BigRedJed
10/28/2008, 07:12 PM
Really good read, but too long to quote here. Published last Friday. I won't quibble with much, other than the date MAPS was passed (1993, not 1992), and the passing indication it gives that the Chesapeake Boathouse was a part of MAPS. Actually, it was privately-funded development that came a decade after MAPS, and is part of the post-MAPS private development that now totals more than $2 billion.
Linky (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/magazine/26NBA-t.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink)
I think it makes some pretty fair assessments of OKC. Many of the positive ones will surprise readers of the NYT. Eventually, the fact that Oklahoma City is an emerging city won't be lost on people, thanks to this type of thing. Which is exactly what MAPS and the NBA relocation were designed to accomplish.
It's also interesting to see the comparison it makes between the commonly-held images of OKC and Tulsa, even mentioning that at first blush it might be surprising to people from outside of the state that a team is locating here rather than Tulsa.
Linky (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/magazine/26NBA-t.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink)
I think it makes some pretty fair assessments of OKC. Many of the positive ones will surprise readers of the NYT. Eventually, the fact that Oklahoma City is an emerging city won't be lost on people, thanks to this type of thing. Which is exactly what MAPS and the NBA relocation were designed to accomplish.
It's also interesting to see the comparison it makes between the commonly-held images of OKC and Tulsa, even mentioning that at first blush it might be surprising to people from outside of the state that a team is locating here rather than Tulsa.