Skip to content

Bold idea that would change the landscape of sports in Cleveland

The Browns Board
355 22 6.5k
  • Development under construction around MetLife stadium  NY/NH

    636614832538763047-May-2018-Parks.jpg?wi

    mjp28M mjp28 wrote on last edited by

    @the-gipper said:

    Development under construction around MetLife stadium  NY/NH

    636614832538763047-May-2018-Parks.jpg?wi

    Good pics, puts things in perspective.

  • @tour2ma said:

    Oh, Gipper...

    You're the only one here who thinks any of your arguments are reasonable.

    Surprised you even saw that comment.  

    Who among us here has won court cases with reasonable arguments?   If you take off your bridal veil of prejudice,  You clearly would see that my arguments are perfectly reasonable on this matter, because, in reality,  from my experience, the best argument is that in which the full force of the facts are on your side.  And the full force of the facts ARE on my side on this:   Many of the NFL owners are going full guns on the mega-development model for their stadiums...they are going fully into wanting largely private/public partnership  funded facilities that can put them into the category as "project developers" as it does "NFL team owners".   And, as I said, where they have not done that, those owners were still far more willing to slurp from the public money trough than their brethren who had more foresight into the future.    

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by

    @the-gipper said:

    Surprised you even saw that comment.  

    Who among us here has won court cases with reasonable arguments?   If you take off your bridal veil of prejudice,  You clearly would see that my arguments are perfectly reasonable on this matter, because, in reality,  from my experience, the best argument is that in which the full force of the facts are on your side.  And the full force of the facts ARE on my side on this:   Many of the NFL owners are going full guns on the mega-development model for their stadiums...they are going fully into wanting largely private/public partnership  funded facilities that can put them into the category as "project developers" as it does "NFL team owners".   And, as I said, where they have not done that, those owners were still far more willing to slurp from the public money trough than their brethren who had more foresight into the future.    

    I rest my case.

  • arlington-texas-cowboy-and-ranger-stadiu

    Dallas.  Tons of surrounding parking (for both stadiums)....tons of hotel/restaurants/commercial surrounding it.

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by Tour2ma

    @the-gipper said:

    Dallas.  Tons of surrounding parking (for both stadiums)....tons of hotel/restaurants/commercial surrounding it.

    You're missing a stadium.

    Rangers are building a new, retractable roof home, Globe Life Field.

    image.png.46d7f3fbe6ddaabb6fafb7c62e1fae22.png

  • @the-gipper said:

    Surprised you even saw that comment.  

    Who among us here has won court cases with reasonable arguments?   If you take off your bridal veil of prejudice,  You clearly would see that my arguments are perfectly reasonable on this matter, because, in reality,  from my experience, the best argument is that in which the full force of the facts are on your side.  And the full force of the facts ARE on my side on this:   Many of the NFL owners are going full guns on the mega-development model for their stadiums...they are going fully into wanting largely private/public partnership  funded facilities that can put them into the category as "project developers" as it does "NFL team owners".   And, as I said, where they have not done that, those owners were still far more willing to slurp from the public money trough than their brethren who had more foresight into the future.    

    I rest my case.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by

    @tour2ma said:

    I rest my case.

    And you lose your case, because:  A. You didn't present any sort of a case to begin with. Snarky drive-by remarks do not a case make. B.  You made no argument on either side of this stadium issue thing.   You clearly have nothing to contribute. You certainly provided nothing to the discussion that Dutch and I were having.  You have to score points to win.  When your point score is exactly -0-....you can't win a thing.   C. Your best option is to simply declare that you are bankrupt with no assets at your disposal. 

  • @the-gipper said:

    Dallas.  Tons of surrounding parking (for both stadiums)....tons of hotel/restaurants/commercial surrounding it.

    You're missing a stadium.

    Rangers are building a new, retractable roof home, Globe Life Field.

    image.png.46d7f3fbe6ddaabb6fafb7c62e1fae22.png

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by

    @tour2ma said:

    You're missing a stadium.

    Rangers are building a new, retractable roof home, Globe Life Field.

    image.png.46d7f3fbe6ddaabb6fafb7c62e1fae22.png

    What is that in the upper right hand corner, labeled  "Globe Life Park in Arlington"?  Is that the "old" stadium  (that isn't very old)?  This was the best aerial view I could find that encompassed the entire area. If you have a more recent depiction of what is going on there, by all means, show us. 

  • @tour2ma said:

    Oh, Gipper...

    You're the only one here who thinks any of your arguments are reasonable.

    Surprised you even saw that comment.  

    Who among us here has won court cases with reasonable arguments?   If you take off your bridal veil of prejudice,  You clearly would see that my arguments are perfectly reasonable on this matter, because, in reality,  from my experience, the best argument is that in which the full force of the facts are on your side.  And the full force of the facts ARE on my side on this:   Many of the NFL owners are going full guns on the mega-development model for their stadiums...they are going fully into wanting largely private/public partnership  funded facilities that can put them into the category as "project developers" as it does "NFL team owners".   And, as I said, where they have not done that, those owners were still far more willing to slurp from the public money trough than their brethren who had more foresight into the future.    

    Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on last edited by

    @the-gipper said:

    Surprised you even saw that comment.  

    Who among us here has won court cases with reasonable arguments?   If you take off your bridal veil of prejudice,  You clearly would see that my arguments are perfectly reasonable on this matter, because, in reality,  from my experience, the best argument is that in which the full force of the facts are on your side.  And the full force of the facts ARE on my side on this:   Many of the NFL owners are going full guns on the mega-development model for their stadiums...they are going fully into wanting largely private/public partnership  funded facilities that can put them into the category as "project developers" as it does "NFL team owners".   And, as I said, where they have not done that, those owners were still far more willing to slurp from the public money trough than their brethren who had more foresight into the future.    

    You: NFL teams demand 300 acres outside the city limits so they can build megaplexes

    Me: Here's a list of NFL teams that have recently built stadiums in their respective downtowns, or just outside their respective downtowns, with nowhere near that much land.

    You: THOSE TEAMS DON'T COUNT! 

  • @dutch-oven said:

    I would love to see the plans for the OTHER ideas they had for the stadium, because the rumor was that the one they picked was basically the most generic one. 

    In part true. We'll  use a cookie cutter  plan because the architectural guys already  had something  similar,  and it cuts down on  costs. BUT, the plan also was to keep the "feel" of the old stadium  as much as possible,  resulting in  my major  gripe about the  place. The inadequate room behind the  stands relative to any "modern" stadium.  If you've  ever been to  Ford Field, Lucas Oil, or Paul Brown  you know  what  I'm  talking about.  

    @dutch-oven said:

    If you couldn't figure out that was sarcasm, I honestly feel bad for you. 

    Jesus Christ, I would have paid money to see you in court. That had to be hilarious.

    Sorry  Dutch your sarcasm comes through  very poorly the majority  of the time. Gipper  isn't the only one who doesn't  see it.  

    Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on last edited by

    @hoorta said:

    Sorry Dutch your sarcasm comes through very poorly the majority  of the time. Gipper  isn't the only one who doesn't  see it.  

    Apparently my sarcasm isn't appreciated by the 4:00pm supper crowd? ?

  • Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on last edited by

    Ooh pictures! 

  • @tour2ma said:

    I rest my case.

    And you lose your case, because:  A. You didn't present any sort of a case to begin with. Snarky drive-by remarks do not a case make. B.  You made no argument on either side of this stadium issue thing.   You clearly have nothing to contribute. You certainly provided nothing to the discussion that Dutch and I were having.  You have to score points to win.  When your point score is exactly -0-....you can't win a thing.   C. Your best option is to simply declare that you are bankrupt with no assets at your disposal. 

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by

    @the-gipper said:

    And you lose your case, because:  A. You didn't present any sort of a case to begin with. Snarky drive-by remarks do not a case make. B.  You made no argument on either side of this stadium issue thing.   You clearly have nothing to contribute. You certainly provided nothing to the discussion that Dutch and I were having.  You have to score points to win.  When your point score is exactly -0-....you can't win a thing.   C. Your best option is to simply declare that you are bankrupt with no assets at your disposal. 

    Sorry... no directed verdicts in this court. Shall we let the BrownsBoard jury decide?

    A&B... Been there... done that, Gip. Waste of time. Took you off "Ignore" as I think now I can limit when and how much I engage.

    @the-gipper said:

    What is that in the upper right hand corner, labeled  "Globe Life Park in Arlington"?  Is that the "old" stadium  (that isn't very old)?  This was the best aerial view I could find that encompassed the entire area. If you have a more recent depiction of what is going on there, by all means, show us. 

    Yes... built in '94.  Beautiful stadium... I've seen a couple games there. When wind blows ground level openings funnel air low into the stadium and lower seats are comfortable even on a hot, Irving afternoon. Problem is if there's no wind, then you roast. So here comes the roofed newbie.

    No...

  • Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on last edited by

    Minnesota Vikings

    minnesota vikings stadium.png

  • Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on last edited by

    Indianapolis Colts 

    indianapolis colts stadium.png

  • Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on last edited by

    Atlanta Falcons 

    atlanta falcons stadium.png

  • Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on last edited by

    Seattle Seahawks 

    seattle seahawks stadium.png

  • Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on last edited by

    Can we all agree that the Atlanta Falcons built one hideous stadium? ?

  • @the-gipper said:

    Surprised you even saw that comment.  

    Who among us here has won court cases with reasonable arguments?   If you take off your bridal veil of prejudice,  You clearly would see that my arguments are perfectly reasonable on this matter, because, in reality,  from my experience, the best argument is that in which the full force of the facts are on your side.  And the full force of the facts ARE on my side on this:   Many of the NFL owners are going full guns on the mega-development model for their stadiums...they are going fully into wanting largely private/public partnership  funded facilities that can put them into the category as "project developers" as it does "NFL team owners".   And, as I said, where they have not done that, those owners were still far more willing to slurp from the public money trough than their brethren who had more foresight into the future.    

    You: NFL teams demand 300 acres outside the city limits so they can build megaplexes

    Me: Here's a list of NFL teams that have recently built stadiums in their respective downtowns, or just outside their respective downtowns, with nowhere near that much land.

    You: THOSE TEAMS DON'T COUNT! 

    hoortaH hoorta wrote on last edited by hoorta

    @dutch-oven said:

    You: NFL teams demand 300 acres outside the city limits so they can build megaplexes

    Me: Here's a list of NFL teams that have recently built stadiums in their respective downtowns, or just outside their respective downtowns, with nowhere near that much land.

    You: THOSE TEAMS DON'T COUNT! 

    Don't obfuscate, as you're wont to do. Both me and Gip are totally aware you can build a modern stadium inside the city limits. However- that's no longer the paradigm of many of the billionaire owners out to maximize their profits. A couple hotels and a mall that you have complete financial control over next to your stadium? CA-CHING!!!!  

    We've also said other than Burke Airport, Highland Golf Course, and maybe a potential site in the Flats- that's about it in Cleveland. Unless you want to tear up entire neighborhoods to build a new stadium.

    @dutch-oven said:

    minnesota vikings stadium.png

    Looks like plenty of room to develop right around that stadium. but other than Minneapolis- and I've already said once- no problems building a Dome where the average December\ January temperatures can run 5-10 degrees during a game, or well below zero. 

    But Centurylink and Lucas Oil are already 10 or more years old- that's about 1\2 of their life expectancy on the owners greed-o-meter. You can say tearing down First Energy is a possibility- but go look at the aerial views. It's landlocked by train tracks and a freeway to the south, docks to the west, Great Lakes Science Center and the Rock HOF to the east. I doubt you could develop much- even if the stadium wasn't there. Of course, you could dump a cubic mile or so of landfill into the Lake, and build it out North as far as you like, assuming you wouldn't run afoul of the EPA. 

    For sure- whatever Haslam decides he wants- he's going to get. The Browns are far too valuable an asset to NE Ohio to let them move anywhere else. The Modell move taught the area a lesson that won't ever be forgotten. 

  • @dutch-oven said:

    You: NFL teams demand 300 acres outside the city limits so they can build megaplexes

    Me: Here's a list of NFL teams that have recently built stadiums in their respective downtowns, or just outside their respective downtowns, with nowhere near that much land.

    You: THOSE TEAMS DON'T COUNT! 

    Don't obfuscate, as you're wont to do. Both me and Gip are totally aware you can build a modern stadium inside the city limits. However- that's no longer the paradigm of many of the billionaire owners out to maximize their profits. A couple hotels and a mall that you have complete financial control over next to your stadium? CA-CHING!!!!  

    We've also said other than Burke Airport, Highland Golf Course, and maybe a potential site in the Flats- that's about it in Cleveland. Unless you want to tear up entire neighborhoods to build a new stadium.

    @dutch-oven said:

    minnesota vikings stadium.png

    Looks like plenty of room to develop right around that stadium. but other than Minneapolis- and I've already said once- no problems building a Dome where the average December\ January temperatures can run 5-10 degrees during a game, or well below zero. 

    But Centurylink and Lucas Oil are already 10 or more years old- that's about 1\2 of their life expectancy on the owners greed-o-meter. You can say tearing down First Energy is a possibility- but go look at the aerial views. It's landlocked by train tracks and a freeway to the south, docks to the west, Great Lakes Science Center and the Rock HOF to the east. I doubt you could develop much- even if the stadium wasn't there. Of course, you could dump a cubic mile or so of landfill into the Lake, and build it out North as far as you like, assuming you wouldn't run afoul of the EPA. 

