New stadium in Denver for Colorado Rapids (MLS)

QueSi2Opie · Post by **QueSi2Opie** » Wed Sep 24, 2003 9:25 pm

KC needs to get on the ball.

"In a press conference held Tuesday, September 23, 2003, Major League Soccer Commissioner Don Garber introduced the Leagueâ€™s newest investor-operator, Stan Kroenke and Kroenke Sports Enterprises, at the Pepsi Center in Denver, Colorado. Kroenke Sports announced the purchase of MLSâ€™ Colorado Rapids soccer team from Anschutz Entertainment Group and the organizationâ€™s plans to build a new stadium for the club which currently plays at Invesco Field at Mile High."

QueSi2Opie · Post by **QueSi2Opie** » Wed Sep 24, 2003 10:37 pm

Might as well post this too.

September 23, 2003
San Antonio-Express News

San Antonio Soccer Spurs in MLS 2005?
The San Antonio City Council encouraged Alamodome director Mike Abington to continue his efforts to bring a Major League Soccer team to San Antonio in time for the 2005 season when MLS expansion plans the addition of two teams to the league. San Antonio faces strong opposition from - Cleveland, Houston, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Oklahoma City, Seattle, Rochester, N.Y. and Tulsa. Chipp Haass, who represents District 10 said, "I think soccer is the way to go and I think if we do anything with international soccer, it will be a big economic boost for San Antonio. International soccer is successful wherever it goes." The league currently plans to add two teams every two years until 2013.

GRID · Post by **GRID** » Wed Sep 24, 2003 10:51 pm

wow, problem is Hunt gets a sweet deal in KC, otherwise he would have built one here before Columbus. JoCo did that study that showed that a public funded soccer stadium is feasible and makes financial sence. This would be a great project for one of the suburbs to build along side a massive soccer complex, I would like to see it built at the sports complex myself, where Kauffman stands now, you know when the move Kauffman Downtown and renovate Arrowhead and then they could develop all that vacant land around the complex into soccer fields. But I'm dreaming of course.

I still don't get it, most cities will now have at least two, some FOUR stadiums before we get a new arena built. And most are designed here too. Go Denver.

KC0KEK · Post by **KC0KEK** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 11:43 am

I don't know much about soccer, so I'll defer to the experts on this question: Does an MLS team typically generate enough revenue that an owner or city can justify building a stadium?

QueSi2Opie · Post by **QueSi2Opie** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 12:14 pm

KC0KEK wrote:I don't know much about soccer, so I'll defer to the experts on this question: Does an MLS team typically generate enough revenue that an owner or city can justify building a stadium?

As far as ticket sales, I'd say "yes" on some and "no" on others. The San Jose Earthquakes should be relocated to San Diego, Portland or Seattle. If you build a 22,000 seat stadium, but only average 10,000 people a game, then it's not worth it.

For Dallas, it was costing more money to lease the CottonBowl in the long run than to build their own stadium (to be completed in 2005).

The teams don't make a lot on merchandise sales, but they do have nice television contracts with ESPN and Fox Sports World as well as sponser money from Budweiser, Pepsi, New York Life, etc.

Investing in MLS is a gamble, but so far it's paying off for teams like Columbus and Los Angeles who both have soccer-specific stadiums. Cities that have soccer-specific stadiums will also get more World Cup Qualifying games and other popular soccer tournaments that draw locals and tourists alike. MLS investors started by losing millions in 1996, but they are breaking even now.

Even if every MLS team sells out every soccer-specific stadium, the league won't succeed unless the television and sponser contracts get bigger in the future. Demand for the game has to not only be in the MLS cities, but nationwide.

You only have to look at the youth in this country to make a decision on whether or not soccer will continue to grow in the U.S. Kids now have a professional soccer league to look up to jus' as we did with the NFL, MLB, NHL and NBA.

KC_JAYHAWK · Post by **KC_JAYHAWK** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 12:17 pm

The problem with Kansas City sports is the Halls and Stowers don't care to own major league sports franchises. That's where the money is. Hunt will be happy if he can get Arrowhead renovated and Glass (I'm not really sure what Glass' intends to do. He goes on record and states we should renovate Kauffman but then a few weeks later he'll state we should at least look into a new downtown stadium. Glass just needs to come out and say, "hey, I'm the owner of this team and I think it would be in the best interest of the Royals and Kansas City if we just build a new stadium downtown". Then at least they could start planning/projecting and designing a future home for the Royals. Maybe start looking for corporate sponsors, state funding and a possible tax increase.
The latest I've heard about Bi-State II is that it won't be on the Nov 2004 ballot. Do all these people have their heads up their ass or what. I mean come on, show some freaking initiative.

