How much would you pay for ten games?
My apologies for not posting last week. I was having too much fun coughing and hanging out at the doctor’s office last Thursday to write up a post.
This past Monday, MinnPost posted an article on a new Vikings Stadium. Of course, it’s perfectly obvious why they want a new stadium: the Wild (and Swarm) are playing in the Xcel Energy Center which opened in 2000. The Twins will be moving to a new stadium in 2010. The Timberwolves (and Lynx) are playing at the Target Center, which opened in 1990. The Gophers Football team is playing at TCF Stadium, which opened in 2009. The Gophers Men’s Hockey team plays in Mariucci Arena, which opened in 1993. Ridder Arena, where the Gophers Women’s hockey team plays was opened in 2002. Obviously, Twin Cities based sports cannot exist in a stadium that opened in 1982!
According to the article, the Vikings are suggesting it costs $900 million to build a football stadium—with a roof. On the bus, as we girls were talking about it, we realized that’s an insane amount of money for a stadium that will be used for 10 games/year. (Well, let’s make it 15, because of pre-season and playoffs.) This includes a retractable roof, because clearly football can’t be played in adverse weather, while it’s no problem for baseball. Wait. What?
Target Field, where the Twins will play, does not include a roof. Total construction costs are around $390 million. Target Field will be used, on average, for 82 games per year (there are 81 regular season games most years, and we’ll give them the extra game for the years they do make the playoffs; it’s completely overestimating, but take what you can get). And there’s no retractable roof, making poor weather a detriment to the game.
I’m not a huge fan of spending public money on rich people, but I recognize that professional sports not only bring money into the city (although I doubt enough to pay for the stadiums), but also improve the quality of life for those living in the area. I’ll grudgingly accept that today’s society has pushed the stadium cost to the people. But the question comes how much we owe. There’s some finance cost-effectiveness that has to be weighed in. Is it work spending $900 million for a stadium that will be used 15 days each year? Or can something else be done?
I agree with most people: it was a huge failure when the Gophers and Vikings refused to work things out to build a joint stadium. They play on different days of the week, and it would up the cost-effectiveness of both stadiums by having more games played in them each year. The original concept of the Metrodome was onto something when it had three different teams playing there—the only problem was that the two sports were completely different and had completely different field requirements, making it poor viewing for the fans of one team compared to the experience for the fans of the other two teams. But, alas, it’s too late for that now. (Although I think it would be fantastic if the Vikings and U of MN work together to get something done, I just don’t see either of them willing enough to compromise to do so.)
With that, I also think the expense of a new stadium is a bit ridiculous for the use it will get, based on the number of games. However, I am not opposed to upgrading the Metrodome. I recognize based on technology, it’s getting old and out-of-date. It’s not the most comfortable, or the prettiest, place to watch football. I don’t hate football. I don’t think they should have to suffer with something old and out-of-date (although they can’t claim that it’s hurting their fan base, as they still have the largest fan base in the state, according to my unscientific observation). I just don’t think it’s worthwhile to spend $900 million when there’s a perfectly adequate place for them to play. It’s like buying a new luxury car because the ashtrays on the Taurus are full. Clean it up, replace the tires, get seat covers, get a new stereo system—it won’t be as good as new, but it will be perfectly comfortable. You don’t have to buy a new car just because all your neighbors have. But don’t let yours fall apart.
This past Monday, MinnPost posted an article on a new Vikings Stadium. Of course, it’s perfectly obvious why they want a new stadium: the Wild (and Swarm) are playing in the Xcel Energy Center which opened in 2000. The Twins will be moving to a new stadium in 2010. The Timberwolves (and Lynx) are playing at the Target Center, which opened in 1990. The Gophers Football team is playing at TCF Stadium, which opened in 2009. The Gophers Men’s Hockey team plays in Mariucci Arena, which opened in 1993. Ridder Arena, where the Gophers Women’s hockey team plays was opened in 2002. Obviously, Twin Cities based sports cannot exist in a stadium that opened in 1982!
According to the article, the Vikings are suggesting it costs $900 million to build a football stadium—with a roof. On the bus, as we girls were talking about it, we realized that’s an insane amount of money for a stadium that will be used for 10 games/year. (Well, let’s make it 15, because of pre-season and playoffs.) This includes a retractable roof, because clearly football can’t be played in adverse weather, while it’s no problem for baseball. Wait. What?
Target Field, where the Twins will play, does not include a roof. Total construction costs are around $390 million. Target Field will be used, on average, for 82 games per year (there are 81 regular season games most years, and we’ll give them the extra game for the years they do make the playoffs; it’s completely overestimating, but take what you can get). And there’s no retractable roof, making poor weather a detriment to the game.
I’m not a huge fan of spending public money on rich people, but I recognize that professional sports not only bring money into the city (although I doubt enough to pay for the stadiums), but also improve the quality of life for those living in the area. I’ll grudgingly accept that today’s society has pushed the stadium cost to the people. But the question comes how much we owe. There’s some finance cost-effectiveness that has to be weighed in. Is it work spending $900 million for a stadium that will be used 15 days each year? Or can something else be done?
I agree with most people: it was a huge failure when the Gophers and Vikings refused to work things out to build a joint stadium. They play on different days of the week, and it would up the cost-effectiveness of both stadiums by having more games played in them each year. The original concept of the Metrodome was onto something when it had three different teams playing there—the only problem was that the two sports were completely different and had completely different field requirements, making it poor viewing for the fans of one team compared to the experience for the fans of the other two teams. But, alas, it’s too late for that now. (Although I think it would be fantastic if the Vikings and U of MN work together to get something done, I just don’t see either of them willing enough to compromise to do so.)
With that, I also think the expense of a new stadium is a bit ridiculous for the use it will get, based on the number of games. However, I am not opposed to upgrading the Metrodome. I recognize based on technology, it’s getting old and out-of-date. It’s not the most comfortable, or the prettiest, place to watch football. I don’t hate football. I don’t think they should have to suffer with something old and out-of-date (although they can’t claim that it’s hurting their fan base, as they still have the largest fan base in the state, according to my unscientific observation). I just don’t think it’s worthwhile to spend $900 million when there’s a perfectly adequate place for them to play. It’s like buying a new luxury car because the ashtrays on the Taurus are full. Clean it up, replace the tires, get seat covers, get a new stereo system—it won’t be as good as new, but it will be perfectly comfortable. You don’t have to buy a new car just because all your neighbors have. But don’t let yours fall apart.
Labels: G-g-g-girl, Minnesota Vikings, Stadiums
posted by thisisbeth | 8:38 AM
1 Comments:
Awesome post. I agree 100%
Post a Comment
<< Home