KCRag Forum

I'm not against the Downtown the stadium by any means!!! But, I must admit, I would miss the Truman Sports Complex! Why? Because the sports complex is unique to Kansas City. I think some other cities have since built side-by-side stadiums, but Kansas City was the first to do so! So, why not have both the Royals and Chiefs play Downtown...in side-by-side stadiums along the River front?? Just an idea!


I just don't want the city to regret losing the side-by-side stadiums.





All Things KC,
- J. C.,
E-Mail: VictoryM37@yahoo.com

The biggest problem with a riverfront location is that there is no parking nearby. It would need need massive parking garages or acres of parking lots. A baseball stadium in the business loop can take advantage of the 40,000 parking spaces already withing walking distance.

I think a football stadium would be too big and require too much parking to be downtown, especially since it would be used so much less than a baseball stadium. A football stadium is one facility that I would say is better to be located in an outlying area.

Imagine the riots that'd happen if they demolished arrowhead, I'd only approve of it if the stadium had 85,000 seats, and was a duplicate of Arrowhead (only bigger)
The riverfront wouldn't be very good... Think about floods... Especially the flood of '93, you can't control mother nature and she would seriously screw up the stadiums...

You'd also take away the whole tailgating aspect of the game which is half the fun. I really don't think there is anything wrong with the TSC location for the Chiefs.

What's the appeal of the two stadiums being side by side anyway? Rarely is there a day when both facilities are being used on the same day, and when they are, doesn't that just make traffic flow more of a mess?

Lamar's got a billion bucks. If he wants to move it downtown, I won't stand in his way. He can spend his money how he deems fit.

CM....I think they share a lot of common expenses that can be used for both stadiums, that would have to be doubled if seperated.

I'm totally against downtown football stadiums. For many reasons. #1 football stadiums are not used enough....10 times a year for sure plus special events. Huge dead space for too much of the year. More importantly #2 it kills tailgating. Football games take on a culture of their own unlike baseball, hockey, basketball games which do better interacting with their surroundings. Football needs to be out by itself and let the crazies go crazy.

KCPowercat wrote:CM....I think they share a lot of common expenses that can be used for both stadiums, that would have to be doubled if seperated.

I'm totally against downtown football stadiums. For many reasons. #1 football stadiums are not used enough....10 times a year for sure plus special events. Huge dead space for too much of the year. More importantly #2 it kills tailgating. Football games take on a culture of their own unlike baseball, hockey, basketball games which do better interacting with their surroundings. Football needs to be out by itself and let the crazies go crazy.

So why not build a new stadium across the river in North Kansas City? They've got plenty of room to go crazy and skyline views to boot. Besides, maybe they could use some of that Harrah's money to build it...

NO team will have a stadium or be based outside of KCMO... If it's based in the north side, it has to be in KCMO city limits

I'm actually fine with putting renovation money into Arrowhead....I don't think it needs $200M with the owner only putting in a fraction of that though.