And they cite Kentucky Kingdom as an example of how it could work (!?):

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20111015/NEWS01/310130088/Proposal-theme-park-TN-state-fairgrounds-ignites-debate

So in their eyes, it's the themeing that will make the difference.

Hey, I'm all for theme. Ya'll know that. But that's not what draws the typical visitor, I don't think. How well did Hard Rock Park go over after relying on a brand and a music theme to keep it afloat, even near a marketable vacation destination? A whole other can of worms, perhaps, but this proposal sounds like a nice mix of Hard Rock Park and Kentucky Kingdom... (that's not a compliment).

My true opinion is that true, marketable, regional theme park destinations cannot be built from scratch today without the backing of a corporate brand or an experienced operator. The cost to build a park like Kings Island from scratch would be astronomical. Thankfully, the cost of its construction to this point has been paid for by a handful of owners. I think that Kings Island 1972 is at least a reachable goal for a start-up park - that is, a couple of coasters at most. The question is, would a park of that caliber pull its own weight in today's world? We look at the half-dozen coasters at Freestyle Music Park and think, "Gee, that's not many at all.." So could 1972 Kings Island survive if it were built today?

As many of the comments to the posted article note, this location for the proposed Nashville park is far less than desirable. No direct Interstate access, less than affluent neighborhood (to be kind), and neighbors deadset against the proposal.

Add in the failed NASCAR park in GatlInburg, and one phrase comes immediately to mind:

Paging Mr. Spiegel!

So could 1972 Kings Island survive if it were built today?

Actually, yes, just look at Indiana Beach and Holliday World. Indiana Beach is in fact actually smaller than KI in 1972.