Jump to content

NYC 2024 or 2028


Soaring
 Share

Recommended Posts

Stryker,

You are making good arguments against a recyclable venue. But the idea of a pure tear down is still untested and probably, IMO, a good idea. However, I don't know if anyone will suggest it because of the optics.

Explain to us why you think it's a good idea? Because I'm still trying to grasp the concept of how spending money for a temporary arena/stadium, then completely tearing it down, is a good thing. Or that the main reason it hasn't been suggested is because of the optics. Perhaps it hasn't been suggested because it's a stupid idea? Again, please don't tell me you're making an Athensfan argument here that this should be tried simply because it hasn't been done before and therefore we can't know for sure if it's a bad idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stryker,

You are making good arguments against a recyclable venue. But the idea of a pure tear down is still untested and probably, IMO, a good idea. However, I don't know if anyone will suggest it because of the optics.

It looks stupid because it is stupid. Why spend $350 million on a stadium that will be used for three weeks and then be recycled?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks stupid because it is stupid. Why spend $350 million on a stadium that will be used for three weeks and then be recycled?

It's insane. Anything over $60 million for a stadium being used only like 32 days (7 days for a test event the year before; 15 days during the actual Olympic period; and what? 10 days during the Paralymipc period) is insane. Even at $60 million, that works out to some $2 million a day and nothing to show for after those 32 days -- except probably a plaque and the remains of the cauldron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The jets or Giants could get out of the stadium by 2025.

"The lease for the new stadium is for 25 years, with options to extend it that could eventually reach 97 years. After the 15th year of the lease, every five years, one of the two teams may opt out of the lease after giving the state 12 months notice. However, if one team leaves for a new stadium, the other team would have to remain for the remainder of the lease. "

So by 2025 the jets can leave. If NYC hosted the 2028 Olympics or 2032 it would make more sense to leave in 2030 or 2035 because if they leave before the games happen I wouldn't make much sense because you'd be without a stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The jets or Giants could get out of the stadium by 2025.

"The lease for the new stadium is for 25 years, with options to extend it that could eventually reach 97 years. After the 15th year of the lease, every five years, one of the two teams may opt out of the lease after giving the state 12 months notice. However, if one team leaves for a new stadium, the other team would have to remain for the remainder of the lease. "

So by 2025 the jets can leave. If NYC hosted the 2028 Olympics or 2032 it would make more sense to leave in 2030 or 2035 because if they leave before the games happen I wouldn't make much sense because you'd be without a stadium.

What are you talking about? 25 years? If New York gets awarded the Games in 2021 or 2025...and they can be out by 2030 or 2035? Whakindda math do you practice?? Prison math?? :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you talking about? 25 years? If New York gets awarded the Games in 2021 or 2025...and they can be out by 2030 or 2035? Whakindda math do you practice?? Prison math?? :blink:

You must not understand what he wrote. At the earliest, one of the two teams can leave MetLife after 15 years, BUT after 15 years one of the teams has to stay in Metlife another 10 years, making the total lease time 25 years. But either team, or both teams, have the option to extend their lease at the stadium for a total of 97 years.

If a team decides to leave the stadium, they are only allowed to make that decision every 5 years. So 2025 would be the earliest the Jets or the Giants can leave the stadium. If an Olympic plan is put into place to build an Olympic stadium that will be later converted to an NFL stadium, then this would have to be for the 2028 games, 2032 games, etc since NYC won't be going for the 2024 SOGs. So if either team leaves for this new converted stadium, provided everything goes through, 2030/31, or 2035/36 would be the most logical choice. They also have to put in a year in advance, not sure if that's a year that's put in after the 5 year mark or before the 5 year mark of giving you that option.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks stupid because it is stupid. Why spend $350 million on a stadium that will be used for three weeks and then be recycled?

Because it's better than spending $1billion on a stadium you don't need or have a use for.

It's insane. Anything over $60 million for a stadium being used only like 32 days (7 days for a test event the year before; 15 days during the actual Olympic period; and what? 10 days during the Paralymipc period) is insane. Even at $60 million, that works out to some $2 million a day and nothing to show for after those 32 days -- except probably a plaque and the remains of the cauldron.

$2 million a day.. for a stadium that sells 100,000 tickets a day at an average of $100-200 each?

Not bad actually

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Giants or the Jets aren't going anywhere even by 2025. Both franchises have put too much money into MetLife Stadium to leave so soon regardless of the terms of the lease.

$350 million is a ridiculous price tag for a temporary facility. Permanent college football stadiums (smaller ones anyway) can be built for a cheaper price tag. $2 million a day during an Olympics might not seem like much, but you won't find an American public anywhere that would support that. That goes back to one of the problems facing the Olympics today. Venues built for an Olympics that get little or no use afterwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Giants or the Jets aren't going anywhere even by 2025. Both franchises have put too much money into MetLife Stadium to leave so soon regardless of the terms of the lease.

Thank you. Everyone needs to stop interpreting the terms of that lease as some excuse the Jets or Giants will use to leave the stadium so that it will better conform to your dream Olympic bid. MetLife Stadium cost $1.6 billion to build. That would be a pretty bad investment if 1 of the teams (it would be the Jets, not the Giants) decided to leave after only 15 years) decided to leave and build their own stadium which would probably cost another billion. Don't count on it happening.

Because it's better than spending $1billion on a stadium you don't need or have a use for.

A.) Who says a new stadium has to cost a billion dollars. B.) Who says there won't be a use for said stadium? Beijing found a use for their stadium.. China tourists twig to Beijing's Bird's Nest. Supposedly they're making some money off that and the stadium does still host some events, case in point the IAAF World Championships coming up next week.

So here's a question to ask yourself.. if a temporary stadium costs $350 million (and probably doesn't include the cost of tearing the stadium down and building whatever will replace it), why is a permanent stadium nearly 3 times the price? That $350 million investment is guaranteed to leave you with no positive return after the Olympics. As opposed to spending, say, $500 million for a more permanent facility (and I'll tack on an extra $100 million for redevelopment) that actually gives you a chance to earn back something for your money.

No, this isn't about optics. If you're concerned it's going to look like a waste of money and a stupid idea.. that's because it is a waste of money and a stupid idea. Certain excess spending with the Olympics is out of necessity (things like security costs have grown and can't realistically be reduced), but spending a billion dollars on a stadium is not a necessity. Rio spent only $700 million to build and renovate not 1, but 2 stadiums for their Pan Am/Olympic bids. João Havelange Stadium cost $200 million. And it's a permanent facility. Just because Tokyo is spending top dollar on their stadium does not mean the next bidder needs to spend top dollar on theirs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because it's better than spending $1billion on a stadium you don't need or have a use for.

Sure. And I would prefer to be decapitated rather than being disembowled. I won't be volunteering for either one, though.

The process for a city bidding on any major event should be:

1) Look at the infrastructure it wants.

2) Look at what kind of events it can host using that infrastructure.

Unfortunately cities have being going about it in the reverse, which leads to football stadiums being built in the Amazon for the sake of hosting the World Cup.

If New York can figure out a way to support the Olympics using desired infrastructure (such as a combination of Stade de France and London's plan to build a half-temporary stadium, with the stadium ending up as a 40,000 seat stadium for the annual New York athletics meet and New York City FC) then great. If not there are plenty of other events the USA and New York can host. New York/New Jersey could host the Rugby Sevens World Cup in Metlife and the Red Bull Arena or whatever their stadium is called. And the USA is actually half decent at the sport now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If New York can figure out a way to support the Olympics using desired infrastructure (such as a combination of Stade de France and London's plan to build a half-temporary stadium, with the stadium ending up as a 40,000 seat stadium for the annual New York athletics meet and New York City FC) then great. If not there are plenty of other events the USA and New York can host. New York/New Jersey could host the Rugby Sevens World Cup in Metlife and the Red Bull Arena or whatever their stadium is called. And the USA is actually half decent at the sport now.

I don't think the stadium would be suitable for NYCFC. First of all its too far off in the distance (they were looking to be in a stadium by 2016 but that's not going to happen). Also the stadium is just too big. Unfortunately soccer or football isn't that big in America, even though it's growing and the MLS attendence has increased by 11% since last years World Cup, the sport isn't big enough.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps an athletics stadium can be shared among the city of NY and surrounding colleges? Or just one college?

There really aren't many big enough colleges surrounding NYC. The biggest is Columbia and they already have a stadium, only 18,000 of course. They could need a new stadium but I don't think a giant would fit it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There really aren't many big enough colleges surrounding NYC. The biggest is Columbia and they already have a stadium, only 18,000 of course. They could need a new stadium but I don't think a giant would fit it.

If their American football was more popular I'm sure they could have worked something out to downscale a new stadium to like 40k capacity. But the student body is less than 30k and I don't see New England flocking to college footballs as much as the south does with few exceptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure. And I would prefer to be decapitated rather than being disembowled. I won't be volunteering for either one, though.

The process for a city bidding on any major event should be:

1) Look at the infrastructure it wants.

2) Look at what kind of events it can host using that infrastructure.

Unfortunately cities have being going about it in the reverse, which leads to football stadiums being built in the Amazon for the sake of hosting the World Cup.

If New York can figure out a way to support the Olympics using desired infrastructure (such as a combination of Stade de France and London's plan to build a half-temporary stadium, with the stadium ending up as a 40,000 seat stadium for the annual New York athletics meet and New York City FC) then great. If not there are plenty of other events the USA and New York can host. New York/New Jersey could host the Rugby Sevens World Cup in Metlife and the Red Bull Arena or whatever their stadium is called. And the USA is actually half decent at the sport now.

The advantage of disembowling is that you can use the last for something useful. As somebody mentined, land in NYC is precious, especially land with the kind of transportation access you'll want for the Olympics. Even if you can find some tiny use for a stadium after than games, the land is better used for something else. Heck, I'd rather see it used for open parkland or recreational soccer than a T&F staidum that is empty 95%+ of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The advantage of disembowling is that you can use the last for something useful. As somebody mentined, land in NYC is precious, especially land with the kind of transportation access you'll want for the Olympics. Even if you can find some tiny use for a stadium after than games, the land is better used for something else. Heck, I'd rather see it used for open parkland or recreational soccer than a T&F staidum that is empty 95%+ of the time.

Here's another idea that has even more advantages.. don't bid for the Olympics in the first place if you don't have a legacy plan. Because if that land is better used for something else, than use that land for something else and save yourselves the $400 million and years planning/effort and jump straight to whatever your endgame is. If an Olympic bid is based on a temporary stadium that's going to be completely demolished afterwards, it's not a good bid and probably shouldn't be tried in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The advantage of disembowling is that you can use the last for something useful. As somebody mentined, land in NYC is precious, especially land with the kind of transportation access you'll want for the Olympics. Even if you can find some tiny use for a stadium after than games, the land is better used for something else. Heck, I'd rather see it used for open parkland or recreational soccer than a T&F staidum that is empty 95%+ of the time.

The land is there already. There's no need to build a temporary stadium or host the Olympics at all for developers to have access to land.

I don't think the stadium would be suitable for NYCFC. First of all its too far off in the distance (they were looking to be in a stadium by 2016 but that's not going to happen). Also the stadium is just too big. Unfortunately soccer or football isn't that big in America, even though it's growing and the MLS attendence has increased by 11% since last years World Cup, the sport isn't big enough.

My point is that American cities should do what London did in reverse. Build a small stadium with the retractable lower bowl, suites and a small middle tier that is designed to be upgraded for the Olympics. If they did that NYCFC wouldn't be waiting for years to see what happens with the Olympic bid.

Second, New York is attracting about 28,000 fans for their inaugural season, so as they develop a fanbase they should be able to push the average attendance up to 35,000. A 35-40,000 capacity stadium should work for them if they can get a stadium in New York proper instead of Jersey. The obstacle is in finding the land, but if the city wants the Olympics (a huge "if," of course) they can cut a deal with the team where the land is only made available in Queens in exchange for the team building a stadium capable of being upgraded for the Olympics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

New York City FC are still looking for a Stadium. 2028 is a long time away though.

Yea I highly doubt they'll get one through an Olympic games by downsizing an athletics stadium for a MLS team. NYC's best chance of hosting was in 2012 and they blew it. They won't ever get another chance until they figure out if they're willing to go the temporary stadium route, or if they go with a permanent one what will they do with it after the games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New York stands no chance of hosting for a while at least until either the Giants or Jets want a new stadium and that's not happening in the near future. Forget the temporary stadium idea. It's a failed concept. See London and Incheon for evidence. The idea of scaling one down for NYCFC is nearly as ridiculous

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New York stands no chance of hosting for a while at least until either the Giants or Jets want a new stadium and that's not happening in the near future. Forget the temporary stadium idea. It's a failed concept. See London and Incheon for evidence. The idea of scaling one down for NYCFC is nearly as ridiculous

And then who the hell from the Giants and Jets would want the trouble of downscaling a T&F stadium to an NFL stadium? I can't imagine there is any way they're going to compensate for the excessive distance from the higher tier seats to the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

The most likely (however unlikely) way for something plausible to manifest (financially justifiable etc) would be if City Football Group - who own NYCFC, Man City & Melb City - to buy a sizeable minority stake in the Jets to have skin create another revenue stream to offset the costs/risks of building a brand new stadium. 

Stadium architectural design and capability is at a point where building a stadium that can morph into different use-cases is possible (i.e Soccer, NFL & Olympic T&F layouts). So building a new stadium that works is the easy part. It's having a compelling, sustainable business plan that is the issue. Having City Football Group combine with an NFL team (Jets) would fix that in my eyes.



 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...