Originally Posted by Titty Meat (Post 17471690)

So I have a question for you and other folks on here who say new stadium in Kansas. A quick look at the numbers and if I'm wrong please correct me. The total Kansas 2023 budget was 9 billion, Kansas City's budget was 2 billion, Missouri's was 44 billion.

What would stop a new stadium being built in say Lee's Summit? If it comes down to money Kansas is out gunned by a wide margin

Originally Posted by srvy (Post 17471956)

I don't see how Jackson Countians will ever trust Shyster Sherman after all his dirty tricks trying to get this passed. He may move them or sell the team. I'd be all for that dudes a turd and have always been.

Originally Posted by ptlyon (Post 17471626)

What we got

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 17471679)

I love Arrowhead and the gameday experience. And I'm not a Jackson County taxpayer.

But I'm also realistic and Arrowhead is on borrowed time. That being the case, there's no sense in limping along here. The stadium was built in such a way that it just cannot continue to keep pace with other franchises through renovation. And if we are going to be (and should be) a crown jewel franchise for the next 10-15 years (and hell, we weren't dogfood before Mahomes), that's not tenable.

So I think I'm ready for a new stadium. And if that stadium is going to be done well, it's not going to be in Jackson County. So if that means a move to Wyandotte, I'll set my anti-Kansas bias aside because it's probably best for the Chiefs long-term.

So include me in the 'new stadium near the Legends' crowd. Or wherever it will need to go to get the kind of revenue that would make building a true state of the art stadium worthwhile for Hunt and the residents of wherever it's gonna go...

I expect that means a dome for a future SB or other events. And I hate that. So my compromise would be one where there are rules in place for when the roof can be used. I can't recall which stadium did that, but there's a baseball stadium somewhere that has it written into the lease that the roof cannot be closed on days where the weather is between X and Y degrees and there's no rain.

Would I miss the snow games? Yeah. Would I miss rain and frigid cold? No, not really. And again, that's going to mean a hell of a lot more revenue and thus more willingness by Hunt to pull out some of the stops and make this a stadium worthy of replacing an icon.

What I don't want to see is what the Cardinals did in STL. They tore down Busch II and replaced it with a generic retro ballpark that just isn't special in any way because they did it on the cheap. Man I'd hate to see that (and I worry that's what's in store for Kaufman, which is just an incredible place to catch a baseball game to this day. They're going to replace it with something that isn't as good)

Originally Posted by kcbubb (Post 17471950)

I don’t think the ballys site is large enough? Could wheeler airport be relocated? Lots of land there?

Originally Posted by notorious (Post 17471917)

And they are used 365 days a year.

Originally Posted by srvy (Post 17471972)

I doubt the city would want to do that. That airports gets a lot of traffic with commuter and executive airlines.

One place I find interesting is that shithole Harlem. Its on the North side Missouri River between the New Buck O'Neil Bridge and Heart of America Bridge. It has an excellent view of downtown and is still KCMo. It may still be Jackson County because of the river channel change for Municipal Airport.

<iframe src="https://www.google.com/maps/embed?pb=!1m18!1m12!1m3!1d17090.97187156563!2d-94.58274188451863!3d39.1127714404584!2m3!1f0!2f0!3f0!3m2!1i1024!2i768!4f13.1!3m3!1m2!1s0x87c0f0eda25 1ac33%3A0x7ebc6df1d0a1aa20!2sHarlem%2C%20Kansas%20City%2C%20MO%2064116!5e1!3m2!1sen!2sus!4v171233047 9030!5m2!1sen!2sus" width="600" height="450" style="border:0;" allowfullscreen="" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer-when-downgrade"></iframe>

Originally Posted by srvy (Post 17471972)

I doubt the city would want to do that. That airports gets a lot of traffic with commuter and executive airlines.

One place I find interesting is that shithole Harlem. Its on the North side Missouri River between the New Buck O'Neil Bridge and Heart of America Bridge. It has an excellent view of downtown and is still KCMo. It may still be Jackson County because of the river channel change for Municipal Airport.

<iframe src="https://www.google.com/maps/embed?pb=!1m18!1m12!1m3!1d17090.97187156563!2d-94.58274188451863!3d39.1127714404584!2m3!1f0!2f0!3f0!3m2!1i1024!2i768!4f13.1!3m3!1m2!1s0x87c0f0eda25 1ac33%3A0x7ebc6df1d0a1aa20!2sHarlem%2C%20Kansas%20City%2C%20MO%2064116!5e1!3m2!1sen!2sus!4v171233047 9030!5m2!1sen!2sus" width="600" height="450" style="border:0;" allowfullscreen="" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer-when-downgrade"></iframe>

Originally Posted by wazu (Post 17471913)

"NOTHING" (Except keep in tact the greatest home field advantage in all of sports and an iconic, historic venue.)

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 17472012)

Interesting idea, Hoover. Has it actually been floated at all?

Maybe if you give Clark a free hand with the land in the area (and take the Royals out of there so that he can build that sort of entertainment district where they're sitting) he'll convince himself that he can manage what city leaders have failed at for so long.

It really is just a question of making the investment worthwhile for him. If he thinks it can be done in a way that allows them to stay in Jackson County, I suspect Arrowhead is still being replaced, but he'd probably be happy to do so and build a new stadium if it the investment can be recovered.

And for that to be the case I think you're right - it's gotta be his land. Jackson County would still benefit hugely by the tax revenues (sales tax in addition to property). Though without the Chiefs, what's the actual value of that land anyway?

Originally Posted by kcbubb (Post 17472015)

I think you’d need more land than that. If MO added a casino, you’d have room the royals and a casino at the airport. Take a look at this map. You can see the size of arrowhead in red relative to the wheeler airport in blue. If Kansas wanted to make a run, maybe next to the power plant where the pin is located. It could be cool to get a ferry to the game like Disney where they transport people via boat from downtown but the boats would have to be much bigger.

Originally Posted by Woogieman (Post 17471985)

I was just looking at that area...move Wheeler to the big field where the Arabian Steam Boat was excavated (both are Flood Zones) across the river south of Parkville. Probably very expensive to build on flood plain, but at least it's out of Jackson Co.

Originally Posted by Hoover (Post 17472026)

Bingo.

If the Chiefs and Royals vacate its worthless IMO. I have not seen the idea floated anywhere, its just what I think would be best for all involved.

Originally Posted by srvy (Post 17472045)

Go look at the Royals proposed site in the crossroads then Harlem harlem is 2 to 3 times the size on Google Maps. The railroad cant be moved but you can go under or over. and more parking can be acquired in nearby NKC. By the way the street car is proposed to expand north down heart of America bridge then Burlington into the NKC district. That would be ideal for a satellite parking area or garage somewhere on the route that swings over to the ballpark.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 17472046)

Which begs the question - why would Clark see that as a massive benefit over putting it...anywhere?

"Here's 450 acres of land that's worth precisely ****-all if you leave..."

"Yeah, but I can get 500 acres of land that's worth a BUNCH in Wyandotte if I move..."

Just trying to view this as strictly assets at this point. The asset value of the land that Arrowhead is sitting on seems to be very little. I mean honestly I think you're looking at $10 million on the high side (warning: that came from my ass).

He could get $100 million in straight cash via a tax measure in Wyandotte. Giving him a $10 million parcel of land in what would become an industrial park without him seems like a drop in the bucket.

Originally Posted by Hoover (Post 17472060)

Because it has value to him.

Perfect location. Huge. All the infrastructure is built.

Building something from scratch isn't easy or cheap. Plus improving Truman would have different timeline. He could build new team facilities now. You can start building your entertainment district now. Once Kaufmann comes down you start construction of a new stadium (which you want while you still have Mahomes IMO).

Originally Posted by Gary Cooper (Post 17472080)

I want the Chiefs to stay at Arrowhead. Renovate if need be. Don't change the name. Make it like a soccer stadium in Europe or NCAA football stadium in the U.S. The most famous of those stadiums are older but have tons of history and great atmosphere. Modern stadiums are beautiful, but lack history, atmosphere and are just big mausoleums.

The Royals can move to Montreal, Nashville, Bogota, I could care less. They made the playoffs twice in 30 years! They're lucky they have fans remaining.

Originally Posted by bdj23 (Post 17472092)

Man i hate the way every new NFL stadium looks. Completely soulless altar to corporatism. I don't really know what Arrowhead needs, but I wish the Chiefs could just stay there forever.

As for the Royals, not really a fan so it's no concern to me. I like the K too, it's just not in a good baseball location. It was brutal in the 90s though, just concrete on top of concrete. It looked like it was built by the Soviets.

Originally Posted by Hoover (Post 17471970)

That answer just doesn't work. I understand that's how you feel and its legitimate, but from a team (ie business perspective) it just doesn't work that way.




This is a really good post.

Here is my my take on all of this.

1. The public has do decide if they want a piece of the action or not. I get the argument that the tax payer shouldn't have foot the bill for a new baseball stadium downtown when they love the existing one. And why are we building stadiums for rich owners anyway.

On the other hand, by not extending an existing tax that helps fund the stadiums, both teams will explore their options and they are going to do what's in their best financial interest. While I think the Chiefs are locked into the area, baseball is a different story, what if Oklahoma City really wants a baseball team? It wouldn't surprise me at all if they would bend over backwards to build a downtown stadium. Another option would be Nashville. Both of those cities would love to bring another sports franchise to their cities, and if I were them I'd be aggressive as hell. Going to either city makes sense for both the city and team.

2. As someone mentioned here the other day the Chiefs are now in a power position. If they did decided to leave the Truman Sports complex, people will rightly point to this vote as the reason why it didn't work.

If I'm the Chiefs, I can't justify sinking hundreds of millions of dollars into facilities that they public no longer wants to support and the team doesn't own. So the only option for the Truman Sports Complex is for the county to sell it to Hunt and the Chiefs. Its a great piece of property, but you are going to sell it for pennies on the dollar (like the Snead trade) because you are getting the Hunt family to permanently stay and invst there and in return you get to property tax revenue from the property.

The Chiefs owning the Truman Sports Complex allows them to totally reimagine it. I'm sure local governments would give the team some tax incentives (TIF) to help with the cost of redevelopment. You could also give the team a sales tax rebate which would allow them to keep a chunk of the sales tax generated on the grounds for period of time.

Such incentives would encourage the team to build a new stadium, build new state of the art facilities, and probably an entertainment district (Hotels, Restaurants, and Bars), which is what I want to see done.

Originally Posted by Gary Cooper (Post 17472115)

The opposing fans I've met enjoyed the Royals stadium. It's pretty and unique. I know that's true of many MLB stadiums.

I haven't heard anyone complain about it except for KC residents, and those complaints are always about location.

Originally Posted by Woogieman (Post 17471960)

Good thoughts...what we haven't seen yet is much from Mike Parson...I would expect the State of Missouri to step up and get involved with grants or muni bonds to calm down the Chiefs FO. The Latter Day Saints just released 2,000 acres for sale along 470. However, they would still have to deal with Jackson County (but maybe not Frank White, as there was a petition to sack him at the polling location!).

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88 (Post 17472179)

The Royals should really re-consider the downtown stadium concept.

This isn’t the 1990’s anymore… downtown isn’t filled with workers in offices who will be in close proximity to attend 81 home baseball games.

Originally Posted by Cooter Bailey (Post 17472212)

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 17472010)

In the Andy Reid era the Chiefs home record has been 66-24 vs. 62-27 on the road.

They're a little better at home than they are on the road, just as the average NFL team is.

You can tell yourself whatever you want, but that's an awfully tough sell to the people that actually have to foot that bill.

Originally Posted by wazu (Post 17472305)

Just doing a little quick research it looks to me like Arrowhead vs Road games is the following:

Chiefs at Arrowhead all-time winning pct: .603
Chiefs away games all-time winning pct: .461

That seems pretty crazy. We haven't always had Reid/Mahomes to make sure we just kick ass everywhere no matter what.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 17472371)

HFA has evened out across the league though. Historical HFA isn't terribly relevant. Modern history says it means less than ever.

A variety of reasons have been forwarded but ultimately that's just the way it seems to be trending.

Originally Posted by wazu (Post 17472157)

Kauffman is beautiful. It gets overshadowed a bit because in KC we have Arrowhead as a comparison point, but it's pretty incredible. I understand downtown as a better location because of impact to the surrounding community, but I'd be very pleasantly surprised if we build a new stadium and it is anywhere near the Kauffman experience.

