So Just What Do We All Want Stadium-Wise?

[GabyKeepsMeWarm]

This is a Chiefs board, so I know and expect to see some obvious bias toward the Chiefs over the Royals in this forum. This is weighted even moreso towards the Chiefs favor due to their incredible run over the past six years.

I know we all love the Chiefs, but there are a lot of Royals fans too. KC has historically been a very, very good sports town, and great host for the Chiefs and Royals. Weird that the teams never seem to be good at the same time, though maybe that will change if BWJr and the boys in blue can get something going during what is now the Mahomes Era.

But I digress... sorry, I get long-winded sometimes. What do we all want stadium-wise going forward? Enough of this sky is falling horseshit where both teams are getting their ducks in a row to get the hell out of KC. I don't buy that for a second. Maybe you don't agree, that's fine. But I really want to know what the people of this board would like to see happen, because there will be another vote within the next year or two with future proposals. So what do we want these proposals to ideally be?

[wazu]

Originally Posted by kysirsoze

A billion dollars of tax payers money is required for that? Also, the Packers are owned by the city, aren't they? Of course they aren't talking about moving. If KC owned the Chiefs this wouldn't be an issue and we'd probably have bleachers, too.

I think the Chiefs threw out a half assed renovation plan and attached it to a doomed Royals proposal because they wanted to lose. Now they can say "we tried" and move to Kansas to have their shiny new stadium in the area they'd prefer. I don't want to leave Arrowhead and I'll miss it, but if this is what Clark wants, he's gonna get it.

I don't think anybody realized that the Royals plan was doomed until long after the Chiefs added their plan to the ballot question. I think the majority thought it would probably "barely pass". So if Clark was hard-charging to get out of it, he took a major risk. Plus their ads talking about there's "no place better than Arrowhead" specifically.

I suppose if we really see zero effort to independently pass something for Arrowhead that isn't intertwined with a controversial downtown baseball plan that will bolster your theory.

[kysirsoze]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

There are roughly a half dozen wealthy owners that control the Packers. The ownership certificates the fans own in the form of "stock" are trinkets.

Ok, fair enough. Never did quite get their whole deal.

[kcbubb]

Originally Posted by Mr_Tomahawk

Level Bally’s and put the Royals on the riverfront, near the current stadium. Activate the riverfront and what a sight coming in town from the north.

Keep Arrowhead where it is at. Modernize the finishes, but don’t screw with the seating. But bring back the rolling roof that will cover the stadium or a performance pavilion of sort adjacent to it.

I don’t think the ballys site is large enough? Could wheeler airport be relocated? Lots of land there?

[Woogieman]

Originally Posted by Dante84

It won’t happen, but I wish they would just tear down everything in the West bottoms area, and drop the new Arrowhead in there, and have the Royals go to the East Village site.

But the smell...it's not constant, but when it kicks, it causes Havana Syndrome.

[srvy]

I don't see how Jackson Countians will ever trust Shyster Sherman after all his dirty tricks trying to get this passed. He may move them or sell the team. I'd be all for that dudes a turd and have always been.

[Woogieman]

Originally Posted by Titty Meat

So I have a question for you and other folks on here who say new stadium in Kansas. A quick look at the numbers and if I'm wrong please correct me. The total Kansas 2023 budget was 9 billion, Kansas City's budget was 2 billion, Missouri's was 44 billion.

What would stop a new stadium being built in say Lee's Summit? If it comes down to money Kansas is out gunned by a wide margin

Good thoughts...what we haven't seen yet is much from Mike Parson...I would expect the State of Missouri to step up and get involved with grants or muni bonds to calm down the Chiefs FO. The Latter Day Saints just released 2,000 acres for sale along 470. However, they would still have to deal with Jackson County (but maybe not Frank White, as there was a petition to sack him at the polling location!).

[Woogieman]

Originally Posted by srvy

I don't see how Jackson Countians will ever trust Shyster Sherman after all his dirty tricks trying to get this passed. He may move them or sell the team. I'd be all for that dudes a turd and have always been.

