Field of Schemes
sports stadium news and analysis

  

This is an archived version of a Field of Schemes article. Comments on this page are closed. To find the current version of the article with updated comments, click here.

December 12, 2010

Snow deflates Metrodome roof

In case you missed it, the roof of the Metrodome collapsed last night, under the weight of more than a foot of snow. Stadium workers usually wash snow off the roof with hot water during storms, but were forced to stop the process yesterday due to high winds.

This isn't actually as serious as it might sound: The roof is an air-inflated Teflon bubble, and has actually deflated on three other occasions and been quickly repaired. "Quickly" might not be enough to save tomorrow night's Vikings game, though, which was already rescheduled from today thanks to the heavy snow. The NFL says it will make a decision on where to play the game "ASAP."

Meanwhile, one can only guess how this will play into the Vikings' new-stadium push. The Minneapolis Star Tribune notes: "Vikings officials, who have long made it known they desire a new stadium and have been attempting to get one, declined to make any statements, referring questions to the Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission."

COMMENTS

It appears that the league is planning to screw the fans over pretty good on this moving the game to Detroit or New Orleans. Playing this anywhere else other than TCF Stadium is a stiff punch to the face from the League to the fans and may have a negative effect for getting a new stadium.

Posted by VikeFan on December 12, 2010 11:40 AM

Neil;

I can't believe Wilf & Bagley passed up a chance to hold a presser and say "See, even God wants a new Vikings stadium... and you know, ya can't argue with the big guy..."

Posted by John Bladen on December 12, 2010 01:22 PM

Vikefan:

TCF stadium was considered, but officials there told the NFL that it had been shut down for the winter and could not be readied in time for a Monday or Tuesday game (let alone cleared of snow). They did try...

In reality, this isn't a 'stadium' issue. Air supported domes in other facilities have collapsed on occasion as well. They are cheaper to install, but more expensive to operate than fixed roofs. And, of course, sometimes bad weather does cause them to fail. I believe this has happened with fixed (and retractable, come to think of it) roof facilities on occasion as well. Just glad no-one was hurt.

Posted by John Bladen on December 12, 2010 01:48 PM

Sorry, that should have read "maintenance" issue...

Posted by john bladen on December 12, 2010 01:49 PM

I'm sure they'll use this to their advantage eventually. They'll let some time pass so it's not as blatantly obvious that they're just taking advantage of the situation but they'll use it, of that there can be no doubt. As for "screwing" the fans, not much that can be done about that. TCF is closed for the winter (and is outdoors which doesn't really solve any of the problems anyway being it's what? 8 degrees out?). Detroit is as good as anywhere else on short notice, and it doesn't do either team any favors offering KC any advantage playing closer to KC might on short notice.

What can you say, it's the price to be paid for living somewhere with occasionally extremely bad weather and a poorly designed pillow dome. There's a reason the breed is all but extinct (in fact I think the only other functioning pillow dome left is the Silverdome (which has no tenants) now that the dome was taken off BC Place in Vancouver.

Posted by Dan on December 12, 2010 03:09 PM

Carrier Dome is still up, no? Also Tokyo Dome - not sure how many others.

Posted by Neil deMause on December 12, 2010 03:43 PM

While the Silverdome has no permanent big-league sports team, it's actually seeing a fair amount of use. Next Feburary, it's an indoor snowmobiling race. Yeah, there's a joke in there somewhere Minneapolis.

Ford Field wins by default I suppose as everything is already in place from today's game. Of course the fans in Minnesota probably won't make the trip to Michigan but that big storm is already there.

Posted by Doug on December 12, 2010 04:44 PM

Well this will help the Vikings stadium push, that's for sure. I don't understand why they don't tear down the roof and renovate the whole Metrodome that way it's more cost effective.

Posted by kombayn on December 12, 2010 06:09 PM

It's the plan they're following in Vancouver with BC Place. And the Metrodome isn't much older than BC Place. A new roof is definitely do-able, and far cheaper than a new stadium. But I think the "realities" of the NFL (if you can call it reality), is that unlike a CFL/MLS stadium in Canada, the they want more. More luxury boxes, more seats, more extraneous amenities to satisfy all the overweight ADD masses like most other NFL teams have.

Posted by Dan on December 12, 2010 06:37 PM

@ kombayn

Usually the way this goes is there will be an estimate for the renovations to come in at one price - ie. 350M - and the new building to cost another - ie. 650M - and the critics will sound off that if you're in for a penny you're in for a dollar.

In all fairness, the renos might be overestimated and the new building underestimated but that's just par for the course now.

My guess is that since those in the know have nothing better to spend the 300M they'd be saving here in my crude example so they figure it may as well go into a stadium.

Posted by Andrew T on December 12, 2010 06:38 PM

@Dan

You are right. I think the biggest difference in comparing the leagues you mentioned is that the NFL and other leagues like the NHL have revenue sharing models where the money that comes from luxury suites is the owners as opposed to new revenue from seats, which they share with others.

Hence, the 65000 that shows up to to pay top dollar year after year may be sitting in an antiquated stadium since their team is sharing more in general revenues than other teams.

Posted by Andrew T on December 12, 2010 06:42 PM

Compare BC Place's similarly scandalous roof wardrobe malfunction of a few seasons back. Now? They're retrofitting the thing with a retractable roof.

The lesson: it's possible to retrofit one of these models with a retractable roof. Ought the good people of the State of Hockey not consider a Metrodome reno rather than a brand new boner-dome?

Posted by Anderson on December 12, 2010 06:52 PM

I pass by the BC Place stadium every day on my commute. I have to say it looks very impressive! The 40 or so towers that have been raised to sit at the edge look very cool. It looks like a crown.

www.vancouversun.com/sports/mma/Exclusive+Inside+Place+Stadium+renovations/3713985/story.html

Agreed - they should do the same for the Metrodome.

Posted by Dave on December 12, 2010 09:14 PM

Would this have happened in Qatar?

I doubt it.

Posted by MikeM on December 13, 2010 01:22 AM

Dave, at $450M, the renos (including new roof system, which we are now told can't be opened or closed in bad weather...) should look impressive.

I know "more" is being done to BC Place than just a new roof... but this stadium is one in which a new facility might have turned out cheaper (not to mention freeing up prime real estate in downtown Vancouver).

Anderson: I don't think there's any question that a renovation can be done cheaper. But if they are going to renovate to the NFL/Vikings specification, they'll probably end up spending the same as the new facility anyway.

Posted by John Bladen on December 13, 2010 01:25 AM

I doubt a new stadium would have cost less than the renovation of BC Place Stadium. The running rate for stadiums that size these days is well over the $800 million US mark for a "basic" model like the CFL would use. A luxury model like NY and Dallas have is running in the $1 billion plus range. And keeping BC Place in that "prime downtown location" is a good thing. Stadiums in the burbs are a 1960's anachronism that is usually a bad idea unless you're Jerry Jones.

Posted by Dan on December 13, 2010 01:53 AM

Some of the stadium supporters are comparing this to the 35W bridge collapse, where 13 people died. I'm sure right now Wilf is preparing his "I just want my life back" speech.

Posted by Geoff on December 13, 2010 08:16 AM

On yesterday's Fox NFL Pregame show it took Howie Long about 30 seconds to mention that maybe Minnesota needs a new football stadium. I'm surprised it took that long.

Posted by Chris A. on December 13, 2010 09:34 AM

On yesterday's Fox NFL Pregame show it took Howie Long about 30 seconds to mention that maybe Minnesota needs a new football stadium. I'm surprised it took that long.

Posted by Chris A. on December 13, 2010 09:35 AM

I will not get into the financing issue because I do not agree with most items listed on this site. I will say that having gone to games for 10 years at the RCS Dome (a 95% copy of the metrodome) and now to Lucas Oil Stadium, that difference is amazing. I have a regular seat but it's no longer a bench. It use to take 30 minutes to get a soda (not beer) and all half to go to the rest room. There was no room to walk and to get to my bench I had to climb 4 flights of staris.

Now a soda is 5 minutes, restrooms are close and available, escalators exist and the experience is much maore fun. I can actually see the scoreboard and video screen, and hear the loudspeakers.

Say what you want about financing, but I was at the metordome once and the RCA Dome 100 or more times. A pit is a pit is a pit. It needs to be torn down.

Posted by bigjer on December 13, 2010 11:18 AM

@bigjer:
So you're OK with the amounts of money lost by local governments for the creation of new stadia so you can get your $10 soda more quickly and return to your seat more conveniently? That's incredibly selfish. Want a drink? Want to eat? Tailgate before the game. It's much cheaper and the selection is better. And if the restroom lines are too long it would be much cheaper to add more bathrooms than to build a brand new facility.

Fenway Park is a pit but I wouldn't knock it down. I actually miss the old Foxborough Stadium because the atmosphere was SOOO much better even if it was all aluminum benches. I pay good money for a seat to watch a game. I don't care how "pretty" the place is when my focus is on the field of play.

Posted by Chris A. on December 13, 2010 03:23 PM

Have you ever been to BC Place, Dan?

If so, I hope you drove. And tried to park.
Then you would understand why a downtown stadium doesn't always 'work' the way you think it does. I keep hearing from SD fans that Petco park doesn't actually work as well as the owners, councillors, and designers say it does either. But I'm sure it's great once you are inside.

If transit & parking are available, a downtown stadium can work. The land for same is still shockingly expensive, but it can work. And the parking can be used for more than just stadium events, which is an advantage (assuming that revenue doesn't go to the club of course).

The basic cost for new stadia (in any league) these days is artificially elevated because the clubs themselves are not paying for them. I'd have higher standards too, if someone else was footing the bill. Transit access, parking, bigger & better seats (for fatter people), larger concourses and the like are legitimate needs/wants. Many of the higher cost additions are not.

If anyone wants to know what actually can be done, take a look at some of the privately funded university facilities in North America. Many are comfortable and well laid out. They just don't cater solely to the ultra wealthy fan, that's all.
And they tend to cost around half (some much less) what the publicly funded gifts to private sports businesses do.

Never ask a surgeon if you need an operation, as they say.

Posted by John Bladen on December 13, 2010 04:53 PM

John, who is saying PETCO does not actually work? From my experience and what I've read, it not only works but has been very successful while "working".

Posted by Dan on December 15, 2010 12:54 AM

Latest News Items

CONTACT US FOR AD RATES