep track of it all, anyway?

Don't get me wrong, I'm solidly with Nickels in his position, but I'm not naïve enough to think that Nickels wouldn't be taking this position if it weren't for the efforts of Brian and the A Deal is a Deal organization. As a politician, Nickels is canny enough to know that one of the best positions to take in an argument is against someone the public despises. Government officials love this tactic: Politicians will always beat the drum against tobacco companies or sex offenders, even if there is no immediate danger, simply because they know they'll score points in the court of public opinion.

It helps, of course, when you have someone like Clay Bennett, who - like Michael Heisley in Vancouver a few years back - has been playing his new-found home like a piano in the Tulsa production of "A Music Man."

Unlike Harold Hill, though, Clay Bennett isn't selling us a pile of musical instruments and uniforms, he's trying to take away something that's been a part of Seattle for more than 40 years. Let's hope, like Hill, he sees the error of his ways soon enough.

Clay Bennett Is Not Amused

From Mike Seely of Seattle Weekly, in his Buzzer Beater blog, which any self-respecting Seattle sports fan reads with the avidity of George Hamilton scanning the UV index, comes a message from Clay Bennett.

The press release is apparently in response to Mayor Nickels' comments to the TNT and other local papers that the city is interested in sweetening the Key Arena pie in such a manner that the much-maligned building becomes suitable to Bennett & Co. To wit:

“In issuing our call to action last month, we were hopeful the Mayor would use his regional leadership platform to rally support for a solution. Instead he focused on old unworkable concepts that are not acceptable. It is clear that if all we have to discuss is the renovation of KeyArena, then a meeting with the Mayor will not be productive or necessary."

Consider the sabres rattled.

Tough Start

Spent a little time looking at the new schedule more closely, and I'm getting a rather uneasy feeling in my stomach when I think about how the Sonics start the season.

Now, it may come to pass that the decision regarding the future of this franchise gets settled far in advance of the October 31 deadline Clay Bennett has imposed. But it may not. Bennett's deadline has no legal backing, and is solely a motivation tool for the city/personal goal for him. And if it does not get settled - and it wouldn't be the first time an owner had to make a u-turn regarding a franchise - how the Sonics play to start the season will have at least a small impact on how receptive the region is to throwing more money at Bennett's team.

And that's where the unsettled feeling in my stomach comes in. If you look at the first month of the season, and pick the games based on how Vegas would look at them, well, the Sonics might not exactly get off to a hot start. In fact, they could get off to a real lousy start:

at Denver (loss), Phoenix (loss), at Clippers (loss), at Sacramento (loss), Memphis (win), Utah (loss), Detroit (loss), at Orlando (loss), at Miami (loss).

That's 1-8 after 9 games. You can argue that the Sonics might steal a win in Sacramento, or in Orlando, or at home against the Jazz or the Pistons, but if you had $100 to wager on any of those events, you'd probably go with Seattle's opponent, right?

The schedule eases a bit after that, and the Sonics could finish up November by splitting the remaining 8 games, giving them a record of 5-12 entering December.

As I said before, the arena situation and the Sonics' future will probably be settled in advance of that first month of games, but it may not. Let's just hope that it is.