Minnesota Vikings Stadium: Minneapolis Has Issues
by Christopher Gates on Jan 27, 2012 6:00 AM CST
in Minnesota Vikings Stadium
Email
PrintMost of you probably looked at the title and said, "Yeah, we knew that already." But, in this case, I'm not talking about issues of the ego or the complex that makes them feel like a stadium can't possibly be built anywhere outside of the greater Minneapolis area.
No, in this case, I'm talking about issues that could actually derail the plan to use the Metrodome site to build a new stadium. In this case, it's not just one issue. . .it's two issues. And the combination of those issues explains why the Wilfs have continued to maintain that the site at Arden Hills is the only logical place to build a new Minnesota Vikings' stadium.
The first issue is that a lot of people seem to be on board with the Metrodome site being used to build a new stadium. . .unfortunately, that does not include the Minneapolis City Council. At least, not at the moment. Seven of the 13 members of the Council are against passing any sort of funding bill for the stadium. A requirement in the Minneapolis city charter requires that any stadium spending over $10 million needs to be put to a referendum, but Mayor R.T. Rybak seems to be of the impression that he can sway the Council to override that in order to get the job done.
Following the hearing, Rybak said "we're not going to do a referendum in the city. We are going to have a referendum in a couple years when I stand for re-election."
As for the seven council members now publicly opposed to his plan, Rybak did not believe their stances were that firm.
"I don’t think too many people are drawing exact lines yet. And so that’s a good thing," Rybak said.
Now, that's all well and good and everything. . .I mean, Rybak isn't going to come out and say, "Well, it looks like we're pretty much screwed on this one." However, as the folks at Pro Football Talk point out, getting the Council to waive the referendum for this would pretty much render a rule that require that anything be put to a referendum pretty much null and void as long as the government can do an end run around the rules. In this case, Rybak's plan seems to be to deposit city sales tax revenues into an "independent stadium authority," who would then be in charge of spending the money.
However, even if the Minneapolis City Council does decide to waive the referendum requirement for this sort of thing so that a new stadium can be built on the Metrodome site, it appears that the National Football League has noticed a little something that we've pointed out numerous times already.
The NFL is annoyed with the idea of the Minnesota Vikings playing up to three seasons at TCF Bank Stadium. There is the $67 million financial hit, not to mention potential logistical nightmares while waiting for Metrodome 2.0.
And league owners still would have to sign off on this concept before the Vikings play a single down at the University of Minnesota.
"I can tell you there won't be a lot of happy campers among the membership (owners)," said a person close to the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of stadium negotiations. "TCF is a gem, but it's not an NFL stadium."
We've heard numerous times that the Vikings are one of the teams that gets a bunch of money from the NFL's revenue sharing plan because of the crappy lease they have with the Minneapolis Sports Facilities Commission and the fact that opportunities for revenue are already limited. How do you suppose the other 31 NFL teams are going to feel about kicking in even more to cover the $23 million per year (on average) that the Vikings would be losing over the three-year stint they would spend at TCF Bank Stadium?
I mean, don't get me wrong. . .it isn't that the city of Minneapolis and the state of Minnesota don't realize that the Vikings are going to be losing a ton of money if they have to play at TCF Bank Stadium. It's that they simply don't give a damn.
Back on December 6, we mentioned a plan that came up during some of the hearings that took place at the Capitol regarding a Vikings' stadium that sounded too good to be true. That was the plan that involved the White Earth Ojibwa building a casino at the Arden Hills location. Seriously, if Zygi Wilf hasn't been on the phone with these folks yet, I'm not sure what, exactly, he's waiting for. Cut Minneapolis out of the equation entirely, get the stadium that the team wants at the site the Wilfs want it, and end all the drama surrounding this facility. It's a hell of a lot better idea than anything that anyone seems to want to seriously entertain at this point.
153 comments
|
Add comment
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Could the White Earth Ojibwa casino plan work?
Or would that plan have to jump through all the political hoops too. If this isn’t the case Zygi and the White Earth Ojibwa folks should be not just talking but finalizing a plan and telling all the politicians to f off. Furthermore Zygi and the tribe should tell the state they will get nothing for any events that are played in THEIR new venue.
I got to say from where I sit (not in the state of Minnesota anymore :( ) this whole thing is a joke and makes it harder and harder to say I’m from the state. To this day I still consider myself a Minnesotan, but man that state is a political mess.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Jan 27, 2012 6:25 AM CST reply actions
This line is getting old.
Furthermore Zygi and the tribe should tell the state they will get nothing for any events that are played in THEIR new venue.
What does that even mean? What stable of events do you think the State of Minnesota has lined up? And why do you think Wilf would turn down revenue?
Yea
has anyone looked at the Metrodome event schedule lately? A lot of rollerdome and gopher baseball – you know, the BIG MONEYMAKERS.
http://www.msfc.com/detail.cfm/page/msfcSite_UZPZYVQT_PFVOHZNS/
Let me spell it out for you
IF Wilf and the Indian tribe fund the entire AH project then they would own it. When the state wanted “there share” for events ie concerts, conventions, final four, Super Bowls. As owners with no state help why wouldn’t they be able to tell them to bad, when we asked for your help you wouldn’t.
Whats getting OLD is the state dicking around with the Vikings. With the NFL now getting involved by not liking the losing even more money having to play @ TCF this get get a lot messier. It would be nice if the Wilfs put in 350M of their own money and the rest of the owners all contributed 15M apiece and have the NFL kick in the remaining about 200M and the stadium would be owned by the NFL owners. This could set the stage for any new stadium being built and then the state would only reap the benefits of the taxes.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Jan 27, 2012 8:39 AM CST up reply actions
So...you didn't answer my question.
I get the concept you are proposing. It’s not hard. Wilf owns stadium, Wilf tells state to pound sand. That isn’t rocket science.
I’m asking you, what specific events do you think Wilf would be able to deny? Or does suggesting he make empty threats just make you feel good?
I'm not sure why you mean
Wilf isn’t denying any events. What he and the BEO would be doing is denying the sate of any receipts from the gate of any events like concerts, conventions and what ever else. I think you misunderstood what I was trying to get across.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Jan 27, 2012 8:52 AM CST up reply actions
I did indeed.
Others have been saying “deny state right to hold events/right to get any profit off state events” and I read your comment in that light. My bad.
From
this persective, the AH site is not ideal. Having a huge parking lot out in the suburbs is great for tailgating, not so great for drawing conventions and Final Fours.
Wrong!...
Jerry’s World has more tumble weeds blowing around it than a ghost town. But he will get his events come hell or high water.
JerryWorld is also in Texas.
Getting multiple Super Bowls or the Final Four when you’re talking Feb/March/April weather in Texas is a lot different than in Minnesota.
Weather...
has nothing to do with these events. Minneapolis, Detroit, New York have all gotten SBs. If it has a roof, they will come.
Indeed it will. One of them. Every new stadium gets one.
JerryWorld is poised to be the new SuperDome and get several in the coming decades.
As for Final Fours...
…I’d be very surprised if a stadium in AH got one given the lack of hotels/entertainment in the area combined with the weather. Wouldn’t be surprised if it still hosted a Regional from time to time though. Downtown location will definitely see Final Fours, but that’s not a good enough reason to support a DT location over AH.
