Birmingham is set to spend millions to host the entire USFL for one season

If you haven’t been paying attention to the latest iteration of the USFL, well, who can really blame you: The first version lasted three years in the 1980s before some delusional rich developer’s son destroyed it, someone attempted a reboot in 2010 that went nowhere, and the latest version is brought to you by a completely different set of people, including a semipro spring league called The Spring League and, perhaps inevitably, Fox Sports. When it takes the field in spring 2022 it will, however, allegedly feature the same teams as when it gave up the ghost in 1986 — though not, bizarrely, in the same cities.

That’s because the entire USFL season is, if all goes according to plan, set to be played in one city: Birmingham, Alabama. This is being called a “bubble,” because bubbles are an established sports thing now even if this one has nothing to do with protecting public health, but more likely is about cutting costs while providing some made-for-TV product. (I did mention that one of the owners of the league is Fox Sports, yes?) And, of course, extracting some money from Birmingham city government in exchange for hosting games of a sports league with no fans: The Greater Birmingham Convention and Visitors Bureau, the city of Birmingham, and Jefferson County are collectively putting up $3 million to cover “expenses” in the league’s first year, as well as providing free rent on two Birmingham football stadiums. Plus whatever the hell is going on in this paragraph from AL.com:

An accord was reached when the [Birmingham Jefferson Civic Center] restructured its budget to include projected revenues. The agency originally said it would cost $3.7 to host the league, still $700,00 short of the $3 million committed by various stakeholders to fund the losses. Late Tuesday, the BJCC added “additional” projected revenue into the model, bringing the numbers more in alignment.

You can’t just add $700,000 to your revenue projections and pretend your books are balanced! Though you also can’t forget to write “million” after your cost projections or leave off an entire zero from one of your figures, but I guess that’s just how they roll in Birmingham.

The interesting thing here … okay, there are many interesting things here, but the one that stands out is that we’re seeing the emergence of a totally new business model for sports extortion: Instead of shopping around franchises to different cities to see who’ll pay for the right to host them, shop around the entire league for one season at a time and see what cities will cough up. Presumably if the Birmingham goes well and the league is renewed for Season 2, they’ll go shopping for another city to host them then — it’ll be like Top Chef, only with host cities paying for the privilege. Wait, does Top Chef get paid to locate in particular locations? Does that explain the season spent entirely in Kentucky? I’m seriously afraid to Google this now.

Anyway, the official announcement of your New Jersey Generals brought to you by Birmingham is tentatively scheduled for next week, and we already have lots of local elected officials saying things like “this is what regional cooperation looks like” and “this will work if everyone pitches in” and “think of all the other sports that could come once people see how well things are run.” Which, yes, it’s impressive in a way to see everyone in Birmingham pulling together to send public money to Fox Sports so as to find a use for the football stadium they just spent $250 million to build, but maybe not the kind of impressive you want.

Share this post:

Friday roundup: Big-league owners seek big-money land deals, while in the minors they’ll just take a check, thanks

Holy moley, all the news this week! No time for clever repartee, let’s dive right in:

Share this post:

Trump threatens to move convention out of Charlotte if demands not met, like former sports owner he is

A former sports team owner threatened yesterday to move a planned event out of town if his arena demands weren’t met, and the only surprise, really, is that the culprit was the president of the United States:

Let’s for the moment ignore the bit where the nation’s leader is demanding to pack 20,000 people into an indoor arena during a pandemic where the one thing we know is that packing people into indoor spaces is the worst possible thing you can do. (And the bit about “building the Arena to a very high standard,” since in fact it was Charlotte taxpayers who just spent $27.5 million on upgrading the Hornets‘ arena.) Instead, I’d like to focus on Trump’s claim that if he isn’t allowed to fill the Charlotte arena to capacity, he will take his “jobs and economic development” and go elsewhere. How many jobs do political conventions create, anyway?

The usual lazy way (or self-interested way, if you’re in the business of staging conventions) of calculating convention economic impact is to add up all the visitors to a city and multiply it by how much you think they spend, which results in numbers as high as $230 million. The better way would be to look at all the cities that have hosted conventions and see if there was any discernable change in job growth or personal income as a result — and sports economists Robert Baade, Robert Baumann, and Victor Matheson did just that in 2008, finding that “the presence of the Republican or Democratic National Convention has no discernable impact on employment, personal income, or personal income per capita in the cities where the events were held confirming the results of other ex post analyses of mega-events.”

