980 stadium debate

Discussion about new sports facilities in Kansas City
User avatar
kevink
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 201
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 6:35 pm
Location: MidtownKC

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by kevink »

GRID wrote:
I also came away thinking that KC is just screwed right now and this might be our only real chance to save what we have.  I don’t know if the teams are going to leave or not, but I believe the threat is real and I don’t have enough faith in this town and this town’s residents to get on the same page if this fails.
Grid - do you honestly believe the teams would leave?

My $.02:

It's hard to fathom the Chiefs ever leaving. Think of it as if you were the owner: they have a *sure thing* in KC, with a very healthy profit. They don't even have to be very good to do so. Anywhere else they would move is a risk. Plus, the NFL will oppose them moving. And, even in a worst case scenario where they did move, we would be 1st on the list for an expansion team b/c of our consistent support.

For the Royals, I do think it's a possibility they could move at some point, but that point is not now. The Glass family has been consistent in reiterating their support for KC, and that they have no intentions of moving or selling. If we reject 2 or 3 more stadium deals, that could happen. But the Marlins and Twins have both had far worse dealings with their cities over the last decade, and both are still not moving. MLB does not want teams moving.

And frankly, even as someone who has been a Royals fan my whole life, and went to games in the 70's & 80's when they were great, I'm sad to say I'm not sure I'd even care that much if they left town. The organization is a national embarrassment, and the future does not look encouraging. I'm guessing that for the vast majority of Kansas Citians, baseball has stopped being anything more than a passing interest in their lives. That's obviously not true for the Chiefs, despite their own lack of on-field success.
User avatar
beccanator
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1067
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:27 am
Location: Bremen, Germany

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by beccanator »

Just some notes on my part:

-Yes, "State of the Art" was discussed, quite heatedly actually, but as was everything else.

-The "Yes"-side did appeared to be represented by a greater number of people, or perhaps just a more vocal number of people. The opposing side seemed to be a little bit more reserved in their reactions to the panelists statements, but this does not imply a lack of concern or passion about the issue.

-Summary of the two opposing views of the panelists, which were repeatedly stressed: No- the stadium tax is immoral; Yes- the stadium tax would only cost Jackson County taxpayers a cup of Quik Trip coffee a month (enough with the coffee already!!!!).

-Very few minorities were present at the forum, however, each discussion panel did have their "token black guy".
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson
User avatar
beccanator
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1067
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:27 am
Location: Bremen, Germany

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by beccanator »

warwickland wrote: i was there in spirit


it started hailing as i was supposed to leave



and stuff


:-({|=
I don't buy it, warwickland.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson
kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by kcdcchef »

kevink wrote:   Plus, the NFL will oppose them moving.
yet, they would be powerless to do a damn thing. baltimore, cleveland, and la were as established as kc if not more when their teams bolted.
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D
lock+load
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 4209
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:25 am
Location: brookside

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by lock+load »

kcdcchef wrote: yet, they would be powerless to do a damn thing. baltimore, cleveland, and la were as established as kc if not more when their teams bolted.
STFUA
LenexatoKCMO
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14667
Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Valentine

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by LenexatoKCMO »

kcdcchef wrote: yet, they would be powerless to do a damn thing. baltimore, cleveland, and la were as established as kc if not more when their teams bolted.
Classic Chef - argue and jump all over a guy who prefaced his entire post with "my $.02".  It's his opinion chef; your arguing over the accuracy of his opinion does nothing to further the dialogue. 
lock+load
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 4209
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:25 am
Location: brookside

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by lock+load »

There are no opinions.  Only chef's facts.
kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by kcdcchef »

LenexatoKCMO wrote: Classic Chef - argue and jump all over a guy who prefaced his entire post with "my $.02".  It's his opinion chef; your arguing over the accuracy of his opinion does nothing to further the dialogue. 
hey lenexatokcmo. how are ya? nice weather today, no?? well, have a nice day, friend.

oh, by the way, i read his whole post, good passion in it too. however, when someone offers that the nfl will never let a team move, you have to be informed of the other 3 cities that have said that about their teams. his opinion, was about profits, and being established in kc, his fact, was that the nfl would not let them move. i corrected that.
lock&load wrote: There are no opinions.  Only chef's facts.
hey buddy, how is everything?? good day? ummm, chef's facts, well, i did supply the fact that 3 teams have moved in the last 20 years, who, were as established as the chiefs, if not moreso. i figured you would be happy that i had facts. guess you need a link to prove those teams moved. here ya go.

www.nfl.com
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D
lock+load
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 4209
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:25 am
Location: brookside

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by lock+load »

Attendance in Baltimore the year before they moved:  37,411 per game.  Hardly comparable to the Chiefs currently.

http://www.kenn.com/sports/football/nfl ... dance.html


Rams final two years in LA:  42k, 45k
Raiders final two years in LA: 51k, 49k
Cleveland:  64k, 70k.  They had a team back in three years.
User avatar
kevink
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 201
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 6:35 pm
Location: MidtownKC

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by kevink »

lock&load wrote: Attendance in Baltimore the year before they moved:  37,411 per game.  Hardly comparable to the Chiefs currently.

http://www.kenn.com/sports/football/nfl ... dance.html


Rams final two years in LA:  42k, 45k
Raiders final two years in LA: 51k, 49k
Cleveland:  64k, 70k.  They had a team back in three years.
Good points. And, the situation in the NFL is different now - they want an expansion franchise in LA, so the owners can share in the franchise fee. That fee won't be as high in KC. The business side of the game is different than when the others moved, and they will be very reluctant, if not downright against a successful franchise in KC moving.
kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by kcdcchef »

lock&load wrote: Attendance in Baltimore the year before they moved:  37,411 per game.  Hardly comparable to the Chiefs currently.

http://www.kenn.com/sports/football/nfl ... dance.html


Rams final two years in LA:  42k, 45k
Raiders final two years in LA: 51k, 49k
Cleveland:  64k, 70k.  They had a team back in three years.
yeah, but 50,000 in l.a. makes the same amount as 79,000 does in k.c.

now, with regards to baltimores attendance before they lost their team, that was pretty much average back then.

www.kenn.com
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D
User avatar
bahua
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 10940
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2003 7:39 pm
Location: Out of Town
Contact:

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by bahua »

If that's the case, then it seems to me that nothing we do, even voting yes on April 4th, will guarantee that the Chiefs will stay. Laws are made to be broken, and ballot language is made to be reinterpreted. That's what expensive lawyers(that we pay for, btw) are for.

They have expressed no interest whatsoever, in leaving. Hunt has even said that they have no interest in leaving KC, yet you're still convinced they might, and probably will? Why? Are you honestly taken in by the inconsistent FUD being spread by the SOS campaign?
LenexatoKCMO
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14667
Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Valentine

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by LenexatoKCMO »

bahua wrote: Are you honestly taken in by the inconsistent FUD being spread by the SOS campaign?
He isn't taken in by it, he just needs it to crutch his position. 

"I love TSC so much that it should be saved at any cost to taxpayers or downtown" just isn't as convincing as spending weeks trying to "factually" show the liklihood of something we all really know is never going to happen.
kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by kcdcchef »

LenexatoKCMO wrote:  

"I love TSC so much that it should be saved at any cost to taxpayers or downtown" just isn't as convincing as spending weeks trying to "factually" show the liklihood of something we all really know is never going to happen.
i agree with akp, you are finally talking sense here lately. make that your signature, then go vote yes on tuesday.
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D
LenexatoKCMO
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14667
Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Valentine

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by LenexatoKCMO »

kcdcchef wrote: i agree with akp, you are finally talking sense here lately. make that your signature, then go vote yes on tuesday.
#-o

I guess you didn't get my comment. 
User avatar
bahua
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 10940
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2003 7:39 pm
Location: Out of Town
Contact:

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by bahua »

Yeah, I found that kind of contradictory to what you've already been saying, chef.
kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: 980 stadium debate

Post by kcdcchef »

LenexatoKCMO wrote:
"I love TSC so much that it should be saved at any cost to taxpayers or downtown" 
just this part. and further, there is no cost to downtown kc, this is a win win. downtown already has 4b plus the east village project, and all that dst already has on the table planned, so, the cost to downtown is nothing.

make it your sig lenexa.
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D
Locked