NWSL Kansas City announces New stadium
- Thread starter LadyStanley
- Start date
Calgary city council should read this article before dealing with any more irrational Flames demands. This facility will be privately funded and good for the owners for not demanding tax dollars.
PCSPounder
Stadium Groupie
It'll be on public land. Which matters in these debates.
Still, that's a heck of a move and even more curious timing.
Depends on where the land is. Here in Calgary the land is centrally located, valuable and should have been purchased by the Flames at fair market value. Something that never occurred to our genius council or city staff.
LadyStanley
Registered User
The first stadium built for a National Women's Soccer League club is ready to open in Kansas City
One by one the women walked onto the field for the first time, shortly before they departed for a warm-weather camp in Florida, and gazed at the stands towering above them on three sides and the scoreboard looming over them on the fourth. “I'm very happy for Kansas City," Brazilian star and KC...
Ready for play
PCSPounder
Stadium Groupie
JMCx4
Censorship is the Sincerest Form of Flattery
Firewall restrictions, but the KC Star offered it's own version of the story last week via MSN ...
KevFu
Registered User
This is the thing that gets me about city planning and stadium stuff. It just seems like so "fly by the seat of your pants" in literally every city but Philadelphia...
My first thought on Kansas City is "why didn't they build it in the Kaufman parking lot and when the Royals move downtown..."
When I worked in college sports at one school, there was an Associate AD (second in command) who was a CPA, and he had three facility map renderings on his office wall: What it is now on the left, what the absolute dream would be if it was like Sim City and he could just do whatever he wanted, and the middle one was "what we could do next to move A towards C."
I just don't get why cities don't have like "We have X number of teams, they're all gonna want stadiums every 30-35 years, so we need two good sites for each team and a funding plan to build a new place every 10-12 years. Like, a rotating cycle, consistent funding.
They act like this is a one-time expense over and over again, which makes no sense.
My first thought on Kansas City is "why didn't they build it in the Kaufman parking lot and when the Royals move downtown..."
When I worked in college sports at one school, there was an Associate AD (second in command) who was a CPA, and he had three facility map renderings on his office wall: What it is now on the left, what the absolute dream would be if it was like Sim City and he could just do whatever he wanted, and the middle one was "what we could do next to move A towards C."
I just don't get why cities don't have like "We have X number of teams, they're all gonna want stadiums every 30-35 years, so we need two good sites for each team and a funding plan to build a new place every 10-12 years. Like, a rotating cycle, consistent funding.
They act like this is a one-time expense over and over again, which makes no sense.
Because that would be a super shitty place to plunk a women's soccer stadium in Kansas City when you are trying to grow the game? And the timing didn't align...at all?
These sports franchises are for the most part completely independent organisms with different owners, different ideas and goals and completely different mechanisms in terms of how their infrastructure is funded. Taxpayers can also be fickle about different franchises in the same city depending on views towards ownership.
The citizens of Jackson County, Missouri - of which I am - would probably take a big hit if the Chiefs twisted their arm - to make sure they stay in KCMO and don't move to North Kansas City or...heaven help us, the Kansas side of the state line. This despite the fact that Clark Hunt just got voted the worst (cheapest) owner in the NFL and isn't even from KC. And yet the Royals, who desperately need to upgrade their situation to remain competitive and have a frankly pretty beautiful plan in place for a new downtown stadium - are probably going to fail miserably in an upcoming ballot measure for a tax hike to get it done even though John Sherman, the owner, is pumping in a billion dollars and is a local. The NIMBYs are out in full force and the outrage is high that a billionaire owner would have the gall to ask for some public funding for a stadium and entire mixed-use development that in theory is going to benefit everybody.
Long way of saying - good freaking luck trying to get permanent funding cycles approved in major metro areas for unspecified future use.
IU Hawks fan
They call me IU
Right? I don't know a ton about KC, but I do know those 2 stadiums are in the middle of nowhere and the Royals can't wait to GTFO.
PCSPounder
Stadium Groupie
I can think of way more middle of nowhere than the Truman Sports Complex. Like, say, where Children’s Mercy Park is located.
That is… at least in the minds of American soccer fans. We seem to like the concept of mass transit and being more central in the city. The NFL doesn’t exactly burden themselves with that thinking. However, 20 years down the line, will the NFL have made some massive mistakes?
(An aside, as if this needed one. The first Portland MLS game was at Colorado Rapids. Portland’s stadium is just 18 blocks from the Willamette River and 12 blocks from what might constitute a financial district downtown. It’s an easy walk. But Timbers Army rented a bus or two from a Denver pub out to DGSP in Commerce City, and about 12 miles into that excursion, we’re chanting “WE’RE IN KANSAS!” This is a matter of perspective, but I’m thinking the next generation has different expectations of cities. Do not forget that rates of car ownership are down amongst younger people.)
KevFu
Registered User
Thanks. I said "first thought" hoping someone would save me the trouble of educating myself. So I appreciate it.
I totally understand that independent operators are always going to act on individual self-interest and not really seek out cooperation. That's why I'm surprised it isn't like, some politician who's also a sports fan/nerd who's like "Let's do the smart thing for the city, and take care of our teams."
By THEM going to teams and saying "Hey, every 30 years you don't have to fight and politic and negotiate; it's AUTOMATIC that you each get a new crib at the end of each lease. We just have to set up this cycle." Why wouldn't any franchise respond with "great!" You don't risk becoming the Oakland A's that way.
There's places where everyone knows the city will play ball and getting a new stadium is NOT a problem. But even there it takes way longer than it should. New York for example, there's no chance they're losing the Mets/Yankees, but the Mets were in Shea for 45 years.
And Bill Shea is a great example of the type of guy who'd try to do something like that. He was the one who brokered the deal for the NL to add New York and the AL to add Los Angeles in a "trade;" he's also the one who convinced the NHL & Rangers to add the Islanders instead of competing with the WHA in that building instead; and the NBA with the Nets.
Ah the wonders of MLS 2.0. Maybe even 1.5 at that point. When 18-20k suburban soccer-specific stadiums were considered the pinnacle of being the elite in the league.
As for NFL stadiums, they have the double disadvantage of being the largest yet least-used of major pro sports facilities. There's only so many concert tours big enough for stadiums, and so many dates Monster Jam and supercross can visit. Wrestlemania is only once a year (and in early April, knocking out a bunch of cities). Otherwise it's just ten games a year, maybe 12 if the team is lucky in the playoffs. They're just not a very efficient land use case. Putting them in a more outskirts or suburban location makes sense. Not so much for arenas (which are constantly busy) or ballparks (which at least get 81 home dates a year, plus can also host concerts, etc). Even MLS stadiums get more dates than NFL stadiums before adding friendlies, tournaments, etc.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
-
BET ON ONLY ONE HORSE Fort Marcy Stakes (Gr. 2) - BELMONT AT THE BIG A - RACE 8Wagers: 1Staked: $5,000.00Event closes- Updated: