Sports stadium roundtable on 38 the spot

[Eleazar]

Jack Harry, Kevin Keitzman, county sports figures debating the issue.

Kind of interesting so far if you can deal with the personalities clashing.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Cochise

I don't think it would be a bad idea at all to have a downtown ballpark. If it is $375 million to fix up the K or $400 million for a brand new downtown stadium, I say build the new one.

If the costs are close, then why not have it downtown for the benefits to the downtown area? But if they aren't close, there's no pressing need to replace the K.

I agree, if the costs are close they should spring for a new stadium. Rennovating now means rennovating again repeatedly in the future, just like Keg said.

However, for the Royals, it isn't close. They know that their best chance to get an upgrade is to attach themselves to the Chiefs...

And THAT is what really burns KK more than anything else.

[CHENZ A!]

Originally Posted by DomerNKC

do they have to call you personally to tell you that this is what they want? they are gonna pay for part of this plan ($25 million). they are gonna extend their lease to 2031. i mean really, they have not come right out and said that they are not gonna play in my back yard either but i see that they have put their money where their mouth is on this issue.

No, they don't need to call me pesonally, but a statement regarding the negatives of a new stadium in the paper or on TV or radio would due. Did they ever say publicly that playing in your back yard was a good idea? The fact that there are some people that think this bogus deal will keep them here for 25 yrs is comical, we will no doubt default on a lease of that length(we are in yr 16 of a 25 yr lease that we signed in 1990).

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I think the downtown stadium is a good idea despite kietzman. He does more harm than good for the cause, however, the self-serving, self-aggrandizing fuck.

And don't think for a second that personal financial and political gains don't fuel the other side, too. Self-interest abounds...

Exactly on all counts.

[redbrian]

Originally Posted by mcan

Frankly, I think that the Royals should move anywhere else. If they are sure that KC-Live and the Sprint Center are going to get people into downtown, then put the new ballpark there. Right now, the Royals just aren't going to be competitive unless they can start getting people in the seats.

If the Royals hadn't won a game all year, but THE K was around 119th and I-35, they would still put a ton of passing traffic in the seats. I'd go once a week, instead of twice a year... So would just about everybody I know.

Yeah, the stadiums are built very well, and if improvements were made, they would be really really really really cool...

But people still wouldn't show up because the damn thing is 45 minutes away from EVERYTHING. I'd rather build a shitty ballpark in a better location. The cool thing is, if we did it right, we could get a better ballpark AND a better location!

Hell I'm only 15min from Truman, downtown is only 5 to 10 away.
The only thing which will get the butts in the seats and keep them there is a winning club.

The only thing which will produce a winning club is an overhaul of the system.

There is going to be way to much to do downtown to put butts in the stadium for 3plus hours watching a suck ass game.

[DomerNKC]

Originally Posted by CHENZ A!

No, they don't need to call me pesonally, but a statement regarding the negatives of a new stadium in the paper or on TV or radio would due. Did they ever say publicly that playing in your back yard was a good idea? The fact that there are some people that think this bogus deal will keep them here for 25 yrs is comical, we will no doubt default on a lease of that length(we are in yr 16 of a 25 yr lease that we signed in 1990).

and we are defaulting on that lease right now, that is why we are redoing it. IF we do what we say we will do, the impetus is on us you might notice, they are contractually bound to stay here for 25 years. funny how if you cant understand things they are both bogus and comical. when entering a legal contract, if you dont hold up your end of the deal, you will pay for it.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by CHENZ A!

No, they don't need to call me pesonally, but a statement regarding the negatives of a new stadium in the paper or on TV or radio would due. Did they ever say publicly that playing in your back yard was a good idea? The fact that there are some people that think this bogus deal will keep them here for 25 yrs is comical, we will no doubt default on a lease of that length(we are in yr 16 of a 25 yr lease that we signed in 1990).

What the hell does that have to do with the Royals being on-board with the rennovation project?

[CHENZ A!]

Originally Posted by DomerNKC

and we are defaulting on that lease right now, that is why we are redoing it. IF we do what we say we will do, the impetus is on us you might notice, they are contractually bound to stay here for 25 years. funny how if you cant understand things they are both bogus and comical. when entering a legal contract, if you dont hold up your end of the deal, you will pay for it.

I guess I'm not sure what it is you think I don't understand. The reason why I brought up the fact that we are in yr 16 of 25 that we signed in '90 is to show how we've screwed this up before. I think it would be nice to have downtown baseball, but don't really care all that much, as I still love to go out to the K but believe this to be a bad deal. We would just be putting too much money into renovating old buildings and that doesn't seem smart to me. Also, why is it so necessary to sign this particular deal at a time when there is absolutely no threat of either team going anywhere? I'm not going to stop going out to the park, or stop being a fan regardless of what happens though.

[CHENZ A!]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

What the hell does that have to do with the Royals being on-board with the rennovation project?

absolutely nothing, has everything to do with the misconception that they don't want downtown baseball.

[mcan]

Originally Posted by DomerNKC

check out the numbers. if our attendance figures improved, is that gonna even cut in half the difference in the tv and radio rights?

Nope, there would still be that disadvantage (of living in a small market where the TV rights we get pale in comparison to the TV rights New York, Boston, etc... get).

BUT, that portion of the pie is at least partially cut up with revenue sharing. I believe it's 30% of the MLB TV pie gets shared equally among all the teams. Yeah, NY gets a bunch more than the Royals, but that's a crappy excuse to not try and fill up YOUR stadium and make money on your own...

[Ultra Peanut]

Why no pinch?