Again, like Arrowhead, Kauffman shows no signs of needing replacement when you attend. Feels like everything has been upgraded and kept up-to-date. I guess we just have to trust that the concrete is about to disintegrate even though it looks fine to us laypeople.

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 17472154)

As for what I want in a stadium, here's my list.

1. Easily accessible via subway or light rail or other large scale people movers. Or even better (for me) walkable from hotels. Maybe even close to the airport, though I recognize that's a niche need for me.

2. Stuff to do before the game that's better than walking laps on the concourse. A team history museum is nice, but you need at least two hours of activity that's not static for repeat visitors. Per Post 105, it doesn't have to be in the stadium itself. It can be across the parking lot, and doesn't even need to be football-oriented if the private sector just wants to make a big mall/entertainment area within walking distance.

3. Big TVs in the concession areas. We're talking big TVs. Big ones.

4. Individual urinals. We live in the 21st century.

5. More leg room in the seats would be nice, though I recognize that's a tradeoff with visibility.

6. A little radiant heating in the concrete below the seats would be nice.

7. Unique and recognizable architecture. When you tune in on television, you instantly know it's Arrowhead.

I think that's my main list.

Originally Posted by comochiefsfan (Post 17472477)

I have yet to hear a single rational argument for why urinals are better than troughs in stadiums.

Shouldn't the point of a stadium bathroom to be to get as many people in and out as quickly as possible? Troughs are obviously far more efficient than urinals. Why would I want to spend more time away from my seat? Because troughs are icky?

WTF?

Originally Posted by New World Order (Post 17472481)

Eh, I value my privacy. I'm willing to wait a bit for that.

Originally Posted by comochiefsfan (Post 17472477)

I have yet to hear a single rational argument for why urinals are better than troughs in stadiums.

Shouldn't the point of a stadium bathroom to be to get as many people in and out as quickly as possible? Troughs are obviously far more efficient than urinals. Why would I want to spend more time away from my seat? Because troughs are icky?

WTF?

Originally Posted by comochiefsfan (Post 17472477)

I have yet to hear a single rational argument for why urinals are better than troughs in stadiums.

Shouldn't the point of a stadium bathroom to be to get as many people in and out as quickly as possible? Troughs are obviously far more efficient than urinals. Why would I want to spend more time away from my seat? Because troughs are icky?

WTF?

Originally Posted by comochiefsfan (Post 17472477)

I have yet to hear a single rational argument for why urinals are better than troughs in stadiums.

Shouldn't the point of a stadium bathroom to be to get as many people in and out as quickly as possible? Troughs are obviously far more efficient than urinals. Why would I want to spend more time away from my seat? Because troughs are icky?

WTF?

Originally Posted by comochiefsfan (Post 17472489)

Maybe it's just because I'm hanging 8 inches, but i've never felt insecure about someone else getting a glance of my schlong in a bathroom.

Originally Posted by Red Dawg (Post 17472570)

Are you sure it's not closet homosexuality? You like men looking at your dick.

Originally Posted by wazu (Post 17472563)

Arrowhead has individual urinals now and it seems to me like people get in and out of the restroom much faster than the days of the trough.

Can't do this anymore, though.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Xw3X_aEzohM?si=Sdweb8EbX0w5czJf" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88 (Post 17472179)

The Royals should really re-consider the downtown stadium concept.

This isn’t the 1990’s anymore… downtown isn’t filled with workers in offices who will be in close proximity to attend 81 home baseball games.

Originally Posted by Titty Meat (Post 17472815)

Yeah only 25k live downtown this ain't 1990 anymore!

Originally Posted by Mr. Plow (Post 17472676)

They have troughs up where my tickets are.

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88 (Post 17472840)

Compared to how many in Johnson County?

Or the Northland?

The calculus for a downtown stadium is people work nearby and are in close proximity to attend an 81 game home schedule.

Are people working in downtown office space in the same #s or at the same frequency as they were 20 years ago?

Originally Posted by wazu (Post 17472563)

Arrowhead has individual urinals now and it seems to me like people get in and out of the restroom much faster than the days of the trough.

Can't do this anymore, though.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Xw3X_aEzohM?si=Sdweb8EbX0w5czJf" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Originally Posted by displacedinMN (Post 17473168)

I am in philly, all stadiums together although sixers want to move downtown.

Cle has a lot together too.

Why would you want something where no one can park and tailgate?