Arthur Blank and the Atlanta Falcons have been pushing for a new open air stadium for a few years now. They currently play in the 19 year old Georgia Dome, which is owned by the Georgia World Congress Center Authority. Here is an article from the AJC the other day

http://www.ajc.com/business/falcons-push-for-open-848736.html

The Authority agreed to enter into a “memorandum of understanding” with the Falcons on plans for a potential $700 million open-air stadium downtown.

Both parties emphasized the memorandum does not constitute a done deal, but rather allows them to begin negotiations over details of the project, including financing.

But the Falcons have made it clear that they want a new open-air stadium, rejecting alternatives such as expanding the Georgia Dome, adding a retractable roof to the facility or building a new dome with a retractable roof.

A new stadium could open as soon as 2017, officials said, and would be built on a site just over a half-mile north of the Georgia Dome.



Here is a link to the proposed plan with site details. They are pushing to put the facility north of the GWCC campus

http://www.ajc.com/multimedia/archive/00844/Read_the_Master_Pla_844511a.pdf

If the financing is right, I'm all for this!:banana:

Arthur Blank and the Atlanta Falcons have been pushing for a new open air stadium for a few years now. They currently play in the 19 year old Georgia Dome

Is it that necessary to replace a 19 year old stadium??

If it's not generating enough revenue, it doesn't really matter how old it is.

If/when this stadium gets built, what about the Georgia Dome?

If/when this stadium gets built, what about the Georgia Dome?

I would think GT would want to play there, their stadium looks like crap

I don't see any reason to get rid of it. Still plenty good for the Final Four, bowl games, and big concerts/conventions. Without the Falcons in the way, it might make sense for GA Tech to move their home game against UGA there, as there would be a larger capacity and they would get to keep all the revenue.

The Georgia Dome was built before the boom of luxury suites and club seats in these NFL stadiums. It just missed the boat. I personally believe it can be salvaged with a state of the art renovation that would include a retractable roof. As a falcons fan, I would prefer them to play outdoors. Anybody who's been to a game in a dome will tell you that it is a sterile and bland atmosphere. Also the parking in and around the Dome is spread out.

I don't see any reason to get rid of it. Still plenty good for the Final Four, bowl games, and big concerts/conventions. Without the Falcons in the way, it might make sense for GA Tech to move their home game against UGA there, as there would be a larger capacity and they would get to keep all the revenue.

Could be possible. Georgia State University just started their football program last year and is playing games there now.

Yeah, chances of GSU using it are greater than GT using it for their games

... Maybe GT and Georgia State could play one or two games there a season, but there has to be more than that if they keep it stading (which they should).

Final Fours, WrestleManias, BMX/Monsterjams... those come at least every 5-6 years or so. There's gotta be more. Especially if the new stadium is open air (why?).

What about the Alamodome? Nothing major happens there and that's still standing. What about the Astrodome for crying out loud? GSU will have at least 6 games at the Georgia Dome per year, plus maybe some high school games, bowl games, Final Fours, and concerts. Jacksonville's football stadium only has 9 football games per year and it's still standing. Unless you wanted to expand the convention center, there's no reason to tear down the Georgia Dome, and the GWCC is plenty big enough already.

Remember, if you tear down the Georgia Dome, Atlanta is out of the mix for Final Fours. The Final Four rotation is an exclusive club that's tough to break into.

This seems really stupid. They should refit the premium seating, put up a retractable roof and convert the upper level endlines to temporary seating. That sounds like $300-350 million, and not creating any redundancy. I suppose they would need to spend a season or a season and a half playing at Bobby Dodd or Sanford or something, but its better than wasting $300-400 million.

You don't think they looked at that already? Blank is a pretty savvy guy, and history indicates he's not in the wasting-money business. If renovating the Dome is not workable and it's better to build an open-air stadium from scratch, I'll take their word for it. All depends on the financing. I'm not sure this would be a great deal for the taxpayers.

Georgia Tech won't move off-campus. They've been playing at Bobby Dodd since 1912 I believe. Bobby Dodd has the worst concourses I've ever seen, but it's got a beautiful location and has good atmosphere.

I read a while back that the Georgia Dome hosts over 100 events a year. ~12 of those are Falcons games (in a good year). So don't anticipate the dome becoming decrepit, or even having a lack of use. There are numerous conventions, concerts, religious events, etc.

The GWCC manages the Georgia Dome, and has agreed to this MOU. They wouldn't agree to it if there wasn't more money to be made than to be lost.

There haven't been any rumblings of the Falcons moving out of Atlanta. However, there have been threats to move away from the GWCC and immediate downtown area (north or south suburbs). I think there could be some weight behind that threat since most of the money is in the northern suburbs.

This seems really stupid. They should refit the premium seating, put up a retractable roof and convert the upper level endlines to temporary seating. That sounds like $300-350 million, and not creating any redundancy. I suppose they would need to spend a season or a season and a half playing at Bobby Dodd or Sanford or something, but its better than wasting $300-400 million.

I wouldn't call it stupid. As was said earlier its more about time frame. The newer stadiums are making a killing. A new stadium really doesn't have to be that great or super expensive to make a ton on revenue. Especially if the Falcons don't own the Georgia Dome or have a good negotiable contract on what revenues they keep.

What about the Alamodome? Nothing major happens there and that's still standing. What about the Astrodome for crying out loud? GSU will have at least 6 games at the Georgia Dome per year, plus maybe some high school games, bowl games, Final Fours, and concerts. Jacksonville's football stadium only has 9 football games per year and it's still standing. Unless you wanted to expand the convention center, there's no reason to tear down the Georgia Dome, and the GWCC is plenty big enough already.

I'm not saying you are, but I think you're taking my post in thinking that I'm saying the Georgia Dome should be torn down. I'm NOT saying that... (just couldn't tell if you were directing this at me).

And I was actually going to bring up the Alamodome. And since the Spurs moved out, it's only been used for Final Fours, High School football, and maybe a couple other events, I'm not sure.

But UT-San Antonio has their football program now and that will be their official home stadium, so it will be used more frequently once again. I would say GaSt. could do the same for the Georgia Dome, but doesn't that school already have a stadium of their own?

I'm not saying you are, but I think you're taking my post in thinking that I'm saying the Georgia Dome should be torn down. I'm NOT saying that... (just couldn't tell if you were directing this at me).

And I was actually going to bring up the Alamodome. And since the Spurs moved out, it's only been used for Final Fours, High School football, and maybe a couple other events, I'm not sure.

But UT-San Antonio has their football program now and that will be their official home stadium, so it will be used more frequently once again. I would say GaSt. could do the same for the Georgia Dome, but doesn't that school already have a stadium of their own?

Georgia State does not have a stadium suit for FCS/FBS football. You may be thinking of Kennesaw State University, a school outside Atlanta who has a new soccer stadium.

The state money will apparently be from hotel/rental car taxes, but that may still drive conventions away in the end.

If the Falcons want a new stadium, can't they build one next to Turner Field?

According to Google Maps, directly north of Turner Field is a long stretch of parking lots. An NFL stadium there would create a nice sports complex south of downtown.

Wouldn't that be better than building one north of the Georgia Dome?

And maybe they could extend the MARTA to that area.

If the Falcons want a new stadium, can't they build one next to Turner Field?

According to Google Maps, directly north of Turner Field is a long stretch of parking lots. An NFL stadium there would create a nice sports complex south of downtown.

Wouldn't that be better than building one north of the Georgia Dome?

And maybe they could extend the MARTA to that area.

I know what you're talking about. That parking lot is the site of the old Atlanta-Fulton County Baseball Field.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/5/10678497_ddd462491d.jpg

And I agree that that would seem like a more logical place for a stadium.

I know what you're talking about. That parking lot is the site of the old Atlanta-Fulton County Baseball Field.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/5/10678497_ddd462491d.jpg

And I agree that that would seem like a more logical place for a stadium.

That is a perfect place for a stadium. It's easily accessible to both I-20 and I-75/85. Marta is nearby. However, I believe the city and ACOG (Atlanta Committe for Olympic Games) who built the stadium own the in and around Turner Field and they have prohibitted anything (especially another stadium) being built there. I could be wrong, but i remember hearing that from somewhere.

That parking lot is the site of the old Atlanta-Fulton County Baseball Field.
Actually both the Falcons and Braves played there. It was one of the worst examples of the multi-purpose cookie cutters that came out of the mid 60s.

I wouldn't call it stupid. As was said earlier its more about time frame. The newer stadiums are making a killing. A new stadium really doesn't have to be that great or super expensive to make a ton on revenue. Especially if the Falcons don't own the Georgia Dome or have a good negotiable contract on what revenues they keep.

My point is that they are making money because of fancier/more diverse VIP seating, which would not be a hard retrofit. If they renegotiated the Georgia Dome contract and refitted it in terms of vip, concession and sales areas the revenue levels would be almost the same. And its only more profitable when the Taxpayer fronts most of the bill, which I heard they did not all that long ago.

My point is that they are making money because of fancier/more diverse VIP seating, which would not be a hard retrofit. If they renegotiated the Georgia Dome contract and refitted it in terms of vip, concession and sales areas the revenue levels would be almost the same. And its only more profitable when the Taxpayer fronts most of the bill, which I heard they did not all that long ago.

nah. Jerry is doing fine and he fronted 3/4 of the bill. The Georgia Dome looked at extensive renovations a few years ago. They were expensive and they were not going to give the Falcons the type of control they want. Not surprised they want a smaller, inexpensive, but complete with the type of revenues they want. The thing is, the Cowboys could still make a killing with half the stadium they built. Jerry is just Jerry. If you compare it to the Vikings, then the Falcons simply want a Falcons venue that's more profitable. Not looking for extra events. Plus they're in a cheaper parts and labor market. Just a different animal. Not all stadium deals are bad. Not all need to be jack of all trades. Especially given that the Georgia Dome still exists and wouldn't really be challenged for events because of its roof.

I know what you're talking about. That parking lot is the site of the old Atlanta-Fulton County Baseball Field.

And I agree that that would seem like a more logical place for a stadium.

I take it back. According to Wikipedia, the footprint of the old stadium is still there.

The fence and wall display commemorates the spot at which Hank Aaron's 715th home run landed on April 8, 1974.

I don't think Braves fans will tolerate a piece of history being demolished in favor of a new NFL stadium.:dunno:

yeah i feel like it's to early for a new stadium unless the plan is to keep the george dome and build a new stadium off site. But I don't really see a problem with it hopefully the new stadium has a good design.

The Georgia Dome was built before the boom of luxury suites and club seats in these NFL stadiums. It just missed the boat.
It actually has about 200 suites and 5,500 club level seats.

I personally believe it can be salvaged with a state of the art renovation that would include a retractable roof. As a falcons fan, I would prefer them to play outdoors. Anybody who's been to a game in a dome will tell you that it is a sterile and bland atmosphere. Also the parking in and around the Dome is spread out.
I agree. The Georgia Dome has a superb infrastructure. It just needs a bit of a refresh -- nothing $200M couldn't fix.

I agree. The Georgia Dome has a superb infrastructure. It just needs a bit of a refresh -- nothing $200M couldn't fix.
Wouldn't it make more sense in this economic climate to try to fix it for around $20 million?

Could be possible. Georgia State University just started their football program last year and is playing games there now.

Yeah, chances of GSU using it are greater than GT using it for their games

GSU are delusional if they believe they can even fill the lower tier of a 70,000-seat stadium.

They're better off playing at nearby 15,000-seat Herndon Stadium, which is going to waste.

Wouldn't it make more sense in this economic climate to try to fix it for around $20 million?
Good point...$100 mil.

I just can't see why adding a retractable roof is out of the picture. I've been to the Georgia Dome, and it's solid.

Georgia Tech won't move off-campus. They've been playing at Bobby Dodd since 1912 I believe. Bobby Dodd has the worst concourses I've ever seen, but it's got a beautiful location and has good atmosphere.

More importantly, GT controls every dollar spent at Bobby Dodd.

It also would allow the Falcons to downsize the stadium, an industry trend. The idea is to offer fewer seats at a higher premium.

*shakes his head*

Still ain't gonna support a new white elephant stadium for the Atlanta Falcons even if it means spelling doom on a good domed stadium.

nah. Jerry is doing fine and he fronted 3/4 of the bill. The Georgia Dome looked at extensive renovations a few years ago. They were expensive and they were not going to give the Falcons the type of control they want. Not surprised they want a smaller, inexpensive, but complete with the type of revenues they want. The thing is, the Cowboys could still make a killing with half the stadium they built. Jerry is just Jerry. If you compare it to the Vikings, then the Falcons simply want a Falcons venue that's more profitable. Not looking for extra events. Plus they're in a cheaper parts and labor market. Just a different animal. Not all stadium deals are bad. Not all need to be jack of all trades. Especially given that the Georgia Dome still exists and wouldn't really be challenged for events because of its roof.


Jerry is also in a Market that can support the ticket/suite prices they have plus an obscene number of psl's. A market like Atlanta tends to be so apathetic when it comes to pro sports that most people won't spend that kind money on an NFL game and Minnesota isn't nearly big enough to sell 300 suites and 15,000 club seats (or 200 suites and 10,000 club seats for that matter). That sort of economic model might work in Dallas and New York (possibly DC and maybe one or tow others) But the vast majority of markets in the country aren't going to fill up that many seats at those prices.

I found the following AP article on the new stadium proposal.

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2011/02/23/1470919/plans-for-new-atlanta-falcons.html

I would like to point out the following statement:

Falcons officials have made it clear they want a new open-air stadium, saying that is the only way to stay competitive financially. They have rejected plans for a renovated Georgia Dome or adding a retractable roof to it, pointing out that 22 teams have moved into new or completely rebuilt stadiums since the dome opened in 1992.

It's worth mentioning that the Rams and the Lions moved into 100% indoor stadiums. And both Edward Jones Dome and Ford Field are relatively new.

If the Rams and the Lions can be satisfied with domed stadiums, why can't the Falcons be content with one as well?

EDIT: EJD and Ford Field were built after the Georgia Dome had opened in '92. The Superdome was renovated after Katrina, but it still looks outdated to me.

Not to be contrarian, but the Rams are not happy with their stadium. It's a bare-bones convention hall that was quickly built to lure the witch from LA, with a terrible atmosphere that brings in among the lowest revenues in the league. Detroit made a bit more sense to be indoors, and it's a lot newer than the EJD. The Superdome was also among the worst before it's recent renovation. Teams are trying to get out of domes.

Not to be contrarian, but the Rams are not happy with their stadium. It's a bare-bones convention hall that was quickly built to lure the witch from LA, with a terrible atmosphere that brings in among the lowest revenues in the league. Detroit made a bit more sense to be indoors, and it's a lot newer than the EJD. The Superdome was also among the worst before it's recent renovation. Teams are trying to get out of domes.

Sorry to get all off-topic...

But does that mean the Rams and the Saints would be looking forward to moving into new (open-air) stadiums if given the opportunity?

I saw a rendering of a proposed new Saints stadium a few years ago. I don't know what happened to that.

The Rams are stuck in the EJD from what I can tell. And they're one of the teams being eyed to move to L.A.

I guess the Lions are fine with Ford Field, as it's new and not ugly.

They want out because they want a stadium that makes more money -- for the Falcons.

The Georgia Dome is wonderful for Atlanta and Georgia, but only decent for the Falcons. An outdoor stadium would be excellent for the Falcons, probably not so much for Atlanta and Georgia.

Also worth noting, the Falcons don't operate the Georgia Dome, the GWCC does.

They want out because they want a stadium that makes more money -- for the Falcons.

The Georgia Dome is wonderful for Atlanta and Georgia, but only decent for the Falcons. An outdoor stadium would be excellent for the Falcons, probably not so much for Atlanta and Georgia.

Also worth noting, the Falcons don't operate the Georgia Dome, the GWCC does.

You are spot on with all of that said. AB wants control and profit of everything that happens on Sundays at Falcons games. From concessions to parking, etc. The Georgia Dome makes money hand over fist, but when it comes to the Falcons, they take little of that home.

You are spot on with all of that said. AB wants control and profit of everything that happens on Sundays at Falcons games. From concessions to parking, etc. The Georgia Dome makes money hand over fist, but when it comes to the Falcons, they take little of that home.
The issue is that the GWCC would still own a huge chunk of the operation since they own the site. If the city/state finances the stadium, the Falcons can't expect much control. If the Falcons do it through bonds, they might have more control after paying it off.

Taxing the public for a new stadium will be tough to impossible. Especially since the public views it as a great venue.

Let's say that this new stadium does get built.

Do you guys think Ted Turner will pony up some of his millions to put his name on the venue?

Turner Stadium?

Personally, I think Coca-Cola Field, Delta Stadium, SunTrust Stadium, or GP Field would sound better.

Let's say that this new stadium does get built.

Do you guys think Ted Turner will pony up some of his millions to put his name on the venue?

Turner Stadium?

Personally, I think Coca-Cola Field, Delta Stadium, SunTrust Stadium, or GP Field would sound better.
Why would he want his name on two stadiums in the Atlanta region?

Why would he want his name on two stadiums in the Atlanta region?

I don't see why not. He's loaded.

I don't see why not. He's loaded.

Nah. Ted has no affiliation whatsoever with the Falcons. And I don't believe Arthur Blank and his ego would go for that. I believe Coca-Cola Field sounds good. And it's colors match the Falcons

Couldnt the Falcons and GWCCA just renegotiate the lease agreement so the Falcons can get a larger share of game day revenue instead of building a new stadium? Im sure that this new stadium pursuit is really all about that and not the bells and whistles of a new venue.

I dont know how much money the state has collected to pay off the bonds, but they should to be paid off as soon as possible before shovels go into the ground.

I think Arthur Blank is interested in a venue for soccer and football. If I'm not mistaken, he was in the running for an expansion MLS franchise for Atlanta several years ago. An outdoor stadium would be far better for soccer and football.

The MARTA train doesn't reach the Turner Field location. You have to hop off the train and take shuttle buses to the stadium.

The Kennesaw State stadium is amazing!

Perhaps it's time for another Olympics for Atlanta? It would be the perfect excuse to build a new main stadium that would be home to the Falcons post Olympics.

A perfect chance for a of conventional looking athletics stadium of 80,000, that could technically have it's pitch lowered to make room for a lower tier of seating (like the City of Manchester Stadium, England).

A great opportunity to show what the Centennial Olympics should have been.

Simply build the new stadium either directly adjacent Turner Field (where you'd have to make parking underground, and tunnel some roads), or at a purpose designed Olympic Park elsewhere in the city accessible by train.

^^^^ Yeah that could actually help it get built if it were part of an Olympics bid but, the only problem is well it doesn't look an American City will be getting the Olympics for quite some time after Chicago's bid for 2016. But hey it couldn't hurt to try biding because the only way that I could see justifying this would be to use the venue as an Olympic Stadium.

So are they actually going to proceed with this new stadium for the Falcons?

I saw the Georgia Dome for the first time this past weekend when I attended Wrestlemania 27.

The Dome looks so 'blah' on the outside. It reminds me of another aging structure- the Pontiac Silverdome.:shifty:

^^ The Pontiac Silverdome is considerably older and is nowhere near downtown in Detroit, so it's hardly a comparison.

All Georgia Dome needs is a roof replacement and to somehow make the exterior upper walls that support the roof look more pleasant, perhaps mirrored glass? Something that would match the exterior facade? It really doesn't look too bad, and probably doesn't need to be replaced for now.

^^So what happened to all this talk about the Falcons eventually getting a new stadium?

Is the project at a standstill like the new Vikings stadium?

^^So what happened to all this talk about the Falcons eventually getting a new stadium?

Is the project at a standstill like the new Vikings stadium?
Probably even more so. The Falcons have no need for a new stadium. The Vikings do, sort of. Building something new in Atlanta is pure vanity. And waste.

^^ The Pontiac Silverdome is considerably older and is nowhere near downtown in Detroit, so it's hardly a comparison.

All Georgia Dome needs is a roof replacement and to somehow make the exterior upper walls that support the roof look more pleasant, perhaps mirrored glass? Something that would match the exterior facade? It really doesn't look too bad, and probably doesn't need to be replaced for now.

I agree with this. Actually, if they could find a way to put a level of suites where the upper walls are, that would add more suite revenue that Blank is looking for. Maybe cut out a section of seats in the upper level in the endzone facing the GWCC and Philips arena. Let a little natural light into the place and it would also have a view of the Atlanta Skyline. the Georgia Dome has great sightlines. I honestly believe that if the Superdome can have its transformation, the Georgia dome definitely can. It's just a matter of whether AB is willing to continue dealing with the GWCC...

Atlanta Business Chronicle (http://saportareport.com/blog/2011/11/atlanta-falcons-to-kick-off-new-stadium-design/)


Atlanta Falcons to kick off new stadium design

Date: November 10th, 2011, 10:35 pm

By Maria Saporta
Friday, November 4, 2011

The Atlanta Falcons and Georgia World Congress Center will soon send out a request for proposals to potential designers of a new football stadium.

Falcons and GWCC officials expect to issue the RFP by the end of November for national and international architects to provide conceptual designs for a new open-air football stadium. The new stadium would be located north of the Falcons existing home — the Georgia Dome — at the intersection of Northside Drive and Ivan Allen Jr. Boulevard. “It gives us an opportunity to look at some conceptual designs for the stadium and to get cost estimates,” said Rich McKay, Falcons president and CEO. “Our hope is that it would be issued in the next 30 days.”

McKay said the RFP is an important next step in the future development of a new stadium. It follows a master plan that was done by Kansas City, Mo.-based Populous, which was released last February. “If you look at what Populous did, it was at the 40,000-foot level,” said Frank Poe, GWCC executive director. “This will take it to the 25,000-foot level.”

The Populous report estimated a new stadium would cost about $700 million. But to have a more accurate assessment of what it would cost, McKay said a conceptual design is needed. An independent third party likely will break down the costs once a conceptual design has been selected. “There are a lot of qualified architects, and there are a lot of stadiums that have been designed in the last 10 years that have made great advancements from a design and sustainability standpoint,” McKay said.

Having a conceptual design and a more accurate cost estimate is critical in the ongoing negotiations between the Falcons and the GWCC to develop a business agreement for financing the new football stadium. “We are at the point where this piece of information is important to understand whether a financial deal can be done,” Poe said. “You have got to look at the cost, the design and what the financial plan would look like.”

The Falcons are committed to building a new outdoor stadium rather than remaining in the Georgia Dome. But until a financial agreement is reached between the team and the state on how to pay for a new stadium, the option to remain in a renovated Georgia Dome is still on the table — which would be a far less expensive alternative. “We are focused on trying to make a business deal on a new stadium,” McKay said. “We look at it as a long-term solution rather than a short-term solution, which is what a renovation would be.”

If a new stadium is built, the state would try to make sure there would be enough revenue to keep the Georgia Dome open as an amenity to the convention center for large gatherings, other sporting events and concerts. The state also would seek to be made whole in other ways. As currently envisioned, the new stadium would be built on the 21-acre truck marshaling yard that is necessary to serve one of the country’s largest convention centers. (The stadium also would need the property that is now the 7-acre yellow parking lot.)

Either the marshaling yard would need to be relocated to a new site or planners would need to figure out a way to design the stadium in such a way that it could co-exist with the current truck marshaling yard. Either option would add a cost to the development of a new stadium. “It is a functional part of the center,” Poe said of the truck marshaling yard. “It is a critical element of what we do. It’s an item that will be included [as part of a development plan].”

McKay and Poe said the two parties are still working on what would be included as part of the RFP, and it has not yet been decided whether the state or the Falcons would actually issue the request for proposals. If the GWCC issues the RFP, the process would then need to follow state procurement guidelines. In determining which firm would be selected, McKay and Poe said several factors would be considered, such as the proposed design and the firm’s professional experience. But McKay said the process probably would not turn into a full-scale design competition, such as was used in selecting the architectural team for the proposed National Center for Civil and Human Rights.

Still, McKay said that the architect selected through the RFP process likely would be commissioned to do the actual final design of the stadium. The final design, however, could end up being different from the conceptual design that comes out of the RFP process. “Our intent going in is that they would be the one ultimately to design the stadium, pending the ability to work out a financial arrangement between the Congress Center and the Falcons,” McKay said.

Once the RFP is issued, then architectural firms likely would have a couple of months to turn in their conceptual designs. Then the Falcons and GWCC officials would conduct a formal evaluation of the various proposals. McKay said they likely would make a decision on the firm and the conceptual design by next spring. But until a financial agreement is reached, the actual timeline to build a new stadium is unknown.

The Falcons have to play in the Georgia Dome until the bonds that were issued to build the facility are paid off. The 30-year bonds are scheduled to be repaid by 2020, but could be paid back earlier — maybe 2017. The bonds are being repaid through hotel-motel taxes collected in the city of Atlanta. The Falcons would like to be able to move to a new facility once the bonds are paid off — ending the team’s lease of the Georgia Dome. The Georgia General Assembly passed a bill that would allow the collection of hotel-motel taxes to be extended if the new stadium were to be built as part of the GWCC campus

[...]

^^Dont get it...
Georgia dome built in 1992... All the luxury boxes, club seats, bathrooms and snooty bars you could ask for in a new arena... What could you possibly get for $700mil that you couldn't get with another (yes another. already spent $30mil in 2006 for renno...) update? K, so you need your fancy new scoreboard or perhaps new video equipment... Maybe a new coat of velvet on the team locker room? What?

^^Dont get it...
Georgia dome built in 1992... All the luxury boxes, club seats, bathrooms and snooty bars you could ask for in a new arena... What could you possibly get for $700mil that you couldn't get with another (yes another. already spent $30mil in 2006 for renno...) update? K, so you need your fancy new scoreboard or perhaps new video equipment... Maybe a new coat of velvet on the team locker room? What?

Open-air fan experience vs crappy indoor dome; and oh, btw: SUPER BOWL. Atl basically got told that there will be no Super Bowls coming to the Georgia Dome anytime soon. But build a spanking new fantastic outdoor field, and it's party time! :yes:

Open-air fan experience vs crappy indoor dome; and oh, btw: SUPER BOWL. Atl basically got told that there will be no Super Bowls coming to the Georgia Dome anytime soon. But build a spanking new fantastic outdoor field, and it's party time! :yes:

K... so take the roof off of it...

And wouldn't that it hurt your chances for getting the Superbowl? Atlanta does have a bit of a winter last time I checked.

Besides the dome, whats crappy about it? On top of what I already said, its right downtown next to a metro stop... Not the prettiest thing in the world outside, but 'we don't have a pretty stadium' is a poor excuse for throwing down $700mil on a new stadium.

I can understand SF, Oakland, SD, Minnesota etc. need for new digs, but the situations with Saint Louis and Atlanta are just crazy to me. Espcially considering what stadium deals can do to local governments if they're not careful. Ask Cincy (or better yet a Cincy school teacher) how the fancy pants Bengals and Reds stadiums are working out for them.

The Cowboys didn't need a new stadium either. Jerry just wanted it to keep the revenues. Probably a similar situation.

The Cowboys didn't need a new stadium either. Jerry just wanted it to keep the revenues. Probably a similar situation.
But Jerruh paid most of the bills on that one. The Falcons are just trying to rip off the taxpayers.

Open-air fan experience vs crappy indoor dome;
A retractable roof would take care of that for a lot less than the cost of a new stadium...

and oh, btw: SUPER BOWL. Atl basically got told that there will be no Super Bowls coming to the Georgia Dome anytime soon. But build a spanking new fantastic outdoor field, and it's party time! :yes:
So an event that brings in maybe $100-200M every 5-10 years is worth an $800M stadium?

K... so take the roof off of it...

And wouldn't that it hurt your chances for getting the Superbowl? Atlanta does have a bit of a winter last time I checked.

Besides the dome, whats crappy about it? On top of what I already said, its right downtown next to a metro stop... Not the prettiest thing in the world outside, but 'we don't have a pretty stadium' is a poor excuse for throwing down $700mil on a new stadium.

I can understand SF, Oakland, SD, Minnesota etc. need for new digs, but the situations with Saint Louis and Atlanta are just crazy to me. Espcially considering what stadium deals can do to local governments if they're not careful. Ask Cincy (or better yet a Cincy school teacher) how the fancy pants Bengals and Reds stadiums are working out for them.

Alright, I feel I have a little credibility on this one, since I grew up an hour north of Atlanta and have been to a dozen or so Falcons, SEC Title Games, Peach Bowls and the Olympics and have sat in every different section in the dome.

For all intents and purposes, the dome does not need to be replaced. It is easy to get to, has plenty of parking for tailgating and is close to public tranportation. The sightlines are great, the seats are new (and comfortable), the interior looks remarkably better than the original interior, the atmosphere is great (and loud) and the ammenities are as good if not better than every other NFL stadium I have been too. The only criticism I can think of is that the individual suites are a little small, but I only include that because we all know the experience of the high dollar fans counts a lot more than us regular folk. I only sat in the suites once and was perfectly happy with it myself.

The reason Atlanta hasn't gotten a Super Bowl recently is because of the ice storm that hit during the last one. It did nothing to affect the game itself, but everything else was a mess. This wasn't a rare occurance either. That happens pretty regularly in North Georgia. With the exception of Denver, I beleive Atlanta is the city with the highest elevation in the NFL. An outdoor stadium will only make the entire Super Bowl experience worse. On top of that, the city is scorching hot Aug-Oct, or half the season. When my dad used to take me to games at Fulton County Stadium, it bordered on unbareable if your seats weren't in the shade.

From what I have been told by people who still live there and follow this more closely than I do, the driving force behind this move is for Author Blank to get away from the crummy lease the Falcons have with the Dome owner, the Georgia World Congress Center. I have heard he wasn't happy with club level renovations from a few years ago, based on the limitations due to the existing framing, but I really don't see what is wrong with it.

Open-air fan experience vs crappy indoor dome; and oh, btw: SUPER BOWL. Atl basically got told that there will be no Super Bowls coming to the Georgia Dome anytime soon. But build a spanking new fantastic outdoor field, and it's party time! :yes:The Super Bowl is a Red Herring in this instance, though, because the last time Atlanta lost out on the event it was because of reservations about... the weather! Ever since the Titans and Rams had to take turns practicing in an ice storm Atlanta was moved down a tier in the Super Bowl pecking order.

K... so take the roof off of it...Engineers have determined the dome would be incapable of handling the runoff issues because there is no graceful way to incorporate decent drainage into the seating areas (which obviously don't need such under a roof.) Plus, as Topher said Mr. Blank hates the lease and thinks they won't get anything like he wants with this venue, since it's so critical to the GWCC for other events.

Besides the dome, whats crappy about it? On top of what I already said, its right downtown next to a metro stop... Not the prettiest thing in the world outside, but 'we don't have a pretty stadium' is a poor excuse for throwing down $700mil on a new stadium. Nothing's crappy about it, but the Falcons are convinced the costs for renovations without adding the outdoor game experience wouldn't yield the desired returns. They fear average fans will grow tired of the dome in the near-term, and the other elements will wear out soon, so paying $300M just to upgrade premium seating conditions to match the 21st century norm isn't viable to them. It's myopic in my view, but to people in the development industry land is almost as disposable as home computers. Due to tax laws all they need to do is secure the financing and their investment is all but secure, leaving the banks to take any risk or hit. Or also, in this case, the taxpayers.

But Jerruh paid most of the bills on that one. The Falcons are just trying to rip off the taxpayers.

Taxpayers paid about $375 million on Cowboys Stadium. Jerry paid more so he could get the NFL allowed revenues. If the Falcons owners aren't majority owners or owners at all of the Georgia Dome, they are probably missing 90% of the revenues that some of the other owners are making. This is why the whole, is the US done with new stadiums thing is a lot premature. A lot of stadiums that aren't making the owners as much money as they could. Even fairly new ones that were built to get NFL revenue, but don't have the right ownership deal in place.

Taxpayers paid about $375 million on Cowboys Stadium. Jerry paid more so he could get the NFL allowed revenues. If the Falcons owners aren't majority owners or owners at all of the Georgia Dome, they are probably missing 90% of the revenues that some of the other owners are making. This is why the whole, is the US done with new stadiums thing is a lot premature. A lot of stadiums that aren't making the owners as much money as they could. Even fairly new ones that were built to get NFL revenue, but don't have the right ownership deal in place.
That's fine, as long as Blank is writing the checks. And $375 million means that Jerruh paid about 75% of the cost. Still too much burden for the taxpayers, but better than many places here.

Just want to say that Turner Field was named after Ted Turner, it's not sponsored by him (as someone earlier stated).

This sucks.

This sucks.

Agreed. However, losing the Falcons as a tennant isn't the end of the world. The Georgia Dome is still a great venue and I doubt the Peach Bowl (as it shall ever be called in my mind) or the SEC title game will move outdoors in the winter. They play a neutral site SEC game there every season now and the GWCC uses it pretty regularly too. I think Georgia State just started playing their home games their also. I don't see any of that leaving.

Some of those events might not sell out, but the dome won't sit unused. Besides, unless the Falcons are elite (which they rarely are), they don't even sell out the dome.

Agreed. However, losing the Falcons as a tennant isn't the end of the world. The Georgia Dome is still a great venue and I doubt the Peach Bowl (as it shall ever be called in my mind) or the SEC title game will move outdoors in the winter. They play a neutral site SEC game there every season now and the GWCC uses it pretty regularly too. I think Georgia State just started playing their home games their also. I don't see any of that leaving.

Some of those events might not sell out, but the dome won't sit unused. Besides, unless the Falcons are elite (which they rarely are), they don't even sell out the dome.

Agree the dome won't go un-used. GWCC will lose ~10 events from their 100+ event schedule.

SEC title game is POSSIBLY tilting away from Atlanta with the aTm and Mizzou additions. I don't see where they'd play unless they go to the total opposite end of the conference and use Jerry World. Are ~30k more seats worth leaving Atlanta and much of the SEC's history with the city for the western bounds of the conference?

It isn't an SEC game every year. They just want a couple teams of local interest to kick off the season (likely an SEC or ACC team will be one of the 2 every year). Pretty sure they're adding a 2nd game too.

SEC title game is POSSIBLY tilting away from Atlanta with the aTm and Mizzou additions. I don't see where they'd play unless they go to the total opposite end of the conference and use Jerry World. Are ~30k more seats worth leaving Atlanta and much of the SEC's history with the city for the western bounds of the conference?


The only place I could ever see it moving to is New Orleans, but I doubt it.

The only place I could ever see it moving to is New Orleans, but I doubt it.

The SEC has said they would stay in the Georgia Dome, regardless of whether the Falcons build a new stadium.

It'd be beyond foolish for the SEC to move the game. A domed NFL-stadium centrally located in the conference footprint, with a travel friendly situation hotel- and airport-wise, in a city that LOVES college football. And oh by the way, the College Football Hall of Fame is moving from South Bend to Atlanta in 2013. Plus, playing the CG in the Superdome or Jerry World might mean 1 of the CG participants could be repeat visitors for the respective SEC bowl game, which nobody wants.

The Cowboys didn't need a new stadium either. Jerry just wanted it to keep the revenues. Probably a similar situation.

What? I loved Texas Stadium but it was old, falling apart, out dated, no room for improvement.

I hope the new stadium, if it happens, lands Atlanta the 150th anniversary of the Olympics!!

Much as I would love to see the games return to show off how well the city responded to critics from the '96 games, I don't think Atlanta would satisfy the IOC's requests regarding an Athletics stadium. Plus Atlanta likely shouldn't bid again until the IOC wises up and drops some of their events. IMHO, anyway.

I hope the new stadium, if it happens, lands Atlanta the 150th anniversary of the Olympics!!
2046 Winter Olympics in Atlanta?

^^Forget it, Atlanta is good for eternity without another Olympics. A second Olympics is the last thing Atlanta needs.

Not to dis Atlanta, but the Olympics have grown out of Atlantas size.
The IOC are only after new markets or really big cities nowadays.
In the US, I can only see NYC, LA, Miami, Chicago getting it.

Sadly. They're just to damn greedy. :/

I hope the new stadium, if it happens, lands Atlanta the 150th anniversary of the Olympics!!

RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.

I remember during the closing ceremonies, there was a big to-do made about the president of the IOC not saying the games were "the best games yet" or something like that. Apparently that had been done at every Olympics before and every Olympics since. The IOC was very uphappy with the Atlanta games overall and would never give them another shot. Especially since many world class cities have yet to host a second games.

Not to dis Atlanta, but the Olympics have grown out of Atlantas size.
The IOC are only after new markets or really big cities nowadays.
In the US, I can only see NYC, LA, Miami, Chicago getting it.

Sadly. They're just to damn greedy. :/
a city the size of Atlanta was lucky to get one in the first place

Can't see Miami getting the olympic's think New York or LA have the best shot at getting them but both citys will need brand new stadiums to host them. But this is off topic

Would the Falcons move citys if they did not get a new stadium deal ?

Can't see Miami getting the olympic's think New York or LA have the best shot at getting them but both citys will need brand new stadiums to host them.
How much would a suitable Olympics venue cost? And who would need it post-Games?

Our biggest problem is the fact that most of our larger venues are built specifically for American football, which doesn't allow much room (if any) for a track, and most of those that had one have removed theirs to bring seats closer to the field.

Would the Falcons move citys if they did not get a new stadium deal ?
Unless they win the L.A. sweepstakes, I'm having a hard time figuring out who would build them a new stadium.

What I think will most likely happen, is that Blank will renegotiate his lease of the Dome with the State to receive a share of revenues more equitable with what other owners are receiving, which is essentially the reasoning behind this entire folly of moving out of a venue two decades old that recently underwent a $55 million modernization.

RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.

I remember during the closing ceremonies, there was a big to-do made about the president of the IOC not saying the games were "the best games yet" or something like that. Apparently that had been done at every Olympics before and every Olympics since. The IOC was very uphappy with the Atlanta games overall and would never give them another shot. Especially since many world class cities have yet to host a second games.

What were the IOC's objections to Atlanta?

Can't see Miami getting the olympic's think New York or LA have the best shot at getting them but both citys will need brand new stadiums to host them. But this is off topic

Would the Falcons move citys if they did not get a new stadium deal ?

I know it's off topic, but I'm just curious why you don't think Miami could get it?

Feel free to PM me. :)

^^^^ The size of the city maybe a factor in getting it but also the heat would get in the way of it. Does the city have a few Billion to spend on a stadium and other building ?

RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.

I remember during the closing ceremonies, there was a big to-do made about the president of the IOC not saying the games were "the best games yet" or something like that. Apparently that had been done at every Olympics before and every Olympics since. The IOC was very uphappy with the Atlanta games overall and would never give them another shot. Especially since many world class cities have yet to host a second games.

Who cares? That prissy old man is dead!! C'mon Billy Baby, we want ANOTHER Atlanta Olympics. Those were good Games. Samaranch, piss off!!

What were the IOC's objections to Atlanta?
)

That Coke gave too many freebies!! The pin dealers did NOT make enough $$$.

RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.

I remember during the closing ceremonies, there was a big to-do made about the president of the IOC not saying the games were "the best games yet" or something like that. Apparently that had been done at every Olympics before and every Olympics since. It was simply Samaranch's trademark line and everyone went into the closing ceremonies nervous about it because of a) the olympic park bombing and b) some misgivings by visitors expecting Atlanta to be a tourist mecca. Some of the well to do had grown used to the games being their paid vacation, and Atlanta is more a place for living and working than for recreating (no beaches, no mountains, etc).

The IOC was very uphappy with the Atlanta games overall and would never give them another shot. The IOC was thrilled because they made tons of money and the events themselves were loved by the athletes and spectators. Hell, even the City made a profit. It was the tourists comparing Atlanta with larger global cities that were frustrated because these games were almost completely funded by sponsors rather than on the government dime. Thus the city was besieged by make-shift shops and peddlers of all-kinds. It was, shall we say, the exact opposite of the regimented big-brother approach of China, and not as traditionally stoic as long-time Olympic-philes were accustomed.

Atlanta's games were bad by any account, and the City knew it was reaching for the stars (a very Olympian effort, as it were). It had the venues, the hotels and the ease of access, it simply lacked the more esteemed tourist appeal to "Wow!" visitors.

Can't see Miami getting the olympic's think New York or LA have the best shot at getting them but both citys will need brand new stadiums to host them. But this is off topic

Would the Falcons move citys if they did not get a new stadium deal ?

Yeah. I think Dallas or Houston would have just as good of shot given the current state of the national economy.

NY, sure but I do not think the state and local governments of California could handle the cost. San Francisco would have made a beautiful backdrop for the games but is it really financially realistic.

The money is in Texas right now (as annoying as that is).

. Some of the well to do had grown used to the games being their paid vacation, and Atlanta is more a place for living and working than for recreating (no beaches, no mountains, etc).

.

uhmmmmm...R u kidding? There is Hartsfield International, Buckhead, Margaret Mitchell's mansion, Stone Mountain. The World of Coca-Cola, Centennial Olympic Park!! These are fantastic tourist destinations -- right up there with the Eiffel Tower and Times Square.

The South will rise again!! A revived Atlanta will win 2032 or 2036!!

I'll refrain from further threadjacking, but... That poor Margaret Mitchell house. That thing has been through political and ownership wrangles, survived multiple fires, break ins... It seemingly can't catch a break.

Spoke with a GWCC official this week about the proposed stadium and at the staff level they're convinced it will be a go. Apparently the power brokers are thinking more and more they can make enough out of the Georgia Dome to keep it a highly viable venue for select sporting events, especially since it will essentially be paid off soon. Meanwhile the new Falcons stadium would still be contributing to GWCC coffers, so as long as the facilities loading and parking demands are still met as part of any renovations then this might prove to be a win/win from their eyes. Two interesting notes also came up:

- Look for the proposed stadium to have the long-term potential for a roof structure of some kind, as a possible, eventual replacement of the Georgia Dome. Not a guarantee, but an option that the GWCC would support.

- Expect the Falcons to pitch the new stadium as a future home venue for Ga Tech. The Jackets don't need anything that large at the moment, and they're still paying off renovations made to Bobby Dodd Stadium in 2003, but the Falcons obviously want to make the most of their stadium and this facility would be less than a mile from GT's stadium. Given the campus' tight footprint and premium demand for land, and how poorly the last renovation was done, the Falcons are wondering if the Jackets might move in, say, 10-15 years.

As a GT grad and fan I'm not for the idea but the location means it would be a whole lot more feasible than comparable pro-college sharing deals in Pitt, USF, Miami, etc.

It was simply Samaranch's trademark line and everyone went into the closing ceremonies nervous about it because of a) the olympic park bombing and b) some misgivings by visitors expecting Atlanta to be a tourist mecca. Some of the well to do had grown used to the games being their paid vacation, and Atlanta is more a place for living and working than for recreating (no beaches, no mountains, etc).

The IOC was thrilled because they made tons of money and the events themselves were loved by the athletes and spectators. Hell, even the City made a profit. It was the tourists comparing Atlanta with larger global cities that were frustrated because these games were almost completely funded by sponsors rather than on the government dime. Thus the city was besieged by make-shift shops and peddlers of all-kinds. It was, shall we say, the exact opposite of the regimented big-brother approach of China, and not as traditionally stoic as long-time Olympic-philes were accustomed.

Atlanta's games were bad by any account, and the City knew it was reaching for the stars (a very Olympian effort, as it were). It had the venues, the hotels and the ease of access, it simply lacked the more esteemed tourist appeal to "Wow!" visitors.

I was going to say it was thought to be too commercialized, had the terrorist attack and it had the unfortunate luck of hosting right after Barcelona, but you gave a much more detailed explanation. Don't get me wrong, as a 17 year old I went to several events and had a blast, but Atlanta has zero chance of hosting another one in my lifetime.

Spoke with a GWCC official this week about the proposed stadium and at the staff level they're convinced it will be a go.
Who's paying for it?

Who's paying for it?The conventional mix of taxpayers, sponsors, taxpayers, the owner and the taxpayers. :colgate:

Obviously that detail remains to be sorted, but the feeling seems to be Blank wants the move much, much more than any compromise deal on staying in the Dome. The assumption is the studies about the proposed site are as much to determine the cost logistics for the Falcons regarding a design as it is about can it work. Thus the Falcons will pitch a "This or nothing" deal to the City/County, and negotiations will commence from there.

But it appears the subtle message being conveyed from the Falcons is "We will be leaving that dome."

The conventional mix of taxpayers, sponsors, taxpayers, the owner and the taxpayers. :colgate:

Obviously that detail remains to be sorted, but the feeling seems to be Blank wants the move much, much more than any compromise deal on staying in the Dome. The assumption is the studies about the proposed site are as much to determine the cost logistics for the Falcons regarding a design as it is about can it work. Thus the Falcons will pitch a "This or nothing" deal to the City/County, and negotiations will commence from there.

But it appears the subtle message being conveyed from the Falcons is "We will be leaving that dome."
If he goes there then the city of Atlanta (and subsequently the state of GA) should call his bluff.

Like I asked before, where's he gonna relocate the Falcons if another franchise moves to L.A. before he can? Toronto? :lol:

Can't see GT leaving Historic Grant Field.

I bet the money they'd spend/lose moving to a New Falcons Stadium would be better used by paying the massive amount of $$$$ needed to replace the West stands. The North endzone is a cluster****. You just hope they do the West side correctly when that time comes.

Like I asked before, where's he gonna relocate the Falcons if another franchise moves to L.A. before he can? Toronto? :lol:I think the threat is to move north of the perimeter, or at least outside City limits.
Can't see GT leaving Historic Grant Field.

I bet the money they'd spend/lose moving to a New Falcons Stadium would be better used by paying the massive amount of $$$$ needed to replace the West stands. The North endzone is a cluster****. You just hope they do the West side correctly when that time comes.I doubt it, but the Institute knows land is at a premium and the stadium is especially landlocked. And they're not going to do any further renovations to the stadium so soon after just spending $63M on the effort concluded in 2003 ('04?). An effort, which did all they could to the west stands without incuring more expensive work to bring the facility into full ADA compliance. More importantly, the Athletic Association is more than $100M in debt (though manageable), which means anything that maximizes revenues going forward will be favorable.

Really wish they'd added a smaller second tier to the north end that matched the east side, resembling something like BC's Alumni stadium.

I think the threat is to move north of the perimeter, or at least outside City limits.The Doraville plant on the NE side (JUST inside the perimeter) has been mentioned, and makes somesense. The location is much larger than needed for a stadium, and could possibly add a good amount of retail around it.

I'd like to see it turn into something else. I like repurposing industrial buildings for modern residential and commercial use. But, that isn't the most desirable location to live in an expensive new development.

CLOUD Architecture | Design have released this proposal (http://cloudarchitecturedesign.com/?p=13) for the new Falcons Stadium:

http://atlanta.curbed.com/uploads/falcons%20stadium.jpg
http://atlanta.curbed.com/tags/new-falcons-stadium

Why does it have a roof?

its no full roof.

Why does Atlanta need a new stadium?

And it looks like the Birds Nests forgotten cooler cousin.

Why does it have a roof?It's just the architects own concept, and it isn't even sited where the Falcons are looking. No formal RFPs have been let at this time, so the folks at Cloud offer their reasoning at the link listed above.

Why does Atlanta need a new stadium?They don't. Owner Blank simply wants something newer that gives him more money. Due largely to the lease terms and the limited parking, the Falcons' revenue streams are among the lowest in the league. Though low in the NFL is all relative, of course.

Blank wants a new stadium because the Dome is 20 years old. I disagree with that being a good reason but he's the owner.

Blank wants a new stadium because the Dome is 20 years old. I disagree with that being a good reason but he's the owner.

Yes, he's the owner, but the usual playbook is to get the city to pay for as much of it as possible or threaten to move the team to LA ;). Work out better lease terms with the Georgia dome and don't waste the city's money.

They don't. Owner Blank simply wants something newer that gives him more money. Due largely to the lease terms and the limited parking, the Falcons' revenue streams are among the lowest in the league. Though low in the NFL is all relative, of course.
Like I've been saying, why can't the city/state just rewrite the lease and give him a fairer cut?

NEW STADIUM! The Georgia Dome is one of the ugliest stadiums in the country, and Atlanta, as the capital of the New South needs to be keeping up! I'm gonna be pissed if they keep the georgia dome.

Like I've been saying, why can't the city/state just rewrite the lease and give him a fairer cut?They can, but Blank is balking because he feels he'll get a better deal out of a new venue and the State is balking because they doubt he'll find a better option. Political chicken.

According to Blank's men any plausible new agreement would still leave the Falcons low on the revenue poll, and with the "same 'ol digs." The expense of any substantial renovation wouldn't be worth it to anyone (or so they say), and the open-air faction would hate remaining in the dome. Basically, we need someone to come along and introduce a feasible long-term plan for making the dome convertible, for producing worthy high end seating that doesn't take away too many seats overall, and the fosters a better tailgating arrangement.

NEW STADIUM! The Georgia Dome is one of the ugliest stadiums in the country, and Atlanta, as the capital of the New South needs to be keeping up! I'm gonna be pissed if they keep the georgia dome.The exterior lacks pinache, but it's one of the most efficient multi purpose venues and apart from the finer points desired by Mr. Blank is highly function and in a solid location. Those of us who actually live here and attend events at the facility would rather they simply make a renovation work somehow, because it's far from a poor stadium. The City/State are loathe to do much to it because it is so successfull, from their vantage point.

NEW STADIUM! The Georgia Dome is one of the ugliest stadiums in the country, and Atlanta, as the capital of the New South needs to be keeping up! I'm gonna be pissed if they keep the georgia dome.

So what? Since when does a football stadium have to be a iconic piece of architecture? Farmers Field is going to be becuase LA is true world class city and that venue will be used constantly for a wide range of events. The Georgia Dome holds 12 or so football games a year plus conventions and monster truck rallys. A new Falcons stadium would host even less events and probably won't even be downtown.

If the people of Atlanta want iconc civic buildings, they should get off their @sses and build the Syhmphony Center already. They don't need any new stadiums. The ones they have are well above average for each league they play in.

http://www.midtownalliance.org/Images/ASO_3.jpg

NEW STADIUM! The Georgia Dome is one of the ugliest stadiums in the country, and Atlanta, as the capital of the New South needs to be keeping up! I'm gonna be pissed if they keep the georgia dome.

I didnt vote for them.

Why does it have a roof?

It's a canopy not a roof. With an opening for growing a natural grass field. And this is just a proposal from one firm that's angling for a bid.

The Falcons want a new stadium with all the bells and whistles and Atlanta wants to host a Superbowl or three, something the league will not award to the aging Georgia Dome. The only issue is who pays. Atlanta and Georgia are in no position right now to pay for a new stadium. If Blank can wrangle some other financing vehicle for his stadium, who knows?

The only issue is who pays. Atlanta and Georgia are in no position right now to pay for a new stadium. If Blank can wrangle some other financing vehicle for his stadium, who knows?

If he wants to pay for it himself, then by all means... but thats not typically how it goes.

I didnt vote for them.

Your vote wasn't needed haha. I don't include texas in the South. I think it's in a region along with new mexico and arizona, the "desert states" if you will

NEW STADIUM! The Georgia Dome is one of the ugliest stadiums in the country, and Atlanta, as the capital of the New South needs to be keeping up! I'm gonna be pissed if they keep the georgia dome.
The stadium was renovated just 3 years ago.

The seating, concourses, and premium areas have all been modernized. There is nothing obsolete about it.

Those who want a new stadium can either a) find a billion dollars to build one, or b) move.

Your vote wasn't needed haha. I don't include texas in the South. I think it's in a region along with new mexico and arizona, the "desert states" if you will
Very little of Texas is desert; it's largely prairie, part-forest, part-hills and part-Gulf Coast.

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/kids/about_texas/images/regions/regions325.gif

Very little of Texas is desert; it's largely prairie, part-forest, part-hills and part-Gulf Coast.

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/kids/about_texas/images/regions/regions325.gif

I know, but I consider grasslands, or land without trees or with few trees to be desert. I was born in San Diego and it seems to be borderline desert, only brush there, no trees, except for the non-native eucalyptus, and the rare torey pine.

Anyway, here's a map of US desert, most of texas seems to be desert by this.

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=map+of+us+deserts&start=39&num=10&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&biw=1024&bih=865&tbm=isch&tbnid=k1OMeX09m5L4hM:&imgrefurl=http://www.biologycorner.com/worksheets/biome_map_key.html&docid=f3KwABDfPtvgdM&imgurl=http://www.biologycorner.com/resources/biome_map_key.gif&w=683&h=880&ei=CWofT-PRM4S5tweN08XTBQ&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=366&sig=102340679198414174940&sqi=2&page=3&tbnh=166&tbnw=129&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:39&tx=52&ty=77

The stadium was renovated just 3 years ago.

The seating, concourses, and premium areas have all been modernized. There is nothing obsolete about it.

Those who want a new stadium can either a) find a billion dollars to build one, or b) move.

I will do neither because
a) I have no interest in putting together 1 billion dollars to build a stadium in Atlanta of all cities, especially when my hometown of San Diego needs one more.
b) I don't live there so I don't have to move, and I have no intention of living in Atlanta ever. I live in Raleigh now, and even this is too "southern" for me.

The Falcons want a new stadium with all the bells and whistles and Atlanta wants to host a Superbowl or three, something the league will not award to the aging Georgia Dome.

Has RG even been back to the Dome since they renovated it?

Has RG even been back to the Dome since they renovated it?

The Georgia Dome is never getting a Super Bowl again. No amount of reonvations will fix that. The NFL likes shiny new places.

I know, but I consider grasslands, or land without trees or with few trees to be desert. I was born in San Diego and it seems to be borderline desert, only brush there, no trees, except for the non-native eucalyptus, and the rare torey pine.

Anyway, here's a map of US desert, most of texas seems to be desert by this.

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=map+of+us+deserts&start=39&num=10&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&biw=1024&bih=865&tbm=isch&tbnid=k1OMeX09m5L4hM:&imgrefurl=http://www.biologycorner.com/worksheets/biome_map_key.html&docid=f3KwABDfPtvgdM&imgurl=http://www.biologycorner.com/resources/biome_map_key.gif&w=683&h=880&ei=CWofT-PRM4S5tweN08XTBQ&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=366&sig=102340679198414174940&sqi=2&page=3&tbnh=166&tbnw=129&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:39&tx=52&ty=77
:lol: that map looks like some straight grade-school shit

they have Houston and Corpus Christi in the f**king desert? :ohno: good grief...

The Georgia Dome is never getting a Super Bowl again. No amount of reonvations will fix that. The NFL likes shiny new places.
Does ATL even need the Super Bowl, and would it be anywhere near a break-even R.O.I. for a billion-dollar stadium?

Look at what good it did Jacksonville...

I will do neither because
a) I have no interest in putting together 1 billion dollars to build a stadium in Atlanta of all cities, especially when my hometown of San Diego needs one more.
b) I don't live there so I don't have to move, and I have no intention of living in Atlanta ever. I live in Raleigh now, and even this is too "southern" for me.
So why are you so concerned with them building a stadium when they already have one that was recently upgraded, is nearly paid off, is centrally located and has no trouble attracting marquee events?

I know, but I consider grasslands, or land without trees or with few trees to be desert. I was born in San Diego and it seems to be borderline desert, only brush there, no trees, except for the non-native eucalyptus, and the rare torey pine.

Anyway, here's a map of US desert, most of texas seems to be desert by this.

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=map+of+us+deserts&start=39&num=10&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&biw=1024&bih=865&tbm=isch&tbnid=k1OMeX09m5L4hM:&imgrefurl=http://www.biologycorner.com/worksheets/biome_map_key.html&docid=f3KwABDfPtvgdM&imgurl=http://www.biologycorner.com/resources/biome_map_key.gif&w=683&h=880&ei=CWofT-PRM4S5tweN08XTBQ&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=366&sig=102340679198414174940&sqi=2&page=3&tbnh=166&tbnw=129&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:39&tx=52&ty=77

That's ridiculous because the type of grasslands in Texas are nothing like the areas around San Diego. They are actually lush with tall grasses and anywhere there is water, there are lots of trees, even forests. Nothing like a desert. The only part of Texas that is desert is the part labelled Big Bend Country, and even that is very mountainous and the extreme western part of the Panhandle. So maybe the western 1/5 of the state.

As for the stadium, what is the ownership and revenue agreement like between the team owner and the owner of the Georgia Dome? There's a always a better way to make money out of the stadium itself, and that's what NFL owners get to keep for themselves. So what's the agreement? Is it a lease? Are they losing out on parking or vending contracts or somesuch?

I know, but I consider grasslands, or land without trees or with few trees to be desert. I was born in San Diego and it seems to be borderline desert, only brush there, no trees, except for the non-native eucalyptus, and the rare torey pine.

Anyway, here's a map of US desert, most of texas seems to be desert by this.

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=map+of+us+deserts&start=39&num=10&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&biw=1024&bih=865&tbm=isch&tbnid=k1OMeX09m5L4hM:&imgrefurl=http://www.biologycorner.com/worksheets/biome_map_key.html&docid=f3KwABDfPtvgdM&imgurl=http://www.biologycorner.com/resources/biome_map_key.gif&w=683&h=880&ei=CWofT-PRM4S5tweN08XTBQ&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=366&sig=102340679198414174940&sqi=2&page=3&tbnh=166&tbnw=129&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:39&tx=52&ty=77

The only parts of Texas that are Dessert is around Midland and Odessa.

Back to the Stadium. Georgia Dome is fine, this is all talk and if it happened, everyone would be like....what?

I know, but I consider grasslands, or land without trees or with few trees to be desert. I was born in San Diego and it seems to be borderline desert, only brush there, no trees, except for the non-native eucalyptus, and the rare torey pine.

Anyway, here's a map of US desert, most of texas seems to be desert by this.

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=map+of+us+deserts&start=39&num=10&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&biw=1024&bih=865&tbm=isch&tbnid=k1OMeX09m5L4hM:&imgrefurl=http://www.biologycorner.com/worksheets/biome_map_key.html&docid=f3KwABDfPtvgdM&imgurl=http://www.biologycorner.com/resources/biome_map_key.gif&w=683&h=880&ei=CWofT-PRM4S5tweN08XTBQ&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=366&sig=102340679198414174940&sqi=2&page=3&tbnh=166&tbnw=129&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:39&tx=52&ty=77

According to that map, the entire Rocky Mountain region is desert. That map is ridiculous. Do you consider Tundra to be desert too?

I don't understand why more owners don't simply build their own stadiums. Bob Kraft did it with Gillette and they get to control the revenues from Patriots games as well as concerts and other sporting events held at the stadium.

I don't understand why more owners don't simply build their own stadiums. Bob Kraft did it with Gillette and they get to control the revenues from Patriots games as well as concerts and other sporting events held at the stadium.

Because most teams get the same revenue control on tax payer financed stadiums. They just get to avoid that whole pesky deal of paying for them. Some teams even get paid for taking tax payer money.

I don't understand why more owners don't simply build their own stadiums. Bob Kraft did it with Gillette and they get to control the revenues from Patriots games as well as concerts and other sporting events held at the stadium.

because for what Kraft paid you can get a much better stadium that can host 5x as many events and control certain types of revenue in them.

What if the Falcons moved somewhere else if this proposed white elephant stadium did not get built? If that had happened, all Atlanta would have are the Braves and the Hawks?

What if the Falcons moved somewhere else if this proposed white elephant stadium did not get built? If that had happened, all Atlanta would have are the Braves and the Hawks?

Oh, that's not happening....

What if the Falcons moved somewhere else if this proposed white elephant stadium did not get built? If that had happened, all Atlanta would have are the Braves and the Hawks?

The Falcons are one of the few teams in NFL history who haven't threatened to move. Nevermind they played at Fulton County for 20+ years, I think they can survive playing in the Dome for a while.

yeah, probably not moving. Too much of a regional fanbase and probably making decent revenue. That's not always a promise, even in LA since the revenue rules are so strict in the NFL.

because for what Kraft paid you can get a much better stadium that can host 5x as many events and control certain types of revenue in them.

How do you figure Kraft could have had a better stadium for the money he paid? A roof would have increased the price and he did not want one on the stadium. Kraft controls everything in his stadium and the surrounding developments.

Has RG even been back to the Dome since they renovated it?

I believe he visited here last season during a Thursday Night game. He stated in no uncertain terms that the facility as in its current state was not up to Super Bowl standards and that the Falcons either need to A. Build a new one or B. Have a massive renovation of the Dome.

Here's the thing no one is talking about. I believe it would be in the Falcons' best interest to have a stadium that is fully enclosed or that has a retractable option. Some Fans down here mostly come to these games and treat it as a fashion show (women wearing club attire, heels,etc.) Most Atlantans today for the most part want no parts of an outdoor game in December with temps in the low 40's. The stadium would be about 70% full. That's just facts. Some come to the games knowing the place is enclosed and are not your typical die hards you see in Pittsburgh or Green Bay.

The other thing that makes me think an outdoor stadium is not a good idea is that there is no guarantee it would bring a Super Bowl to town. Houston arguably had the most impressive stadium in the NFL before Jerry World was built and they still havent the big game since 2004 and it doesn't look like they'll be getting it anytime soon. With Atlanta's so so winter weather, an outdoor Super Bowl here might be a bad look for the NFL.

I believe he visited here last season during a Thursday Night game. He stated in no uncertain terms that the facility as in its current state was not up to Super Bowl standards
Yet the Superdome is?

Even after the upgrade it isn't much nicer than ATL's.

How do you figure Kraft could have had a better stadium for the money he paid? A roof would have increased the price and he did not want one on the stadium. Kraft controls everything in his stadium and the surrounding developments.

From the NFL, he can only make revenues from certain things in and around the stadium. The rest goes to the league no matter what he controls in the stadium. Without a roof for the winter, he loses out on some events that are required to be indoors. Even if he had a partnership with a public entity, he would still likely have a revenue agreement and make money off of events that he simply can't host without it.

