Another new proposed site for a Vikings stadium.

[trekbkr]

Then sell beer for Vikings games but not Gophers games. People make life harder than it has to be.

Just say the land isn't on University property.

LOL what?

You've never heard of that? Colleges do it all the time. They'll have an open container ban on the campus, but to get around it for the stadium (ie. tailgating) the stadium will be registered on general town property so its not subjected to University laws.

An easier thing to do would be to just lower the drinking age, but the moralists behind the law don't want to face the consiquences of what the law actually does and would rather believe it does what they want it to do, so it'll be around for awhile.

By that, do you mean they actually convey the property to some other entity, or that they merely re-draw the boundaries of the campus so the stadium is on the outside?

Does the University of Minnesota make any kind of distinction between "University-owned property" and "campus property" when it comes to alcohol policy? If not, then it wouldn't matter where the campus boundaries are. That'd be good info to find out.

[pmoehrin]

Then sell beer for Vikings games but not Gophers games. People make life harder than it has to be.

Just say the land isn't on University property.

LOL what?

You've never heard of that? Colleges do it all the time. They'll have an open container ban on the campus, but to get around it for the stadium (ie. tailgating) the stadium will be registered on general town property so its not subjected to University laws.

An easier thing to do would be to just lower the drinking age, but the moralists behind the law don't want to face the consiquences of what the law actually does and would rather believe it does what they want it to do, so it'll be around for awhile.

By that, do you mean they actually convey the property to some other entity, or that they merely re-draw the boundaries of the campus so the stadium is on the outside?

Does the University of Minnesota make any kind of distinction between "University-owned property" and "campus property" when it comes to alcohol policy? If not, then it wouldn't matter where the campus boundaries are. That'd be good info to find out.

I would say redrawing the boundry would solve your problem no matter what.

What your reffering to with Unveristy owned versus campus property are details that I really don't care to look into. Every college is different with alcohol policies, and its not my job to know what those differences are.

Point is that its easy to make legal maneuverings to solve this issue.

[The_Admiral]

lol at hand-wringing over responsible and situationally appropriate alcohol consumption in the upper midwest.

[Gothamite]

Maybe yes, maybe no. If you don't care to learn anything about the University's policy, then you can't really say it's easy to circumvent.

[trekbkr]

I would say redrawing the boundry would solve your problem no matter what.

What your reffering to with Unveristy owned versus campus property are details that I really don't care to look into. Every college is different with alcohol policies, and its not my job to know what those differences are.

Point is that its easy to make legal maneuverings to solve this issue.

But knowing those differences helps define the issue that needs solving. If the U's policy is no alcohol on any U-owned property, and they refuse to budge on the matter, then what you're describing would require actually conveying the land to some other entity -- presumably the City of Minneapolis or the Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission, but I suppose anyone with enough money could theoretically take it off their hands. We're talking about a fairly complex conveyance of a piece of real estate worth millions of dollars. That's no mere "registration" issue, but one of real property law, with all its associated hoop-jumping and red tape. NOW you're talking about mountains being made from molehills, all for the sake of beer sales. If, on the other hand, the policy simply applies only to whatever area is defined as "the campus", then your boundary-moving proposal may be more sound. That's why the distinction may be worth looking into -- not necessarily by you, but by whatever movers-n-shakers may be interested in the Vikings playing at TCF.

[pmoehrin]

Maybe yes, maybe no. If you don't care to learn anything about the University's policy, then you can't really say it's easy to circumvent.

I may not know much about law, but I do know this issue is very much solveable if indeed came up. That's pretty much all I was trying to get at. If you redraw the boundry you don't have to worry about about any alcohol policies and I know for a fact that colleges do it, so how hard can it be?

I'm just not getting caught up in hammering out details of a case that doesen't even exist. If people are that into it, research it yourself. I don't the have the time to look into nonsense like that, nor do I really care to either. If more is required to do it then what I am saying, then there's more work required. I can't get caught up in proving a point about an issue that I could really care less about, so this is the last comment I'm going to make on the subject.

[Gothamite]

I don't the have the time to look into nonsense like that

Hey, it was your post.

[pmoehrin]

I don't the have the time to look into nonsense like that

Hey, it was your post.

And I regret even brining it up.

[Gothamite]

I just bet you do. I think that's one of those things that seems really simple, but turns out to be very complicated. Which is why it's not a likely solution to their problem (not to mention that it wouldn't address the Vikings' capacity problems, or the fact that the stadium naming rights are already sold).

[pmoehrin]

I just bet you do. I think that's one of those things that seems really simple, but turns out to be very complicated. Which is why it's not a likely solution to their problem (not to mention that it wouldn't address the Vikings' capacity problems, or the fact that the stadium naming rights are already sold).

All I really said was that it was doable. That's it. I just offered one example of a situation where it was doable. That's all I want to leave it to.

Not interested in having a full detailed conversation on the subject. If others want to go at it, be my guest, just leave me out it. Personally I think people tend to take themselves way too seriously about things that things aren't even going to happen when you start getting into those kinds of conversations. I'm also smart enough to know that I don't know much about the subject, which is another reason why I want to steer clear. If I say one general item and its wrong, I'm okay with that. At least I didn't put much effort into being wrong.

