MINNEAPOLIS - New Vikings Stadium (65,115)

[shhyvoodoo]

Originally Posted by shadyunltd

Montreal is one of the biggest party cities in North America. Easily the best in Canada. Strangely, I have much more fun when it's freezing outside than during the Summer.... Dallas is just a really boring city where everything is closed past 5pm in the CBD. Montreal is nothing like that. Bars close at 3. We have beautiful women and a lot of strip clubs. So much that hockey players call it "Sin City" when they come play here.

Nevermind.. i mean you still don't get it. Who will wanna go to a place in the teens, especially if they are LIVING in a place with the same weather?? Why would someone from Florida, California, Arizona, Texas, whatever, want to go somewhere with extremely cold weather?? Especially for a week to 10 days??
You're only gonna be in a stadium for 3 hours 4 tops..

[Welkin]

I don't think the Bills are ever going to Toronto full time. Keep in mind that after Ralph Wilson dies and the team goes up for sale, a lot more cities than just Toronto will be trying to get the team. Also, getting the Bills into Toronto will be a $2.5 BILLION investment ($1 billion for the team and another $1.5 billion for an NFL caliber stadium) and the NFL is just not that hot in Toronto. It may be TV viewership hot, but it is not "show up at the game" hot. The Bills in Toronto series has been a total bust and a major money loser for Rogers Communications. None of the games sold out and most tickets were sold way below face value. For a comparison, Carolina sold out every exhibition game and the fans bought 62,000 psl's to help finance the stadium. Carolina is a much bigger NFL market than Toronto will ever be, and that is why they got the expansion franchise.

Who is going to invest $2.5 BILLION in a team that is going to have lackluster fan support and always play second fiddle to the Leafs. Montreal is much more of a football town, but I think even they would have a problem drawing 65-70,000 week in and week out at NFL prices. Plus, the Canadian government is not going to build a free stadium for any NFL team. Any new stadium will have to be privately financed without PSLs. No CFL team has even remotely tried selling PSL's to finance new stadiums because of fan resistance. PSL's are not going to fly north of the border. Personally I think the Bills are headed to LA or San Antonio/Austin.

[shadyunltd]

Originally Posted by rantanamo

You just described Dallas except for the CBD thing. You don't go out in the CBD in Dallas. You go Uptown.

CBD or Uptown is similar. Texas is similar to most of the Bible belt cities + Midwest.... no fun cities. No nightlife whatsoever. Suburbia.

Unlike coastal cities (Miami, New Orleans, LA, San Diego, San Francisco, NYC)

[shadyunltd]

Originally Posted by Welkin

I don't think the Bills are ever going to Toronto full time. Keep in mind that after Ralph Wilson dies and the team goes up for sale, a lot more cities than just Toronto will be trying to get the team. Also, getting the Bills into Toronto will be a $2.5 BILLION investment ($1 billion for the team and another $1.5 billion for an NFL caliber stadium) and the NFL is just not that hot in Toronto. It may be TV viewership hot, but it is not "show up at the game" hot. The Bills in Toronto series has been a total bust and a major money loser for Rogers Communications. None of the games sold out and most tickets were sold way below face value. For a comparison, Carolina sold out every exhibition game and the fans bought 62,000 psl's to help finance the stadium. Carolina is a much bigger NFL market than Toronto will ever be, and that is why they got the expansion franchise.

Who is going to invest $2.5 BILLION in a team that is going to have lackluster fan support and always play second fiddle to the Leafs. Montreal is much more of a football town, but I think even they would have a problem drawing 65-70,000 week in and week out at NFL prices. Plus, the Canadian government is not going to build a free stadium for any NFL team. Any new stadium will have to be privately financed without PSLs. No CFL team has even remotely tried selling PSL's to finance new stadiums because of fan resistance. PSL's are not going to fly north of the border. Personally I think the Bills are headed to LA or San Antonio/Austin.

1 - Toronto is a GODAWFUL sports cities. No offense, but nothing except the Leafs works well down there.

2 - The Canadiens' ticket prices are more expensive than a lot of NFL teams' prices (Bills, Raiders, Jaguars, etc.). And they have 41 home games, and they have no trouble at all selling them out. There is so much demand that the prices on the secondary markets are not very affordable.

3 - Quebec City, as I said previously, will build a state-of-the-art C$400m 18,000 seater, financed by the city government, the provincial government and Quebecor Inc. (which will actually own the arena, operate it and likely own the team as well). Quebecor will invest tens of millions into the project, though much of the money will come from taxpayers. The Federal government is also expected to provide tens of millions as well (to gain voter support in the region).

4 - Montreal, while a smaller market, has a much better chance of actually selling out a 65,000-70,000 stadium "at NFL prices" than Toronto. However, I wouldn't blame Toronto for the failure of the Bills in Toronto series... The Bills are GODAWFUL and I sure as hell wouldn't pay hundreds of dollars to see a bad team playing against an equally bad opponents (matchups haven't been stellar in Toronto, have they?).

[Welkin]

Originally Posted by shadyunltd

1 - Toronto is a GODAWFUL sports cities. No offense, but nothing except the Leafs works well down there.

2 - The Canadiens' ticket prices are more expensive than a lot of NFL teams' prices (Bills, Raiders, Jaguars, etc.). And they have 41 home games, and they have no trouble at all selling them out. There is so much demand that the prices on the secondary markets are not very affordable.

3 - Quebec City, as I said previously, will build a state-of-the-art C$400m 18,000 seater, financed by the city government, the provincial government and Quebecor Inc. (which will actually own the arena, operate it and likely own the team as well). Quebecor will invest tens of millions into the project, though much of the money will come from taxpayers. The Federal government is also expected to provide tens of millions as well (to gain voter support in the region).

4 - Montreal, while a smaller market, has a much better chance of actually selling out a 65,000-70,000 stadium "at NFL prices" than Toronto. However, I wouldn't blame Toronto for the failure of the Bills in Toronto series... The Bills are GODAWFUL and I sure as hell wouldn't pay hundreds of dollars to see a bad team playing against an equally bad opponents (matchups haven't been stellar in Toronto, have they?).

I agree that Montreal is a better city for the NFL than Toronto and I live in Toronto. However filling a 20,000 seat arena for hockey is not the same thing as filling 70,000 seats for NFL football week in and week out. No sell out = a blackout in the NFL. Also, no PM/Premier is going to push funding for an NFL stadium and thus kill the CFL. It all about votes remember. Paying for a NHL arena is one thing. Paying for something that will kill our home league is another. And last... outside of Jacksonville and Detroit, most NFL cities sellout their stadiums even when they have a bad team and are playing another bad team. If Montreal is going to wait until their team is successful before they pay hundreds of dollars each game to support them, they are not NFL ready. Most NFL teams sell out even when the team is losing (kind of like the Leafs). Kansas City draws 78,000 a game even when they go 4-12. Montreal is a great city, but it is not NFL ready.

[Darloeye]

Why would the NFL put the Super Bowl in Canada anyway? Remember the outcry when they were thinking about putting one in London, England. Think the NFL want LA more than Canada and would not want to move the bills because of the history of the team.

[Somnifor]

Originally Posted by shadyunltd

CBD or Uptown is similar. Texas is similar to most of the Bible belt cities + Midwest.... no fun cities. No nightlife whatsoever. Suburbia.

Unlike coastal cities (Miami, New Orleans, LA, San Diego, San Francisco, NYC)

Your post is a completely off topic tangent but I would like to point out that your stereotype of the Midwest is not very accurate. Chicago has great nightlife. Minneapolis has better nightlife than a lot of cities on the coasts, it would probably be #3 on the west coast after LA and SF and is as good as Boston or Philladelphia. This is a Minneapolis thread, so you should expect someone from Minneapolis to rebut that; we have one of the best underground music scenes in the US, nightlife comes with that. Milwaukee also has good nightlife. Not all of the midwest is like it is portrayed in Hollywood.

[Somnifor]

Anyway here is something on topic:

Mondale laments stadium glut
The head of the sports facilities commission wants a broader approach to overseeing all the stadiums.

By Mike Kaszuba, Star Tribune

Last update: February 9, 2011 - 11:19 PM

Gov. Mark Dayton's point man for shepherding a new Minnesota Vikings stadium wants to create an umbrella agency that would have jurisdiction over all professional sports arenas in the Twin Cities.

As a draft copy of legislation for a Vikings stadium is about to be circulated at the State Capitol, Ted Mondale, the new chair of the Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission, said the Twin Cities area has built too many duplicative stadiums, all controlled by separate governing agencies.

"Everyone's thinking that if a bill goes through this year, that we definitely got to look at that," Mondale said.

As for the Vikings' current home, Mondale's sports commission will vote Thursday on a plan to restore the Metrodome's storm-damaged roof. It would cost up to $18 million to install a new roof.

Once that issue is resolved and the push for a new Vikings stadium takes center stage, a new commission with broader authority could have far-reaching implications: It could serve as a taxing authority and assume the debt of existing facilities -- such as Xcel Energy Center -- in exchange for governing them.

Just as importantly, it could end the city-vs.-city competition to build sports arenas in the Twin Cities metro area that led to Target Center in Minneapolis and Xcel Center in St. Paul. Such an agency, he said, could revolutionize the way stadiums and local arenas are built and financed.

In his most expansive comments since being appointed by the governor, Mondale said that too often in the past professional teams wanting stadiums have driven the debate, leading to inefficiencies and likely higher public costs.

"I think there's a pretty broad consensus that we, as a region, have not done well," he said.

The individual requests are piling up: St. Paul wants help retiring the Xcel Center's debt; the St. Paul Saints want money for a new ballpark; Target Center has asked for a $150 million face-lift and the Vikings want a new home that would cost at least $700 million.

"Would it be complicated? Yeah. Anything you do, it's always complicated," said Bill Huepenbecker, senior director of planning and public affairs for the St. Paul Arena Co., a subsidiary of the Minnesota Wild hockey team, which plays at the Xcel Center. "[But] if they're looking at a global solution, we want to be part of that discussion."

An array of public officials view the proposal with caution and skepticism, but some are already firmly on board.

"I think that's a good idea," said Minneapolis City Council President Barb Johnson. The city is struggling with a costly renovation plan for the aging and dowdy Target Center, which it owns. "You get to the point that these facilities compete against each other."

Hennepin County Board chair Mike Opat, who was instrumental in assembling a public subsidy package for Target Field, new home of the Minnesota Twins, was noncommittal. "Anything's theoretically possible," Opat said. "[If they] come up with something with some detail, at that point, we'll react."

The proposal is also gaining leverage as the Vikings seek -- unsuccessfully so far -- to find a local government partner that could provide a public subsidy revenue stream. Mondale said it is too early to decide whether a broader umbrella agency would have taxing authority or could assume the public debt of existing facilities, but the idea is being seen as a possible assist for the Vikings stadium.

"It is an important issue," said Lester Bagley, the Vikings' vice president for public affairs and stadium development, referring to a governing authority.

Target Field is run by the Minnesota Ballpark Authority, which was created in 2006 by the same bill that authorized the ballpark. The authority is a five-member board appointed by the governor, Hennepin County and Minneapolis. The county has two seats on the board and levies a county-wide sales tax that provides the bulk of the financing.

Last year's Vikings stadium plan, which was defeated in a House committee, would have created a separate, 13-member Minnesota Stadium Authority that could have raised taxes for the project. That authority would have replaced the sports facilities commission, which owns the Metrodome.

Ted Johnson, a senior vice president with the Minnesota Timberwolves, said a broader stadium agency would benefit the public. "The state Legislature over 18 years has faced a stadium or arena issue [every year], and could face it for another 20 years," he said, as existing stadiums need remodeling.

"I don't think that's so much [of] a leap," he said.

The proposal could prove hard to resist for cash-strapped local governments. Minneapolis still owes $57.5 million on Target Center. Two years ago, St. Paul tried to get the state to forgive its $48 million loan on the Xcel Center but failed.

David Olson, president of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, said Mondale recently expressed his frustrations with the existing situation.

"You got the Saints coming, you got the Timberwolves lining up," Olson said. "I'm sure [Mondale's] just thinking, you know -- man."

http://www.startribune.com/politics/...tml?page=1&c=y

[Somnifor]

Anyway my guess is that nothing happens. The Vikings don't get a new stadium in the short run and they don't go anywhere.

Some of you are thinking like the recession we just went through never happened. States are facing huge budget deficits. In Minnesota there is no way a stadium is getting built with public money when we are cutting education, health care for the poor, infrastructure, etc. Try justifying a stadium to the electorate right now - it is impossible to do. If the Vikings threaten to move who is going to build them a stadium? What state is in any kind of fiscal shape to do that - California? Nevada? Not going to happen. Anyway I doubt the NFL wants the Vikings to move, it screws up their rivalries and marketing narritive for the NFC North; and any open city besides LA or TO would be a smaller market than MSP. I don't doubt that they want to be in those cities but I don't think the Vikings are the team they want to move.

[aavmarine]

Originally Posted by Somnifor

Anyway my guess is that nothing happens. The Vikings don't get a new stadium in the short run and they don't go anywhere.

Some of you are thinking like the recession we just went through never happened. States are facing huge budget deficits. In Minnesota there is no way a stadium is getting built with public money when we are cutting education, health care for the poor, infrastructure, etc. Try justifying a stadium to the electorate right now - it is impossible to do. If the Vikings threaten to move who is going to build them a stadium? What state is in any kind of fiscal shape to do that - California? Nevada? Not going to happen. Anyway I doubt the NFL wants the Vikings to move, it screws up their rivalries and marketing narritive for the NFC North; and any open city besides LA or TO would be a smaller market than MSP. I don't doubt that they want to be in those cities but I don't think the Vikings are the team they want to move.

Dude, where have you been? L.A. already has a stadium picked out, the money, the location and they already have a 30 yr deal to call it "Farmers Field". They just need a team. And its probable going to come down to 3 teams. San Diego, the Vikings or Jacksonville. Back click out of the thread and go up 2 spots to the L.A. Stadium thread.

[Somnifor]

Originally Posted by aavmarine

Dude, where have you been? L.A. already has a stadium picked out, the money, the location and they already have a 30 yr deal to call it "Farmers Field". They just need a team. And its probable going to come down to 3 teams. San Diego, the Vikings or Jacksonville. Back click out of the thread and go up 2 spots to the L.A. Stadium thread.

This thing? Maybe...

There remain a locker room full of “ifs,” however. A plan has not yet been submitted, for one, and hoped-for assistance from the L.A. City Council – an exemption from the state’s environmental quality act and a $350 million bond – might not materialize.

Not to mention the fact that the developer, sports and entertainment giant AEG, is pushing forward without any commitment from the National Football League that L.A. will ever get a pro football team.

Backers say these are problems that easily be overcome. Skeptics suggest it could make AEG's bid to bring pro football back to L.A. merely the latest in a long line of failures.

'Just a PR ploy'?
“I think this is just a PR ploy to keep this idea on the public radar,” says Rick Eckstein, author of “Dollars, Private Stadiums: The Battle over Building Sports Stadiums.”

He and others note that ideas for NFL teams and new stadiums pop up here regularly every two years or so and then fizzle out. "They make the announcement, journalists write about it, and the idea stays on the map to live a little longer,” says Mr. Eckstein, also a professor at Villanova University in Pennsylvania.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society...otball-stadium

Does LA have $350 million to spend on a stadium right now? I have no idea what it's budget situation looks like.

[Welkin]

Originally Posted by aavmarine

Dude, where have you been? L.A. already has a stadium picked out, the money, the location and they already have a 30 yr deal to call it "Farmers Field". They just need a team. And its probable going to come down to 3 teams. San Diego, the Vikings or Jacksonville. Back click out of the thread and go up 2 spots to the L.A. Stadium thread.

Jacksonville is locked up until 2030 so they are not part of the equation. I really don't see the other owners letting one of their poorer teams step in and scoop up the riches of LA. LA will be an expansion team and the fee will be well over a billion dollars (which gets divided up among the other owners). The Vikes or Chargers might end up in San Antonio-Austin, but the NFL is not going to just let them slide into LA. When it is all said and done, everyone will pretty much just stay where they are except for the Bills, which are probably headed to Texas.

[flashman]

Originally Posted by Somnifor

Your post is a completely off topic tangent but I would like to point out that your stereotype of the Midwest is not very accurate. Chicago has great nightlife. Minneapolis has better nightlife than a lot of cities on the coasts, it would probably be #3 on the west coast after LA and SF and is as good as Boston or Philladelphia. This is a Minneapolis thread, so you should expect someone from Minneapolis to rebut that; we have one of the best underground music scenes in the US, nightlife comes with that. Milwaukee also has good nightlife. Not all of the midwest is like it is portrayed in Hollywood.

Very well stated. It's funny how people think that just because the weather turns cold, people stop enjoying themselves. Or that all the women talk like Frances McDormand did in Fargo.

Although work took me mainly into Bloomington, my colleagues had us out on several memorable nights through the Twin Cities great clubs and bars. As for the west coast, Seattle's night life is very good, too.

[carnifex2005]

Originally Posted by Welkin

Jacksonville is locked up until 2030 so they are not part of the equation. I really don't see the other owners letting one of their poorer teams step in and scoop up the riches of LA. LA will be an expansion team and the fee will be well over a billion dollars (which gets divided up among the other owners). The Vikes or Chargers might end up in San Antonio-Austin, but the NFL is not going to just let them slide into LA. When it is all said and done, everyone will pretty much just stay where they are except for the Bills, which are probably headed to Texas.

The NFL has no power to stop a team from moving. Al Davis killed that when he took the NFL to the court about moving to LA and won.

[shhyvoodoo]

Originally Posted by carnifex2005

The NFL has no power to stop a team from moving. Al Davis killed that when he took the NFL to the court about moving to LA and won.

...and after going through all that, where are the Raiders now???

[Welkin]

Originally Posted by carnifex2005

The NFL has no power to stop a team from moving. Al Davis killed that when he took the NFL to the court about moving to LA and won.

Al Davis was never a team player and that was back in 1982. The NFL is a different league now and nobody is moving anywhere without Goodell's or the leagues approval. Back in 1982 you could buy an NFL team for $100 million or less. Now it is a multi-billion dollar business and LA is the prime jewel. Just like Houston, it will be expansion, not re-location.

[carnifex2005]

Originally Posted by Welkin

Al Davis was never a team player and that was back in 1982. The NFL is a different league now and nobody is moving anywhere without Goodell's or the leagues approval. Back in 1982 you could buy an NFL team for $100 million or less. Now it is a multi-billion dollar business and LA is the prime jewel. Just like Houston, it will be expansion, not re-location.

Al Davis won in court. That is president. That is why since then numerous teams have moved since then with absolutely no resistance from the NFL because they couldn't stop them from moving even if the NFL wanted to. That and the NFL owners have pretty much said that expansion isn't in the cards anymore because of the ease of scheduling a 32 team league.

[Welkin]

Originally Posted by carnifex2005

Al Davis won in court. That is president. That is why since then numerous teams have moved since then with absolutely no resistance from the NFL because they couldn't stop them from moving even if the NFL wanted to. That and the NFL owners have pretty much said that expansion isn't in the cards anymore because of the ease of scheduling a 32 team league.

From The Sun Sentinel November 2010: "Although he wouldn’t talk about his team’s front office or rath of injuries, Miami Dolphins owner Steve Ross was pretty chatty about a variety of topics Tuesday, when he was the featured interview speaker at the SportsBusiness Journal’s Sports Media & Technology conference in New York.
On expansion: Ross said he believe there needs to be a team in Los Angeles, and perhaps two to make the economics a stadium there work".

[ryebreadraz]

Originally Posted by carnifex2005

Al Davis won in court. That is president. That is why since then numerous teams have moved since then with absolutely no resistance from the NFL because they couldn't stop them from moving even if the NFL wanted to. That and the NFL owners have pretty much said that expansion isn't in the cards anymore because of the ease of scheduling a 32 team league.

The difference is any stadium in LA needs Super Bowl guarantees to make it financially viable and the NFL can say that if a team they don't want to move to LA moves to LA then LA doesn't get Super Bowls. Legally they cannot stop a team from moving, but all they have to do is withhold Super Bowls so yes, the NFL can stop any team it doesn't want to move to LA from moving there.

[shadyunltd]

Mark my words:

Chargers move to San Antonio, TX.
Raiders move back to Los Angeles, CA.
Vikings move to Toronto, Canada.
Bills move to Montreal, Quebec.

There's no way the Vikings will continue to play in that dump that is the Metrodome. Same for the Chargers in Qualcomm. The Raiders have 2 options; either play in that dump they play in or move to the 49ers' stadium, but they will be selling out by doing so.

Once Ralph Wilson dies or transfers ownership, there's no way the Bills will stay in Buffalo when there is a far more lucrative market 90 minutes North of Buffalo (or let's say there's already a team in Toronto, then Montreal would be a good option (over 5 million people in a 100-mile radiu.