In other words, political conventions are much like the Super Bowl: They bring a ton of people into town, but they also drive away other potential visitors who steer clear of the convention week crowds (and convention week hotel prices), as well as local residents who may stay at home if they think restaurants and such will be too crowded. As Baade, Baumann, and Matheson noted, “During the week of the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City, for example, attendance at Broadway shows fell more than 20 percent compared with the same week a year earlier despite the presence of tens of thousands of visiting conventioneers and journalists.”

(Matheson and Baade also previously crunched the numbers for the NCAA tournament, another brief “mega-event” similar to political conventions, and found that the men’s tournament appeared to have a small negative impact on host cities’ economies, which is impressively bad.)

Reached via email, Matheson further observes that political conventions don’t even provide the “feel-good” effects of a major sporting event, where residents at least report an increase in warm fuzzies from having been in proximity to greatness. (The 2016 Rio de Janeiro Olympics, he notes, seem to have been an exception.) Political conventions, by contrast, are generally remembered in story and song for less cheery reasons.

Now, there’s an obvious caveat here, which is that a pandemic economy is not a normal economy; hotel stays in North Carolina are way down what with much of America not leaving the house, so there may not be many tourists to drive away with a convention (though that’s already starting to change as the state slowly reopens). Matheson writes:

No one is going to fill those rooms up if the convention were to not take place. Hotel occupancy across the country has essentially fallen to zero, so the crowding out effect of mega events has disappeared during COVID-19, leading to real economic damage done by the cancellation of sporting (and political) events.
This also gives Trump’s threat slightly more teeth. In normal times, Trump’s threat to move the convention would be just another inane bit of bluster from a guy who likes to make threats he has no ability to carry out. There would be no city in the country with available hotel rooms and convention space that you could move the event to with this little notice. Nowadays, however, there are probably 30 different cities that actually have availability to host an event like this with last minute notice.

A chunk of the convention spending that advocates like to crow about, however, is from going out on the town during the event: Another paper by Matheson (with co-authors Lauren Heller and Frank Stephenson) found that convention-goers would have to spend seven times as much on food and entertainment as on hotel rooms to justify the most common economic impact claims. Restaurants, though, remain limited to 50% capacity in North Carolina, and if my experience getting takeout food in Brooklyn last night is any guide, there’s plenty of demand for restaurant food from bored, hungry locals right now, so it’s extremely likely that at least some Charlotte residents would choose to stay home rather than line up to sit six feet from Republican convention visitors from who knows where, with their icky who-knows-where germs.

Gov. Cooper hasn’t yet responded to Trump’s demands beyond a brief press statement saying North Carolina will make its decisions based on “data and science,” which certainly could be read as “Yeah, yeah, the president is tweeting at us, give him 24 hours and he’ll be off tweeting at clouds instead.” But don’t sell Donald Trump short: In his time as New Jersey Generals owner, he surely learned something about ways to leverage his power to get concessions from his foes. Or, you know, not.

Share this post:

Revived USFL pitches “mid-sized” stadiums as economic boost

Sending out a press release saying you’re going to start (or restart) a sports league is cheap, so hey, why not the USFL? Only this press release has a novel twist:

San Diego, Calif. (February 11, 2013) – The United States Football League (USFL) announced today that it has signed a confidential agreement with an established real estate development company to build multiple commercial developments throughout the United States, with the centerpiece of each development to be a mid-sized stadium to host a USFL team…

Each development will contain a USFL football stadium, a sports and entertainment complex, residential and retail space. The USFL and its development partner plan to build the new developments across the spectrum of small, mid-size and large markets, with the goal of bringing economic development to underserved areas and creating jobs and a sustainable economy for these selected cities.

There’s nothing in there about asking for subsidies for these projects, but the bit about “economic development to underserved areas and creating jobs and a sustainable economy” certainly sounds pitched for mayors of small towns with medium-town dreams. (The press release also claims that the development company would benefit “by securing an anchor tenant for developments,” but if there are really development companies out there that think a USFL team would be a solid anchor tenant, I have some pointing and laughing I want to do.) More info as it’s available, I guess, but this is one to keep half an eye on, anyway.

Share this post: