Friday roundup: Titans want Miami-style renovation to 20-year-old stadium, Orlando throwing more cash at World Cup hopes, and urban myths about small stadiums

I’m back from vacation, and thanks for sticking with my slightly unpredictable posting schedule for the last couple of weeks. (As opposed to my usual slightly unpredictable posting schedule.) It was an eye-opening trip to, among other places, a city that built a stadium with public money and now suffers from a legendarily bad public transit system, though it just might be unfair to blame the one on the other.

Anyway, stadium news kept coming at us fast this week, so let’s get to it:

Share this post:

29 comments on “Friday roundup: Titans want Miami-style renovation to 20-year-old stadium, Orlando throwing more cash at World Cup hopes, and urban myths about small stadiums

  1. Remember when the new Stadium in L̶o̶s̶ ̶A̶n̶g̶e̶l̶e̶s̶ Inglewood was going to be a threat to planes and air traffic? Well, if you can’t lick ’em….join ’em!

  2. It just occurred to me that “Raiders” is the most perfectly matched name with its host city of any NFL team.

    1. I’ve gone through the trouble of matching proper team names to their host cities. Here’s my ideas: Green Bay Co-ops, Chicago Bullets, Cleveland Blights, Pittsburgh Rusters, Detroit Dystopians, Baltimore Ravin’ Rats, Washington Red Inks, Philadelphia Boo Birds, Charlotte Carolinians, Cinncinati Has-Been-Gals, Houston Taxin’s, Dallas Ruby Oswalds, Atlanta Pit Bulls, Nashville Clampetts, New Orleans Sinners, L.A. Homeless and L.A. Ramblers. San Francisco Kaepernicks, Seattle Lattes, Glendale Phonecians, Minneapolis Siberians, Kansas City Tornados, Indianapolis Irsays, Tampa Bay Cits, East Rutherford Giant Jets, Foxborough Expatriates, Orchard Park Tax Bills, Miami-Dade Sea Lampreys and just…… Jacksonville.

      1. I still like the idea of changing the Washington NFL team’s name to the US Department of Football.

  3. Kreisman and Sternberg met again this week on the Rays situation. They replied with no comment. If this goes on for, 6 months without Sternberg using an rhetoric like”we are working on a solution to keep baseball in the Tampa area” and progress in made getting a ballpark in Basin Peel in Montreal, the Expos are coming back. Notice I am outlining a “if-then” scenario. I didn’t say its going to happen. Stop typing.

    1. Why six months? The Rays’ use agreement runs until 2027, so it’s not like there’s anything Sternberg can do soon unless Kreisman lets him.

      1. Kreisman is hot to develop the property the Rays are on. Its a boon to the city. Again its an if then scenario. If you here nothing from them over say six month but they are meeting, I’m sure they’re not having social hour.

        1. I have a question about the “Iron Clad” Lease the Rays are playing under. I should say first, am NOT from Tampa or St Pete, so I am no expert on this.Is this really “Iron Clad” where they will be there until 2027, or is it really a “Dog & Pony Show” where everyone knows that within 5 years, the Rays will be sold and moved to Montreal, and the City will allow them to do so in exchange for the development rights that both the City and the Rays have.

          1. It’s not a lease, it’s a use agreement, which is part of the reason why it really is ironclad:


          2. The original user agreement was panned by critics when it was signed by in the 90’s because it give whoever owns the Rays some development rights in 2028 on land where the Trop sits. It was deemed a bad deal for the city. It is more so now that St. Petersburg has grown and the rights more lucrative. Its almost a missed opportunity if the Rays stay on the site indefinitely. Kreisman has said in the past he wants to know the Rays plans.

          3. You have it backwards: The Rays’ 50% share of development rights expires in 2028. And it’s only good while the team plays at the Trop, anyway — if they leave, the city gets 100% of development rights:


          4. What is interesting about the article you cite is a commenter named Devil Rays. I think this corroborates David Brown’s point.

            At the end of the day, it depends on what St. Pete wants. Again If Kriesman and Sternberg continue to meet with no public comment over a long period of time,its either about a new stadium or relocation. Is St. Petersburg going to pony up $1 billion for a new stadium on a site the make the teams problem worse(Al lang site)?

          5. The answer is that the rays will play here until 2027 and then no one cares.

            Stu ruined baseball here with his antics. Not one public dollar for him.

            If he wants out before, we can probably set a price. I would start at $2 million a remaining game. We have no reason to be reasonable. The Rays are the flea on the dogs back of our economy. If they want out, pay us.

          6. I am from St. Pete.

            First off, it is St. Pete. Tampa has nothing to do with the Rays and never did. We are not the same thing.

            Second, it is a use agreement. Essentially we hold a license to all Rays home games. No Rays home game can be played outside of the city of St. Petersburg until the end of the 2027 season without the permission of the city.

  4. Coyotes’ new owner Alex Meruelo says staying in city’s arena long term will be ‘difficult.’ Can Glendale sway him?

    1. Staying in the short term (IE: every year since 1997) has been ‘difficult’ too.

      To quote Richard Burke (on occasion of his unloading of team to then partner Ellman in 1998, as I recall) “I’d have lost way less money if I’d stayed in Winnipeg”.

  5. It’s good to see the ladies getting in on the stadium improvement gravy train. No reason for it be an exclusive male club.

  6. If MLB can build an 8000 seat temporary stadium in Iowa, shouldn’t they build one in Tampa too?

    1. If they can build temporary stadia for one game, why can’t they build permanent ones for 81 games a year (plus)?

      They can. They just would prefer to have someone else pay for them.

  7. In fairness to MLSe (ok, even I can’t believe I just typed that…), they not only paid the full ($265m as I recall) cost to build the arena in the first place, they have regularly upgraded it since.

    I’ve no idea how accurate the quote is, but Richard Peddie (former MLSe president) did say a few years ago that they had “probably spent as much on year on year upgrades to the facility as it cost to build in the first place”.

    See. Sports teams/owners can too pay for their own crap.

    And any MLB team with a payroll over $100m a year (which is nearly all of them) certainly could fund their own stadium mortgages. But like Capone once (maybe) said, ‘hey, if people wanna gimme things, what, I should refuse?”

        1. “Stop calling it “the MLS.””

          Yeah, yeah, yeah. There’s also nothing “major” about it. So just chill a bit.

      1. Keith: Lol. The lower case e is a reference to the actual level of entertainment the sports conglomerate has provided over all but the last couple of years of it’s existence…

        And never rule out an MLS eSports league… especially now that cities (governed by people who don’t even know what eSports are) are willing to pay for eSports arenas (or video gamers deluxe basements, in more common parlance…)

  8. That the same Allegiant Air with the less than inspiring safety record?

  9. Word is on the street, a new stadium for the Rays in St. Pete, Tampa, Clearwater, Orlando and Jacksonville. 32 games which equates to 16.3 games in each stadium. It’s very exciting news.

    1. And Ken Hagan is willing to spend a billion of taxpayers’ money in each of them for new stadia.

Comments are closed.