[Gothamite]

At least I didn't put much effort into being wrong.

No, you're a natural.

Relax, I'm just kidding.

[NatsFan2004]

What is so terrible about having to share a stadium?

Well, speaking from the college perspective, a lot. Most of it has to do with recruiting and competing in an environment with other peer institutions that have their own dedicated on-campus venues. In the Big 10, for example, you're already in a competitive environment in which every other school has their own non-shared venue.

With a dedicated on-campus venue, you can more effectively pitch your program to prospective high school players and get better talent to sign with your school. For these reasons:

* You can tout the convenience of the football venue being close to where the kids go to class, train, eat etc.

* You can have dedicated school sports exhibits that don't have to share space with the pro team (if they're allowed at all). This provides for solid eye candy on recruiting visits.

* You can have all the seats and stadium color scheme in your school's colors. Again, eye candy for recruiting visits.

* You can potentially incorporate the team offices, film room, weight room, training room, academic affairs, dining hall, etc. into the building, meaning that the athlete only has to go into one building instead of a half-dozen.

Ultimately, college and NFL venues are fundamentally different in what they are designed to do. College stadiums are designed to attract attention from college recruits to make the program successful, as well as to please athletic donors/boosters that support the program. NFL stadiums are designed to generate cold, hard cash in large quantities. Just because they have a grass (or turf) field in the middle doesn't mean they are the same or necessarily compatible.

[pmoehrin]

What is so terrible about having to share a stadium?

Well, speaking from the college perspective, a lot. Most of it has to do with recruiting and competing in an environment with other peer institutions that have their own dedicated on-campus venues. In the Big 10, for example, you're already in a competitive environment in which every other school has their own non-shared venue.

With a dedicated on-campus venue, you can more effectively pitch your program to prospective high school players and get better talent to sign with your school. For these reasons:

* You can tout the convenience of the football venue being close to where the kids go to class, train, eat etc.

* You can have dedicated school sports exhibits that don't have to share space with the pro team (if they're allowed at all). This provides for solid eye candy on recruiting visits.

* You can have all the seats and stadium color scheme in your school's colors. Again, eye candy for recruiting visits.

* You can potentially incorporate the team offices, film room, weight room, training room, academic affairs, dining hall, etc. into the building, meaning that the athlete only has to go into one building instead of a half-dozen.

Ultimately, college and NFL venues are fundamentally different in what they are designed to do. College stadiums are designed to attract attention from college recruits to make the program successful, as well as to please athletic donors/boosters that support the program. NFL stadiums are designed to generate cold, hard cash in large quantities. Just because they have a grass (or turf) field in the middle doesn't mean they are the same or necessarily compatible.

I'm not going to argue that its not nicer. But when were talking about several hundred millions of dollars in difference with taxpayer dollars, I think the Golden Gopher football program can afford a tougher time recruiting. And when six college teams are sharing a stadium with an NFL team, I think its possible to do.

I also worked for a college team for two years. You'd always like to have more, but you make due with what you have.

[gosioux76]

I've always been of the belief that as long as the Los Angeles market remains vacant, the Vikings have all the leverage they need. The second Jacksonville or St. Louis or anyone else moves west, the Vikings will be at the table ready to compromise.

[rams80]

The Gophers draw very well too. I'm sure there wouldn't have many issues with filling a 75,000 either at or close to capacity.

Ummm.....What. The Gophers had trouble cracking 50,000 in the Metrodome. I'm not quite sure where you're going to find 25,000 more certifiably sick s to buy season tickets for Gopher football.

As for playing bureaucratic games to sell beer in stadia, I don't think as many major schools do that as you think.

[rams80]

I'm not going to argue that its not nicer. But when were talking about several hundred millions of dollars in difference with taxpayer dollars, I think the Golden Gopher football program can afford a tougher time recruiting. And when six college teams are sharing a stadium with an NFL team, I think its possible to do.

Except 4 of the 6 are mid-major teams that by their less-than-august status would settle for anything. Minnesota (I think anyway) has slightly greater aspirations.

[dfwabel]

Some quick things to remember:

1-This land is recommended by a private businessman who does not even own the property in question just land AROUND his proposed location. He wants to profit from the location of his property to the location. Even is the site is chosen, there still is the issue of financing.

2-The University of Minnesota already owns a liquor license. They just do not use it in their athletic facilities on a gameday.

3- While at the Metrodome, both the Gophers and Twins did not receive suite revenues as all the private suites are owned by the Vikings. It was not until 2006 when the Twins and Gophers earned some revenue as 16 private suites were converted into two "Party Suites".

[OnWis97]

Story

According to this, they're getting close in the northern 'burbs.

[Gothamite]

That's good. As much as I want to see a team in LA immediately, I don't want that team to be the Vikings.

But options are narrowing - Hennepin County has taken itself out of the running. That appears to kill the Minnesota Farmers' Market site.

[smith03]

I have a feeling we have not heard the end ofthe "Farmers Market" site quite yet.