If Detroit can get a Final Four, I wouldn't count out any location...
…including Beijing.
"Man invented language to satisfy his deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Ford Field is downtown.
Next to a bunch of hotels, an entertainment district, etc. That’s the sort of location the NCAA is willing to put a Final Four in if it’s a cold climate. Same goes for Indy.
Awful venue, awful city, awful weather...
… makes me think anything is possible after that.
My buddy ended up staying at a hotel in Canada along with lots of other folks for the Final Four.
"Man invented language to satisfy his deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Read this
The most recent team to play the Final Four in its home city was Butler in 2010; its home court seats only 10,000, as opposed to the 70,000-plus of Lucas Oil Stadium in its Final Four configuration.)
They allowed that and it’s only a 10,000 seat court…
If we can't laugh at ourselves, Packer fans will call us crybabies and we will be forced to kick their tooth in. I really don't want to go to jail (again).
by Alittlemore_cowbell on Jan 27, 2012 9:49 AM CST up reply actions
What does Butler's home court (which didn't host anything in 2010)...
…have to do with a Final Four held at Lucas Oil stadium or a potential Final Four at a new Vikings stadium in AH?
That information is wrong, sorry.
But my point was that final fours will sell out regaurdless of where they are because of the following across the nation and what-not. Surroundings shouldn’t be that big of a factor due to it having no effect on how much money the NCAA makes (though I’m pretty sure the tournament is mostly a “charity”) in the games.
Here’s a list of all the host stadiums of final four history. Some of these are really small stadiums (or at least, compared to an NFL stadium). If they can host it, no way we can’t.
If we can't laugh at ourselves, Packer fans will call us crybabies and we will be forced to kick their tooth in. I really don't want to go to jail (again).
by Alittlemore_cowbell on Jan 27, 2012 10:08 AM CST up reply actions
Minnesota and Indy
Have been great to my Blue Devils. I’m all for the Final Four in Minny!
"At this point, what we got to lose, right? So we might as well throw caution to the wind and hit people in the face."
--Vikings DE Jared Allen
Your Blue Devils?
I’m guessing you saw the Duke-FSU game then, huh?
laughs maniacally
If we can't laugh at ourselves, Packer fans will call us crybabies and we will be forced to kick their tooth in. I really don't want to go to jail (again).
by Alittlemore_cowbell on Jan 27, 2012 10:58 AM CST up reply actions
I actually missed it
But it’s okay, being a Duke fan the FSU game isn’t exactly the biggest game on the schedule ;-)
"At this point, what we got to lose, right? So we might as well throw caution to the wind and hit people in the face."
--Vikings DE Jared Allen
If the future is as bright as it seems for Florida State,
It may your biggest (non rival) game sooner rather than later.
ANYWAY
Back to the Vikings : )
If we can't laugh at ourselves, Packer fans will call us crybabies and we will be forced to kick their tooth in. I really don't want to go to jail (again).
by Alittlemore_cowbell on Jan 27, 2012 12:40 PM CST up reply actions
That's kind of my point though.
Because selling out isn’t the issue the NCAA can focus on placing the Final Fours where they provide the best experience for those who do attend.
It’s not about size. Previous use of small arenas isn’t a good indicator of anything because it is clear that the current trend is to put the games in large, NFL arenas (which is what we’re talking about for the Vikings anyway).
The NCAA can focus on placing the Final Fours where they provide the best experience for those who do attend.
Being in a large stadium that’s rocking is a hell of alot better experience than a nice hotel…
If we can't laugh at ourselves, Packer fans will call us crybabies and we will be forced to kick their tooth in. I really don't want to go to jail (again).
by Alittlemore_cowbell on Jan 27, 2012 10:19 AM CST up reply actions
Let's think here
Small arena vs NFL Stadium, which get’s louder and is a better experience?
If we can't laugh at ourselves, Packer fans will call us crybabies and we will be forced to kick their tooth in. I really don't want to go to jail (again).
by Alittlemore_cowbell on Jan 27, 2012 10:46 AM CST up reply actions
What small arena are you talking about?
Arden Hills will be a big NFL stadium. And if you haven’t noticed, the NCAA clearly feels the kind of “rocking” they get now is good enough.
The point is to have the next great thing
That’s all. Jerry’s world has a huge gimmick, albeit an expensive one in those damn HDTVs. It’s so ridiculously over the top that people absolutely have to go there. Hell, even LSU-Oregon played there(i believe). There’s been plenty of basketball games in there, already a SB and more to come. AH is best for this because it can be spread out. Sure, there might not be hotels/other amenities, but once wilf is done constructing, there’ll be tons of places to stay out there. You would think Ramsey County would be pushing for the casino too because that keeps people coming on a daily basis.
White Horn Gold Pants
I dunno...
I’m not sure there will really be “tons of places” when he’s done. What will be the market for all those rooms outside of football season? Developers typically dream bigger than they build and I wouldn’t be surprised if this was another example of that.
The fact remains that he isn’t going to have a larger inventory of rooms near an AH stadium than are located in a downtown metro. There’s no logic to support that idea. Even if he builds a convention center (which, recall, he claims are not part of the plans) there won’t be a need for the kind of inventory that exists downtown.
I’m assuming Ramsey is staying away from the casino right now because it adds one more poison pill to the whole plan.
These things are big parties/events
And all else being equal, the NFL and NCAA would rather have in places where people can party all week/weekend and be close the stadium. San Antonio, for example, is a favored venue. As is New Orleans.
In the short run, Arden Hills will not be like that, and if people stay downtown (or near the MOA), they will have to get in a car to drive up there. That lower’s the appeal somewhat.
Now, maybe Wilf will build an entertainment mecca up there eventually that will change all that, but it will take some time.
As for the casino, I’m not sure the city wants that, and I really doubt that the folks who live up the street in North Oaks want that.
by amiller92 on Jan 27, 2012 11:12 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
AH would only have a 65,000 capacity
about 900 more than the Metrodome…about 35,000 less than Texas Stadium. Not exactly a big stadium.
That's HUGE for basketball though.
Couple other things to note. The stadium would be expandable to 70,000+ for basketball (since they add bleachers on field level since the court is obviously much smaller than the field).
And at that size it is the same as every stadium who has hosted the Final Four since 2000 (and some of the stadiums in that list were hosting well before that).
Anything is small compared to JerryWorld. Otherwise 65K isn’t small for basketball (though it is average for a Final Four).
So a single Final Four in Detroit...
…which you claim was a dud, is now evidence to support putting one in MN at an AH site that would have fewer hotels within a reasonable distance and no public transpo to speak of?
“Anything” is always possible, but if the NCAA also found Detroit to be a dud I’d be surprised if they found the AH location enticing.
Now you exaggerate...
…but it’s possible. And I wouldn’t let a FInal Four opportunity (or hosting a Superbowl) dictate where I place a stadium for the next 30 years.
"Man invented language to satisfy his deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
How am I exaggerating?
There will indeed be far fewer hotel rooms at/near an AH site than in a downtown metro and there will likely be no major public transpo options (perhaps an express bus route). As for Detroit being a dud, I was taking that from your comments. If I misunderstood, then I apologize.
