no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / American Football in real life / San Diego Chargers announce move to LA... Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
oakbark
|
posted: 2017-02-02 16:35:26 (ID: 100097137) Report Abuse |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
So all the arguments for a "better/newer" stadium is the team owner making more money or wanting something nicer? To me this has nothing to do with a Europe/US cultural difference, I'm just having a hard time sympathising with billionaires wanting public money to help them get richer, on any continent. I think the difference is if you moved a major European football team,thinking Manchester United or Barcelona size here, you would alienate the fan base and it would cost your millions. There is no closed market so any rich dude can bank roll a team to the big time. For an example look at how Fleetwood Town in England have been bankrolled through several divisions to the professional ranks over the last few years. The American sports system is closed so you move a team to a new and free market then you replace the fan base almost immediately. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2017-02-02 20:02:39 (ID: 100097156) Report Abuse |
|
I don't think I expressed my point correctly, my point is that I dislike public money going to billionaires. I am not talking about rich people getting richer because of sports, I'm OK with that when public money isn't used. And I'm not talking about a team moving to a new city either, I'm talking about a new stadium. If the team owner and private sponsors paid for 100% of the stadium, in his current city or in another, I would have no problem with it. To me it's a poor use of public money, schools, hospitals, roads & bridges, public transportation, cops, fire departments etc need the money more than an NFL team does.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Schwabe
|
posted: 2017-02-02 20:22:16 (ID: 100097158) Report Abuse |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
I don't think I expressed my point correctly, my point is that I dislike public money going to billionaires. I am not talking about rich people getting richer because of sports, I'm OK with that when public money isn't used. And I'm not talking about a team moving to a new city either, I'm talking about a new stadium. If the team owner and private sponsors paid for 100% of the stadium, in his current city or in another, I would have no problem with it. To me it's a poor use of public money, schools, hospitals, roads & bridges, public transportation, cops, fire departments etc need the money more than an NFL team does. Or FC Bayern |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oakbark
|
posted: 2017-02-02 20:34:49 (ID: 100097159) Report Abuse |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
I don't think I expressed my point correctly, my point is that I dislike public money going to billionaires. I am not talking about rich people getting richer because of sports, I'm OK with that when public money isn't used. And I'm not talking about a team moving to a new city either, I'm talking about a new stadium. If the team owner and private sponsors paid for 100% of the stadium, in his current city or in another, I would have no problem with it. To me it's a poor use of public money, schools, hospitals, roads & bridges, public transportation, cops, fire departments etc need the money more than an NFL team does. Is there a corresponding financial benefit for the city though in terms of revenue through tourism taxes other uses of stadium, to construction in taxes, exposure, hosting a Super Bowl? I am sure there are many more I have missed, I am not offering a definitive answer just throwing out there, that there is a lot more to the equation than just an expense. I guess the success of the franchise as in all sports will impact on the bottom line. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2017-02-02 21:45:47 (ID: 100097167) Report Abuse |
|
I prefer looking at it from a different angle. If no public money was used for any stadium in the US the NFL would still generate tourism revenue and such but cities would not compete with one another by giving public money to billionaires. We're basically in a situation where a handful of billionaires are pressuring cities to hand them cash but if cities all refused to play this "game" then team owners would find other (private) ways to finance their stadiums and tax payers would be better off.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2017-02-03 03:18:00 (ID: 100097174) Report Abuse | |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
I prefer looking at it from a different angle. If no public money was used for any stadium in the US the NFL would still generate tourism revenue and such but cities would not compete with one another by giving public money to billionaires. We're basically in a situation where a handful of billionaires are pressuring cities to hand them cash but if cities all refused to play this "game" then team owners would find other (private) ways to finance their stadiums and tax payers would be better off. Totally agree with you in an ideal world...no reason for cities to subsidize such profitable businesses like sports teams. But that will never happen. Have you ever been to football crazy Texas? Check out these high school stadiums: 10 Biggest High School Football Stadiums in Texas. Nuts...isn't it! Steve SD Blitz |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2017-02-03 06:41:09 (ID: 100097178) Report Abuse | |
 I'm surprised it's only about 20.000 max for those stadiums.
Regarding public money to sport in europe: It happens also, just on a different level. Starts with the heavy police forces needed and ends with those high priced TV contracts from the public funded tv stations. Stadiums are also often in city care and build by a mix of public money and teams money. The only difference, at least in germany, is that the clubs usually are not owned by a single person, so they have to spend the money they get, and the value of the club is meaningless, since it can't be sold. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
hollyhh2000
|
posted: 2017-02-03 10:19:54 (ID: 100097186) Report Abuse |
|
jack6 wrote:
Starts with the heavy police forces needed You can argue about it. Does sports or our general society let some people behave in a way that heavy police forces are required? Imo that's a general issue of our society and sports is just a vehicle for those idiots. You cant fault sports for someone who does not know how to behave |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2017-02-03 11:31:06 (ID: 100097190) Report Abuse |
|
Solana_Steve wrote:
Meitheisman wrote:
I prefer looking at it from a different angle. If no public money was used for any stadium in the US the NFL would still generate tourism revenue and such but cities would not compete with one another by giving public money to billionaires. We're basically in a situation where a handful of billionaires are pressuring cities to hand them cash but if cities all refused to play this "game" then team owners would find other (private) ways to finance their stadiums and tax payers would be better off. Totally agree with you in an ideal world...no reason for cities to subsidize such profitable businesses like sports teams. But that will never happen. Have you ever been to football crazy Texas? Check out these high school stadiums: 10 Biggest High School Football Stadiums in Texas. Nuts...isn't it! Steve SD Blitz I spent over 8 years in the US but have never been to Texas unfortunately but I did know how crazy they are about football already 
And I disagree that it will "never happen". It's unlikely to happen any time soon but it's certainly not a utopia, with a tiny bit of political will from the right people things could be changed. That being said, I understand that it is a very very low priority item these days, much bigger fish to fry at this point  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2017-02-03 12:51:14 (ID: 100097192) Report Abuse | |
|
hollyhh2000 wrote:
jack6 wrote:
Starts with the heavy police forces needed You can argue about it. Does sports or our general society let some people behave in a way that heavy police forces are required? Imo that's a general issue of our society and sports is just a vehicle for those idiots. You cant fault sports for someone who does not know how to behave Well, there are way less forces needed to secure a concert for example, even with similar amount of attendance. And the clubs just refuse to pay at least a part of that extra security needed. I decided a long time ago not to attend any of those games anymore. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 >| | |
| Main / American Football in real life / San Diego Chargers announce move to LA... | |
