Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 23, 2024, 05:26:23 am
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
News: Brian Fein is now blogging weekly!  Make sure to check the homepage for his latest editorial.
+  The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums
|-+  TDMMC Forums
| |-+  Around the NFL (Moderators: Spider-Dan, MyGodWearsAHoodie)
| | |-+  Roger Goodell holding the City of Miami hostage
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: Roger Goodell holding the City of Miami hostage  (Read 5373 times)
ethurst22
Guest
« on: January 06, 2010, 03:58:51 pm »

This is just great.

Roger Goodell wants stadium improvements in excess of 200 million bucks while peoples homes are being foreclosed upon at record rates in the Miami-dade county area. When are people going to say "enough is enough?".

This is nothing but a shakedown of the taxpayer. I thought that Huiezenga paid for the improvements that were needed at the stadium and now Goodell comes along and says the facilities are not adequate?

What more does Goodell want? Jet powered outhouses in the parking lot?

But knowing the lame Miami-Dade politicians that would kill do anything to get their name on something big, they will probably cave in while the homeless sleep under the Airport expressway bridge.
Logged
MyGodWearsAHoodie
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 14505



« Reply #1 on: January 06, 2010, 04:07:32 pm »

I don't know if he is holding Miami hostage.  He has said that unless MIA makes improvements the 30 year old stadium will have a hard time competing to get future superbowls.  Which make sense when you have stadiums like Dallas who also want to host the superbowl and they have a much more awesome stadium than Landshark.  He has told Foxoboro the only way we a superbowl is we add a roof.  How is that different? 
Logged

There are two rules for success:
 1. Never tell everything you know.
ethurst22
Guest
« Reply #2 on: January 06, 2010, 04:20:06 pm »

I don't know if he is holding Miami hostage.  He has said that unless MIA makes improvements the 30 year old stadium will have a hard time competing to get future superbowls.  Which make sense when you have stadiums like Dallas who also want to host the superbowl and they have a much more awesome stadium than Landshark.  He has told Foxoboro the only way we a superbowl is we add a roof.  How is that different? 

But didn't Huizenga make the improvements that were needed for the Sb that was held in 2006? That's just three years ago. What would be outdated? During that time, Uncle Wayne was catching grief for pouring more into the stadium than the product out on the field. When is enough good enough?
Logged
Sunstroke
YJFF Member
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 22855

Stop your bloodclot cryin'!


Email
« Reply #3 on: January 06, 2010, 04:29:06 pm »

Man, talk about your industrial strength overreactions...

The title of this thread should probably be:

"Roger Goodell conducts business with Miami exactly as every other pro sports commissioner has conducted business with event host cities in the history of pro sports"

OK, it's a little long for a title, but the accuracy is spot on. Wink

Logged

"There's no such thing as objectivity. We're all just interpreting signals from the universe and trying to make sense of them. Dim, shaky, weak, staticky little signals that only hint at the complexity of a universe that we cannot begin to comprehend."
~ Micah Leggat
MyGodWearsAHoodie
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 14505



« Reply #4 on: January 06, 2010, 04:32:22 pm »

But didn't Huizenga make the improvements that were needed for the Sb that was held in 2006? That's just three years ago. What would be outdated? During that time, Uncle Wayne was catching grief for pouring more into the stadium than the product out on the field. When is enough good enough?

That was before Dallas built the largest TV in the world.  If you think Mia is as nice as Dallas to hold a SB you gotta be kidding.  MIA can upgrade to be one of the best stadiums to hold the SB or not.  But if 4 or 5 stadiums are nice venues why the hell should the sb be held in MIA?  
Logged

There are two rules for success:
 1. Never tell everything you know.
Sunstroke
YJFF Member
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 22855

Stop your bloodclot cryin'!


Email
« Reply #5 on: January 06, 2010, 04:42:51 pm »


^^^ Because Miami is a helluva lot nicer place for visiting NFL fans to vacation than Dallas?

Logged

"There's no such thing as objectivity. We're all just interpreting signals from the universe and trying to make sense of them. Dim, shaky, weak, staticky little signals that only hint at the complexity of a universe that we cannot begin to comprehend."
~ Micah Leggat
bsmooth
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 4638


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


« Reply #6 on: January 06, 2010, 07:00:49 pm »

That was before Dallas built the largest TV in the world.  If you think Mia is as nice as Dallas to hold a SB you gotta be kidding.  MIA can upgrade to be one of the best stadiums to hold the SB or not.  But if 4 or 5 stadiums are nice venues why the hell should the sb be held in MIA?  

So in order to host a SB you have to build a billion dollar stadium?
Logged
MyGodWearsAHoodie
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 14505



« Reply #7 on: January 06, 2010, 09:04:20 pm »

So in order to host a SB you have to build a billion dollar stadium?

Personally I think the rule should be last years SB winner hosts it this year.  And if you don't want to sit outside in Feburary in Greenbay to watch a football game...watch it from home. 

But if we are going to select the stadium based on nicest place to watch....the stadium shouldn't be a run down 30 years old place when nicer ones exist. 
Logged

There are two rules for success:
 1. Never tell everything you know.
Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15677



« Reply #8 on: January 07, 2010, 10:16:53 am »

I would absolutely love to see a cold weather Super Bowl with a nice covering of snow.

Logged
jtex316
YJFF Member
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 11007


2011 NFC East Champions!


« Reply #9 on: January 07, 2010, 10:20:49 am »

Green bay ain't good enough to win a Super Bowl, so you don't have to worry about sitting in the freezing cold Smiley

I still think that I'd like to see a neutral site for the Super Bowl. A big large city that does not have an NFL team could host the Super Bowl every year and you can lead up to it every year, like, "The road to ___, 2010".

I know a big city in the USA that does not have an NFL franchise - Los Angeles!! They could build a fantastic new Super Bowl stadium with a dome and play it there every single year.
Logged

Giants: '56 NFL Champs; Super Bowl XXI, XXV, XLII Champs
Dave Gray
Administrator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 30797

It's doo-doo, baby!

26384964 davebgray@comcast.net davebgray floridadavegray
WWW Email
« Reply #10 on: January 07, 2010, 12:15:03 pm »

I think that having a singular site for the game would be a mistake.  The multiple city thing gives you a unique opportunity to show off the city's characteristics, something that would be lost if it were in L.A. every year.  I'd like to see the Super Bowl go more in that direction and be kinda like the Olympics, tailored around that city.

Also, this is all about money.  You're not going to get as much influx of cash in Green Bay.  They just aren't currently capable of providing for that kind of event.  Also, you want people to travel and spend money in hotels and bars and everything else.  There's going to be a lot less of that, if you're asking people to travel to the freezing cold in February.
Logged

I drink your milkshake!
Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15677



« Reply #11 on: January 07, 2010, 01:28:18 pm »

I don't think the site makes any difference. People are going to go to the Super Bowl either way. Detroit just hosted one and that is about the most depleted city I can think of so destination isn't the driving factor (although the cold may keep a certain type pf person away I still would predict a sellout easily).
Logged
Dave Gray
Administrator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 30797

It's doo-doo, baby!

26384964 davebgray@comcast.net davebgray floridadavegray
WWW Email
« Reply #12 on: January 07, 2010, 01:39:42 pm »

^^

Absolutely, the game would sell out.  That's not the question.

It's about the other money -- sponsorships, hotels, bars, restaurants, other events in the area, pre-game, post-game, etc.

That's the money that would get lost, and I think that's where most of the big money is spent anyway, not on the actual ticket.
Logged

I drink your milkshake!
jtex316
YJFF Member
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 11007


2011 NFC East Champions!


« Reply #13 on: January 07, 2010, 01:44:16 pm »

Why can't they give a "neutral" site a shot and see how ti works?

They can pack 90,000 into the L.A. Coliseum...right? L.A. is a big city with clubs, shopping, bars, casinos, beaches, etc...and it's a warm-weather climate, right?

LA Can't get a stadium for a team...maybe they can get the Super Bowl stadium?
Logged

Giants: '56 NFL Champs; Super Bowl XXI, XXV, XLII Champs
Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15677



« Reply #14 on: January 07, 2010, 01:55:17 pm »

^^

Absolutely, the game would sell out.  That's not the question.

It's about the other money -- sponsorships, hotels, bars, restaurants, other events in the area, pre-game, post-game, etc.

That's the money that would get lost, and I think that's where most of the big money is spent anyway, not on the actual ticket.

I don't get your theory. If people attend the game they have to use hotels, restaurants, etc. The less outside distraction away from those (as a city like Miami has beaches) the more time is spent in the areas you say would lose out. Can you expand on why they would lose money?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

The Dolphins Make Me Cry - Copyright© 2008 - Designed and Marketed by Dave Gray


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines