FCP logo

Full Court Press

FCPrep logo

Friday, July 19, 2019

Maloofs Likely Now Wishing for a Do-Over on Monarchs Closure

Article Lead Image

Credit: Original Artwork Courtesy istock Photo.com©

By Clay Kallam

I bet the Maloof brothers wish they had spent that extra $500,000 now.

That number is the most they could have lost, from all accounts, by keeping the Sacramento Monarchs afloat for the summer of 2010, and given the multi-millions at risk in the high-stakes poker game of “Move That Franchise,” $500,000 looks like chump change.

But why do the Monarchs matter? After all, they didn’t draw that well in their declining days—a dull, mediocre team in a dull, mediocre arena—and their existence will have no direct bearing on whether the NBA Kings stay in California’s capital or shuffle on south to Anaheim. Indirectly, though, the demise of the Monarchs could play a pivotal role in whether the Maloofs survive in Sacramento or merely get a stay of execution.

The reason is politics.

The only way the Kings can compete in the NBA is with a new arena. The Maloof fortune is tied to the Las Vegas economy, which has plummeted further than confidence in Glenn Beck’s conspiracy theories, and so the brothers can’t come up with the cash to build it themselves. Their plan all along was to have Sacramento pony up the cash, but that city, like Las Vegas, has seen its economy crater, and its voters have shown absolutely no inclination to fund a building that will help the Maloofs make a lot of money and pay the salaries of young multimillionaires.

The new arena plan, which was announced early last week and will keep the Kings in Sacramento for at least one more season, sounds suspiciously like the old plan, but there’s a hint that the $350 million will come not just from Sacramento proper, but from the region as a whole. That’s nice, but it’s hard to believe that voters outside the city will be any more enthusiastic than voters inside the city about an arena that will really only benefit Sacramento.

But let’s just say that Mayor Kevin Johnson, various regional officials and everyone who has any influence supports the new arena. That’s charming, but remember, the 2006 vote was 80% against raising the sales tax, and 71%  said even if the sales tax passed, spending half the money on the arena was a bad idea.

Now just consider how hard it is to get 80% of the voters to agree on anything less controversial than something like “water is wet,“ and you can see that there’s a very big mountain to climb in Sacramento if money for a new arena is going to come from the public trough—which is where the Monarchs come in.

First, let’s acknowledge that the Monarchs were not a civic treasure, and the city didn’t hold its breath waiting for the results of the games. But they did win a WNBA title, and they did have a solid group of supporters. When the Monarchs played the L.A. Sparks, back in the day when both were good, nine or ten thousand people would pay the $12 parking, buy a ticket and suck down a $6 beer or two in order to cheer for Ticha and boo Lisa.

But when the Maloofs abruptly shut down the Monarchs, the WNBA fans were angry and bitter, and still are. They remain a solid anti-Maloof pocket of voters, and though it’s hard to say what percentage of the electorate they comprise, a new arena needs every single vote it can get—remember, it was 80-20 against just five years ago, and the economy was a lot better then. A lot better.

It’s possible the Maloofs might win some of those fans back by promising to bring another WNBA franchise to Sacramento, but even if it’s the Chicago Sky or Tulsa Shock, both of which could be on the move if attendance doesn’t pick up this summer, it still won’t be the Monarchs. And if it’s an expansion team, it’s hard to imagine fans who are used to success warming up to whatever dismal group of retreads and rookies the league would foist on the city in 2012.

Still, that’s probably the Maloofs’ best chance to woo disgruntled Monarchs’ fans, and what’s ironic is that it will wind up costing a lot more to bring in a new team than it would have to just keep the Monarchs going for another year. And you know, it’s just possible that the 2010 Monarchs might not have lost $500,000, or $300,000. They might have come close to breaking even, which they have done in the past.

But the Maloofs, like all casino owners, prefer sure things to gambling with their own money so they shut the doors. This is one time they should have rolled the dice.

Originally published Tue, May 17, 2011

Reader Discussion

Please Log in or, if you are not yet a member, Register to use the full features of this site.

Women's Basketball Calendar

July 2019
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 1 2 3 4

Game of the Day

Friday, July 19, 2019

Today's Top Games

For a full calendar and related details on upcoming nationally televised and Top 25 games, as well as past game scores, and other women's basketball games of interest, click on the link "Women's Basketball Calendar" above.


Try Advanced Search

Week: February 7, 2012
1 Baylor (31) 24-0 1 1 1 775
2 Notre Dame 23-1 2 2 2 743
3 Connecticut 21-2 3 4 3 710
4 Stanford 20-1 4 5 4 685
5 Duke 19-3 6 8 5 650
6 Miami (FL) 20-3 7 7 6 604
7 Kentucky 21-3 5 15 7 584
8 Maryland 20-3 10 10 8 534
9 Wisconsin-Green Bay 20-0 9 24 9 530
10 Ohio State 21-2 11 NR-RV
10 483
11 Tennessee 17-6 8 3 11 476
12 Delaware 20-1 13 NR 12 434
13 Georgetown 18-5 15 11 14 379
14 Texas A&M 16-5 16 6 15 378
15 Nebraska 19-3 18 NR 13 309
16 Rutgers 17-4 14 12 17 372
17 Louisville 17-6 12 9 20 276
18 Gonzaga 21-3 19 NR-RV
19 234
19 Purdue 19-5 17 21 16 222
20 Georgia 18-6 20 12 21 202
21 Penn State 18-5 21 14 18 176
22 DePaul 17-7 23 18 NR-RV
23 Georgia Tech 16-6 22 NR-RV
22 104
24 South Carolina 18-5 NR-RV
NR 24 46
25 Vanderbilt 18-5 NR-RV
NR 45
Dropped Out: No. 24 North Carolina, No. 25 Kansas.
First-place votes: Total first-place votes received (if any) are indicated in parentheses following school name.
Others receiving votes: St. Bonaventure (22-2) 34; North Carolina (17-6) 19; California (17-6) 18; Florida Gulf Coast (21-2) 16; Middle Tennessee (19-5) 15; Texas-El Paso (20-2) 8; Texas Tech (16-6) 5; Brigham Young (21-4) 4; Fresno State (19-4) 4; St. John's (15-8) 4; Princeton (15-4) 3; Oklahoma (15-7) 2; West Virginia (17-6) 2; Kansas State (15-7) 1.
Rank remains unchanged since last week
Ranking has risen since last week.
Ranking has dropped since last week.
Credit: Courtesy Women's Basketball Coaches Association (WBCA). The weekly Division I Top 25 Coaches' Poll, sponsored by USA Today and ESPN, is based on voting by a Board of Coaches made up of 31 head coaches at Division I institutions all of whom are WBCA members.