HoosierCat Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574525692182968388.htmlYup, Cincinnati's ROI on PBS pretty much stinks.Hopefully that's in the process of changing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pidge Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 With this D, I would hope the next decade will be a reverse of the last one largely.Our stadium is nicer than all those anyway. Lovely style and beautiful setting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted November 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Our stadium is nicer than all those anyway. Lovely style and beautiful setting.It's certainly better than how they massacred Soldier Field in Chicago -- and that's worked out about as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ickey44 Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 I had no idea PBS costs that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
COB Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 The following line from the Wall Street Journal article explains a lot:"as the Steelers have delivered two Super Bowls and a .666 winning percentage since then."There you go, Satan's football team is the Steelers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregstephens Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 I had no idea PBS costs that much.No offense to PBS, as it is a fine facility, but we got hosed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet23 Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Paul Brown's legacy is the playbook, draw play, face mask, 40-yard dash and bringing professional football to Cincinnati. soP's legacy is duping the fine sheepherders of Hamilton County... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted November 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 I had no idea PBS costs that much.No offense to PBS, as it is a fine facility, but we got hosed.I always wondered about that myself, especially in light of the much lower price tag for stadiums built after PBS, like Reliant. Anybody know the story there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregstephens Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 I had no idea PBS costs that much.No offense to PBS, as it is a fine facility, but we got hosed.I always wondered about that myself, especially in light of the much lower price tag for stadiums built after PBS, like Reliant. Anybody know the story there?As far as I'm concerned, it all sums up thusly. Bob Bedinghaus, county commissioner at that time, ram-rodded the stadium down everyone's collective throats, while creating an environment that encouraged overcharging on the construction. Were there folks on 'the take'? Perhaps. Can't prove it. Wouldn't surprise me. Then, as soon as the stadium was built and he was no longer a commish, he goes to work for the Bengals. Evvvvvvverybody made out real good on that deal, except the taxpayers of Hamilton County. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregstephens Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 FWIW--if you wiki PBS, and I'm not championing that as a definitive source mind you, it states the final construction costs on PBS was actually about 455 million, with the county suing the architect due to the overruns and recouping about 14.5 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 FWIW--if you wiki PBS, and I'm not championing that as a definitive source mind you, it states the final construction costs on PBS was actually about 455 million, with the county suing the architect due to the overruns and recouping about 14.5 million. For those who are interested, the same architect designed the new stadium being built in the Los Angeles area (City of Industry), and admits his firm was awarded the nearly 1 billion dollar contract largely due to the overwhelmingly positive reaction to Paul Brown Stadium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 SShhhh, hair. You are messing up the communal whining again.PBS is architecturally stunning, has won awards along those lines, and is a spectacular place to watch a game. The views of the river and and downtown are exemplary. And, despite the crappy football played therein at times, at least we have had a team to watch play crappy. And, at times, it has been a LOT better than crappy. Like '03, '04, '05, '06, and even chunks of '07. And now '09.As the decades pass, that stadium will remain class, and will age very, very well. Cincy will more than get its monies worth out of it as the years wear on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregstephens Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 FWIW--if you wiki PBS, and I'm not championing that as a definitive source mind you, it states the final construction costs on PBS was actually about 455 million, with the county suing the architect due to the overruns and recouping about 14.5 million. For those who are interested, the same architect designed the new stadium being built in the Los Angeles area (City of Industry), and admits his firm was awarded the nearly 1 billion dollar contract largely due to the overwhelmingly positive reaction to Paul Brown Stadium.One billion bucks to build something under the theory 'if you build it they will come' is a whole lotta cabbage.Is this part of the federal stimulus plan? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregstephens Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 SShhhh, hair. You are messing up the communal whining again.PBS is architecturally stunning, has won awards along those lines, and is a spectacular place to watch a game. The views of the river and and downtown are exemplary. And, despite the crappy football played therein at times, at least we have had a team to watch play crappy. And, at times, it has been a LOT better than crappy. Like '03, '04, '05, '06, and even chunks of '07. And now '09.As the decades pass, that stadium will remain class, and will age very, very well. Cincy will more than get its monies worth out of it as the years wear on.Bob Bedinghaus, I knew this was you!!Seriously, I don't even necessarily dispute what you've just said. I think the sticker shock effect coming from the original post and the link therein results from the question if we couldn't have gotten the same class, et cetera, at a slightly lower price tag. My memory is fuzzy as this all took place over a decade ago, but I think the original touted price tag was in the 250 million to 300 million range. If anyone can correct my admittedly declining memory, that'd be great. But I do suspect that is the source of the communal whining. Hamilton Countyians were expecting a much lower price tag, based on the representations made at that time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJJackson Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 That, and my mcdouble now costs me 1.06 instead of 1.05 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 FWIW--if you wiki PBS, and I'm not championing that as a definitive source mind you, it states the final construction costs on PBS was actually about 455 million, with the county suing the architect due to the overruns and recouping about 14.5 million. For those who are interested, the same architect designed the new stadium being built in the Los Angeles area (City of Industry), and admits his firm was awarded the nearly 1 billion dollar contract largely due to the overwhelmingly positive reaction to Paul Brown Stadium.One billion bucks to build something under the theory 'if you build it they will come' is a whole lotta cabbage. Well, Los Angeles is a pretty big cabbage patch...ehhh? BTW, the NFL's immediate response to Ed Roski's stadium proposal was to fund a study looking into the economic impact of moving TWO NFL teams into the new stadium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Whatever else the NFL is, it ain't stupid.Why, that's leverage to use against TWO cities at that point... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Whatever else the NFL is, it ain't stupid.Why, that's leverage to use against TWO cities at that point... Most of the local scuttlebutt is based upon an existing team being moved to Los Angeles with an expansion team being added a year or two later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregstephens Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Whatever else the NFL is, it ain't stupid.Why, that's leverage to use against TWO cities at that point...Detroit and Tampa spring to mind, given how horrid the Lions have been forever and the rumored financial difficulties of the Bucs.Other candidates:Bills, to keep them in the countryRedskins, to put them in a West division in which they might could win a gameBrowns, because it's already been done onceJaguars, see Tampa and lack of sell-outs for home gamesBengals, just because SoP has threatened to do it once over PSLs beforePanthers, because who really cares about NFL football in NC/Duke basketball countryMissing any? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregstephens Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Whatever else the NFL is, it ain't stupid.Why, that's leverage to use against TWO cities at that point... Most of the local scuttlebutt is based upon an existing team being moved to Los Angeles with an expansion team being added a year or two later.Ok, so the NFL doesn't usually add just one expansion team (see Jacksonville/Carolina and Houston/Cleveland). Where's the second expansion going to go? Las Vegas? Goodell's nutty London, England, plan (no offense, Pidge)?Any other suggestions for a second expansion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
COB Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Missing any?The Rams. That is the team some experts think is most likely to move once everyone's stadium deals are evaluated, ownership's willingness to move, or in the Rams case, to sell, is taken into account, and a bunch of other variables too boring for me to continue reading were factored in. Los Angeles Rams, has a nice ring to it, eh?And the NFL is considering 2 teams for LA? Pretty ballsy cosidering the history out there. Also, the prohibitive favorite to own the new team, Ed Roski, Jr., has all his own private financing lined up to build a new stadium. He also paid off, to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, neighboring municipalities to shut their yaps about traffic problems, environmental impact, quality of life issues, etc., that will all be raised by having a huge stadium nearby. Presenting that impressive collection of data to the NFL is what put him in the