Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Gloves come off in Minnesota.

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by iwatt View Post
    The problem with LA is not the fan base. It's the stadium. The stadium will never be state funded in LA, were they are even more broke than in Minnesota. But the project for the stadium in LA is a private sector one, that doesn't neccesarily require to own the team this time. They wwant to build it in LA live, and use it for a lot more things than just football.

    - LA hasn't had final four since the seventies.
    - An LA stadium would be essential for the bid of a World Cup
    - The MLS would alos play there.
    - Concerts in downtown LA instead of driving to the Rose Bowl.
    - If they go dome, they can use it for expos as well.
    - Hosting a Superbowl
    - Hosting NBA All-Star games
    - Hosting the BCS playoffs (when they come)

    There are smart people looking at this project. Once the stadium is built, teams will be lining up to move to LA. Stop thinking of it as 8-10 games a year. That place, if it's in downtown LA, will be in use A LOT.
    You left out the Olympics.

    And monster truck rallies.

    The viability of an LA stadium is not at all dependent upon it housing an NFL team. A football team would help a ton. But those stadia will be fine without one, IMO.

    As for teams lining up to go to LA, don't bet the house on that. The LA market is very fickle. They show up late and leave early. If you are less than excellent, they don't show up at all. Not exactly an ideal circumstance for an NFL team.
    Screw you guys, I'm going home.

  2. #12
       
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Santiago, Chile
    Posts
    3,636
    Blog Entries
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by GoBigOrGoHome View Post

    As for teams lining up to go to LA, don't bet the house on that. The LA market is very fickle. They show up late and leave early. If you are less than excellent, they don't show up at all. Not exactly an ideal circumstance for an NFL team.
    - Think of the Cheerleaders....
    - The city is huge. Even a small percentage of the population becoming fans would help.
    - There is a lot of money there. And demand will be high at first because it will be the IT thing to do.

    The fans won't be great, I agree. But the hype will surpass that of the Cowboys, trust me. The NFL network and ESPN will cover it like nobody's business.

    - And they'll get Gruden to coah it
    “Never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by incompetence.”
    ― Napoleon Bonaparte

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by iwatt View Post
    - Think of the Cheerleaders....
    - The city is huge. Even a small percentage of the population becoming fans would help.
    - There is a lot of money there. And demand will be high at first because it will be the IT thing to do.

    The fans won't be great, I agree. But the hype will surpass that of the Cowboys, trust me. The NFL network and ESPN will cover it like nobody's business.

    - And they'll get Gruden to coah it
    LA is huge mainly because people come from all over and settle there. They don't have that much of an indigenous fanbase. This is not basketball. Celebrity fans don't get to sit on the sidelines and inject themselves into the game (a la Jack Nicholson). So, as soon as the shine wears off and the team is settled, the beautiful people will stop attending and the average LA fan will go back to rooting for their original team.

    If a team moves to LA, they will relocate somewhere else by 2023.
    Screw you guys, I'm going home.

  4. #14
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Posts
    1,635
    Blog Entries
    2
    Originally Posted by iwatt
    - Think of the Cheerleaders....
    Good idea, thanks bro!

  5. #15
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Greenville, South Carolina
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by Pruitt View Post
    What have the people of the Twin Cities EVER done for the Vikings?!

    (sarcasm)

    It makes me more than a little sick to hear **** like this. 50 years of rabid support and the people of Minnesota are now going to be faced with a choice - spend $150-$300 million of your taxes to help build a stadium or lose your team. And the worst part is, once the tax dollars are siphoned out of the treasury, people are going to have to pay PSLs and hundreds of dollars a ticket.

    F the Wilfs and any owner who doesn't think owning a billion dollar asset is enough. Scumbags like Wilf (and Modell and any other franchise owner who ever blackmailed the people who put money in their pockets) make me want to call my old poli sci prof - the on who thought Marx was 100% right.

    Here's a shirt for Ziggy:
    It would be a shame for the Vikings to leave after 50 years in the Norris division. To play the part of devil's advocate, a few points in response to reflexive blaming of the owner:

    1) The Vikings have watched the Twin Cities public support the financing of the Target Field for the Twins (2/3 to 3/4 funded through Hennepin County sales tax).

    2) The Vikings have watched the state of Minnesota fund 52% of the new TCF Bank Stadium for the Golden Gophers football team (granted that this is a state university).

    3) The Vikings are not a billion-dollar asset. Forbes had them at $774m in 2010. Forbes estimates that a great part of this asset value is Wilf's ability to move the team to another city. He took on some $300m in debt to purchase the team, so if he stays in Minnesota on an extension of the current unfavorable lease his asset value net of debt is much closer to $0 than $1 billion.

    4) The Vikings are not asking for favorable treatment in comparison to other teams. For example, public funds paid for over half of the Soldier Field renovations in Chicago. Sales taxes and PSL licenses paid for most of the Lambeau Field renovations. Same for Ford Field.

    To me, it seems like the best solution would be a modern, retractable-roof stadium with 70,000 - 75,000 seats where the Metrodome now sits or at some other location. Something similar to Reliant Stadium in Houston. The new facility could host Super Bowls, Final Fours, etc. as well as year-round concert events. It would also allow for some out-door early season Vikings football games. If the stadium were to be outside the city, the Metrodome could be demolished and the real estate developed over time. The proceeds from that redevelopment could go toward the new stadium costs.

    Obviously, in the current economy, such a plan might be hard for the taxpayers to swallow, but it would be a long-term investment in the area. I'm not a Minnesota taxpayer.

  6. #16
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    5,608
    As a tax payer in a city and province that got shafted on the building of a stadium - Skydome cost over $600 million to build. We were told that it would be profitable.

    Later turned out that in order for the Skydome to break even, it would have to be booked for more than 600 nights a year.

    The original $600 million stadium was later sold to Blue Jays owners Rogers Communications for $25 million. The entire idea of publicly funding stadiums is based on accounting tricks and political blackmail. Sadly, the people of Minnesota have a stark choice: fund a stadium or watch the Los Angeles Vikings in a couple of years.

  7. #17
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    1,533
    Los Angeles is already hosting the NBA All-Star game this year - at Staples Center. Where it should be held. Why would they host it in a multi-purpose football stadium? Dallas only had a couple of random skills events and the rookie-sophomore game in Cowboys Stadium last year. The game itself was still held at American Airlines Center.

  8. #18
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southwest Florida
    Posts
    1,635
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Pruitt View Post
    As a tax payer in a city and province that got shafted on the building of a stadium - Skydome cost over $600 million to build. We were told that it would be profitable.

    Later turned out that in order for the Skydome to break even, it would have to be booked for more than 600 nights a year.

    The original $600 million stadium was later sold to Blue Jays owners Rogers Communications for $25 million. The entire idea of publicly funding stadiums is based on accounting tricks and political blackmail. Sadly, the people of Minnesota have a stark choice: fund a stadium or watch the Los Angeles Vikings in a couple of years.
    Going back to the World's Fair (I think it was called Expo '67), Canada has seemed to lose money on these development deals. But I'm far from well versed on this stuff.
    Pru, do you think the main reason is the Canadians employ honest accounting methods? I would not be surprised if the difference between the Montreal and the LA olympic games level of success was the use of the Arthur Andersen school of accounting principles.

  9. #19
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    5,608
    I know that the 1976 Olympics in Montreal were a financial and planning fiasco of the highest order. The Stadium itself was just finally paid for a couple of years ago and it almost bankrupted the city of Montreal. But I think you're giving us Canadians too much credit. No one has learned from Montreal's mistakes - the Skydome was a debacle, band just this past year, Vancouver has begun to update their 30 year old domed stadium. Original estimates were that the new retractable roof would cost $365 million. Rumours have the cost pushing towards a half billion.

    This is to renovate a stadium that is home to a CFL team, a new MLS franchise and the occasional concert. As there is no chance of Vancouver getting an NFL or MLB team, one has to wonder why this huge white elephant which originally cost $150 million in 1986 needs to be redone.

    The CFL team there draws around 25,000 per game, and there's no way the new MLS franchise will draw more than that.

    Wouldn't a small open air stadium like the new one in Toronto (about $80 million) have made more sense.

    Oh, and the taxpayers in BC (Vancouver's province) have just had their sales tax rate raised.

    I am always skeptical when a huge event like the Olympics claims to have turned a profit. In my mind, such claims are based on similar accounting practices that are trotted out whenever a city blows its budget on new stadiums. They always talk about the jobs that a sports franchise brings in - the vast majority of which are part time and very low paying. Amazing that in such a fiercely capitalist country as the US (and to a lesser extent, canada), we accept state-sanctioned socialism in order to allow billionaires to earn more money.

Similar Threads

  1. NFP News - Tom Zbikowski hangs up his boxing gloves for rest of offseason
    By Administrator in forum National Football Post
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-24-2011, 03:30 PM
  2. What's up with Minnesota?
    By BMW in forum NFL
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-16-2010, 06:31 PM
  3. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-23-2010, 02:06 AM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-18-2010, 04:56 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •