Rays owner proposes new $892m domed stadium, says he “hasn’t looked at” who’d pay for it

After what seems like a lifetime of false starts and saber-rattling and playing footsie with every locality in the Tampa Bay region, Rays owner Stuart Sternberg finally unveiled actual plans for a new stadium in the Ybor City neighborhood of Tampa yesterday, complete with renderings. And oh, what renderingsYep, Sternberg is proposing to build a giant glass trilobite, with the best seats right behind the plate removed to make way for some kind of triumphal entryway, and Tropicana Field’s much-hated fixed roof replaced by a different fixed roof, only this time translucent, because we know how well that worked at the Astrodome. (For those who don’t want to click through: Outfielders couldn’t see flyballs, the dome’s skylights were all painted over, the grass all died, and Monsanto had to invent Astroturf.) Also some gratuitous lens flare even though the shadows indicate the sun should be way off to the left, because nothing says “ooh, shiny” like lens flare. It may not be a Brancusi sculpture, but it’s certainly something.

And from there, the stadium details just get more … audacious? unexpected? wackadoodle? … let’s go with one of those:

  • The stadium would be by far the smallest in MLB, holding only 28,216 seats, while another 2,600 people could stand or sit in folding chairs or something. That sort of makes sense when you consider Rays attendance, which hasn’t topped 23,148 per game since their inaugural season, though less so when you consider that the whole point of this new-stadium exercise is to attract more fans in a better location.
  • In place of a retractable roof — or no roof at all — the stadium would expose fans to the elements with a retractable wall, which I guess would remind them that the outside world still exists by letting the occasional breeze in, without actually making them vulnerable to rain or sun or the sky or any nuisances like that. It’s still likely to sound like you’re inside an airport hangar, which in my experience is the worst part of domes, but maybe that next-generation translucent roof material will be permeable to sound, too, who knows?
  • A smaller capacity and a non-retracting roof could both be ways to keep costs down, but if so, they weren’t kept down very far: The price tag on this arthropod of dreams is an estimated $892 million.

And, all renderings that will invariably change later aside, here’s the part we’ve really all been waiting for: How does Sternberg expect to pay for this thing? Let’s listen in:

I mean … I mean … I mean … seriously? Rays execs had, depending on how you count, somewhere between five months and ten years to come up with some ideas, any ideas at all for how to pay for a stadium, Sternberg and friends came up with, well, this:

Reactions from the rest of the world were similarly nonplussed, as a trip down Noah Pransky’s Twitter feed shows:

https://twitter.com/noahpransky/status/1017015178079166466

Okay, so the Tampa Bay Times was enthralled, at least.

If you want tough questions from the Tampa press corps, here’s Pransky himself asking Sternberg himself about how on earth he actually plans to build this thing that he’s been dreaming and talking about for years upon years:

Pransky: 892 million. Can you afford it?

Sternberg: Well, potentially.

Pransky: What do you need from the public sector?

Sternberg: I haven’t even looked at it at this point really.

Pransky: You guys haven’t looked at it all?!?

Sternberg: Not to the point that’s necessary. We’ve been focused on what you saw today, which is in itself a huge, huge undertaking.

So we are supposed to believe that the owner of a pro sports team, who for years has been demanding a new stadium as a way of improving his bottom line, went into designing and pricing out a new stadium with no thoughts at all of how it would be paid for or whether it would make money. Or the other possibility is that he thought, Hey, asking for hundreds of millions of dollars is a bad look — let’s just give the public lots of pretty pictures and hope they’ll be distracted enough not to worry about where the money will come from. I bet it’ll work on those stenographers at the Tampa Bay Times, anyway!

This, needless to say, is only the beginning of what is sure to be a long, painful battle. I’ll be on The Beat of Sports with Marc Daniels at 10 am ET today to talk about the Rays’ announcement, and more if we have time — tune in here. I’ll try to have more to say than just leaving my jaw hanging open in flabbergastment for the entire segment.

Friday roundup: Graceland seeks arena money, Marlins and Cards seek spring-training stadium money, guy in Raleigh seeks MLS stadium money

In no particular order, or as we call it in New York, Mets style:

People are now designing sports venues based entirely on abstract geometric shapes, this is truly the future

Okay, the Tampa Bay Rays may have just won vaportecture for all time, as team owner Stuart Sternberg declared Saturday that he wants his new stadium to look like this:

Or not look exactly like Romanian artist Constantin Brancusi’s 1923 sculpture Bird in Space — it would make for some really short foul lines — but at least use that as “our guiding design” towards a building that will be a “minimalist, iconic, porous facility.” (“Porous” here appears to be a hip architectural term that means “relating to its surroundings,” as coined by Richard Goodwin in his memorably named Porosity: the Architecture of Invagination.)

“We’re going to continue to push the designers really hard,” Sternberg said the day after announcing the Ybor project was the team’s choice for a new home. “If the stadium is done correctly, it’s going to be iconic yet you won’t even know it’s there.”

It’s an invisible stadium, you guys! Or maybe one that’s just so in tune with its surroundings that it disappears into them, like a Mayan pyramid or this guy.

All this, of course, is roughly 50% bluster and 50% misdirection, since the whole point of Sternberg’s current push, what with announcing a stadium site and all with no idea how to pay for it, is to get people all excited about this and hope the sense of momentum gets them to view a multi-hundred-million-dollar funding gap as an obstacle to be overcome, rather than a reason maybe not to do this at all. The Tampa Bay Times editorial board is already down with this, writing on Friday that “significant progress has to be made by the end of the year” because “it will take regional support to ensure baseball remains in Tampa Bay” and this “could be the last, best option.” (To be fair, they also said Sternberg will have to kick in more than the $150 million he’s promised, but still, this is how-do-we-get-it-done-ism in a nutshell.)

In fact, I would dismiss Sternberg’s Brancusi references to just the ravings of a rich dude hoping to sweet-talk the public out of their tax dollars if not for the fact that Madison Square Garden has announced it’s building an 18,000-seat arena in Las Vegas that will be shaped like a sphere, and called, naturally, the MSG Sphere:

This will be for concerts only, no sports, and will cost nobody knows how much, and will feature “high-speed internet at every seat” and “beamforming” technology so that people in adjacent seats can hear different things and 36 miles of LEDs on its exterior that will enable projection of anything they want, including the event taking place inside or even:

A different camera system set up around the city will be able to virtually cloak the dome with real-time images and video of its surroundings, making it seemingly disappear.

An invisible arena. Maybe that way Las Vegas can pretend it doesn’t already have 43 other arenas. Vegas is headed for the Arena Event Horizon any day now.

Latest Texas Rangers’ stadium renderings don’t like geometry any more than last batch

The Texas Rangers released their latest round of vaportecture renderings yesterday, and their new taxpayer-funded building will apparently feature a retractable roof and oh so many power chords. I can’t figure out how to embed the video that the Rangers put together, but please click here to enjoy it on the Fort Worth Star-Telegram’s site. Then once you’re done with that, let’s spend some quality time with this particular rendering:

Several things about this:

  • Yup, it still looks an awful lot like the Houston Astros‘ stadium.
  • Whoever drew it either thinks stadiums are best viewed through a fish-eye lens or has some funny ideas about stadium geometry. Or maybe thinks the Rangers actually play pesäpallo?
  • For an image supposedly meant to illustrate how close fans will get to the game, “specifically in the upper deck,” this actually shows anything but: The players are tiny flyspecks from this vantage point, which if you look carefully is actually the middle deck — there are two more decks even farther from the action, which are both set back immensely far horizontally from the field and also cast up into the rafters by a big glass wall of luxury suites or restaurants or car dealerships or something.
  • The three levels of seating in left field unreachable by any human means have now been reduced to only one level suspended in midair. Improvement, I guess?
  • Somebody has just gotten their 3000th hit as a member of the Rangers, it looks like. Adrian Beltre already cleared that milestone, so it looks like next in line on the team roster is … Shin-Soo Choo, who is a mere 1656 hits away and on pace to reach 3000 at age 50, in 2033. No wonder beefy-arm dude is so excited!

I guess I shouldn’t be too hard on HKS architects’ illustrators, though. After all, it’s notoriously hard to draw air-conditioning.

Here’s a video of quick glimpses of new Rams, Chargers stadium renderings, excited yet?

Awright, new stadium rendering porn from the Los Angeles Rams and Chargers! And like all the cool media kids today, they’re pivoting to video:

That’s not all that different from the last renderings we saw, but has the advantage of zipping by really quickly and being set to music that sounds like a 1980s video game developer trying to emulate Grandmaster Flash. From this we can tell that the new Inglewood stadium will definitely contain people. and a latticework roof, and some kind of weirdly shaped scoreboard ring suspended over the field. You can get a better (sort of?) look at that last element in this tweeted still image:

And finally, here’s what the site looks like now, courtesy of the Associated Press:

Stay tuned for more exciting images! We have three years of this left to go, people, before anyone can see this with their own eyes, hopefully set to their own hip-hop-lite soundtrack.

FC Cincinnati unveils stadium vaportecture, downplays $100m in tax money needed to build it

FC Cincinnati has unveiled renderings of its new stadium plans! Do they have fireworks? Do they have spotlights aimed pointlessly at the sky? Do they have poorly proportioned people and soccer goals that defy physics? You betcha!

Basically, it looks like a soccer stadium, only way more orange. Have your own fun picking apart the artistic skills of the renderers — my favorite is the way in the top photo there appears to be light streaming upward from the soccer pitch itself, which will no doubt be equipped with a fiber-optic turf surface — and keep in mind all the while that the main goal of this exercise is to get taxpayers in Cincinnati (or maybe Newport, Kentucky, across the Ohio River) to cough up as much as $100 million toward building this thing, because who can say no to women in tank tops holding scarves?

Rangers release first unintentionally hilarious renderings of new $1B stadium design

The Texas Rangers have selected HKS, designers of the Dallas Cowboys‘ stadium, to design their new stadium set to open in 2020, which means we now have initial images of what a replacement ballpark for a 23-year-old stadium marked for death because it doesn’t have air-conditioning looks like. Take it away, HKS renderings department:

newrangers1-hks newrangers3-hks newrangers2-hks

Initial gripes from Rangers fans are that it looks a hell of a lot like the Houston Astros‘ stadium that opened just six years after the one that the Rangers are tearing down. Which it does, but hey, there are only so many ways you can design a stadium with a sliding retractable roof (the right-field seats are reminiscent of the Miami Marlins‘ new stadium, too), and they didn’t have much time to work up these preliminary drawings. More fun is to play “What’s wrong with this picture?” with them, because there sure is a lot:

  • Those three levels of seats suspended in the left-field archways are remarkable not just for seemingly having no structural support at all, but no way for fans to actually get to their seats. Maybe state-of-the-art stadiums will now include transporter technology?
  • There appear to be enormous bullpen areas in both left and right fields, which would seem to be overkill unless the Rangers want the ability to have four teams warming up at the same time.
  • That’s an awfully weird defensive shift that the road team is playing, what with the center fielder playing super-shallow and the left fielder extremely deep. Though maybe they’re just making up for the fact that the first baseman has apparently left to use the restroom.
  • The woman with the sleeveless shirt and purse in the outdoor promenade is awfully blasé for having just walked right through the guy checking his phone.
  • Judging from the number 10 and the five-letter name, that kid on the promenade (who photobombed two separate renderings, what the heck?) appears to be wearing a Michael Young jersey. If that’s the case in 2020, the Rangers are going to be in big trouble, such that they’re not going to be selling out the stands with people mysteriously raising their fists skyward when everyone around them is sitting still.
  • The couple in the final image are wearing their “Texas” and “Rangers” shirts backwards, no doubt in protest of the team not having any players worth celebrating since Michael Young.
  • All of these people are shown enjoying a baseball game outside in the open air in the daytime, when it’s been firmly established that nobody will go to baseball games in Texas without air-conditioning, how could you even think of such a thing?

I am 100% sure that the final stadium design will end up looking very little like this, so there’s time for HKS to fix their errors. In the meantime, though, if their renderings department wants to hire a fact-checker, I can recommend some people.

Wizards’ $50m practice arena renderings are scenes from a post-apocalpytic nightmare

New renderings for the Washington Wizards practice facility (and Mystics home arena) to be built with at least $50 million in city money were released yesterday, and, I’m sorry, what?

new-dcpract-4

The new arena will apparently be surrounded by a massive frozen pond, or maybe a thin coating of a liquid polymer. Fortunately, no one will be around to try to walk on it, since that could get ugly.

new-dcpract-6

Is that a WNBA player? If so, why is she wearing so much makeup? What’s suspending the banner (?) in midair like that? And why on earth is there a film reel countdown projected (?) on a brick wall? What is it counting down to? Will there be any concession stands, or will the whole place just feel like an empty hotel lobby?

new-dcpract-2

The most important part of any new development: lens flare.

new-dcpract-5Put it all together and you have … dear lord. At least the rest of human civilization appears to have been destroyed in whatever cataclysm turned the very ground into a shiny flat surface, so no one will be around to see this. When the aliens land, though, they’re going to be disappointed that there’s nowhere to buy any curly fries.

Utah Jazz spending $23m in tax breaks on really big sign reading “PIZZA,” apparently

The owners of the Utah Jazz, as you may recall, are launching a $125 million renovation of their privately owned arena with the help of $23 million in tax kickback subsidies that were approved with no public debate and for no damn reason (Salt Lake City got exactly nothing in exchange for its money), and now they’re releasing their first renderings of what they’ll be spending their cash on, and for some reason the first image is this: screen-shot-2016-09-22-at-7-36-05-amThat’s a whole lotta pizza concession stand! And it tells you that it’s selling pizza! And it’s sorta shaped like a pizza? And the guys making the pizza are definitely wearing chef’s hats, because you can’t put a price on that.

There are other photos in the Deseret News’ slideshow, and you know, the pizza one might actually be the most impressive. Jazz owner Gail Miller may be good at getting public subsidies in exchange for nothing, but she has some work to do on coming up with shiny vaportecture renderings to make taxpayers think they’re getting something for their money.

As Raiders unveil stadium pics, reporters told to ask subsidy questions, keep answers secret (UPDATED)

I have a big stack of news items that I’m going to be playing catchup with all week, but I’m still on the road one more day, so that infodump will need to wait till Tuesday at the earliest. Instead, here’s the latest rendering released by the Oakland Raiders ownership of a possible new stadium in Las Vegas: raiders-vegas-stadium-frontAs stadium watchers and journalists alike immediately noticed, this bears a striking resemblance to the stadium that the Raiders and San Diego Chargers were going to build in Carson, California:
raiders-carson-rendering-08-26-16There’s even the return of the giant Al Davis eternal flame that was originally proposed for Carson, then scrapped because it was just so stupid:

raiders-stadium-vegas-flameWhy cut-and-paste old designs into a new site, especially when you don’t even know which Vegas site it might be? Momentum, duh: This enables Raiders owner Mark Davis and his investment partners Sheldon Adelson and Majestic Realty to make it feel like this thing is going to get built, look, we have pictures of it, rather than having the Nevada public’s main image be of a pile of burning money. It’s the same reason why Davis filed for the trademark “Las Vegas Raiders” and released new stadium spending estimates stressing his own share of costs, even if they were misleading (he’s still failing to mention the roughly $250 million in tax increment kickbacks that Majestic has insisted are necessary for the project) and failed basic math (of a now-$1.9 billion total cost, the state would kick in $750 million in hotel-tax revenues and the private developers would put up $1.25 billion, which wait, what?).

If this stadium does happen, those almost certainly won’t be the final spending numbers, and these almost certainly won’t be what the stadium looks like. But it’s a lot easier to make a deal look like a fait accompli when you have hard numbers and actual drawings, even if those are just things you made up knowing you’ll change them later. It’s the clear plastic binder all over again.

And all this is aided and abetted, meanwhile, by having one of the stadium developers own the biggest newspaper in town, which allows for media manipulation like this jaw-dropping one revealed by Ralston Reports:

Reporters for Sheldon Adelson’s newspaper have been told to ask candidates if they support public money for the stadium proposed by the Las Vegas Sands chairman but that the Las Vegas Review-Journal will not actually publish the answers.

This astonishing request was made in a memo two weeks ago from Assistant City Editor Don Ham:

All of you who are handling state Senate, state Assembly and Clark County Commission races for the tab should make sure to ask this very timely question of the candidates. This question is NOT going to be added to the question asked of candidates for the online election package, though. Should public money, in the form of room taxes, be used to build a proposed stadium in Las Vegas. Why or why not? Any questions, see me. Thanks.

The leading theory here is that Adelson, who owns the Review-Journal, is intent on using the paper’s reporters to gather intelligence on where candidates stand on his stadium subsidy proposal, without actually using any of that information to, you know, inform readers. This would be far from the worst abuse of power by Adelson involving his newspaper holdings, but only because he’s set the bar so very high.

UPDATE: The Review-Journal’s managing editor writes in to say that the stadium questions were too for publication, just for publication in a different part of the paper. I’ll add further updates if I can ferret out whose interpretation of events makes a damn bit of sense.