driver's seat to be the next NFL owner. So if he owns/controls the stadium, how is the NFL going to convince him to rent it out every other week to a business that wants to steal all his customers? I'm sure he wants lease money, but dilute that fan base and you could both fail.A little off-topic, but if you go here http://www.losangelesfootballstadium.com/ you get a look at the new stadium design. Check out the earthen bank built up around the stadium. Think of the structural steel and concrete you save with this design. Just lay your seating in the earthen bowl. PS - This Roski guy must have a pipeline of money flowing to the California Legislature, because they passed a law exempting his stadium from their environmental laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Whatever else the NFL is, it ain't stupid.Why, that's leverage to use against TWO cities at that point...Detroit and Tampa spring to mind, given how horrid the Lions have been forever and the rumored financial difficulties of the Bucs.Other candidates:Bills, to keep them in the countryRedskins, to put them in a West division in which they might could win a gameBrowns, because it's already been done onceJaguars, see Tampa and lack of sell-outs for home gamesBengals, just because SoP has threatened to do it once over PSLs beforePanthers, because who really cares about NFL football in NC/Duke basketball countryMissing any?Your list is way too broad.Detroit is in a new stadium. They are going nowhere. Tampa is in a new stadium, they are going nowhere. Cincy, same. Going nowhere. Washington? Are you high? Seriously, Greg, stay out of the evidence room. That franchise is worth $1 billion dollars, even with Snyder running it, and has a new stadium and a crazy loyal fanbase. Going nowhere. Ever. Browns? NEW STADIUM. Next.The list of cities that can be brided and is in danger of bad things happening in terms of a losing their team?Agree on Jax. Old stadium, never should have been a team there in the first place, not enough of a population to sustain it. They are the next team to move.Minnesota. Needs a stadium. Wylf won't rest until he gets one, particularly with the Twins getting their new palace. Leverage of LA will get him what he wants.Agree with COB on St. Louis. They are vulnerable given the sale, and for some reason, the stadium hasn't aged well. Oakland. The Raiders are perpetually on this kind of list, given that Satan hasn't come for their owner just yet. Davis might move just to prove he's alive.Carolina's an interesting thought. I think, though, given the strong ownership in Charlotte and the fan support there, they are solid and immune to serious move threats.Buffalo. Great passionate fanbase. But their owner is ancient, the NFL for some reason seems to want something done there. The two games in Toronto a year ago were a warning shot across their bow. I could see them relocating to Toronto in the next 10 years.That's my general list of who would be seriously inconveienced by a one billion dollar stadium development in LA... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 And the NFL is considering 2 teams for LA? Pretty ballsy considering the history out there. Maybe, but the problem for Los Angeles and the NFL has nothing to do with historic attendance levels and everything to do with financing new stadium construction. And on that point, Roski Jr seems to have suceeded where others have failed. Also, the prohibitive favorite to own the new team, Ed Roski, Jr., has all his own private financing lined up to build a new stadium. And there's the key. Private financing. All previous attempts to finance a stadium in Los Angeles included some measure of public financing, at the direct insistence of the NFL. And that demand all but wrecked the expansion bid Los Angeles made years ago. He also paid off, to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, neighboring municipalities to shut their yaps about traffic problems, environmental impact, quality of life issues, etc., that will all be raised by having a huge stadium nearby. I give the man credit. Roski based his new design in the aptly named City of Industry, a narrow strip of industrial parks and factories wedged into a long triangular shaped area between two freeways. This so-called city has no homes whatsoever within it's borders and was created decades ago for exactly these types of business friendly situations. Presenting that impressive collection of data to the NFL is what put him in the driver's seat to be the next NFL owner. So if he owns/controls the stadium, how is the NFL going to convince him to rent it out every other week to a business that wants to steal all his customers? I'm sure he wants lease money, but dilute that fan base and you could both fail. Flip it. Because the version I read most often involves a team like the Chargers agreeing to move into Roski's stadium without selling a majority share of the team, prompting the NFL to put an expansion team in the stadium after a couple of years, with Roski as majority owner.A little off-topic, but if you go here http://www.losangelesfootballstadium.com/ you get a look at the new stadium design. Check out the earthen bank built up around the stadium. Think of the structural steel and concrete you save with this design. Just lay your seating in the earthen