If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WSBTV)   Atlanta Falcons: 'We would like taxpayers to pay for a third of our new billion dollar stadium.' City of Atlanta: 'We have ample stadium space downtown, your stadium is only 20 years old and the city has almost 12% unemployment. How about no?'   (wsbtv.com) divider line 102
    More: Stupid, Atlanta, SEC Championship Game, Georgia Dome, stadiums, Georgia World Congress Center  
•       •       •

1761 clicks; posted to Sports » on 14 Sep 2012 at 9:12 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



102 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-14 09:08:10 AM
Meanwhile, in what I will concede to be somewhat unrelated news, local English Language Arts teachers have been assigned the task of teaching a set of novels to their children. Local county governments have supplied these teachers with one set of books for 4 to 6 classes of children. In order, I suppose, to prevent parent outcry over the dearth of books; teachers have been forbidden to ask any parent to purchase any books or donate books to the classrooms. If a parent, unprompted, offers to donate books to a class, the teacher may accept those donations.

I know it is an excessively emotional reaction;I know it wouldn't put any books in the classrooms; I know it is irrational, but I would rather the current stadium burn and NOT be replaced rather than a new stadium built.
 
2012-09-14 09:15:17 AM
$5 says the representative from Johns Creek would change his tone if the stadium was moved to the north side of Atlanta. Not close enough to bring the riff-raff all the way up 400/141....but just close enough that the important people could get to the games easier.
 
2012-09-14 09:15:24 AM
Just imagine what would happen to the local economy if the team left. How many ancillary businesses would go under, leading to even higher unemployment and an even smaller tax base?
 
2012-09-14 09:15:36 AM
They suckered Tampa into something like that awhile back and now we can't even watch the games at local sports bars.
 
2012-09-14 09:18:22 AM
We got a couple hundred million from FEMA to renovate the Superdome after Katrina.
 
2012-09-14 09:19:26 AM
No city should ever pay for a sport team's stadium, especially not a major franchise. It's utterly ridiculous they can't do it themselves, they make insane amounts of money.
 
2012-09-14 09:20:27 AM
"At some point you've got to start planning for the future. Do you build it when the roof caves in?" asked state Rep. Rashad Taylor, D- Atlanta.

Wow, what a moron. Those stadiums are designed to last 50+ years. Yes they require annual upkeep, but no the roof is not going to cave in on a 20 year-old stadium.

Sounds like a negotiation is best to either lower the cost of a new stadium (do you REALLY need a retractable roof?) or budget it out to save the money for the stadium over the next several years. There's also the option to do what's called a build-finance, which means that the contractor who builds the stadium foots the entire cost upfront, and then gets a lumpsum when all is said and done. This increases the cost overall (because they must bring in banks to back them, and those banks require interest on their investment), but it allows construction to begin sooner and gives the city a few years to come up with the funds.
 
2012-09-14 09:21:54 AM

Lost Thought 00: Just imagine what would happen to the local economy if the team left. How many ancillary businesses would go under, leading to even higher unemployment and an even smaller tax base?


That's entirely true - Cleveland businesses suffered tremendously during the three years the Browns were AFK. The problem, I suppose, is how often teams should be able to go to a city and say "time for a new playground or we leave town"

It will never happen but the league should adopt some sort of guideline - 30 years perhaps. If a billionaire owner wants to build a new stadium entirely on his dime every 10 years then go for it. Any stadium lease agreement should include forfeiture of the team if you try to leave before the lease is up.
 
2012-09-14 09:24:41 AM

Nofun: "At some point you've got to start planning for the future. Do you build it when the roof caves in?" asked state Rep. Rashad Taylor, D- Atlanta.


Minnesota: "Pretty much."
 
2012-09-14 09:25:34 AM

Nofun: "At some point you've got to start planning for the future. Do you build it when the roof caves in?" asked state Rep. Rashad Taylor, D- Atlanta.

Wow, what a moron. Those stadiums are designed to last 50+ years. Yes they require annual upkeep, but no the roof is not going to cave in on a 20 year-old stadium.

Sounds like a negotiation is best to either lower the cost of a new stadium (do you REALLY need a retractable roof?) or budget it out to save the money for the stadium over the next several years. There's also the option to do what's called a build-finance, which means that the contractor who builds the stadium foots the entire cost upfront, and then gets a lumpsum when all is said and done. This increases the cost overall (because they must bring in banks to back them, and those banks require interest on their investment), but it allows construction to begin sooner and gives the city a few years to come up with the funds.


Taylor also said "We've lost a WNBA team". Somehow I don't think that's because the Georgia Dome isn't big enough or spiffy enough to keep them.
 
2012-09-14 09:27:36 AM

Nabb1: We got a couple hundred million from FEMA to renovate the Superdome after Katrina.


Are you suggesting the Falcons hold a fundraiser where people pay $5 to shiat on the Falcons and/or help in the destruction of their current stadium? Because I think that's a brilliant idea.
 
2012-09-14 09:28:10 AM
Is it really always necessary to build new stadiums? Are renovations just that impractical? My house was built in the 1940s...but god forbid an professional sports team plays in a building that's more than 15 years old anymore. Yes, I love sports, I watch them regularly. But it's ridiculous for sports teams to threaten to jump ship every time a city doesn't bow down and give into their demands for bigger, better buildings.

/I know that the Falcons haven't made this threat, but it will probably come up now
//everything has to be a show these days
 
2012-09-14 09:31:14 AM
The Falcons have only had 14 winning seasons in their 45 year history, and the four in a row winning season streak that they are currently on is their best ever. They are the Atlanta Falcons, the south's version of the Cleveland Browns, so these winning times will not last. They will be back to being the doormats of the NFC south in short order. So one can see why they would want to make a pitch for a new stadium now.
 
2012-09-14 09:31:22 AM
Public funds should translate into immediate equity in the team, with the team having an option to buy that equity out at any point. With the cash the NFL and to a lesser degree other leagues bring in there's absolutely no reason they shouldn't be building their own stadiums.
 
2012-09-14 09:31:49 AM
These requests always astound me why should ANY tax money got towards builiding a new sports stadium. If they want a new stadium let the multi million dollar franchise pay for it.
 
2012-09-14 09:32:12 AM

bulldg4life: $5 says the representative from Johns Creek would change his tone if the stadium was moved to the north side of Atlanta. Not close enough to bring the riff-raff all the way up 400/141....but just close enough that the important people could get to the games easier.


There's an empty Ford plant at Spaghetti Junction that would be the perfect place for the new stadium. They should talk to those people

/yes, I know what they already said
 
2012-09-14 09:32:49 AM

Tickle Mittens: Public funds should translate into immediate equity in the team, with the team having an option to buy that equity out at any point. With the cash the NFL and to a lesser degree other leagues bring in there's absolutely no reason they shouldn't be building their own stadiums.


While I think this is possibly a great idea, I'd worry the team would go in the red as a result. NFL teams barely turn a profit the way it is.
 
2012-09-14 09:33:10 AM
Isn't Atlanta the city that has residents incorporating to keep from paying local taxes? Have those assholes fund the new stadium.
 
2012-09-14 09:33:27 AM

bborchar: Is it really always necessary to build new stadiums? Are renovations just that impractical? My house was built in the 1940s...but god forbid an professional sports team plays in a building that's more than 15 years old anymore. Yes, I love sports, I watch them regularly. But it's ridiculous for sports teams to threaten to jump ship every time a city doesn't bow down and give into their demands for bigger, better buildings.

/I know that the Falcons haven't made this threat, but it will probably come up now
//everything has to be a show these days



It's generally cheaper to build from scratch than it is to conduct major renovations. I know it sounds strange, but depending on the scope of the renovations, it's true. It cost the Packers almost $300 million to renovate Lambeau field, adding about 12,000 seats.
 
2012-09-14 09:34:11 AM

varmitydog: The Falcons have only had 14 winning seasons in their 45 year history, and the four in a row winning season streak that they are currently on is their only best ever. They are the Atlanta Falcons, the south's version of the Cleveland Browns, so these winning times will not last. They will be back to being the doormats of the NFC south in short order. So one can see why they would want to make a pitch for a new stadium now.

 

fify
 
2012-09-14 09:34:21 AM

Lost Thought 00: Just imagine what would happen to the local economy if the team left. How many ancillary businesses would go under, leading to even higher unemployment and an even smaller tax base?


Umm, absolutely nothing. Seriously, if your business model is based around the performance of a sports team over which you have absolutely no control, then you deserve to go out of business.
 
2012-09-14 09:35:02 AM

Lost Thought 00: Just imagine what would happen to the local economy if the team left. How many ancillary businesses would go under, leading to even higher unemployment and an even smaller tax base?


none?
 
2012-09-14 09:35:20 AM
FTA: "We've lost a WNBA team..."

That's where I stopped. Losing a WNBA team is like losing your favorite pair of socks. Yeah, you liked those socks. They were warm, comfortable, and never let you down. But then they developed holes in the toe and you had to throw them away. Did you mourn? Perhaps for a second...then you went to Target and bought a 6-pack of brand new socks. Your life didn't change. You just moved on.

Same with a WNBA team. Except you don't go to Target to pick up a new one...you just move on. And don't get me started about the hockey team. They failed on that in the 70s...what made them think they could have success with it in the 2000s?
 
2012-09-14 09:35:57 AM

bborchar: Is it really always necessary to build new stadiums? Are renovations just that impractical? My house was built in the 1940s...but god forbid an professional sports team plays in a building that's more than 15 years old anymore. Yes, I love sports, I watch them regularly. But it's ridiculous for sports teams to threaten to jump ship every time a city doesn't bow down and give into their demands for bigger, better buildings.

/I know that the Falcons haven't made this threat, but it will probably come up now
//everything has to be a show these days


It's all about getting the mighty super bowl in town. Goodell (see: dick) said Atlanta will never get another super bowl unless we build a new stadium.
 
2012-09-14 09:36:20 AM

GAT_00: No city should ever pay for a sport team's stadium, especially not a major franchise. It's utterly ridiculous they can't do it themselves, they make insane amounts of money.


I was debating this on Facebook with another TFer just yesterday, but it was about hockey arenas not football stadiums.

As a guy who works in municipal government finance, forking over hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to professional sports franchises instead of spending money on infrastructure or community-based improvements fails every merit test I can possibly think of.

Not that there isn't some benefit to it, there is, but it is vastly overshadowed by almost any other use of that money.
 
2012-09-14 09:36:33 AM

Nofun: It's generally cheaper to build from scratch than it is to conduct major renovations. I know it sounds strange, but depending on the scope of the renovations, it's true. It cost the Packers almost $300 million to renovate Lambeau field, adding about 12,000 seats.


To be accurate, you can fit 48,000 non-Packers fan seats in the same space as 12,000 Packers fan seats.
 
2012-09-14 09:37:22 AM

Nofun: but no the roof is not going to cave in on a 20 year-old stadium.


To be fair, the roof at the metrodome collapsed after 20-30 years. And, the roof at the dome did suffer damage after a tornado a few years ago.

KingKauff: There's an empty Ford plant at Spaghetti Junction that would be the perfect place for the new stadium. They should talk to those people


That's been thrown around for years. Especially since it is so close to a marta line. I believe it first came up when Atlanta wanted to bid for the World Cup, that would be the stadium for the major games. However, I believe it needed to be open air and the Falcons wanted retractable roof.
 
2012-09-14 09:38:00 AM
Arthur Blank is worth $1.3 Billion.
The Falcons are worth around $500 Million
They have the money. And Blank could secure loans and other investors to pay for it.

If the city does pay for a third of it, the city should be entitled to a third of all profits.
 
2012-09-14 09:38:07 AM

KingKauff: Spag


As if traffic around 85/285 isn't bad already.

/also, GM plant
 
2012-09-14 09:38:22 AM
The tricky issue is that often these venues are owned by the local or state government and then the team leases them. In turn, the city/state may draw revenue from event from various streams. I know that the Superdome hosts college football games, concerts and other events year round. The Georgia Dome hosts college games, and probably a lot of other events as well. I think there are situations where it makes sense for the city to invest in a venue if there is a return on the investment for the long term. That's not to say they should foot the bill for the entire thing, but in some cases there are valid reasons why a city might invest in a new stadium.
 
2012-09-14 09:38:53 AM

Snuffybud: Taylor also said "We've lost a WNBA team". Somehow I don't think that's because the Georgia Dome isn't big enough or spiffy enough to keep them.


Cubs300: FTA: "We've lost a WNBA team..."

That's where I stopped. Losing a WNBA team is like losing your favorite pair of socks. Yeah, you liked those socks. They were warm, comfortable, and never let you down. But then they developed holes in the toe and you had to throw them away. Did you mourn? Perhaps for a second...then you went to Target and bought a 6-pack of brand new socks. Your life didn't change. You just moved on.

Same with a WNBA team. Except you don't go to Target to pick up a new one...you just move on. And don't get me started about the hockey team. They failed on that in the 70s...what made them think they could have success with it in the 2000s?


You guys wanna know the funny thing?

Rep. Taylor apparently can't tell the difference between womens basketball and ice hockey.
 
2012-09-14 09:40:09 AM

GAT_00: No city should ever pay for a sport team's stadium, especially not a major franchise. It's utterly ridiculous they can't do it themselves, they make insane amounts of money.


Um... no it's supply and demand. If another is willing to foot the bill, then that's their right to do so. The Falcons can't force anyone to pay for their stadium, but cities will make offers to contribute X% to try an entice them. Sports team do have a positive effect on a city's economy, but there's a point where the investment won't pay off.
 
2012-09-14 09:40:24 AM
While there may be fan loyalty, there is no owner loyalty to the fans or the city(and area outside it where most of the paying customers live). Except for Ted Turner when he had the Braves. Good ole Arthur would probably move them in a heartbeat for another buck. Everyone I know thinks the current stadium is fine. The money should go somewhere else, like fixing Atlanta's crumbling infrastructure or education. Of course most people I know can't afford to go to the games anyways.
 
2012-09-14 09:40:32 AM

H0llyw00d: bborchar: Is it really always necessary to build new stadiums? Are renovations just that impractical? My house was built in the 1940s...but god forbid an professional sports team plays in a building that's more than 15 years old anymore. Yes, I love sports, I watch them regularly. But it's ridiculous for sports teams to threaten to jump ship every time a city doesn't bow down and give into their demands for bigger, better buildings.

/I know that the Falcons haven't made this threat, but it will probably come up now
//everything has to be a show these days

Whats wrong with the Georgiadome for super bowls? It seems huge on TV, just what you'd want.
It's all about getting the mighty super bowl in town. Goodell (see: dick) said Atlanta will never get another super bowl unless we build a new stadium.

 
2012-09-14 09:40:37 AM

H0llyw00d: It's all about getting the mighty super bowl in town. Goodell (see: dick) said Atlanta will never get another super bowl unless we build a new stadium.


They're going to want the NCAA championship game when the playoffs start, too.

And, of course, if they get rid of the dome, then there needs to be an enclosed stadium for the NCAA Final Four.
 
2012-09-14 09:40:55 AM

digistil: Tickle Mittens: Public funds should translate into immediate equity in the team, with the team having an option to buy that equity out at any point. With the cash the NFL and to a lesser degree other leagues bring in there's absolutely no reason they shouldn't be building their own stadiums.

While I think this is possibly a great idea, I'd worry the team would go in the red as a result. NFL teams barely turn a profit the way it is.


lolWUT!?!?!?!
 
2012-09-14 09:41:14 AM
Now, without quotefail:

Whats wrong with the Georgiadome for super bowls? It seems huge on TV, just what you'd want.
It's all about getting the mighty super bowl in town. Goodell (see: dick) said Atlanta will never get another super bowl unless we build a new stadium.
 
2012-09-14 09:42:09 AM

bulldg4life: Nofun: but no the roof is not going to cave in on a 20 year-old stadium.

To be fair, the roof at the metrodome collapsed after 20-30 years. And, the roof at the dome did suffer damage after a tornado a few years ago.


"Acts of God" are different than "creep failure."
 
2012-09-14 09:42:14 AM
Still quotefail. Off to read me some wiki and stfu
 
2012-09-14 09:42:16 AM

H0llyw00d: KingKauff: Spag

As if traffic around 85/285 isn't bad already.

/also, GM plant


I got confused with Hapeville for some reason 0-o
 
2012-09-14 09:42:38 AM
As an Atlanta fan, I'm all for any stadium outside of the city.
 
2012-09-14 09:44:23 AM

Generation_D: Whats wrong with the Georgiadome for super bowls? It seems huge on TV, just what you'd want.


It's pretty damn huge. 70,000 seats for football if memory serves. I don't see why they're snubbing their noses at it.
 
2012-09-14 09:45:51 AM

digistil: Tickle Mittens: Public funds should translate into immediate equity in the team, with the team having an option to buy that equity out at any point. With the cash the NFL and to a lesser degree other leagues bring in there's absolutely no reason they shouldn't be building their own stadiums.

While I think this is possibly a great idea, I'd worry the team would go in the red as a result. NFL teams barely turn a profit the way it is.


That's because many teams are undercapitalized, greatly so in some cases, or they're in vanishing markets. If the community would like to take over the team using that equity, well it's worked out once, and if it doesn't work out again, the NFL could no doubt broker a sale filling a local communities coffers. Each of the 32 teams get 280 million in TV revenue alone. The league is only now exploring online options with streaming, coaches film, for pay fantasy leagues, etc. They only need to find about a billion a year to finance stadium construction within the organization. It's not difficult to imagine that they could find that money if they had to. Frankly, there is more than enough money in play, take away their grossly inappropraite subsidies and let the market set the prices of their costs correctly.
 
2012-09-14 09:47:40 AM
They cant fill the stadium they have now.
Move that shiat heap of a team to Los Angeles
 
2012-09-14 09:48:46 AM

Nofun: GAT_00: No city should ever pay for a sport team's stadium, especially not a major franchise. It's utterly ridiculous they can't do it themselves, they make insane amounts of money.

Um... no it's supply and demand. If another is willing to foot the bill, then that's their right to do so. The Falcons can't force anyone to pay for their stadium, but cities will make offers to contribute X% to try an entice them. Sports team do have a positive effect on a city's economy, but there's a point where the investment won't pay off.


And the Falcons will make less money moving to basically any other city because any place that needs a team is smaller than Atlanta. It's an idle threat. No successful team will leave a city.
 
2012-09-14 09:48:56 AM

Kyro: It's pretty damn huge. 70,000 seats for football if memory serves. I don't see why they're snubbing their noses at it.


I'm thinking it is a location thing. You have to walk a reasonable distance around Philips Arena or the World Congress Center to get there. And, the parking/traffic isn't great.

Also, of course, the stadium is all the way in downtown. The Falcons would really like it if the stadium was closer to the north-Metro Atlanta burbs. Re: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
 
2012-09-14 09:52:06 AM

GAT_00: And the Falcons will make less money moving to basically any other city because any place that needs a team is smaller than Atlanta.


Los Angeles is smaller than Atlanta. Who knew?
 
2012-09-14 09:55:29 AM

Kyro: Generation_D: Whats wrong with the Georgiadome for super bowls? It seems huge on TV, just what you'd want.

It's pretty damn huge. 70,000 seats for football if memory serves. I don't see why they're snubbing their noses at it.


It's probably not as "techy" as other stadiums.

Or there aren't enough suites or something.
 
2012-09-14 09:57:25 AM

Nabb1: GAT_00: And the Falcons will make less money moving to basically any other city because any place that needs a team is smaller than Atlanta.

Los Angeles is smaller than Atlanta. Who knew?


Unless someone with more money than god comes along and rams something thru, any proposed L.A. stadium would be tied up for years as every corrupt politico and developer in SoCal fights over a piece of the pie.
 
2012-09-14 09:59:55 AM

GAT_00: No city should ever pay for a sport team's stadium, especially not a major franchise. It's utterly ridiculous they can't do it themselves, they make insane amounts of money.


This is probably one of the few issues we can agree on. Public funding of sports stadiums - especially football domes that go unused most weeks out of the year - is stupid.
 
Displayed 50 of 102 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report