Page 103 of 147

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 2:06 pm
by Bill Carson
dead_poet wrote:Lawmakers favoring electronic pulltabs for new Vikings stadium
http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_19829074?source=rss
From the article:
The Vikings played their last game under their old lease with the Metrodome on Jan. 1, and team officials vow they won't renew unless they get a stadium deal.
That's some nice posturing, but seriously, what choice would they have?

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 2:18 pm
by Eli
Bill Carson wrote:That's some nice posturing, but seriously, what choice would they have?
Gopher Field. Sign a lease and throw down the $30M to do the necessary upgrades, even if it's just to pressure the powers that be. And if they're going to end up playing there anyway for seven or eight years while the new stadium is being built, the money spent is a wash.

And if the state of Minnesota won't let them sign a lease on Gopher Field, play the ****ing season in Iowa or Wisconsin.

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 3:54 pm
by HornedMessiah
Eli wrote:And if the state of Minnesota won't let them sign a lease on Gopher Field, play the ****ing season in Iowa or Wisconsin.
I'm sure Fargo would gladly take them. :mrgreen:

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 6:04 pm
by glg
I'm talking too damned much about Soldier, so I'll just reply to everyone in one post ;)
HornedMessiah wrote:I'll take your word on it, seeing as your a Chicagoan. :D

I did read an article recently that said it was renovation, so bad reporter, whoever that was.
They call it a renovation on the bears own website. But if you look at the scope of what they did, "renovation" seems light.

Good Description. Also mentions them starting on infrastructure work 6 months before the last game, dealing with water, sewer, electric in the area before demo started. ie, for the Dome, that'd mean starting site work this spring while still playing in the Dome this year.

Here's another one I found about how they replaced the foundation, which they're not talking about doing with the Dome.

http://www.hammersteel.com/09-08-03-sol ... edule.html

Also has a good picture. That second shot is looking north at the Field Museum (possibly taken from the eastern facade), you can see that the entire stadium is gone down to the ground and they're putting in the pilings for the new foundation.

thatguy wrote:I understand that. But with the Dome site, don't you have to account for the time of destroying the whole thing, cleaning it up, etc. etc.?
They destroyed everything but the facade at Soldier. The entire seating bowl, concourses, etc. They had to clean all that up. And not harm the old facade in the process. Note that they did have the north end open, so it's not like they were taking debris out the doors or over the walls or anything.

My point stands. If Soldier could be done in 20 months (1 season out), I do not see how the Dome site couldn't get done in 32 (2 seasons out).

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 1:53 am
by thatguy
lol I'm not trying to argue...but doesn't it help their timing a little when the infrastructure was being implemented before the Bears' season was even done? They had the advantage of knowing where they were going to need to do construction rather than the Vikings who would have to figure all that out once the deal was done.

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 6:15 pm
by bigskyeric
I'd say two as well. A roof either retractable or fixed is going to add a lot of time. New infrastructure is going to be the biggest hurdle. If they want to make it larger, roads will have to be moved. Etc...etc....... And you also have to take into account the weather. While chicago isn't warm in the winter by any means, I'm thinking the possibility of a nasty minnesota winter could effect progress. Maybe the three year timeframe is to make sure they have the time needed in case things don't go as planned.

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 9:08 am
by dead_poet
Commissioner Roger Goodell said on NBC Sports Network's Costas Live that if the league places a team in Los Angeles, the NFL probably would add two more franchises to make it 34.

Goodell said the league "doesn't want to move any of our teams" and "we probably don't want to go to 33" if the NFL decides on expansion over relocation. An odd number of teams would present scheduling issues. Goodell's statement is good news for fans of the Rams, Jaguars, Vikings, and Chargers, as those are the franchises most linked to a Los Angeles relocation.
Source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... th-costas/

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2012 9:15 pm
by glg
dead_poet wrote:Goodell said the league "doesn't want to move any of our teams" and "we probably don't want to go to 33" if the NFL decides on expansion over relocation. An odd number of teams would present scheduling issues. Goodell's statement is good news for fans of the Rams, Jaguars, Vikings, and Chargers, as those are the franchises most linked to a Los Angeles relocation.
Source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... th-costas/
The owners of those teams are all livid with Goodell for hurting their leverage.

When they discussed this on PTI, Tony and Mike mentioned the Rams, Chargers and Jags, but not the Vikes.

Stadium thread

Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2012 11:47 pm
by CalVike
Here we go again, the newest site next to Metrodome is now gaining favor.

http://m.startribune.com/politics/?id=138721284&c=y
Negotiators are hurriedly finishing a plan that would have a new Minnesota Vikings stadium alongside the Metrodome substantially complete by 2016, requiring the team to play only a handful of games at the University of Minnesota.

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2012 12:04 am
by Eli
The latest proposal would have the Vikings play at the Metrodome through 2015. By that time, a new stadium next-door would be 75 percent complete. The Metrodome would be torn down and turned into a large plaza for pregame activities, according to both Mondale and a Vikings spokesman. The space would be large enough to accommodate a $19 million parking ramp for the team.

"I would think 2016 would be the 'go live' year," Mondale said. "Maybe the first two games you play" at the university's TCF Bank Stadium, "but before it gets cold, you'd be ready to go."
2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 at the dome ... and then a couple games at TCF in 2016. ???

They sure do things a lot slower in Minnesota, don't they?

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2012 3:57 pm
by bigskyeric
Eli wrote: 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 at the dome ... and then a couple games at TCF in 2016. ???

They sure do things a lot slower in Minnesota, don't they?
I believe Winter has a lot to do with it. Construction stops in the winter due to Road restrictions. If you can't transport heavy machinery, you can't build stuff.

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2012 5:45 pm
by PurpleMustReign
CalVike wrote:Here we go again, the newest site next to Metrodome is now gaining favor.

http://m.startribune.com/politics/?id=138721284&c=y

This is my favorite site so far. They woule be able to have a nice tailgating lot and it is close to where the Dome is now.

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:47 pm
by dead_poet
Board moves toward potential stadium site cleanup
Acceptable financing plan still missing from Vikings preferred site in Arden Hills.

http://www.startribune.com/local/east/138854074.html

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 2:16 pm
by dead_poet
Duluth politico knows his audience. Wants to fund #Vikings stadium with revenue from lifting state restriction on Sunday liquor sales.
ESPN Blogs NFC North @espn_nfcnblog on Twitter

Re: Stadium thread

Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 3:27 pm
by bigskyeric
This would be freaking awesome. http://www.startribune.com/politics/blo ... 35304.html Most people don't know that Duluth had two pro teams. The Duluth Eskimos, and the Duluth Kelly's. The movie Leatherheads was based on the Kelly's. Ernie Nevers was the first 'star' in pro football and many say the NFL is what it is because of him.