Quote:
Originally Posted by TwistedChief
Sorry, my issue is with his description of people in Chicago and his comparison to what the Chiefs might do. I’ll well aware of the SF transition which is obviously the closest comparison to what Chicago had planned to do.
I would like the Chiefs to stay at Arrowhead. Very, very badly. But if the economics don’t work and they get a better offer elsewhere, then it is what it is. Build a new awesome stadium and start new traditions. But I’m fairly confident the Kansas proposal is a lot of smoke and mirrors offered by people who don’t understand or care about the economics and just want to be the guys who brought the Chiefs over the border. If the project defaults in 10y and that has implications for the state of Kansas and/or the image of the Chiefs, they’ll likely either be long gone or have convenient amnesia as to their involvement. Welcome to politics.
The fact that some of you might actually take what they’re saying at face value is pure insanity. This is the height of all vanity projects. Economics be damned.
|
Your points make sense, but don't the last couple of sentences just describe building a stadium for your sports team perfectly?