MLB Stadium Saga: Oakland/Tampa Bay/Southside

[Dilbert]

Well the old possum home wont sit empty next season.

 

[FiddySicks]

Sweet. Now Roots and Sac Republic will both have similar stadium situations. Playing in public facilities born of the late 1960s that nobody else really wants to use anymore. It honestly makes a lot of sense. 

[The_Admiral]

I made some remark the other day about how the Sox got their dicks smacked for demanding a new stadium and pretty much backed off ever since. Well, apparently I reverse-manifested, because they stuck a sandlot at Roosevelt/Clark to demonstrate how awesome a new ballpark would be there if someone else paid for it:

 

 

I'm just thinking of how much sense a football/soccer stadium would make instead.

[BBTV]

So the Sixers saga has taken a new interesting turn:

NJ has now guaranteed $400M to move them across the river to a "world class sports and entertainment arena".

 

Additionally, Comcast Spectator has just swooped in with a plan to turn the area where the Sixers want their arena into a bio-medical research center which could open in 2028 - 3 years before the Sixers project would be complete.  Apparently their proposal (which I don't think was made public) was so detailed, it had the Pantone values of the paint.

 

So basically the mayor and council have to decide whether to let the Sixers build a stadium in the middle of the city, let the Flyers build a bio-medical research facility, or do nothing and let it be a dilapidated blight on the city like it's been for most of my life.

 

Meanwhile, the Sixers can take New Jersey's money (which they've already done once when they moved their headquarters and practice facility there) and leave the city altogether.  I don't think they'll do that... but I genuinely have no idea how this ends, just that it should end by EOY.

[The_Admiral]

lol, "meanwhile at the Comcast-Spectacor Biomedical Research Facility, doctors announced the discovery of a genetic marker that predicts the likelihood of your child being born Gritty" sounds like a line from a Mark Leyner novel

[BBTV]

I don't know why the labels aren't showing, but:

Blue outline  on the left = Sixers proposed arena

Red outlined rectangle =  Flyers "Gritty Genealogical Research Lab" that they say they can build super duper fast

solid-blue square on the top right = NJ's proposal for the new Sixers arena

small-black square on bottom left = current Sixers headquarters after NJ got on their knees for Josh Harris

 

[The_Admiral]

Do the 76ers already have the same sweetheart deal that the Celtics have at the Garden? I think they've been getting free rent in exchange for not building a competing arena down the street. Seems like that's a better play than the mutually assured destruction of building a new place over the river.

[BBTV]

10 minutes ago, The_Admiral said:

Do the 76ers already have the same sweetheart deal that the Celtics have at the Garden? I think they've been getting free rent in exchange for not building a competing arena down the street. Seems like that's a better play than the mutually assured destruction of building a new place over the river.

 

I don't know the details, but I don't think it's a "sweetheart" deal at all.  The Flyers are so desperate to keep them there that they're offering them an equity stake in the FKA Wells Fargo Center, though the details of that aren't clear either.

 

Harris wants his own place.  I don't think he has any interest in sharing something that he can't have 100% control of, and despite any equity concessions, the Sixers will always be second (or third or fourth) fiddle in that place.

 

I  don't think NJ is a realistic scenario for him.  In general, it's very realistic - hell, they were slated to move there until Ed Snider bought them and dragged them into the Corestates Center - I just don't think that's what Harris wants.  I'd say it's great leverage to use against the city, but he has made exactly zero friends here, so I don't think the decision makers will factor that in at all.

 

This is a very complicated situation, given that you now have a city that doesn't really want them, a state that wants them but isn't wanted back, 90% of neighborhood groups against the plan, Comcast actively funding the protests and now trying to yoink the land out from under them, and now the bicycle community and transit advocates are getting involved.

[RyanMcD29]

4 minutes ago, BBTV said:

This is a very complicated situation, given that you now have a city that doesn't really want them, a state that wants them but isn't wanted back, 90% of neighborhood groups against the plan, Comcast actively funding the protests and now trying to yoink the land out from under them, and now the bicycle community and transit advocates are getting involved.

Don't forget about Delaware's stunt, too, so you got two states doing this!

[The_Admiral]

If Philadelphia is indeed more or less a company town for Comcast as I suspect it is, then "we're going out of our way for you and also we want that land for something else" should pretty much seal the deal, with "this is culturally insensitive to the Chinese" putting the bow on it.

 

I don't see Camden happening. Having practices in Camden and getting people to drive to Camden are two very different things. And I don't see downtown happening either. I'm not a fan of the Sports Containment Zone, but a Sixers-only arena competing with the extant Flyers arena isn't a better alternative.

[GhostOfNormMacdonald]

   A Philly team playing outside of Pennsylvania feels wrong to me. The Giants and Jets are special because where the heck are you going to fit an 80k stadium in NYC? But a Philly team in Jersey or Delaware? What? Is there something my Midwest hick mind isn't getting about the east coast? 

[BBTV]

46 minutes ago, GhostOfNormMacdonald said:

Is there something my Midwest hick mind isn't getting about the east coast? 

 

Maybe.  Camden is basically East Philly, just run by a more sensible state.  Don't get me wrong - there's no reason for most Philadelphians to go there, but our main outdoor music facility is there, as is our aquarium, and for a while, our minor-league team.  Remember, a mile in the northeast is basically 30 on the west coast, and probably something in the middle elsewhere.  A team in Camden is better and more accessible than a team in the suburbs (not that I'd go, as I'm not keen on taking the train over the bridge, and the ferry takes like 20 minutes) and it's not like there's much open land (other than the warehouses and distribution centers down by the existing sports complex) in Phila either.  THey're getting rid of almost all of the surface parking lots within the next few years, but none of them are big enough, and they're mostly earmarked for condos.

 

EDIT: keep in mind that nearly all the streets you see are one-way streets with two (sometimes one) lane, so the "blocks" are smaller than most city blocks.  Unlike NYC or most other cities with wider streets, Philly never changed much from its original city plan, which has stunted a lot of projects and caused the skyline (which was stunted for nearly a century for other reasons) to be very linear and contained.

 

As a proponent of mass transit, I think getting the suburban gas-guzzlers to get on a regional train to go to a game is a good thing, and the city / SEPTA has already announced new metro cars to align with the timeline of the new arena (technically 2 years ahead of time, but there will certainly be a 2 year delay.)

 

I actually think that this could end with the Sixers moving altogether - in fact, it wouldn't shock me if deep down in his heart of hearts, moving was the plan the whole time.  I have no idea where, but this could be one of those things where he's like "hey, we tried an arena on the waterfront and that failed, we tried an arena in center city and that failed, what more could you want from me?"

 

The only thing that quells the cynic in me is that he did make a good faith bid to develop the waterfront with a project that would have included an arena - and while that wouldn't be super convenient for me, it probably would have made the most sense overall.

[Digby]

Biotech is lucrative as one of the few white-collar, moneyed industries that also requires tons of office space nowadays, which is why I thought the bottom fell out of its real estate market with everyone squeezing that one for 4 years now. IDK.

 

Not sure if the Celtics are officially not paying rent to the Jacobs family, but whatever it is, the deal is good enough that their lease goes for another 12 years and the team moved its business ops to one of the new skyscrapers built on the old Garden site, attached to the new Garden. Rumblings that whomever buys the team would want to build a Celtics-only arena somewhere, but seems like that's just speculation (though it's true that the lack of ownership there will depress the team value). As ever, the question is where to build it, and I remain skeptical that there are very many markets that require two 18k+ capacity arenas.

[The_Admiral]

It looks like the Celtics have been forgoing rent for at least 20 years now and have probably negotiated a cut of concessions (the sweetest plum!): 

 

Quote

CELTICS EXTEND LEASE IN BOSTON
April 20, 2006
Copyright 2006 MediaVentures

 

The Boston Celtics have extended their lease at the TD Banknorth Garden through the 2020- 2021 season. In addition to the extension, the team will see improvements to the building and a chance to bring the NBA All-Star game to the venue in 2009 or 2010. The current lease expired in 2011.

 

Team and building officials did not detail the upgrades, but indicated it would include new lighting, sound and scoreboard equipment. The Celtics will create a new Courtside Club for season ticket holders.

 

In 2004, the Celtics sought changes in their lease to get more revenue from the building in which they play rent-free.

Delaware North officials, which own the venue, began exploring other venues to see how they might upgrade the arena. The Celtics also hired Tim Romani to help them review sites and plans for a new building.

 

The Celtics said they wanted money from building concession and premium seating operations. Club seats are sold by the building, which has struggled for years to create demand for the product.

 

Honestly, probably not a bad deal. Hard to see how a separate arena would do much good for them; it would have to be a less convenient location than the one atop a rail terminal, and Delaware North is way too powerful to antagonize.

[Digby]

The only site I've heard bandied about is the superfund site across the street from the casino in Everett where the Revs are trying to build their stadium. But that may be literally within sight of the Garden so I don't see how it makes sense, even if Wynn Resorts built the thing themselves.

 

New Balance has been trying to make their Brighton campus a destination thing these last few years, where they built the Celtics a new practice facility and, for the public, have a fancy indoor track and a new music venue -- had that been master-planned differently, there might be room for a full arena, but there's no public transit beyond a single commuter rail line and it's all residential roads nearby. (Though, I hope the women's hockey team moves back to the ice rink there, like how the Pride played.)

 

I don't see any logical reason for the Celtics to move, never mind the emotional connection to Celtics+Garden. Hopefully the decades of friendly ownership relations will continue and the Celtics group will continue to be fine with foregoing the value of arena ownership. (The arena-concert bubble should be bursting soon anyway.)

 

The Sixers, I sort of get because of how far out the arena is -- there's room to improve there. But at least it is on the subway line, whatever they call their Orange Line. And when I say "improve" I don't mean be further away from the Philly core.

[The_Admiral]

7 minutes ago, Digby said:

I don't see any logical reason for the Celtics to move, never mind the emotional connection to Celtics+Garden. Hopefully the decades of friendly ownership relations will continue and the Celtics group will continue to be fine with foregoing the value of arena ownership. (The arena-concert bubble should be bursting soon anyway.)

 

I think this is something the United Center is trying to get out in front of with the concert hall they want to build next door: they're shooting for 6,000 seats, which is a niche that's way bigger than the old converted theaters on the north side but a smidge under the smaller arenas in end-stage configuration. Arena shows are expensive undertakings with poor acoustics, so maybe as experience quality becomes more important than just getting in the door, that capacity will eventually meet the industry where they are.

 

I was wondering who even plays the Horizon these days or if it's just Wolves games. Looks like it's a lot of Latin and K-pop, but also Weezer this Friday (no thanks) and Kacey Musgraves. The UIC Pavilion, 1.5 miles from the United Center, is even worse: four non-UIC events between now and mid-March, and one is the Martin Lawrence "Y'All Know What It Is!" tour. (Another is Rainbow Kitten Surprise, of all bands, who have to be overrating their drawing capacity by a factor of 12 here.) It feels like a tier of concert venue that, outside of maybe country and super-mainstream rap, just isn't relevant anymore.

[GDAWG]

We have the same situation in Dallas/Fort Worth.  The Cowboys and Rangers are over in Arlington, which is closer to Fort Worth than to Dallas.  There's been scuttlebutt that if Texas ever allows casino gambling, that the Dallas Mavericks will have a new arena that is the centerpiece of a casino/entertainment district (which is the reason as to why Mark Cuban surprisingly sold a majority of the Mavericks).  

[Digby]

2 hours ago, The_Admiral said:

I think this is something the United Center is trying to get out in front of with the concert hall they want to build next door: they're shooting for 6,000 seats, which is a niche that's way bigger than the old converted theaters on the north side but a smidge under the smaller arenas in end-stage configuration. Arena shows are expensive undertakings with poor acoustics, so maybe as experience quality becomes more important than just getting in the door, that capacity will eventually meet the industry where they are.

 

 

Right, the new spot that Fenway built in the old center-field parking lot holds (I believe) 5500, converts nicely between club and theater arrangements, and has been a nice spot in my live-music experience thus far (though the 2nd balcony looks to be in the heavens and the $17 cans of Sam Adams are unfortunate). We have the Garden as big arena and the BU arena as the small one, and I think this venue has already got some of those scale of shows even if they'd rather play 2 nights. OTOH, I just looked at the Garden calendar and somehow they've got Cigarettes After Sex and two nights of Kacey Musgraves booked this week... I cannot imagine 54,000 people have dropped $175 a piece but I am out of touch.

[The_Admiral]

I was completely unaware of this MGM Music Hall (artfully done on the naming rights). It looks pretty cool and I would expect Chicago's to look similar, but I can't figure out how they fit it all in there. It seems to defy geometry.

[Digby]

It only opened a bit over a year ago I think... The naming rights thing is cringe and confusing because the MGM Massachusetts casino is way out in Springfield. I guess MGM just wants to be an all-purpose entertainment brand? But yeah, the sightlines and the sound are great, they're getting big names to play that instead of crappier larger venues, and it is well-designed. It fits in that plot, though, because it is super tall (I've yet to go in the balconies and no plans to do so) and because they have only 40% of the restrooms that they need.