GRID · Post by **GRID** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 12:43 pm

KC_JAYHAWK wrote:The problem with Kansas City sports is the Halls and Stowers don't care to own major league sports franchises. That's where the money is. Hunt will be happy if he can get Arrowhead renovated and Glass (I'm not really sure what Glass' intends to do. He goes on record and states we should renovate Kauffman but then a few weeks later he'll state we should at least look into a new downtown stadium. Glass just needs to come out and say, "hey, I'm the owner of this team and I think it would be in the best interest of the Royals and Kansas City if we just build a new stadium downtown". Then at least they could start planning/projecting and designing a future home for the Royals. Maybe start looking for corporate sponsors, state funding and a possible tax increase.
The latest I've heard about Bi-State II is that it won't be on the Nov 2004 ballot. Do all these people have their heads up their ass or what. I mean come on, show some freaking initiative.

Exactly

KC0KEK · Post by **KC0KEK** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 1:22 pm

I don't think it's so much about having their heads up their asses as it is about sticking their necks out. Right now, it's tough politically to argue for spending hundreds of millions on sports and entertainment facilities when constituents are bombarded with stories about how schools are failing and roads are crumbling. The time to have funded stadiums and arenas was a few years ago, when the economy was flush and the tax coffers were full. That window of opportunity has closed, so my guess is that most politicians will wait until it re-opens.

KC_JAYHAWK · Post by **KC_JAYHAWK** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 3:05 pm

Voters in Tulsa just approved a sales tax increase that will build them a new arena downtown and add other amenities and features to their metro area.

trailerkid · Post by **trailerkid** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 3:12 pm

Aren't the Halls interests in the arts? I'd much rather have people move here who value our art scene more than soccer stadiums.

QueSi2Opie · Post by **QueSi2Opie** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 4:51 pm

trailerkid wrote:Aren't the Halls interests in the arts? I'd much rather have people move here who value our art scene more than soccer stadiums.

I agree, Lamar Hunt owns Arrowhead, so it's not like he has to lease the stadium for the Wizards. A soccer-specific stadium adds to the atmosphere instead of seein' 16,000 or so people spread throughout an 80,000 seat stadium. I'm hopin' JOCO will step up to the plate without Bi-State and fund for the stadium themselves. Afterall, their Kansas neighbor stepped on the professional sports scene with the Speedway.

phxcat · Post by **phxcat** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 8:39 pm

I think that, firstoff, a soccer stadium would not be close to the same expense as an arena or large stadium. Also, with the soccer complex people have been envisioning, that could attract regional or national tournaments which would bring in lots of families who shape their vacations around soccer tournaments and that would mean more money for the area.

Mizzou05 · Post by **Mizzou05** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 10:04 pm

i say they just build a soccer stadium next to the riverfront park. what do you have to lose?

QueSi2Opie · Post by **QueSi2Opie** » Wed Oct 01, 2003 6:17 pm

Mizzou05 wrote:i say they just build a soccer stadium next to the riverfront park. what do you have to lose?

The fact that you can't surround it by a dozen youth soccer fields, a soccer training center and other facilities. Unfortunately, soccer isn't a urban sport in the Midwest (except Chicago), it's a sport where suburban soccer moms haul their children. The idea of surrounding the stadium by youth fields is to make it a regional soccer complex for tournaments as well as gettin' the kids to the MLS games directly after their youth soccer matches.

Post by **bahua** » Thu Oct 02, 2003 8:07 am

I really hate soccer, but I hope it works out for all the soccer-lovers. Spend some cash and support your city, in whatever way you can.

trailerkid · Post by **trailerkid** » Thu Oct 02, 2003 3:50 pm

Jo Co should build a soccer stadium along 435 near the OP Convention Center. It really would fit right in with the suburban landscape.

QueSi2Opie · Post by **QueSi2Opie** » Thu Oct 02, 2003 4:47 pm

bahua wrote:I really hate soccer,

Spend some time in Europe gettin' drunk, high and bashing skinheads in soccer riots...it's really a great time, plus you learn the game and grow a passion for it. This country has built the game around it's youth so it seems like child's play here led by SUV drivin' soccer moms. I cannot bash that too much though, hopefully these kids will love the sport when they're old enough to buy their own tickets. It's good for the future of the game in this nation. A game we can REALLY compete with the rest of the world...unlike football and baseball.