Lions owners, Dan Gilbert discuss adding retractable roof to make Ford Field somewhat less crappy for soccer

Dan Gilbert’s pitch for a Detroit MLS expansion team was declared dead as soon as he gave up on his $300 million–subsidy land swap plan and switched to wanting to have the soccer team play at the Lions‘ stadium instead, but he never exactly gave up on it. So it’s not surprising that he now has a Plan C to get back on the future expansion list — but as for what that plan is, well:

Detroit Lions president Rod Wood said on WJR-AM (760) Monday morning that he and other Lions executives are looking into a retractable roof to help bring a Major League Soccer team to Detroit.

This is not the first time the idea of a roof for soccer has been raised — Gilbert himself mentioned it to Sports Business Daily last month, saying, “If we get that worked out, I think we have a pretty good chance” of getting an MLS team. Wood provided some more details yesterday, though, kind of:

Wood also explained adding a retractable roof is something that would be easy, saying the cost could be “With a ‘M’ and an ‘S’ and maybe three digits in front of the ‘M.'”

“We’ll figure out who’s going to pay for it after we figure out the cost,” Wood said.

For those who aren’t fans of cryptic crosswords, that first sentence translates as “it’ll cost at least $100 million,” which given that the U.S. Open’s new retractable roof cost $150 million and the Tampa Bay Rays owners are talking about a fixed roof that would cost $245 million seems like an underestimate at best. (Of course Wood didn’t say what those three digits would be.) Whereas the second sentence is either one of the most hilariously inept things a sports executive has said, or else code for “we don’t know who’s gonna pay for it, but it sure won’t be us.”

The idea behind adding a retractable roof is that it would enable the Lions to add a grass field, which would make MLS happy. That’s not an outright requirement, though — Atlanta United, for example, was okayed as a new franchise despite an artificial turf field — and it wouldn’t really address other reasons why MLS prefers soccer-specific stadiums, which is that having maybe 10,000 fans rattling around inside a 65,000-seat soccer stadium feels kind of crappy and looks even worse on TV. (The Falcons modified their stadium for soccer by building in moving sections of seats and retractable curtains to cover the upper deck.)

And while I’m always happy to see sports team owners looking to adapt existing stadiums rather than build entire new ones, at anything other than the very low end of this price point, it doesn’t really make a whole lot of sense — other cities are building whole new soccer stadiums for only about $200 million, so if a roof would end up costing something similar, that seems like kind of a waste, though I suppose it does save on land acquisition costs, and let you get twice the bang for your buck on maintenance and operations on your building.

MLS hasn’t even set its next deadline for expansion bids, so there’s plenty of time for the Lions owners and Gilbert to work this out. But for the moment, I’m categorizing this plan of action as “screwy.”

Did Detroit let Lions and Red Wings stall on water bills while punishing residents? Definitely maybe

The Daily Show took a look last night at how Detroit is shutting off water to poor residents who don’t pay their bills, but has left the water on for the Red Wings and Lions despite delinquent payments. It got lots of attention, and because the Daily Show is a comedy show, much of it was of the “Ha ha, so amusing” variety:

The controversy over water shutoffs for Detroit residents unable to pay their bills was front and center Monday night on Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.”

It was a story that took some humorous twists and turns, and it probably was deemed offensive or even inaccurate to some as well.

That article on MLive didn’t actually provide any details of anyone who thought the segment was offensive or inaccurate, but in a followup, the site provided this:

“I can say right now that the information was not accurate,” DWSD spokesperson Curtrise Garner told MLive.com…

Garner said she would send MLive more information via e-mail Tuesday afternoon to show that all the commercial accounts mentioned in the “Daily Show” report have been paying their bills and don’t have any overdue balances.

“I’m taking a look at the larger ones here in the city and they are all current,” Garner said over the phone.

So where did this report of overdue water bills come from in the first place? It looks like from a June article in the Guardian, which further linked to a blog post by Oakland University journalism professor Shea Howell that reported that “Joe Louis Arena/Red Wings Hockey owes $80,000 and Ford Field $55,000.” Howell didn’t provide a source for those numbers, but they’re pretty specific to be made up, leading to the likely conclusion that if everyone is telling the truth, the Red Wings and Lions were behind on their water bills in June, didn’t get their water shut off, and have since paid up. Which is, as the Daily Show segment makes clear, the same treatment that low-income water protestors are requesting from the city.

I’m trying to reach Howell to get more info on her numbers, but as MLive seems eager to show us, modern journalism doesn’t need to wait until we see the actual documents. Updates as needed.

[UPDATE: Okay, thanks to a couple of correspondents who wish to remain nameless, I’ve tracked the Lions/Red Wings water bill story back a bit further: This all dates back to an April WDIV-TV report that found that the two sports teams were behind on their water bills. As of July, the teams still hadn’t paid, but as the Detroit water department told Metro Times, it was because the Lions and Red Wings owners were disputing their past stormwater runoff bills, which the water department was “still in the process of trying to collect.”

So: Detroit’s sports teams aren’t being allowed to keep their running water despite not paying their bills for that; they’re allowed to keep their running water despite not having paid different water bills. Which is less black and white than the simplified version that the Daily Show presented, and they probably should have done their homework better, or at least explained the situation more fully. But the general “one system for poor folks and another for big corporations” vibe is still legit.]