Royals' fans just don't get it... - Page 2

htismaqe · 10-21-2005, 02:18 PM

So says Kevin Keitzman.

I listened to him interview David Glass.

I listened to David Glass dodge and weave and stumble. He sure failed to know some key details.

I listened to caller after caller say that Glass sounded clueless.

And then I listened to an obviously elated Kevin Keitzman tell his callers that he's the only one who "gets it". While everybody else heard incompetence, KK heard Glass "firing shots across the bow" of Jackson County. KK heard Glass issuing an ultimatum to the Sports Authority regarding rennovations on the stadium. He considered it a "victory".

Every employer I've ever worked for had rules against conflicts of interest. They have rules against using your job position or status to advance the agenda of unrelated business, religious, or political agendas.

It's obvious to me that Keitzman's interest in this goes far beyond his role as a sports commentator. It's time for somebody to call him out.

tyton75 · 10-21-2005, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HemiEd

That is only the beginning, KC does not have the transportation abilities to the game at a downtown facility.
I used to bring my family with young daughters to Royals Stadium and had no worries, I would not feel that way going to down town KC.
Parking? If you have ever been to a Cubs game at Wrigley, it is a deterent for me.

Thats a reasonable argument.. and thats about the only negative thing I can see to moving downtown.. but I also think that the benefit to the city would outweigh that perspective

and I don't know if you have seen the Truman Sports overlay on downtown, but I know it suprised me in comparison..

walking 10blocks to the game is about as far as I would walk at the K; although I have to think there would be deals worked out with current garages downtown and parking locations.

tyton75 · 10-21-2005, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poster Nutbag

100 losses in an old stadium or 100 losses in a new stadium- how's a new location going to change anything? Frankly, I can't understand how anyone in their right mind would give the Royals 5 bucks when they clearly don't know what they hell they are doing and are incapable of putting anything other than a crappy-ass product on the field.

MLB is screwed up and those involved don't deserve the sweat off my balls, let alone taxpayers' money. Damn I'm glad I don't live in KCMO.

Jackson County already owes them something in the ballpark of 220million dollars that are going to be spend either way.... and who do you think is going to be paying it..

I would rather spend a little more and build a brand new stadium in a location that can stimulate downtowns' economy and be a fun destination, with plenty of things to do around the stadium.. thats just me though

Seek · 10-21-2005, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyton75

Whatever his motivation.. he puts forth sound arguments for a downtown stadium.. and I really can't find one fault with his logic

Here is a fault. Putting it down town is supposed to bring revenue to Bars and eating establishments down town. Which is supposed to add business interest. Okay fine. How many families life in lofts downtown. I am married, have a kid. that type of lifestyle is not for me. I don't care for the bar hoping scene after or before a game.

They are trying to make down town a place for bachelors, parties high dollar lofts, without TAXES. That is nothing positive to me. And if I had a job downtown I certainly wouldn't want to deal with the game traffic, in the crappy roads of downtown.

Lets see how the Sprint arena works before we go wasting a perfect stadium for a down town one, for an inadequate product.

I think Kaufman is a great place to visit. I certainly love having a parking lot, and the roads are suited for the traffic. There is nothing wrong with kaufman other than it takes up valuable tail gate parking for the Chiefs game.

ChiefsCountry · 10-21-2005, 03:00 PM

Go to that downtownstadium.com site and look at the South Loop site. They haven't pimped it too much but man if we had a new stadium there, its right across from KC Live! and Sprint Center and next to Bartle Hall and new Performing Arts Center. That could be something KC would be really proud of.

**gblowfish** · 10-21-2005, 03:04 PM

I have a friend who's a baseball writer in Chicago. He's against public taxation for downtown ballparks. His 10 reasons in a nutshell:

1) The economic benefits wear off quickly. Look at Toronto Skydome, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Seattle. All new ballparks, none of those teams have sniffed the world series, and their attendance is down. A new ballpark does not tip the competitive balance as long as the Yankees are spending $200 mill a year on players and everyone else is spending $50 mill to $100 mill. If you spend the $, you may not get into the playoffs, but you sure as hell won't get in if you don't spend the money. Even with a new stadium, the Royals will still be $100 to $125 million behind the biggest spenders. Stadiums can't fix that problem, baseball has to level the playing field.

2) In some areas, the development is only within a block or two of the new ballpark (Cleveland, Detroit) and some of those new businesses have already failed. If the ballclub doesn't win, development is stunted.

3) Most revenue generated by downtown ballparks are at the expense of other areas of the city. If new restaurants, bars and shops open around the ballpark, those dollars flow laterally from the surrounding communities where it would have been spent. If a guy buys dinner and a beer at the 810 zone downtown, chances are he would have bought that anyway at the 810 zone in Leawood.

4) Other cities have built stadiums without sucking on the taxpayer's tit. See the SF Giants stadium, all built with private funds. It can be done without the approval of taxpayers.

5) Cities with downtown stadiums already have serious parking and transpo issues. Some lament not building with more parking lot space. That's why the Truman Sports Complex was built where it was built, to make it easy to get in, get out, and park. The stadium it replaced (Municipal Stadium) was at 18th and Brooklyn, just up the hill from the 18th and Vine district just east of downtown.

6) Kansas City is a bedroom community and has never has a truly cosmopolitan center like Chicago, NY or Boston. Most fans are going to come from the suburbs, and don't care about downtown as a destination. They want to go to a ballgame and go home. And although tourists and young people like bars and action, the vast majority of fans are family people who are only there to see the game, and then go home afterwards.

7) Downtown KC will already have an entertainment district and the new Sprint Arena to spur downtown development. A baseball stadium would be redundant. The stimulus for downtown is already there with these other projects.

8) Tourists don't care about KC baseball. They have casinos, Westport, The Plaza, etc. As long as the Royals suck, even if they are downtown, they won't be an attraction. Other activities will hold more enjoyment.

9) KC has no rapid transit system like other cities where downtown ballparks work. St. Louis, Seattle, Atlanta, Boston, NYC, Chicago, all have rapid transit systems. KC's bus system is antiquated, doesn't go enough places, and is too hard to figure out.

10) Royals can't fill Kauffman now. It's also one of the most beautiful and fan friendly stadiums in the majors. If you can't sell out Kauffman except for opening day and the Cardinal series, a new stadium will be just as empty.

htismaqe · 10-21-2005, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief99

Most of the Negative people are just country folk that don't like anything about cities.

tyton75 · 10-21-2005, 03:11 PM

Look, I'm definitely not one for higher taxes.. but the money is already going to be spent on renovations of a very old facility..

all I'm saying is, spend a little more, and move to an area where it has a chance to do more good for the city... either that... or default on the lease altogether and see where the Royals end up

Eleazar · 10-21-2005, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyton75

Look, I'm definitely not one for higher taxes.. but the money is already going to be spent on renovations of a very old facility..

all I'm saying is, spend a little more, and move to an area where it has a chance to do more good for the city... either that... or default on the lease altogether and see where the Royals end up

THAT I agree with. I'm not big on the downtown stadium idea, but if such a big pile of money is already going to be spent, why not just add a little bit more and get a state of the art facility instead of propping up one that's really going to be showing its age in 10 or 20 years?

**dirk digler** · 10-21-2005, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cochise

Any link?

I'm not saying you're wrong, it's just that all I ever hear is heresay. Where did you come across this info?

I've just never heard any of it from a reputable source, is all.

Are you saying Keg isn't reputable?

I have heard him say on the radio he owns property downtown but he didn't say where obviously.

Eleazar · 10-21-2005, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirk digler

Are you saying Keg isn't reputable?

I have heard him say on the radio he owns property downtown but he didn't say where obviously.

No, I'm not. I just mean that I hear everyone say he's pushing it to make himself rich, but it's always "that's just what I heard".

I got no love for KK, but it also sounds like it could be a bit of an urban legend to me.

keg in kc · 10-21-2005, 03:48 PM

I'd say keg isn't reputable.

I don't believe it's just an urban legend, however.

And the only real problem I have with Kietzman doing it's that it's not really interesting radio to me. He's not educating anybody, or providing any sort of useful information or argument/counter-argument. As I said earlier, he's just preaching from his pulpit. And I'm not any more interested in hearing that kind of thing on the radio than I am in a church.

And now I really am leaving for work. Procastinating bitch.

htismaqe · 10-21-2005, 03:54 PM

I'm neither for nor against a downtown stadium. Hell, I don't live in KC.

I'd prefer to see them do as much as they can without taxpayer money, and I'm definitely in favor of building new vs. rennovating when the costs are similar.

But that's not the question.

The question is whether Keitzman has ulterior motives that would explain why he BENDS AND MANIPULATES every conversation on the subject to fit his agenda.

**petegz28** · 10-21-2005, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyton75

I don't care if KK makes a truckload of money from a downtown stadium...

it STILL makes more sense to build a new freaking stadium for a little bit more money, the renovating an already outmoded stadium, (even though its beautiful)

And stick the same shitty team on a brand new field???? WHY?

Peopel will sit in an old, busted down toilet bowl that everyone seems to make Kauffman out to be if we have a winning team on the field!

beavis · 10-21-2005, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

The question is whether Keitzman has ulterior motives that would explain why he BENDS AND MANIPULATES every conversation on the subject to fit his agenda.

Well very obviously, the survival of the Royals is essential to his business. If the Royals up and moved, there'd be a big gap from the end of the NCAA Tourney, until the start of training camp where he'd have nothing to talk about. If the Royals earn a few extra bucks and become competitive, all the better for him. That's the obvious answer.

What I don't understand is his insistence on driving it into the ground. I haven't listened to him for more than two minutes in the last three months, and caught just the last few seconds of the interview, the man is a raving lunatic. He's trying to trump up all these polls, and petitions to prove his point, but I could show you a petition of 3,000 people for just about anything you can think of.

Do us all a favor, turn the radio off. Kill his ratings, and maybe, someday, he will go away.

Sully · 10-21-2005, 04:08 PM

KK was so hilarious about this today. Glass obviously didn't make his opinion known. He sounded fairly "out of the loop" and close to just plain dumb at points. But Kevin wants so hard to believe in the downtown thing that he turn all the "I dunnos" into secret code for "Build me a new stadium."
I'm not against a downtown ballpark, but Kev was an ass today.

10-21-2005, 02:18 PM
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $10269900	Royals' fans just don't get it... So says Kevin Keitzman. I listened to him interview David Glass. I listened to David Glass dodge and weave and stumble. He sure failed to know some key details. I listened to caller after caller say that Glass sounded clueless. And then I listened to an obviously elated Kevin Keitzman tell his callers that he's the only one who "gets it". While everybody else heard incompetence, KK heard Glass "firing shots across the bow" of Jackson County. KK heard Glass issuing an ultimatum to the Sports Authority regarding rennovations on the stadium. He considered it a "victory". Every employer I've ever worked for had rules against conflicts of interest. They have rules against using your job position or status to advance the agenda of unrelated business, religious, or political agendas. It's obvious to me that Keitzman's interest in this goes far beyond his role as a sports commentator. It's time for somebody to call him out.
Posts: 100,022

10-21-2005, 03:00 PM	#19
ChiefsCountry The Insider Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Lake of the Ozarks Casino cash: $2348752	Go to that downtownstadium.com site and look at the South Loop site. They haven't pimped it too much but man if we had a new stadium there, its right across from KC Live! and Sprint Center and next to Bartle Hall and new Performing Arts Center. That could be something KC would be really proud of.
Posts: 49,571

10-21-2005, 03:04 PM	#20
gblowfish Be Kind To Your Pets Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Glorious Independence, MO Casino cash: $17686178 VARSITY	I have a friend who's a baseball writer in Chicago. He's against public taxation for downtown ballparks. His 10 reasons in a nutshell: 1) The economic benefits wear off quickly. Look at Toronto Skydome, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Seattle. All new ballparks, none of those teams have sniffed the world series, and their attendance is down. A new ballpark does not tip the competitive balance as long as the Yankees are spending $200 mill a year on players and everyone else is spending $50 mill to $100 mill. If you spend the $, you may not get into the playoffs, but you sure as hell won't get in if you don't spend the money. Even with a new stadium, the Royals will still be $100 to $125 million behind the biggest spenders. Stadiums can't fix that problem, baseball has to level the playing field. 2) In some areas, the development is only within a block or two of the new ballpark (Cleveland, Detroit) and some of those new businesses have already failed. If the ballclub doesn't win, development is stunted. 3) Most revenue generated by downtown ballparks are at the expense of other areas of the city. If new restaurants, bars and shops open around the ballpark, those dollars flow laterally from the surrounding communities where it would have been spent. If a guy buys dinner and a beer at the 810 zone downtown, chances are he would have bought that anyway at the 810 zone in Leawood. 4) Other cities have built stadiums without sucking on the taxpayer's tit. See the SF Giants stadium, all built with private funds. It can be done without the approval of taxpayers. 5) Cities with downtown stadiums already have serious parking and transpo issues. Some lament not building with more parking lot space. That's why the Truman Sports Complex was built where it was built, to make it easy to get in, get out, and park. The stadium it replaced (Municipal Stadium) was at 18th and Brooklyn, just up the hill from the 18th and Vine district just east of downtown. 6) Kansas City is a bedroom community and has never has a truly cosmopolitan center like Chicago, NY or Boston. Most fans are going to come from the suburbs, and don't care about downtown as a destination. They want to go to a ballgame and go home. And although tourists and young people like bars and action, the vast majority of fans are family people who are only there to see the game, and then go home afterwards. 7) Downtown KC will already have an entertainment district and the new Sprint Arena to spur downtown development. A baseball stadium would be redundant. The stimulus for downtown is already there with these other projects. 8) Tourists don't care about KC baseball. They have casinos, Westport, The Plaza, etc. As long as the Royals suck, even if they are downtown, they won't be an attraction. Other activities will hold more enjoyment. 9) KC has no rapid transit system like other cities where downtown ballparks work. St. Louis, Seattle, Atlanta, Boston, NYC, Chicago, all have rapid transit systems. KC's bus system is antiquated, doesn't go enough places, and is too hard to figure out. 10) Royals can't fill Kauffman now. It's also one of the most beautiful and fan friendly stadiums in the majors. If you can't sell out Kauffman except for opening day and the Cardinal series, a new stadium will be just as empty.
Posts: 40,830

10-21-2005, 03:11 PM	#22
tyton75 Veteran Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: KC North Casino cash: $5968386	Look, I'm definitely not one for higher taxes.. but the money is already going to be spent on renovations of a very old facility.. all I'm saying is, spend a little more, and move to an area where it has a chance to do more good for the city... either that... or default on the lease altogether and see where the Royals end up
Posts: 3,274

10-21-2005, 03:48 PM	#26
keg in kc oxymoron Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: OP/KC/Whatever Casino cash: $9556299	I'd say keg isn't reputable. I don't believe it's just an urban legend, however. And the only real problem I have with Kietzman doing it's that it's not really interesting radio to me. He's not educating anybody, or providing any sort of useful information or argument/counter-argument. As I said earlier, he's just preaching from his pulpit. And I'm not any more interested in hearing that kind of thing on the radio than I am in a church. And now I really am leaving for work. Procastinating bitch.
Posts: 58,682

10-21-2005, 03:54 PM	#27
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $10269900	I'm neither for nor against a downtown stadium. Hell, I don't live in KC. I'd prefer to see them do as much as they can without taxpayer money, and I'm definitely in favor of building new vs. rennovating when the costs are similar. But that's not the question. The question is whether Keitzman has ulterior motives that would explain why he BENDS AND MANIPULATES every conversation on the subject to fit his agenda.
Posts: 100,022

10-21-2005, 04:08 PM	#30
Sully It Goes On Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Lees Summit Casino cash: $10026331	KK was so hilarious about this today. Glass obviously didn't make his opinion known. He sounded fairly "out of the loop" and close to just plain dumb at points. But Kevin wants so hard to believe in the downtown thing that he turn all the "I dunnos" into secret code for "Build me a new stadium." I'm not against a downtown ballpark, but Kev was an ass today. __________________ "And I don't wish that girl any bad luck," he said, "but I hope she gets hit with a car." - Tommy Lasorda
Posts: 18,295