In all honesty, I don't think he is, I think his strength is oil and gas, not real estate development, marketing, and PR. I think he was burned by consulting firms he relied on, who were in way too deep as they started the feasibility studies likely before he bought the team. The official process started in an economic boom, and when the economy soured, they couldn't/wouldn't correct the course. Not excusing their poor performance, but I don't think doing "business as usual" on tax projects (that have always passed) makes someone an evil POS

[Hoover]

Originally Posted by ptlyon

What we got

That answer just doesn't work. I understand that's how you feel and its legitimate, but from a team (ie business perspective) it just doesn't work that way.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I love Arrowhead and the gameday experience. And I'm not a Jackson County taxpayer.

But I'm also realistic and Arrowhead is on borrowed time. That being the case, there's no sense in limping along here. The stadium was built in such a way that it just cannot continue to keep pace with other franchises through renovation. And if we are going to be (and should be) a crown jewel franchise for the next 10-15 years (and hell, we weren't dogfood before Mahomes), that's not tenable.

So I think I'm ready for a new stadium. And if that stadium is going to be done well, it's not going to be in Jackson County. So if that means a move to Wyandotte, I'll set my anti-Kansas bias aside because it's probably best for the Chiefs long-term.

So include me in the 'new stadium near the Legends' crowd. Or wherever it will need to go to get the kind of revenue that would make building a true state of the art stadium worthwhile for Hunt and the residents of wherever it's gonna go...

I expect that means a dome for a future SB or other events. And I hate that. So my compromise would be one where there are rules in place for when the roof can be used. I can't recall which stadium did that, but there's a baseball stadium somewhere that has it written into the lease that the roof cannot be closed on days where the weather is between X and Y degrees and there's no rain.

Would I miss the snow games? Yeah. Would I miss rain and frigid cold? No, not really. And again, that's going to mean a hell of a lot more revenue and thus more willingness by Hunt to pull out some of the stops and make this a stadium worthy of replacing an icon.

What I don't want to see is what the Cardinals did in STL. They tore down Busch II and replaced it with a generic retro ballpark that just isn't special in any way because they did it on the cheap. Man I'd hate to see that (and I worry that's what's in store for Kaufman, which is just an incredible place to catch a baseball game to this day. They're going to replace it with something that isn't as good)

This is a really good post.

Here is my my take on all of this.

1. The public has do decide if they want a piece of the action or not. I get the argument that the tax payer shouldn't have foot the bill for a new baseball stadium downtown when they love the existing one. And why are we building stadiums for rich owners anyway.

On the other hand, by not extending an existing tax that helps fund the stadiums, both teams will explore their options and they are going to do what's in their best financial interest. While I think the Chiefs are locked into the area, baseball is a different story, what if Oklahoma City really wants a baseball team? It wouldn't surprise me at all if they would bend over backwards to build a downtown stadium. Another option would be Nashville. Both of those cities would love to bring another sports franchise to their cities, and if I were them I'd be aggressive as hell. Going to either city makes sense for both the city and team.

2. As someone mentioned here the other day the Chiefs are now in a power position. If they did decided to leave the Truman Sports complex, people will rightly point to this vote as the reason why it didn't work.

If I'm the Chiefs, I can't justify sinking hundreds of millions of dollars into facilities that they public no longer wants to support and the team doesn't own. So the only option for the Truman Sports Complex is for the county to sell it to Hunt and the Chiefs. Its a great piece of property, but you are going to sell it for pennies on the dollar (like the Snead trade) because you are getting the Hunt family to permanently stay and invst there and in return you get to property tax revenue from the property.

The Chiefs owning the Truman Sports Complex allows them to totally reimagine it. I'm sure local governments would give the team some tax incentives (TIF) to help with the cost of redevelopment. You could also give the team a sales tax rebate which would allow them to keep a chunk of the sales tax generated on the grounds for period of time.

Such incentives would encourage the team to build a new stadium, build new state of the art facilities, and probably an entertainment district (Hotels, Restaurants, and Bars), which is what I want to see done.

[srvy]

Originally Posted by kcbubb

I don’t think the ballys site is large enough? Could wheeler airport be relocated? Lots of land there?

I doubt the city would want to do that. That airports gets a lot of traffic with commuter and executive airlines.

One place I find interesting is that shithole Harlem. Its on the North side Missouri River between the New Buck O'Neil Bridge and Heart of America Bridge. It has an excellent view of downtown and is still KCMo. It may still be Jackson County because of the river channel change for Municipal Airport.

[Woogieman]

Originally Posted by notorious

And they are used 365 days a year.

and climate controlled...only exterior facade is exposed to the elements and is not load bearing like upper tanks and columns

[Woogieman]

Originally Posted by srvy

I doubt the city would want to do that. That airports gets a lot of traffic with commuter and executive airlines.

One place I find interesting is that shithole Harlem. Its on the North side Missouri River between the New Buck O'Neil Bridge and Heart of America Bridge. It has an excellent view of downtown and is still KCMo. It may still be Jackson County because of the river channel change for Municipal Airport.

I was just looking at that area...move Wheeler to the big field where the Arabian Steam Boat was excavated (both are Flood Zones) across the river south of Parkville. Probably very expensive to build on flood plain, but at least it's out of Jackson Co.

[kcbubb]

Interesting. You’d have buy out a lot of other properties for harlem to be big enough? And you’d have to relocate the rail road system. You’d probably need to go all the way to 10th Ave to get enough land. That just seems more complicated with so many moving parts. With the airport, it’s just one property. You don’t have to disrupt the railroad either.

Originally Posted by srvy

I doubt the city would want to do that. That airports gets a lot of traffic with commuter and executive airlines.

One place I find interesting is that shithole Harlem. Its on the North side Missouri River between the New Buck O'Neil Bridge and Heart of America Bridge. It has an excellent view of downtown and is still KCMo. It may still be Jackson County because of the river channel change for Municipal Airport.

[Woogieman]

I think the best plan is putting the Arrowhead renovation funds in escrow, pass gambling (Missouri will eventually, they always take the "Show Me" approach and watch what happens in other states first), go "River Quay" on KC Tenants HQ, and build a shiny new stadium with bigger screens and a retractable roof...turf is out of the question. KC will never host a SB though, and I personally could GAF. When the stadium is complete, tix will be about $8,000.

I still can't picture a better site for the Royals than the Crossroads...with the ability to walk from CBD and P&L to the stadium via the South Loop Parks, and the street car coming all the way from UMKC or Brookside, that would be a destination trip anyone in the country would think is cool. Again, RIver Quaying the KC Tenants is a great 1st step

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by wazu

"NOTHING" (Except keep in tact the greatest home field advantage in all of sports and an iconic, historic venue.)

In the Andy Reid era the Chiefs home record has been 66-24 vs. 62-27 on the road.

They're a little better at home than they are on the road, just as the average NFL team is.

You can tell yourself whatever you want, but that's an awfully tough sell to the people that actually have to foot that bill.

[DJ's left nut]

Interesting idea, Hoover. Has it actually been floated at all?

Maybe if you give Clark a free hand with the land in the area (and take the Royals out of there so that he can build that sort of entertainment district where they're sitting) he'll convince himself that he can manage what city leaders have failed at for so long.

It really is just a question of making the investment worthwhile for him. If he thinks it can be done in a way that allows them to stay in Jackson County, I suspect Arrowhead is still being replaced, but he'd probably be happy to do so and build a new stadium if it the investment can be recovered.

And for that to be the case I think you're right - it's gotta be his land. Jackson County would still benefit hugely by the tax revenues (sales tax in addition to property). Though without the Chiefs, what's the actual value of that land anyway?