No real news on Vikings, Raiders, L.A. stadiums; Blue Bombers, maybe a little

At the end of a busy week, you don’t mind if I jam together items about four different football teams in two different leagues into one post, do you? Surely you don’t, so let’s get on with it:

  • Now Tim Leiweke of AEG says he’s not going to wait until after the lockout to start on an L.A. stadium, promising: “I spend most of every waking hour on the NFL. I’m going to tell you this; we’re going to give this our best shot in the next two to three months.” Apparently this solely refers to an “agreement with the city and the NFL,” but not actual stadium designs, or funding plans. Which leaves… the shape of the negotiating table?
  • Amy Trask, who’s in charge of getting a new stadium for the Oakland Raiders, says, “There will be a new stadium for the Raiders, it’s on the horizon and it’s very exciting.” (What else is she going to say?) She also says she’s “tenacious,” “tough,” “my hope is that I’m fair,” and “it’s not my job to be lovable.” She left out “vague,” but that’s kind of in the job description.
  • The price of the new Winnipeg Blue Bombers stadium has now risen from $160 million to $190 million. The team would now be responsible for putting in $70 million of the cost, which would cut into the new revenues that were supposed to be the point of building this thing, but them’s the breaks. (It’s also notable that now that the team will continue to be owned by a community non-profit instead of a for-profit developer, it’s considered okay to ask for a bigger team contribution.) A final plan is expected next week.
  • The Washington Post considers the likelihood of the Vikings moving out of Minnesota, and concludes: We dunno.

And there we go. Now, if FoS readers can help out by devoting the comments section to discussion of World Cup soccer as usual, we’ll have a perfect hash of an item. Have a great weekend!


4 comments on “No real news on Vikings, Raiders, L.A. stadiums; Blue Bombers, maybe a little

  1. “Now, if FoS readers can help out by devoting the comments section to discussion of World Cup soccer as usual, we’ll have a perfect hash of an item.”

    Dripping with sarcasm!!

    Now post something about the World Cup bid and give us a proper place to discuss that topic. :-)

  2. Wait, I thought Oakland couldn’t afford to build a ballpark that costs approx $400 million for the A’s… how do they plan to build an $800 million football stadium? On love, tenacity and fairness?

  3. Dan:

    It’s not so much that they can’t as that they won’t. As to why… who knows. It could be that with the Raiders, at least there is the illusion that one day soon they will be dealing with a better owner.

    Having said that, the fact that Trask says it will happen is no guarantee that it will… we have to keep in mind who she works for (IE: it isn’t the city of Oakland).

    There is, of course, no reason for the taxpayers of Oakland to build a multi million dollar facility for either franchise. They could do what the Giants (either one) have done and build it themselves. Or in a country that celebrates free market capitalism, would that be wrong?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *.
NOTE: Personal attacks on other commenters are not allowed in comments, and will be deleted.

HTML tags are not allowed.

758,077 Spambots Blocked by Simple Comments