bowl. And again, the architect claims the design is based upon design concepts he first introduced at PBS....including massive fan pavilions and gathering areas located either outside the stadium or in open air areas inside the stadium. The rub is fans love these open areas almost as much as the landlords who don't have to pay to heat or cool them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Whatever else the NFL is, it ain't stupid.Why, that's leverage to use against TWO cities at that point...Detroit and Tampa spring to mind, given how horrid the Lions have been forever and the rumored financial difficulties of the Bucs.Other candidates:Bills, to keep them in the countryRedskins, to put them in a West division in which they might could win a gameBrowns, because it's already been done onceJaguars, see Tampa and lack of sell-outs for home gamesBengals, just because SoP has threatened to do it once over PSLs beforePanthers, because who really cares about NFL football in NC/Duke basketball countryMissing any?Your list is way too broad.Detroit is in a new stadium. They are going nowhere. Tampa is in a new stadium, they are going nowhere. Cincy, same. Going nowhere. Washington? Are you high? Seriously, Greg, stay out of the evidence room. That franchise is worth $1 billion dollars, even with Snyder running it, and has a new stadium and a crazy loyal fanbase. Going nowhere. Ever. Browns? NEW STADIUM. Next.The list of cities that can be brided and is in danger of bad things happening in terms of a losing their team?Agree on Jax. Old stadium, never should have been a team there in the first place, not enough of a population to sustain it. They are the next team to move.Minnesota. Needs a stadium. Wylf won't rest until he gets one, particularly with the Twins getting their new palace. Leverage of LA will get him what he wants.Agree with COB on St. Louis. They are vulnerable given the sale, and for some reason, the stadium hasn't aged well. Oakland. The Raiders are perpetually on this kind of list, given that Satan hasn't come for their owner just yet. Davis might move just to prove he's alive.Carolina's an interesting thought. I think, though, given the strong ownership in Charlotte and the fan support there, they are solid and immune to serious move threats.Buffalo. Great passionate fanbase. But their owner is ancient, the NFL for some reason seems to want something done there. The two games in Toronto a year ago were a warning shot across their bow. I could see them relocating to Toronto in the next 10 years.That's my general list of who would be seriously inconveienced by a one billion dollar stadium development in LA... And San Diego, San Diego, and of course....San Diego. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregstephens Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 Whatever else the NFL is, it ain't stupid.Why, that's leverage to use against TWO cities at that point...Detroit and Tampa spring to mind, given how horrid the Lions have been forever and the rumored financial difficulties of the Bucs.Other candidates:Bills, to keep them in the countryRedskins, to put them in a West division in which they might could win a gameBrowns, because it's already been done onceJaguars, see Tampa and lack of sell-outs for home gamesBengals, just because SoP has threatened to do it once over PSLs beforePanthers, because who really cares about NFL football in NC/Duke basketball countryMissing any?Your list is way too broad.Detroit is in a new stadium. They are going nowhere. Tampa is in a new stadium, they are going nowhere. Cincy, same. Going nowhere. Washington? Are you high? Seriously, Greg, stay out of the evidence room. That franchise is worth $1 billion dollars, even with Snyder running it, and has a new stadium and a crazy loyal fanbase. Going nowhere. Ever. Browns? NEW STADIUM. Next.The list of cities that can be brided and is in danger of bad things happening in terms of a losing their team?Agree on Jax. Old stadium, never should have been a team there in the first place, not enough of a population to sustain it. They are the next team to move.Minnesota. Needs a stadium. Wylf won't rest until he gets one, particularly with the Twins getting their new palace. Leverage of LA will get him what he wants.Agree with COB on St. Louis. They are vulnerable given the sale, and for some reason, the stadium hasn't aged well. Oakland. The Raiders are perpetually on this kind of list, given that Satan hasn't come for their owner just yet. Davis might move just to prove he's alive.Carolina's an interesting thought. I think, though, given the strong ownership in Charlotte and the fan support there, they are solid and immune to serious move threats.Buffalo. Great passionate fanbase. But their owner is ancient, the NFL for some reason seems to want something done there. The two games in Toronto a year ago were a warning shot across their bow. I could see them relocating to Toronto in the next 10 years.That's my general list of who would be seriously inconveienced by a one billion dollar stadium development in LA...Oakland? Are you out of your mind? Been there, done that. Think LA is taking Al Davis back, especially when his team sucks?How about 49ers, given the little issues the team has had with the city? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.