To put it differently, let's say Jerruh and Kraft pay the same amount for a stadium and get similar stadiums. Both get club seat revenues, suite revenues, name licensing/stadium sponsors and parking revenue. Jerruh gives up a little rent for a specified amount of time, non-league vending revenue and non-premises parking to Arlington in a deal for Arlington to add a roof, covered concourses a more luxurious finish out including twice as many suites. Now, Kraft and Jerruh have paid for similar stadiums, and get to take home similar revenue. The difference is with what Arlington has kicked in to add to the stadium, there will be events year round of all kinds that can get Jerruh more of that revenue that Kraft never even gets to see from the stadium itself. And we're talking some doozies like Final Fours, Boxing matches, Super Bowl. This is why you see these chances taken.

By all accounts the Super Bowl hardly seems worth the worry in this equation. Atlanta as a climate and a city isn't going to be included in the list of regular hosts unless more of the other favored locales (SD, Miami, NO) continue to let their facilities fall into disrepair. Houston, Dallas and Phoenix will host their fair shares, each respective new and up-to-date venue will get the occassional nod, and then the social hot spots will get their turn. At best ATL would be looking at once every 10-15 years, possibly longer as each new venue gets nicer and nicer.

As such, I fail to see how much nicer a Falcons stadium would have to be. I keep hearing about an upgrade in premium seating, but can't imagine what those upgrades would need to be that would necessitate a totally new venue! My only conclusion is that the logistics and costs of renovations are (being purported to be) far more egregious than we assume.

i use to like the falcons when they had michael vick....now they have this soft ass QB matty ice :|

I glad for the organization having a brand new stadium...georgia dome is mad ugly

Mike Vick was terrible so congratulations of having terrible taste.

@GunnerJacket. The Mercedes Super Dome just underwent a HUGE renovation. Also Miami is planning a large renovation for this off season now that it is just a football stadium.

From the NFL, he can only make revenues from certain things in and around the stadium. The rest goes to the league no matter what he controls in the stadium. Without a roof for the winter, he loses out on some events that are required to be indoors. Even if he had a partnership with a public entity, he would still likely have a revenue agreement and make money off of events that he simply can't host without it.

To put it differently, let's say Jerruh and Kraft pay the same amount for a stadium and get similar stadiums. Both get club seat revenues, suite revenues, name licensing/stadium sponsors and parking revenue. Jerruh gives up a little rent for a specified amount of time, non-league vending revenue and non-premises parking to Arlington in a deal for Arlington to add a roof, covered concourses a more luxurious finish out including twice as many suites. Now, Kraft and Jerruh have paid for similar stadiums, and get to take home similar revenue. The difference is with what Arlington has kicked in to add to the stadium, there will be events year round of all kinds that can get Jerruh more of that revenue that Kraft never even gets to see from the stadium itself. And we're talking some doozies like Final Fours, Boxing matches, Super Bowl. This is why you see these chances taken.

So essentially you are saying that Kraft should have put a roof on Gillette? Kraft owns all the land in and around the stadium and has developed the whole are with stores and restaurants, he makes a killing on the whole thing and gets to control everything.

As such, I fail to see how much nicer a Falcons stadium would have to be. I keep hearing about an upgrade in premium seating, but can't imagine what those upgrades would need to be that would necessitate a totally new venue! My only conclusion is that the logistics and costs of renovations are (being purported to be) far more egregious than we assume.
All of that was upgraded not too long ago. New suite interiors, club lounges, everything.

GA Dome opened with nearly 200 suites, now ~170 since many of them were converted into large single-event suites, so that's not the problem. The problem is the relative lack of club seats -- most NFL stadiums have an average of 7-10,000, whereas the Dome has only ~5,500, located from endzone to endzone on the 200 level. Why not just build two endzone lounges and convert the rest of the 200 level into club seats, or -- better yet -- loge boxes?

All of that was upgraded not too long ago. New suite interiors, club lounges, everything.

GA Dome opened with nearly 200 suites, now ~170 since many of them were converted into large single-event suites, so that's not the problem. The problem is the relative lack of club seats -- most NFL stadiums have an average of 7-10,000, whereas the Dome has only ~5,500, located from endzone to endzone on the 200 level. Why not just build two endzone lounges and convert the rest of the 200 level into club seats, or -- better yet -- loge boxes?

(in grumpy child's voice) No! $1bil new stadium instead!...and I want you to buy (most of) it for me!

Mike Vick was terrible so congratulations of having terrible taste.

Actually he wasn't. The Falcons went to the NFC title game in 2004 with almost no talent but him. He ended up squandering his chance with the Falcons, but he was pretty damn good while he was there.

Back on topic, I can't think of proposed stadium that makes less sense than this one. The dome is in good shape, has plenty of high end amenities and is in a good location.

So essentially you are saying that Kraft should have put a roof on Gillette? Kraft owns all the land in and around the stadium and has developed the whole are with stores and restaurants, he makes a killing on the whole thing and gets to control everything.

You asked why go pub/private and I told you why; To go even bigger and make even more.

Report: Falcons seeking $947M stadium

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/atlanta-falcons-seeking-nearly-1-billion-dollar-retractable-roof-stadium-042612

The Atlanta Falcons are negotiating a deal to build a nearly $1 billion retractable-roof stadium to replace the Georgia Dome, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported Thursday.

In talks Wednesday with state officials, the team said it was no longer pursuing a new $700 million open-air stadium, instead proposing the construction of a $947.7 million, state-of-the-art stadium.

Under the previous plan, the Georgia Dome would have remained intact to host other events, such as concerts and the Final Four. The new plan would mean the 20-year-old dome would be torn down, which may not sit well with state residents.

Frank Poe, executive director of the state authority that operates the dome, said negative public reaction to tearing down the Georgia Dome is a "valid concern."

Poe met Wednesday with Falcons president Rich McKay, touting substantial progress toward an agreement to fund the new stadium.

The state and city are reportedly planning to contribute about $300 million toward the stadium through the extension of a hotel/motel tax.

The team feels the Georgia Dome is becoming outdated compared to new stadiums that have opened in recent years, and has expressed a desire to play outdoors.

The Falcons hope a deal can be reached to allow construction to start in 2014, and the first game to be played in 2017.

Who in this forum actually wants the Georgia Dome to decease because of a new stadium?

No way ! Like the Dome.

Here is the thread about the other stadium design.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1331695

Being in San Diego (and just plain in California for that matter), it amazes me when a city could build (or consider building) two new stadiums since the late sixties (when Qualcomm Stadium was built). Indianapolis with the RCA Dome/Lucas Oil Stadium, Atlanta Falcons if this goes though, etc

Why not renovate the Dome? the Dome is waaay too young to be replaced.

Being in San Diego (and just plain in California for that matter), it amazes me when a city could build (or consider building) two new stadiums since the late sixties (when Qualcomm Stadium was built). Indianapolis with the RCA Dome/Lucas Oil Stadium, Atlanta Falcons if this goes though, etc

Cali is broke...... although, I pretty sure I don't have to tell you.

What's up with San Diego's deal, anyway? Last I heard, the Chargers were the frontrunners to move to L.A. since there was no deal for them in S.D.


And as for this new Falcons stadium, I think this is plain stupid.

And as for this new Falcons stadium, I think this is plain stupid.

So do most Atlantans. An online poll showed 95% of participants didn't want any tax $ going to it.

It won't happen unless they pay for it themselves.

Why not renovate the Dome? the Dome is waaay too young to be replaced. While in great shape and highly functional, the nature of the renovations desired by the Falcons are such that a renovation may indeed not be worth the cost. Renovating electronics to the degree desired would require a lot of smaller construction sites that would still disrupt use and require a great deal of time. Completely redoing the premium seating, meanwhile, would shut down larger sections at a time and require a reengineering of the concourses, access and egress, etc. More importantly Blank wants open air, meaning not only the construction of a retractable roof but also the complete reengineering of the seating bowl to accommodate rainwater and changes in interior temperatures. I'm guessing the work for that alone would impact the stadium almost as much as the conventional complete rebuild.

- - - - - -

Falcons owner Arthur Blank will not renew their lease with the Dome and wants a new stadium (non-negotiable by all accounts). He "needs" one that matches modern NFL amenities and price point opportunities, which the Dome cannot achieve without so much investment that it simply makes financial sense to build new. At least, according to a study commissioned by the Falcons.

Blanks also basically has Atlanta over a barrel in the sense that the City can ill-afford to lose it's most valuable pro franchise nor can it make the Dome work without the Falcons, be they in a 2nd stadium or out of the state. The best option for the GWCC, which wishes to continue hosting the SEC title game, Chik-Fil-A bowl and kickoff classic, college hoops, concerts, etc, is to have just one venue with a full or retractable roof.

Thus, even though the venue is structurally sound and highly functional, it's just ineffecient enough for the primary tenant to force the owner to rethink the model. It's basically saying "We could spend $300M now to see marginal difference and still need to come back in another 20 years to redo this baby, or we can redo it now and hope to hit the mark that we don't need to touch it for another 40+."

Personally I think the Falcons should not worry about the open air aspect and get the best of a remodel within the dome, and then work with the GWCC on a long term plan that gets them more of what they want. I'd like to think that would get them about 75% of what they want at about 50% of the cost, and at least raise the value of the franchise.

Why not just go with a renovation if you need it THAT bad? It was built in '92... that's not that old and it doesn't have to be major.

If a 37 year old Superdome can get a renovation, they can too.

If a 40 year old Arrowhead can get a renovation, they can too.

If a 55 year old Lambeau can CONSTANTLY renovate, they can too.

Soldier Field was built in the 20's, and it's still in use.

Sun Life and Ralph Wilson are also older than the Georgia Dome and they at least have plans on renovating. Why get a brand new stadium that will no doubt cost more?

The Georgia Dome is kinda ugly. I hope this plan goes through. For nearly $1 billion, they can build a truly world class stadium with a retractable roof that everyone in Atlanta can be proud of.

CVTower: "Being in San Diego (and just plain in California for that matter), it amazes me when a city could build (or consider building) two new stadiums since the late sixties (when Qualcomm Stadium was built). Indianapolis with the RCA Dome/Lucas Oil Stadium, Atlanta Falcons if this goes though, etc?

Actually - Indianapolis built two new stadiums since the 1980s. The Hoosier Dome opened in 1984. Lucas Oil Stadium opened in 2008. I think Seattle built two stadiums since about 1980 as well. Pittsburgh, Houston, Dallas and Cincinnati also built two football stadiums since the 1960s.

The Hoosier Dome "only" cost about $80 million when it was built and only about $40 million of that was public funding. (So it didn't seem like such a huge problem to "get rid" of that stadium because it hadn't cost hundreds of millions of dollars.) There was some controversy about building another stadium when the first one was only 24 years old -- but the fact that the Colts were doing very well in the mid 2000's - and it was pretty clear that the RCA Dome was getting pretty outdated, it wasn't too terribly difficult to get the new stadium approved.

The Georgia Dome is kinda ugly. I hope this plan goes through. For nearly $1 billion, they can build a truly world class stadium with a retractable roof that everyone in Atlanta can be proud of.

Does it really have to be a NEW stadium?

Does it really have to be a NEW stadium?[/QUOTE]

For them Yes. Georgia Dome is in good shape. Just renovate the dome. No need to replace it.

It's not a matter of what the Falcons need.

The GWCC needs the Falcons, and the Falcons want a new stadium, erego the GWCC is exploring how to make it happen. Either that or every Falcons fan can simply agree to pay an additional $25 per ticket.

But the bottom line is the Falcons want to develop more revenues and they're convinced they can't do that within the Dome. I wish that weren't the case but there it is. It's a business decision, not an architectural one.

For them Yes. Georgia Dome is in good shape. Just renovate the dome. No need to replace it.

That's what I was refering to.

It's a business decision, not an architectural one.
I would actually submit that it's neither. It wouldn't be that hard to modify the Dome to add luxury suites, and cut the capacity to 63-68,000. Some wider concourses, a few bells and whistles, even have a couple of fancy scoreboards 'floating' over the end zones, and you would have one of the top stadiums in the country.

But Blank wants new, he wants the taxpayers to pay for it, and he doesn't care how many schools get closed to do it. No matter how they spin it, that doesn't qualify as a business decision.

That's what I was refering to.

Georgia dome is perfectly fine but cannot compete with other NFL teams in revenue. Not enough luxury suites, advertising space, etc. That's why the Atlanta Falcons are pushing hard for a new stadium, Business decision.

Georgia dome is perfectly fine but cannot compete with other NFL teams in revenue. Not enough luxury suites, advertising space, etc. That's why the Atlanta Falcons are pushing hard for a new stadium, Business decision.

So the city of atlanta should pony over $300mil because the NFL's business model is broken?

So do most Atlantans. An online poll showed 95% of participants didn't want any tax $ going to it.

It won't happen unless they pay for it themselves.

That is what everyone thought in Minnesota, but look how that one is turning out. They will argue about funding and do their little dance for a couple of years but eventually the Falcons will hire lobbyists who will grease the right palms and get the whole thing called a "jobs program". All the parties involved will sign off on the deal once they get their slice of the pie and the taxpayers will get screwed. The State of Georgia and City of Atlanta will just be another in a long line to build free stadiums for billionaires that are too cheap to build their own. If that doesn't work, Goodell will just go to Atlanta, do a pouty dance and threaten to move the franchise if they don't build exactly what the NFL wants (like what he did in Minnesota this week). This is a done deal. The taxpayers just don't realize it yet. The only thing they don't know, is how badly they are going to get screwed.

Why not just go with a renovation if you need it THAT bad? It was built in '92... that's not that old and it doesn't have to be major.

If a 37 year old Superdome can get a renovation, they can too.

If a 40 year old Arrowhead can get a renovation, they can too.

If a 55 year old Lambeau can CONSTANTLY renovate, they can too.

Soldier Field was built in the 20's, and it's still in use.

Sun Life and Ralph Wilson are also older than the Georgia Dome and they at least have plans on renovating. Why get a brand new stadium that will no doubt cost more?
Soldier field is essentially a new stadium. They only kept the exterior and rebuilt the entire thing.

Georgia dome is perfectly fine but cannot compete with other NFL teams in revenue. Not enough luxury suites, advertising space, etc. That's why the Atlanta Falcons are pushing hard for a new stadium, Business decision.

Well apprently it's not 'perfectly' fine since it is a 20 year old building that the owner wants to now replace.

Again, if you REALLY feel that the Georgia Dome is outdated, then UPGRADE. RENOVATE. Don't needlessly spend (at the least) $700 Million on a brand new stadium.

Soldier field is essentially a new stadium. They only kept the exterior and rebuilt the entire thing.

It's the same with TCU's stadium, only they're not keeping the exterior. They're keeping the lower bowl.
The point of me including Soldier Field is because even though you have new seats and suites and lights and all, but it's STILL the same site and in this stadium's case, at least some of the same exterior. So it's as much a new stadium as it is the same stadium, in my eyes.

Georgia dome is perfectly fine but cannot compete with other NFL teams in revenue. Not enough luxury suites, advertising space, etc. That's why the Atlanta Falcons are pushing hard for a new stadium, Business decision.
Did you even read my previous post? Everything that you mention can be remedied in the existing structure for 10% of the cost of a new place.

Why were these threads merged? The open air stadium idea is dead, and the retractable roof idea is an entirely new stadium idea?

Why were these threads merged? The open air stadium idea is dead, and the retractable roof idea is an entirely new stadium idea?
There will be at most one new stadium for the Falcons, therefore all different ideas and proposals go into one thread. These forums would become too cluttered if every different variation got a new thread.

Plus, the claim that the open air stadium idea is dead is nothing more than an opinion on your part. The only way it can be proven to be anything more than that, would be for construction to start on a non-open air stadium.

I don't see how anything short of a new stadium will keep Blank happy. At the Dome (and any GWCC owned site) he doesn't control the parking revenue, he doesn't control the concession revenue, he doesn't control the structure itself.

If he wants to truly make money he needs to pony it up and fund a new stadium. He's not going to get what he wants out of Atlanta without muting the fan support. He's done a good job so far of not saying "I'm gonna move the team unless...". As soon as he says that, he loses respect from the fans, IMO.

Georgia dome is perfectly fine but cannot compete with other NFL teams in revenue. Not enough luxury suites, advertising space, etc. That's why the Atlanta Falcons are pushing hard for a new stadium, Business decision.

Georgia Dome was built with nearly 200 suites, now down to about 170 after some were converted into event suites. The premium seating areas, concourses, concessions, and bathrooms were all recently renovated. Blank just wants a lease more competitive with other owners.

I am not in favor of tearing down the dome, but as I understand it, Mr. Blank wants two big things. An open air stadium and more open space for concourses and clubs. As was previously mentioned, going from a controlled environment to an open environment is a big change. Drainage and weatherproofing the whole stadium would be a huge expense for something with almost no aesthetic impact. As for creating more open space, the dome is a reinforced concrete structure. You can't just cut out columns and reinforce the beams like you can steel. Again, a huge expense.

The Georgia Dome is kinda ugly. I hope this plan goes through. For nearly $1 billion, they can build a truly world class stadium with a retractable roof that everyone in Atlanta can be proud of.
Yeah...

Yeah...

The question is does everyone in Atlanta want to chip in some of their own money just so some really rich billionaire can make even more money for himself. If you really feel that way, just mail the man some money. It is a lot better than paying higher taxes every year for the next 30 years. Seriously, Falcon fans just take your checkbook out and mail this poor man some money. You will feel better knowing that you helped him out. By the way, the NFL has 19 billionaires (more than MLB, NBA and NHL combined). Lord knows these people need your money and any subsidies they can get.

There will be at most one new stadium for the Falcons, therefore all different ideas and proposals go into one thread. These forums would become too cluttered if every different variation got a new thread.

Plus, the claim that the open air stadium idea is dead is nothing more than an opinion on your part. The only way it can be proven to be anything more than that, would be for construction to start on a non-open air stadium.

In talks Wednesday with state officials, the team said it was no longer pursuing a new $700 million open-air stadium, instead proposing the construction of a $947.7 million, state-of-the-art stadium.


different stadium

I am not in favor of tearing down the dome, but as I understand it, Mr. Blank wants two big things. An open air stadium and more open space for concourses and clubs... I truly believe the "open air venue" claim is purely a McGuffin for Mr. Blank to con the most financial aid possible. Insisting on an open venue makes the brand new stadium options appear more cost effective compared to major renovations of the Dome, and thus the Falcons won't have to worry about minor renovation options even if those yield higher rates of return.

The question is does everyone in Atlanta want to chip in some of their own money just so some really rich billionaire can make even more money for himself. The problem is that credible financial studies demonstrate the value of the Dome to the City and the GWCC, which combined is one of the largest convention spaces going. Investing some money even into a new retractable roof stadium would be sound if it keeps delivering so much business to this convention-oriented city. Models would probably show the City could easily support a $100M investment, done right, but we'll see. Blank and company know the City can ill afford to lose the Dome right now, and that's why they're playing hard ball.

There was some sense to a new building when they were talking about Doraville, but if it's going to be the same central location that equally inconvenient for everyone, just refurbish the Dome. Do a BC Place and convert it to open air. Oh well if it means losing out on Final Fours, one Super Bowl makes more money than five of them. Even if it's freezing like it was in Dallas this year.

Any new stadium for the Falcons would be just for pure vanity.

At least that's what Atlantans over at City Data have said.

different stadium
Are you claiming that the Falcons will have two stadiums, or are you simply not grasping my point?

When i started this thread, it was after the Falcons expressed plans to build an open air stadium, however the thread is a general place to discuss any new stadium plans the Falcons have until a deal is reached and shovels are into the ground. If you look at the Vikings New Stadium thread, there are i believe 3 or 4 different sites discussed there. Same thing here.

Please come up with a list of various excuses for this brand-new altogether-replacement retractable-roof stadium to be built for the Falcons in Atlanta.

Please come up with a list of various excuses for this brand-new altogether-replacement retractable-roof stadium to be built for the Falcons in Atlanta.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$-New Stadium

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$- Current Stadium

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$-New Stadium

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$- Currernt Stadium

Sounds legit.:lol:

Statement against possible demolition of Georgia Dome:

The probable opinions of those who think the Georgia Dome probably needs to be replaced: The Georgia Dome was born on September 6, 1992 and has a current all-seater capacity of 71,228. At its opening, it had 200 luxury boxes, but now after several of them have been converted into larger suites, so the current number is about 160 to 170. Falcons want a possible new stadium, so are there gonna be too many luxury boxes (300 to 400)? There is also a relative lack of club seating (10,000 in some NFL stadiums vs. around 5,000 in the GA Dome). And if the Falcons build a completely brand-new stadium, then the Georgia Dome would have to be torn down. If the Georgia Dome is torn down, then it will certainly be a waste. Most modern stadium ever to die. It is in good shape, structurally sound, good location, plenty of high-end amenities.

The Gergia Dome has hosted an NCAA Men's and Women's Final Four, WWE's Wrestlemania, a Super Bowl, and it was even a Summer Olympic venue. Have we really gotten to the point that the Georgia Dome has nothing more to prove to us?