Stadium/Arena Saga Omnibus

[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.

[GhostOfNormMacdonald]

  All this talk of suburbs fighting for stadium rights makes me really glad the Twikings/Vins ditched Bloomington for downtown MPLS. I'm a 10 minute bikeride away from Target Field, and they have a place to store a bike.

 

Needing to go to an entirely different suburb would suck.

[The_Admiral]

Yeah, I love what Minneapolis has been doing to be just a little less car-centric (tall order for a metro with so much pure 1960s suburbia), and I particularly love what they did with Target Field and the U's stadium. I don't care for The Anvil That Kills Birds, which was a waste of public money when the Vikings could have just gone back outside (those two years they spent there were great, and even made their tenure official by blowing a playoff game late). I hope the one Super Bowl was worth it.

 

 

[chcarlson23]

5 hours ago, The_Admiral said:

Yeah, I love what Minneapolis has been doing to be just a little less car-centric (tall order for a metro with so much pure 1960s suburbia), and I particularly love what they did with Target Field and the U's stadium. I don't care for The Anvil That Kills Birds, which was a waste of public money when the Vikings could have just gone back outside (those two years they spent there were great, and even made their tenure official by blowing a playoff game late). I hope the one Super Bowl was worth it.

 

 

Minneapolis is now apparently the most bike-able city in the US. It’s definitely cool to see a big city try to take steps to make it a more welcoming city to be in. (The suburbs are a whole other mess with a lot of them having the opposite priority, a la Blaine, Woodbury, even the beloved Maple Grove.)

 

St. Paul isn’t half bad when it comes to biking but certainly falls behind. But they are numbers 2 and 3 in park systems rankings across the US, only falling behind DC. About 99% of people living in the two, are within a 10 minute walk of a park, and often a park that has really nice amenities, like playgrounds, trails, benches, and other nice stuff. I currently live about 5 minutes away from 2 and probably another 5 from at least 4 more 

[GhostOfNormMacdonald]

 I like US Bank, but I agree that we just should have built an open stadium. We can do all the kitschy faux-Scandi stuff to decorate the stadium, it doesn't need to be the WHOLE stadium

[Digby]

My thing with US Bank Stadium is that having a giant domed stadium downtown like that is just hideous. It's ugly on the city skyline and it feels like a downtown dead zone, even though it's not surrounded by a sea of parking. Those are the one genre of stadium that I'm fine with keeping in the burbs or city outskirts. Arenas, baseball, soccer, even some college stadiums can fit much more neatly and naturally into the urban fabric.

 

I will say that while I am by no means a "bike guy", I find myself biking or scootering everywhere when in Minneapolis, so mission accomplished. Not bad for a city covered in ice 6 months a year.

[BBTV]

12 hours ago, The_Admiral said:

I hope the one Super Bowl was worth it.

 

It was. 

 

[GhostOfNormMacdonald]

    I guess I will be the 10th dentist and say I like it in the skyline. The MPLS skyline looks so good from so many angles for a city of it's size, and I find myself admiring US Bank whenever I'm driving in from the north or east. It looks like a futuristic Stave church, which fits the glass and steel faux-Scandi vibe of MPLS. I'd prefer an open stadium, but not because of how it looks in the skyline   

[OnWis97]

9 hours ago, chcarlson23 said:

Minneapolis is now apparently the most bike-able city in the US. It’s definitely cool to see a big city try to take steps to make it a more welcoming city to be in. (The suburbs are a whole other mess with a lot of them having the opposite priority, a la Blaine, Woodbury, even the beloved Maple Grove.)

 

St. Paul isn’t half bad when it comes to biking but certainly falls behind. But they are numbers 2 and 3 in park systems rankings across the US, only falling behind DC. About 99% of people living in the two, are within a 10 minute walk of a park, and often a park that has really nice amenities, like playgrounds, trails, benches, and other nice stuff. I currently live about 5 minutes away from 2 and probably another 5 from at least 4 more 

I live in St. Paul and we're doing pretty well, too. I bike about 120 miles a week (weather permitting, of course) from just north of downtown. I have nearly limitless access to miles...of course a lot of those miles are suburban (and when I cross the US 52 Bridge, I take a couple of routes in surprisingly well-covered Dakota County). It's not quite up to MPLS standards but it's doing OK for itself. That all said, I have no experience attempting the suburbs you mention.

 

In any case, particular to the sporting arena subject, the Minnesota teams are doing far better than the good old days of the Met and the Met Center (both of which I am old enough to have gone to, though barely old enough to remember the former). Biking to Target Field/Center can be done from almost anywhere and while I generally agree with the Admiral on the Vikings Stadium in terms of bilking the taxpayers (though I think the aforementioned playoff choke being in dangerous cold points to playing indoors as a good idea), it's outrageously accessible. It's probably a bit less comfortable to bike the Xcel Center (never done it; have walked) but doable for the experienced rider, anyway.

 

3 hours ago, GhostOfNormMacdonald said:

 I like US Bank, but I agree that we just should have built an open stadium. We can do all the kitschy faux-Scandi stuff to decorate the stadium, it doesn't need to be the WHOLE stadium

I think it's a bit overrated in that almost any ranking from both known publications and randos has it top-5; frequently #1. It's tacky from the outside. The concourses are gray and don't seem to have improved on the Metrodome significantly in terms of actually moving people through. The big opening doors are nice, the purple seats are great (compared to the sterile blue of the Dome), and the viewing is great. But is it the best  venue in the NFL? Hell no. Is it top 5? Heck no.

[GDAWG]

3 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

It was. 

 

 

Only one of two QB's to defeat Tom Brady in a Super Bowl.  Also, Brady is the only one so far to defeat Patrick Mahomes in a Super Bowl.  

[spartacat_12]

4 hours ago, GhostOfNormMacdonald said:

 I like US Bank, but I agree that we just should have built an open stadium. We can do all the kitschy faux-Scandi stuff to decorate the stadium, it doesn't need to be the WHOLE stadium

 

Pretty sure the Vikings wanted to build an open stadium, but the state would only agree to provide public funding if they built an indoor facility that could be used for the Super Bowl, Final Four, etc.