But I agree, Final Fours shouldn’t be a deciding factor. IMO they are only important as a very small “plus” in the column for a downtown stadium. I wouldn’t consider the lack of one a “minus” for the AH location (other than I’d love to get the Final Four back in MN since I love college basketball).
About the hotels...
Arden hills is frickin 15 minutes away from Minneapolis!!
If we can't laugh at ourselves, Packer fans will call us crybabies and we will be forced to kick their tooth in. I really don't want to go to jail (again).
by Alittlemore_cowbell on Jan 27, 2012 10:09 AM CST up reply actions
**According to google, I’ve never been out of Minneapolis.
If we can't laugh at ourselves, Packer fans will call us crybabies and we will be forced to kick their tooth in. I really don't want to go to jail (again).
by Alittlemore_cowbell on Jan 27, 2012 10:11 AM CST up reply actions
15 minutes in normal traffic.
Not in post game traffic from an event hosting more than 70,000 people.
And a game in a downtown area has more hotels in walking distance than Arden Hills will have on site or within a short (again, keep in mind the traffic) post game drive.
I’m not saying it could never happen. I’m saying that it really isn’t likely. JerryWorld is kind of a wildcard. While it is in Texas, it does suffer from the same “suburban” issues when it comes to relationship to hotels that an AH stadium would. So how the NCAA perceives the Final Four there this year could also come into play.
There is the factor that it is the nicest stadium ever built and is in Texas too though.
I think you would be surprised
Zygi would be poppin’ up hotels all over the AH location that would all be within walking distance. I’m assuming transportation would make its way out there. Whether that’s taxis, buses, possible extension of lightrail. If you build it, they will come.
White Horn Gold Pants
Even if he puts up a good # of hotels...
…it’s still going to be well below a downtown. That’s still my point.
Also, to get to that point you have to assume demand that doesn’t currently exist and wouldn’t with only the Vikings up there. He’s a smart businessman as far as I can tell. Why would he invest his own money in hotels that don’t have a reason to exist?
If the demand appears I’d certainly expect that to change, but thus far I’m not sure what that demand would be.
Keep in mind that the additional development is part of the PR for that site. Suggesting he’ll build, build, build other things makes the location more attractive. That doesn’t mean he’ll actually build as large as he’s proposed (in the near term I’d very much expect that he won’t).
Just to be pedantic
There’s already a Days Inn and am Americinn (at the Mermaid), right there ;)
But you’re still right.
As for public transpo?
A few thoughts:
- Taxis aren’t public transportation
- LRT is not happening.
First, they need to finish the SW Corridor line which is approved but needs more state funds before it can get matching Fed dollars. So that line is at least 5-8 years off.
As for a line to an AH stadium, there is no demand for this. There are other lines that have been talked about for the LRT system, but neither of them extends to Arden Hills. One potential line would go from downtown to Maple Grove and the other would go from St. Paul to the SE suburbs.
Could it happen? Sure, anything is possible. And as a LRT supporter I’d love to see it be expanded as much as possible. But only to places that make sense. And nothing currently (or on the horizon, including a new stadium) suggest that there is a reason to put LRT out to AH.
It did.
But he’s not going to develop it enough to create anywhere near the kind of hotel room inventory you seen in a downtown because the demand won’t be there the rest of the year.
It would help but...
…nothing suggests a casino is likely. And even a casino does not get you to near the same inventory. Neither does a convention center (which Wilf claims he wouldn’t build anyway, not that I buy that).
Wasn't Wilf going to build on the AH location?
Last I heard he had his own little Zygi World planed out. Hotels, shopping the whole works. Throw in a casino and there wouldn’t be any reason to leave Vikingland.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Jan 27, 2012 5:13 PM CST up reply actions
See the above threads.
Casino very likely not happening. Even if it did, you’re still not talking about enough going on up there to end up with a hotel room inventory anywhere near the one in downtown.
The biggest thing to remember with ZygiWorld is that while he obviously wants it to be as big as it can be, he A) will always sell the grandest vision as a way to make the site more likely to be approved and B) he won’t spend a penny past what he thinks will be profitable (like I said, he strikes me as pretty good businessman). And in the real world with economic ups and downs, B is often much smaller than A.
Oh, and C) the plans he releases now may very well not be the plans he ends up using. For an example, see that hinted at conference center. I’m betting he actually wants one.
And don't forget
B1G conference championship game for football now as well.
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
Which I don't see in MN regardless of location (despite how much I'd love it).
Thanks to our lackluster fanbase for college football in general. But then again, you run into the same issues with hotel inventory that you would for a Final Four. Especially when the B1G has 2 choices (Indy and Detroit) with downtown indoor stadiums (one of which already pulled off a well recieved B1G title game) and a 3rd (Chicago) that is the crown jewel city of the conference.
I don't think that's right
They play in Indianapolis now, where there is no local school nor any major college program.
There is no reason we couldn’t host the B1G championship game from time to time. It’s a not such a long drive for the Wisconsin fans.
Frankly, it should rotate between Minneapolis, Chicago and Detroit, but it won’t.
It's also the most centrally located NFL city in the B1G.
Which means fans can easily drive to a game there. Here are the driving times to Indy from every B1G school’s home city (via Google):
Minneapolis: 10.5 hrs
Lincoln: 10.5 hrs
State College: 8.5 hrs
Iowa City: 6 hrs
Madison: 6 hrs
Ann Arbor: 4.75 hrs
East Lansing: 4.5 hrs
Chicago: 3.25 hrs
Columbus: 3 hrs
Champaign: 2 hrs
West Lafeyette: 1.25 hrs
Bloomington: 1 hr
And here they are to Minneapolis:
State College: 17 hrs
Columbus: 13 hrs
Ann Arbor: 11.5 hrs
Bloomington: 11.5 hrs
East Lansing: 11.25 hrs
West Lafeyette: 9.5 hrs
Champaign: 9 hrs
Chicago: 7.25 hrs
Lincoln: 7 hrs
Iowa City: 5 hrs
Madison: 4.75 hrs
Minneapolis: 0 hrs
The one thing you can say about Minneapolis is that many of the schools who are very far away also have rabid fan bases who will prob travel well, but if you’re the B1G why would you risk having an ACC situation (lots of empty seats) by rotating the title game to the most remote NFL stadium in the conference?
Because if you don't
You have to play in Indianapolis ;)
Indy also...
…has experience hosting these big events in conjunction with the B1G (which isn’t really saying much but it clearly matters to the conference).
I was there for the Final Four 1997
And didn’t particularly enjoy it. But that might have been because that was one of those years that now officially only had 3 teams in it, and it didn’t go well for the ghost team.
That would be a good deal for the state quite frankly
If the state could avoid committing $300M+ and all it would have to give up are tax revenues from touring bands and monster truck rallies, etc. I would say that the politicians would be nuts to let that bother them.
"Man invented language to satisfy his deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Still many political hoops
Maybe more, but they are different.
I would guess that in order for the WEO casino plan to work...
…and in order for the Wilfs to have faith in the idea that it’ll work, the WEO would likely demand that the State agree not to allow any more casinos in the state for the next 30 years. I doubt the State would agree to that.
Worst case for the WEO and the Wilfs is that 3 years after the deal to build the stadium with WEO money, the State agrees to allow more casinos into the State. This would reduce income to the WEO and perhaps even threaten their solvency at a time of significant obligations to the Vikings. Without the guarantee from the State, I doubt this deal gets agreed to by the WEO and Vikings.
"Man invented language to satisfy his deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
The White Earth Ojibwa Plan sounds good
But I just have this feeling that the reaction Minneapolis had to the original AH plan would pale in comparison to their reaction of an AH plan with no state involvement. If we thought they went out of their way to derail the first AH plan, I think that they would flat out burn a new stadium plan down…literally and figuratively.
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
well doesnt minneaplis just suck
They should allow it for the greater good
by Lunchpail on Jan 27, 2012 7:39 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
What really matters is how with no new tax legislators react.
If those folks say “we’re all for it” there may be enough votes for passage. No way to know for sure since there hasn’t been a plan that’s gotten far enough along for a tentative whip count to be leaked.
But there is a good chance that legislators who want the stadium only in Minneapolis might not be able to block a plan that includes the “middle” legislators who aren’t pro-Minneapolis only and the “no new tax” folks who aren’t opposed to gaming expansion.
Right, but
You also have legislatures who object to any more gambling, and the internal political of the Indian gaming lobby. I recall some reports that other tribes weren’t happy with this possibility.
But actually, I think the main reason these things never go anywhere is that teams and the league don’t like the appearance of close association with gambling.
That, and would this plan actually have the support of the gaming lobby...
…or is this the northern MN tribes trying to run an end around and cut into the Mystic Lake profits without agreement from the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community (who run Mystic Lake).
You think they went out of their way
Despite taking no discernible action except making alternative proposals that try to address the legislature’s concerns.
Why are Ramsey County’s efforts to navigate the churning and treturous political waters and get a stadium built good and holy, but Minneapolis’s attempts to do the same thing unfair meddling? It is not the availability of a potential alternative that makes legislative leaders keep saying no to Ramsey County’s funding proposals.
Good point.
The real problem with AH is that at the moment, they stand $300 million short in funding. You can talk all you want about sleazy Minneapolis politicians and the incompetence of Governor Dayton, but it is the legislator that is against overriding the referendum requirement.
It just seems that Arden Hills has done a lot of homework, and they have a serious proposal
and Minneapolis just threw a bunch of stuff on the wall to see what would stick. And yeah, the powers that be in Minneapolis have been trying to sabotage the Arden Hills plan from day one. Heck, Ted Mondale has done more to promote and advance the Metrodome site in four days than he has the Arden Hills site in 8 months.
I understand that politics eventually drive where the stadium goes. My beef is that Arden Hills seems like the best proposal of all of them, and it could have been politically doable if folks like Dayton, Zellers, Koch, etc., got on board with it right away.
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
How would it have been politically doable?
Even if the folks who are “pro-stadium but only if it’s in Minneapolis” don’t seem like they’d be enough to overcome the “no new taxes” block in the legislature, even if combined with the middle of the road folks who just want the thing built.
Or am did the AH proposal come out before the 2010 elections? If it did, then you might have a point. If it didn’t I’m not sure what you’re expecting.
My memory for when the AH proposal came about is fuzzy.
It’s been around long enough (by the standards of this process) to feel old. =)
AH proposal has only been less than a year
And neither plan, AH or Metrodome, was/is politically viable. That said, both could be if there is lobbying, a good PR campaign, and strong endorsements from key players.
It’s not the plan itself, it’s how you sell the plan. And no one outside of the Vikings and Ramsey County want to sell the AH plan, but they will sell the Metrodome plan. And I think when you look at the merits of both, Arden Hills would be easier to sell, if there was some effort put forth by the Governor, the Speaker, or the Senate Maj Leader.
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
Ok. I can see that.
Especially if it were the Speaker or the Senate Majority leader since their party is in control of the Legislature. I think the issue is that they risk their leadership positions if they go against their caucus too much. As for Dayton, I don’t know. I don’t see him convincing the “no state money for a stadium” people and I don’t know if he has the sway to overcome those who simply prefer Minneapolis. But he at least doesn’t have to worry about a caucus replacing him, so he has more freedom to agitate for AH if he wanted to. I just think he doesn’t see the value in it politically, is really sure it can’t pass, or just isn’t that supportive of the site to begin with (or some combo of those).
The issue is
The Speaker and the Senate Majority leader are in the “no new taxes” camp.
As for Dayton’s view on Arden Hills, I don’t know what’s in his heart. But I’m pretty sure that he believes after his last run in with “no new taxes” that he doesn’t think he can move the legislature on that question.
Given that he’s not the strongest leader in the world, he’s probably right.
But it's not
Arden Hills, so far, requires a tax increase. From all appearances, that’s a non-starter.
The Vikings and Ramsey County wrote a great plan for 2008. And given that the city and county on board, in my view there is no logical reason why state legislators from other parts of the state should object to a local tax.
But my view does not prevail. The majority in both houses is opposed to any tax increase. So if we want a stadium, we need a way around that.
Personally, I don’t believe that any number of visits from the governor to, say, Kurt Zellers is going to get that done.
Meanwhile, Minneapolis has an idea that might be a work around because they can redirect an existing tax.
my understanding of the situation is that it isn't the "no new taxes"
people necessarily. The state isn’t getting involved in the local taxes….it’s that the “no new taxes” people want to follow the state law and put that tax increase on the ballot. The pro stadium people believe that the outcome will not be favorable for their position, so they haven’t put it on the ballot…because if it is defeated this year, you won’t get it for another 4.
So...you just described why they are the issue.
If the primary hurdle to an AH stadium is the need to waive a referendum, and the “no new taxes” legislators block the waiving of that referendum, then those legislators are blocking the AH stadium.
Just because they did what they said they’d do doesn’t absolve them of responsibility for the consequences of their action/inaction. Neither does your desire to see the tax increase go to a referendum.
Don't be so gullible
Putting it on the ballot is saying no to the tax increase.
I don't think that is right
That is, don’t think in the alternative universe where Minneapolis stayed quiet and said nothing, the Arden Hills plan would just have been passed.
I don’t think any amount of support from Dayton and Mondale makes the majority in the legislature vote for Ramsey County’s tax proposals.
Sure, Zellers and Koch could have made a difference, but neither is from Minneapolis and neither seem motivated by a preference for Minneapolis rather than a sincere objection to taxes.
Rybak: "We are going to have a referendum in a couple years when I stand for re-election."
…i’m sure that’s comforting for all the schmucks who voted for you last time around.
this guy is such a crook (redundant: politician). this is bad enough, but then he’s going to do his best to make sure the Target Center gets to ride in on the coattails of this bill.
what a joke.
"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."
Can I buy a vowel...?? +1, Kluwe.
And why would you care
Whether Target Center is included? It’s a city tax and it’s only for a facilty for a pro sports team. What’s your objection?
And its
a facility that houses:
A) Our only current championship team (but women’s basketball… I know, just saying)
B) The most exciting team in town with the most potential, the T Wolves.
what a difference a year makes
last year the Twolves sucked and they were by far not the most exciting team in town.
because the Target Center isn't the issue at hand!!
we’re trying to get a Vikings stadium deal done. any piggybacking or earmarking for other projects could potentially (and likely) hold that up, and is completely inappropriate and unnecessary — that’s my objection.
i don’t care if a city tax would ultimately probably be used to help fund eventual renovations to the Target Center — but that bill should be presented separately and on its own. Rybak feels he can kill two birds with one stone, and that is not the way to be going about this.
was a similar approach attempted when Target Field was being built?? if not, why not?? if so, why didn’t it pass??
this whole power-push for a Mpls site just stinks of ulterior motives… even down to completely irrelevant things like Light-rail transportation numbers inevitably decreasing without a major sports team housed in the Dome. Mpls officials had years to figure this out, and they still don’t know what the hell they’re doing. i say good riddance.
"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."
Can I buy a vowel...?? +1, Kluwe.
2 thoughts
we’re trying to get a Vikings stadium deal done. any piggybacking or earmarking for other projects could potentially (and likely) hold that up, and is completely inappropriate and unnecessary
Agree. I don’t have an objection in principle and if it gets included I don’t care. I do however care from the perspective that anything additional gumming up the works is bad. If it can be shown that this somehow improves the stadium’s path to passage then I’ll reverse my feelings.
even down to completely irrelevant things like Light-rail transportation numbers inevitably decreasing without a major sports team housed in the Dome
Where did LRT ridership become an ulterior motive? There are certainly leaders (business, legislative, and Dayton) who think a plus of putting the stadium downtown is the ability to utilize existing/future LRT lines, but the loss of riders for Vikings games doesn’t mean anything significant to the use/value of the LRT system.
The ridership numbers for LRT blew so far past their benchmarks that whatever minimal drop (compared to full 365 day ridership) that occurs from the loss of a downtown Vikings stadium shouldn’t make any difference. Especially not when you add in the Twins ridership which wasn’t included in the original estimates for Hiawatha (might have been for Central Corridor). Besides, the 2 lines directly serving the Dome (Hiawatha/Central) are already funded so the ridership numbers for them are moot. The ridership numbers for the SW corridor don’t need the Dome either since the Dome isn’t on that route.
it was just a wacky example
i don’t like to be a conspiracy theorist, but i’m sure there are several factors that Mpls officials have discussed that haven’t been brought out in any of the conversation to the public.
i just don’t like how Rybak has been so gung-ho about the Target Center renovations (for about a year, now) and not so much about the Vikings stadium solution. i think he probably feels that he can’t get the TC renovations passed on their own, so why not group everything together and say, “nanna nanna boo boo, you elected me to make decisions for you, vote me out in a couple years if you don’t like it”…??
"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."
Can I buy a vowel...?? +1, Kluwe.
Rybak is just kinda odd in general.
I mean, he actually suggested on ESPN 1500 that part of the Dome could be reused. I’m not totally sure if he truly gets all the aspects of what is being debated. Or this is some weird negotiating ploy. Who knows.
but i’m sure there are several factors that Mpls officials have discussed that haven’t been brought out in any of the conversation to the public.
I’m sure this is true on all sides. One of the other things Rybak revealed in his radio interview was that the Vikings were deep in discussions with Hennipen County before the AH deal but that they broke down (badly, apparently). When you hear that (assuming it’s true and there’s little reason for Rybak to fabricate that entirely) then all sorts of interesting behind the scenes questions emerge.
what ulterior motives?
Do people around here even think before they speak? The motives are pretty transparent: Rybak wants to keep the Vikings in Minneapolis. Given that he’s mayor of Minneapolis, that shouldn’t exactly be a surprise.
Target Center needs renovations. It’s owned by the city. He’s talking about a city tax that is more than sufficient to cover the Vikings stadium costs. Why shouldn’t the rest of the money be used by the city on it’s other facility, especially if doing so will help get votes on the city council?
Anyway, I agree, if it’s a complication that may hold up or make passage at the legislature, then I’d prefer it be dropped (assuming that it doesn’t make passage at the city council impossible). I just don’t understand why it should have that effect, and while I see people saying that it would, I don’t seem to see anyone explaining why.
But that’s a political calculation only, and hardly a reason for anger from sports fans.
no need to be rude about it
Do people around here even think before they speak?
settle down there, chief. politicians occasionally do have ulterior motives. politicians also like to tack on crap to one bill that has absolutely nothing to do with the main matter being discussed. considering Rybak is doing the latter, it pretty much implies the former.
He’s talking about a city tax that is more than sufficient to cover the Vikings stadium costs. Why shouldn’t the rest of the money be used by the city on it’s other facility
because people don’t like to hear, “we’re going to tax you, and with this leftover money we’re going to pay for such and such”… all i read there is, “leftover money”, which indicates they could have funded the original ‘whatever’ (in this case, a separate sports facility) without pushing a heavier tax burden on the city. in other words, the Vikings go to AH, and Mpls can work on TC separately.
there is nothing wrong with implementing a tax to help fund certain projects, provided the project is appropriate and useful — but potential over-taxation and trying to pass a plan by having it ride on another proposal’s coattails is where people probably get sketchy.
"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."
Can I buy a vowel...?? +1, Kluwe.
So that's no ulterior motives
That you can specify.
And a theory that using money from an existing tax that would otherwise expire for one sports facility Is great but for two is “over-taxation.”
Got it.
...i thought it was pretty clear the 'ulterior motive' was the Target Center...
though i misinterpreted the tax situation — that’s my bad.
either way, though, Rybak is trying to bypass the referendum charter, which is sketchy. i don’t see that as “laying his neck on the line”, b/c when he’s up for re-election he can simply say, “yeah, bypassing the charter was a dick move, but look at how i relieved your property taxes!!” — all i’m suggesting is, he should figure out a way to restructure the Target Center stuff without shoehorning it into the Vikings stadium proposal.
in the end, we all want the Vikes to stay in MN — but they shouldn’t have to settle on a stadium location that isn’t ideal. the Dome site creates many short-term complications, and does not provide desirable amenities in the long-term.
"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."
Can I buy a vowel...?? +1, Kluwe.
The charter question is tricky
And a big political risk for the mayor. I don’t think it’s “sketchy” because I think it’s pretty stupid to have that type of restriction (or any other question of fiscal policy) in the charter and because it’s entirely within the legislature’s power to override it, but it can and will look that way to a lot of people.
As for whether the Vikes should have to settle, well, I mean, it’s kind of inherent in the process. They want government money, so they have to get what they can through the government process. So far the word from the team is that they think they can make the dome work. If that’s their view, I’m not going to dispute it.
And I’m still quite concerned about whether there is a path through the political thicket. As a fan I’m happy that Rybak is willing to take risks to try to find one as there hasn’t been much progress on getting a viable source of local funding in Ramsey County.
Rybak clearly wants to be a part of the problem
Not a solution. All it takes is one measly $7.30 lunch a year by all Minnesotans.
Rybak is paralysis by politics and needs to be voted out for good.
Vikings in 2012 will be a Wonder-ful year. Seriously!!
I also love the game of golf. My favorite golf GPS app is OptimalClub.
It is hands down the BEST golf aid you'll ever have for club distances
under current elevation and weather conditions. Stop guessing & score low!
by VikesFanSince1967 on Jan 27, 2012 8:54 AM CST up reply actions
Huh?
Yak is willing to take the political heat to get a stadium done and he’s the problem?
This is what I was referring to:
Rybak: “We are going to have a referendum in a couple years when I stand for re-election.”
Translation, you’re going to have to wait A FEW YEARS to get the ‘referendum’ you want. First, he has to be re-elected. That’s close to flipping the bird at everyone bugging him about it. Rybak’s ideas have been dead on arrival so why is he leading? why is he not getting anything done or getting out of the way?
Vikings in 2012 will be a Wonder-ful year. Seriously!!
I also love the game of golf. My favorite golf GPS app is OptimalClub.
It is hands down the BEST golf aid you'll ever have for club distances
under current elevation and weather conditions. Stop guessing & score low!
by VikesFanSince1967 on Jan 27, 2012 9:14 AM CST up reply actions
What are you talking about?
He’s saying that there will be no referendum, but rather he will personally take on the political risk. If voters are unhappy at getting a stadium without a referendum they can vote him out.
That’s generally considered leadership.
Also, so far his ideas are the most politically viable ones that have been raised. As Chris’s article says, he has an issue keeping the members of his party on the city council on board, but that seems more manageable than getting the legislature to vote for a tax increase.
Who is the real leader in MN?
Vikings are now homeless and without a place to play. Solve that problem with real leadership. If legislature doesn’t care for the vikings and what it does for the state, they’re so blind to the obvious fact of all professional sports – football is on a solid growth track for the next 10 years.
Politically viable was a solution to be worked out years ago. Everyone is not playing nice, and is still at it. It is now a crisis mode. Lease has expired. Don’t they get that?
Tax increase? It is not an evil thing when it costs only $7.30 per Minnesotan per year or only .02 cents a day per person. We all get killed daily with prices of everything else going up – gas, cable, aka stuff legislature really has no control over. A price of a pack of cigarettes is so high but do you see folks complaining? No, it is what it is. Smoking may be bad for you, so you pay the price if you want to do it. How can good entertainment like the Vikings be such a difficult proposition? Get it done, and people will adjust and adapt like it was no big deal because the Vikings product has a positive energy impact on millions of fans.
Since 1980 – The number of Minnesotan residents have grown more than million people or >25%. (census facts and estimates: 4,075,970 to 5,344,861) The loss of Vikings will translate into a substantial loss in income tax revenue and residents. This effect is something which cannot be measured directly. It has pain written all over it at a time when economics and jobs are hot issues. Regression at this time is a failure to act and be responsible for the future of Minnesota. History has shown how the Saints made a difference for Louisiana. So can the Vikings.
So who is the real leader and hero? Right now, it’s Mr. Wilf as he is on the verge of becoming an unwelcome guest. He has not complained once. He is Viking proud and wants a good deal for Minnesota. He has offered a vision for the next 30-50 years. He in a similar situation as Mr. Kraft was many years ago with Gillette stadium. Why cant Minnesota show Mr. Wilf proper respect for the exciting product he has on the table. Why cant Minnesota respond and contribute in a positive way to what the Vikings can be in 30-50 years? Last time I checked, the team is called Minnesota Vikings – not Minneapolis Vikings.
$$ is not the problem but the process with elected officials and Minneapolis Sports Commission are the real villains. They’re inept to handle things in a crisis mode nor achieve a solution satisfying everyone. It does not have to happen this way. Deadlines are fast approaching and the legislature is trying to act as if they’re above any timeline. Last fall, the NFL issued a stern warning and things have not changed much. All Minneapolis could muster was a 4 pager for legislature review. I’m sure (sarcastically) the NFL loves the window dressing act and side show of ‘which’ site has the purple football. Next season schedule needs to be set and a place for the vikings to call ‘home’ – even if it is a temporary one.
Thanks Phil Knight. Your recent speech was a masterpiece. Several of your points can resonate here.
Vikings in 2012 will be a Wonder-ful year. Seriously!!
I also love the game of golf. My favorite golf GPS app is OptimalClub.
It is hands down the BEST golf aid you'll ever have for club distances
under current elevation and weather conditions. Stop guessing & score low!
by VikesFanSince1967 on Jan 27, 2012 10:42 AM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Chris, with all due respect
I think you are losing track of the thread here.
First, it won’t be the city ouncil that overrides the charter’s referendum requirement. It cannot. The legislature can and will vote to supersede that provision in the charter (and, yes, Mondale, based on the charter’s language, has suggested that using a non-city entity may work too). The question mark is whether once the state has done that, will the council refuse to vote to redirect the money out of, well, spite (or reverence for the will of the people or whatever).
As to the NFL’s concerns, that article sure should sounds like plant to try to keep Arden Hills alive. Regardless, the reduced revene is not the major issue you keep making it out to be. It just means a further reduction in the team’s contribution.
But do you really think the NFL is going to stand in the way of long term stadium solution over short term revenue issues? Did they in Arizona, Seattle and Denver when each of this teams played temporarily played in a college venue?
This is a complicated puzzle, with lots of different objections that still need to be navigated. I would be much happier if th city council wasn’t making themselves into one (write your council member, people), but they still seem likely to be persuadable.
To be accurate...
…the Cardinals weren’t temporarily at a college stadium. They played at Sun Devil Stadium for 18 years before the new stadium was built.
The NFL owners are already contributing to the Vikings in the Metrodome
If they move to TCF they will have to contribute more to the Vikings.
You lost me with the “It just means a further reduction in the team’s contribution.” sentence.
What contribution is the Vikings making? They are on the receiving end.
This story is no plant. It is the truth. The other owners are tired of having to subsidize teams like The Vikings who are basically on welfare.
He means their contribution to the construction of the stadium.
And of course the NFL doesn’t want them to play in TCF for 3 seasons. That’s understandable and completely expected. The question is not whether they want it, it’s whether they’d actually stand in the way of playing at TCF if it meant a new stadium. That’s the part of the story you have to question. Public statements like this are often a mix of truth and negotiation. Suggesting that TCF might not work out is another way to put pressure on legislators to go for a non-Dome alternative.
I'm not sure that's right
But I’m not sure I u der stand how the league’s revenue sharing works.
A quick bit of research suggests during the last labor negotiation that the top teams in local revenue pay a 10% tax on local funds that goes into a pool that is first used for stadium debt (Vikes have none) and then what’s left over goes to the bottom local revenue teams. No word on how that’s distributed, but it might be done in a way that doesn’t increase as revenues fall. I’ll kee looking.
But these revenue losses will just come out of the Vikings contribution to the stadium. The $70 million or so they have said they will lose from plaing at TCF will be $70 million less they payoff the new stadium.
As for whether it’s a plant, I don’t know. But I do know that owners who want the Vikes finances improved would be very strange to try to block a new stadium that solves the long term revenue problem.
Revenue sharing
As it turns out, it’s not so easy to get the details of how it works. Apparently under the old CBA, it was spelled out right in the agreement, but I looked and it is not there in the new deal (there is a brief reference on page 89, but that’s it).
According to this article from July, which was written before everything was agreed and approved, the top teams in terms of local revenue pay 10% into a pool to be paid out to the bottom teams. It doesn’t say how you define top teams or bottom teams or how payouts are calculated.
But if that article is correct, we can conclude this much: a drop in Vikings revenue does not require the teams paying into the revenue sharing pool to pay more.
It might mean the Vikes get more, and thus other teams get less, but it doesn’t increase the burden on those who have to share their money.
Denver played in a college venue?
Are you talking about when their current stadium was built to replace Mile High? I don’t know if this is true, but it seems unlikely because they built the new stadium immediately adjacent to the old one. I think they played in Mile High until the new one was finished and then tore it down.
I think this might be another misremember.
Wiki says the old AFL Broncos played at the University of Denver’s stadium occasionally but makes no other mention of a college venue. Wiki is also not infallible so don’t take that as gospel either.
Crap
Hat was actually me repeating what had been told. Apparently my source was untrustworthy. Should have known.
But Seattle, darnit, played at UWash’s stadium during construction.
Husky Stadium
holds over 70,000 people compared to about 50,000 in TCF Bank.
If we can't laugh at ourselves, Packer fans will call us crybabies and we will be forced to kick their tooth in. I really don't want to go to jail (again).
by Alittlemore_cowbell on Jan 27, 2012 9:45 AM CST up reply actions
not to mention...
…from what i could find, the Seahawks only had to chip in about $1mil to bring Husky Stadium and a new practice field ‘up to NFL standards’:
The total cost of the FieldTurf installation in Husky Stadium and the east practice field will be $1,074,958. Seattle Seahawks team owner Paul G. Allen is covering the expenses as a gift to the University of Washington.
not quite the $11mil we would have to cover for TCF renovations.
"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."
Can I buy a vowel...?? +1, Kluwe.
Which is really odd given the fact that Husky stadium...
…is pretty dumpy (well, was, since they’re renovating it) and TCF is most certainly not. Unless heating coils cost a boatload to install. What exactly are they estimating with these seating improvements anyhow? =)
ha, the coils probably cost $10.95mil...
…and the rest is designated for as many bleachers as they can buy for $50,000…
"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."
Can I buy a vowel...?? +1, Kluwe.
Oh, and I forgot
The White Earth Band thing is never going to happen. These ideas have been raised before and gone no where. I don’t 100% understand why, although I suspect that the league snt too keen with that close of an association with gambling.
Correct.
Casinos are built on tribal land. If they could build wherever they want, they would all have casinos in the metro area.
by Lars in SLP on Jan 27, 2012 4:49 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
The real question
Is what the members of the city council will say after the charter has been overridden by the legislature. Will they obstruct thing because there was no referendum, or will they get on board because one is no longer required?
Arden Hills
As an outstater- I want the stadium in Arden Hills. The downtown dome sucked in every aspect. Using metrodome site would be putting lipstick on a pig!! Why can’t there be some plan statewide for revenue and not just to the local entities? I would be willing to give my 2 cents- we all sure ate it up a few years ago for the arts and outdoors!!! Football is an art and sometimes it is outdoors.
Because any statewide plan for revenue means a tax.
And that can’t pass in the current legislature. Mayor Coleman of St. Paul floated an interesting idea…an very small (sorry, don’t remember exact amount) increase on the state tax on all alcohol purchases (both on/off sale) in the state. Never stood a shot at passing, but it was one example of a statewide solution.
What exactly
sucked about the downtown aspect? I hear this all the time with no details. I moved to Denver last year but had season tickets for years before that. I tailgated at the Strib lots, tailgated where the Guthrie is now, and have had many a good time at the Dome. From an owner’s perspective, the dome sucks, but guess what? I could give a crap about Zygi’s wallet. From a fan’s perspective, there is nothing wrong enough to spend over a billion dollars on a new facility. Classic “keeping up with the neighbor’s” syndrome.
What Sucked...
Here is a short list from the last time i was at the dome (Lions game 2011)
1) Parking costs a premium and as a bonus you get to walk many blocks to get to the stadium.
2) Hallways or concourses (whatever you want to call them) are small and dimly lit. Going to get food or getting to the restroom is an adventure.
3) Bathrooms: AKA trough-rooms. Small and dank.
4) Seating: Zero movement legroom (unlike TCF) if you want to get to the isle everyone in your way MUST stand up or you are not getting out. I would describe it as basically like backseat of a small car for three hours. Middle-back-seat-feet-on-the-Hump!
5) Traffic: Leaving the dome itself is not horrifically bad but once we got to the car ( we backed out of our parking space and then sat there for 45minues before we moved a car length. it was an hour before we got out of the parking ramp.
Vikings Valhalla .com
by Admiral BigGun on Jan 27, 2012 12:16 PM CST up reply actions
Well...
…#2, #3, and #4 are Metrodome problems, not problems with downtown. That said, the unlimited space at AH makes it possible to completely avoid #2/#4, but a downtown site doesn’t doom the new stadium to the same fate. Good architecture can solve those problems.
- is problem either way. Just a difference in where you’d like to be stuck. That said, AH also allows for post game tailgating and the Dome site is probably the worst possible downtown choice from a traffic perspective. AH would be better for sure, just wanted to point out that better in this case still means stuck in traffic.
how come nobody has floated the idea of building on the Strib land?
makes sense…it’s what, 25 acres, adjacent to the dome, about the same size as the current dome and parking lot?
they could play at the dome while the new facility is built, and once it is complete, then you raze the dome and use that property for parking and development.
it’s kinda what my home town here in MI did with their county courthouse—built the new one on the old one’s parking lot, then razed the old one and turned the site into parking.
of course, that would add 20-45million to aquire the land
But
when you consider the lost revenue and adjustments needed to make TCF Bank Stadium viable – that $20-$45 million is still cheaper. Then you could raze the Dome after construction and have a nice big tailgating area. There was a fan post on this subject sometime back – I think its the best solution!
yeah, there was a fan post on it
but I’m very suprised nobody in a position of authority has brought up the idea…the Strib land has been for sale for what, 5 years?
Didn't Wilf have an option to buy that land...
…which he let expire a few years ago? My guess is the cost of the land has increased as discussion of new stadium looks to be centering on the Metrodome site.
"Man invented language to satisfy his deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
He agreed to buy it and backed out over financing issues
Is what I read.
I still like my grand vision
But hey, it’s my vision so I’m biased.
I don’t know why we haven’t heard anything about this kind of thing from official sources. It could be that they are not as far sighted and brilliant as me (I’m kidding, obviously), or it could be that there are issues that we don’t know about that stand in the way.
One guess is that they have tried to sell a downtown stadium as a cheaper option, and explicitly doing something broader would raise the price tag, but I don’t know.
But
when you consider the lost revenue and adjustments needed to make TCF Bank Stadium viable – that $20-$45 million is still cheaper. Then you could raze the Dome after construction and have a nice big tailgating area. There was a fan post on this subject sometime back – I think its the best solution!
What is not discussed here is how much the Vikings will contribute to the Metrodome site.
All we know is that it is less than that are willing to contribute to the AH proposal,
If it is $100 mil less, the local and state contribution would ROUGHLY be the same as the proposed contribution in the AH site. If it is $150 mil less, will the local and state contribute more. And this is separate from the $70 mil. the Vikes lose in revenue by having to play at TCF for three years.
I think (not sure though) that Rybak’s numbers had the Vikes contributing more than the AH site. I do not think this is anywhere near a done deal. Yet.
Your fantasy football expert since Jerry Rice's rookie year.
Not a done deal yet, no
But we know the Vikes will contribute at least $70 mil less.
You are absolutely correct.
Rybak not only ‘assumed’ the Vikes would willingly roll over and lose money, he ‘assumed’ they would pay more than they’re able to for their ideal location @ AH.
Ludicrous.
by Shawn Gillogly on Jan 27, 2012 7:36 PM CST up reply actions
There's no evidence for that
But there is lots of evidence for Rybak trying to find a funding source that desnt require a legislative vote for new taxes.
I found a link where Rybak would have the Vikings contributing more than AH.
It is from May ’11 and much has changed. Therefore, I consider it old news. It had the Vikings contributing $400 mill when their offer was far less for AH. It had Minneapolis contributing $195 mil. whereas they now offer much more. ($300 mil. ?)
The cost of that stadium was $895 mil. The stadium now is nearing $100 mil. more. Here is the link.
http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/26798/a-hail-mary-in-vikings-stadium-frenzy
I would like to compare more in depth about Rybak’s latest plan, but all that I can compare it to is the 5 page bullet point paper from Jan 12. Rybak’s mindset at the time was naive and/or unworkable.
Your fantasy football expert since Jerry Rice's rookie year.
We are not yet at the numbers stage
We are still at the concept stage.
Any numbers, from Rybak or anyone else, need a big grain of salt.
How can Rybak be at the numbers stage in May of '11
and at the concept stage in Jan. of ’12?
Leading by retreating and delaying is my guess. ;-P
Your fantasy football expert since Jerry Rice's rookie year.
I think its more that the site we're on now...
…hasn’t had Viking input in a while. You get real numbers after you establish the concept. Numbers were required for the half assed “plans” Minneapolis has been tossing out, but without the Vikings input they’ve really been made up numbers. Until the Vikings agree on a concept it’s all hypotheticals.
If the NFL decides that the extra $65M over 3 years is too much...
…then they are being very short sighted. They have an opportunity to get a franchise off of their welfare books for the long term and actually contributing to the league’s coffers. It would cost each NFL owner less than $700K/yr for 3 years to make this happen. If the NFL has a problem with that, they are fools.
"Man invented language to satisfy his deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Probably posturing from the NFL
This is a business and big one at that. Every side is trying to squeeze as much out of the other as possible.
Yeah, that's what I think too. I think it's a non issue.
"Man invented language to satisfy his deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Not too short-sighted.
It’s one more excuse to move them to LA, where they’d make ‘more’ money.
I don’t think the Vikes are the 1st (or even 3rd) choice for the LA move. But the stupidity involved in the Minneapolis deal very wel could make them willing to pull up stakes.
by Shawn Gillogly on Jan 27, 2012 7:38 PM CST up reply actions
You don't have to be Randy Newman to love LA
You have to understand how they think around Hollywood.
Growing numbers of fools have faith that LA is just an idle threat. The problem with that is that once the NFL finds that people think it to be a paper tiger, it loses all its usefulness as a negotiating tool — until you beat someone with that stick hard enough to set an example.
“What we have here is a failure to communicate.” – Cool Hand Luke
The fool’s joy of presumed power who grabs a live tiger by the tail is short-lived — and so is he.
So, the NFL lines up a deal with those already standing in line and uses the stick, then Minnesota becomes the new stick. Twenty years from now, people may say, “Remember Minnesota? They fooled around with more issues than a drunken sanitarium and now they still don’t have another franchise.”
“You’ve got to ask yourself one question: ‘Do I feel lucky?’ Well do you, punk??” – Dirty Harry
It’s not like there is a first choice or a second choice or a third choice for LA as people debate in bars. The truth is more like that at some point in time, the music stops and suddenly you have nowhere to sit.
There are two real tigers lurking out there in the tall grass near the La Brea Tar Pit. It’s a really old, old story. The stripes are camouflage. The teeth are real. A team can be renamed faster than you can say “Baltimore Ravens”. Hungry tigers aren’t all that picky. They eat the first meal stupid enough to wander into range.
“Some men you just can’t reach.” – Cool Hand Luke
No argument.
As I said, it’s stupid of Minneapolis to assume LA is irrelevant. At this point, the Vikings are a free agent team. They can be taken anywhere and play anywhere. And if the NFL leaves Minnesota, it won’t come back. “Keeping the name” ala Cleveland will mean nothing, because this will be the state that has lost 3 professional sports franchises and nearly lost its fourth on multiple occasions.
by Shawn Gillogly on Jan 29, 2012 9:57 AM CST up reply actions
Unless they can put an LA deal together in less than 3 weeks...
…they’ll be waiting another season to be free agents.
Las Vegas doesn’t have a major sports team for a reason. It would only take one player or coach, or even owner, caught betting on a game to cause a major problem.
I don’t see a casino as being an option, owners no doubt want to stay as far away from any type of gambling as possible.
Personally I like the idea, but it won’t happen.
Not the same type of casino/betting as the Tribes conduct.
Also the primary problem with LV is there isn’t sufficient permanent fan base in the area. That’s the kicker for the NFL and MLB. The NBA would do it in a heartbeat if there were a local partner and a suitable arena.
by Shawn Gillogly on Jan 27, 2012 7:40 PM CST up reply actions
Opine without evidence much?
Is there open and legal “line-style” betting on games with the Tribes as there are with LV? Then it’s not the same kind of betting. The kind the NFL and MLB are in fear of. Lots of states and places have similar games-style gambling to what the Tribes offer. If the NFL nuked them, there’d be no markets left.
The NBA would move to LV given a suitable local partner. Part of why they’ve held All-Star games there in the past is trying to woo a local owner. Now, how much of LV is transient vs permanent? Transients don’t get attached to local teams, as a rule. It limits the market size. In the end it’s easier to fill 15k than it is 60k.
I might add at this point that if the NFL were analyzing today, Minneapolis wouldn’t get a franchise, for similar problems of market size, as well. That goes to the whole, “If the Vikes leave, kiss football goodbye” issue.
by Shawn Gillogly on Jan 29, 2012 10:09 AM CST up reply actions
There is
far too much talk about the Vikings on this political site. Jeez. Focus, guys.
Guys, I just had a brilliant idea for the new stadium location.
You know where the state capitol building is? Tear it down, build a stadium there. At the rate our legislature works, I’m thinking that it would be an improvement.
It's falling down anyway!
Let’s go for it!
Charlie Walters:
Upcoming play at the Brave New Workshop Comedy Theatre in Minneapolis: “Occupy Arden Hills: or, Brother Can You Spare a Dome?”
Totally unrelated, but one of the few things I’ve read about the stadium lately that actually brought a smile to my face.
by Lars in SLP on Jan 28, 2012 8:59 PM CST via mobile reply actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Daily Norseman
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- 10 to watch at the scouting combine: The offense
- Wisconsin state assembly passes resolution declaring 12/12/12 as ‘Aaron Rodgers Day’
- Training Day: Working with the quarterbacks, and not breathing
- Tom Martinez, Tom Brady’s mentor, dead at 66
- Brady Quinn apologizes for Tebow remarks, claims an ‘inaccurate portrayal’
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