    For sure- whatever Haslam decides he wants- he's going to get. The Browns are far too valuable an asset to NE Ohio to let them move anywhere else. The Modell move taught the area a lesson that won't ever be forgotten. 

    Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on last edited by

    @hoorta said:

    Both me and Gip are totally aware 

    Desperate times call for desperate measures, I suppose.

    Doesn't get any more desperate than one hitching their debating wagon to ol' "Muddy Waters" Gipper… ? 

  • @the-gipper said:

    Surprised you even saw that comment.  

    Who among us here has won court cases with reasonable arguments?   If you take off your bridal veil of prejudice,  You clearly would see that my arguments are perfectly reasonable on this matter, because, in reality,  from my experience, the best argument is that in which the full force of the facts are on your side.  And the full force of the facts ARE on my side on this:   Many of the NFL owners are going full guns on the mega-development model for their stadiums...they are going fully into wanting largely private/public partnership  funded facilities that can put them into the category as "project developers" as it does "NFL team owners".   And, as I said, where they have not done that, those owners were still far more willing to slurp from the public money trough than their brethren who had more foresight into the future.    

    You: NFL teams demand 300 acres outside the city limits so they can build megaplexes

    Me: Here's a list of NFL teams that have recently built stadiums in their respective downtowns, or just outside their respective downtowns, with nowhere near that much land.

    You: THOSE TEAMS DON'T COUNT! 

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by

    @dutch-oven said:

    You: NFL teams demand 300 acres outside the city limits so they can build megaplexes

    Me: Here's a list of NFL teams that have recently built stadiums in their respective downtowns, or just outside their respective downtowns, with nowhere near that much land.

    You: THOSE TEAMS DON'T COUNT! 

    It wasn't as simple as that stupid.   I never said that they don't count....I said what they did didn't matter for the future of the NFL ....that that was NOT the wave  of the future or the model that the NFL is really wanting to follow going forward.  That they do in fact want these megaplexes.  Sorry if the subtleties of the language get missed by you. 

  • @the-gipper said:

    And you lose your case, because:  A. You didn't present any sort of a case to begin with. Snarky drive-by remarks do not a case make. B.  You made no argument on either side of this stadium issue thing.   You clearly have nothing to contribute. You certainly provided nothing to the discussion that Dutch and I were having.  You have to score points to win.  When your point score is exactly -0-....you can't win a thing.   C. Your best option is to simply declare that you are bankrupt with no assets at your disposal. 

    Sorry... no directed verdicts in this court. Shall we let the BrownsBoard jury decide?

    A&B... Been there... done that, Gip. Waste of time. Took you off "Ignore" as I think now I can limit when and how much I engage.

    @the-gipper said:

    What is that in the upper right hand corner, labeled  "Globe Life Park in Arlington"?  Is that the "old" stadium  (that isn't very old)?  This was the best aerial view I could find that encompassed the entire area. If you have a more recent depiction of what is going on there, by all means, show us. 

    Yes... built in '94.  Beautiful stadium... I've seen a couple games there. When wind blows ground level openings funnel air low into the stadium and lower seats are comfortable even on a hot, Irving afternoon. Problem is if there's no wind, then you roast. So here comes the roofed newbie.

    No...

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by

    @tour2ma said:

    Sorry... no directed verdicts in this court. Shall we let the BrownsBoard jury decide?

    Then you know nothing about judges and juries.  If you bring a case, then you have to make a case.  If you don't make a case, then the judge can and will direct a verdict, and it will never make it to a jury. 

    A&B... Been there... done that, Gip. Waste of time. Took you off "Ignore" as I think now I can limit when and how much I engage.

    Been there, done that?  Other than that photo of the "Megaplex" surrounding AT&T...what did you been done there and did?  Nada.

    Yes... built in '94.  Beautiful stadium... I've seen a couple games there. When wind blows ground level openings funnel air low into the stadium and lower seats are comfortable even on a hot, Irving afternoon. Problem is if there's no wind, then you roast. So here comes the roofed newbie.

    I have not seen renditions of it. 

  • @dutch-oven said:

    You: NFL teams demand 300 acres outside the city limits so they can build megaplexes

    Me: Here's a list of NFL teams that have recently built stadiums in their respective downtowns, or just outside their respective downtowns, with nowhere near that much land.

    You: THOSE TEAMS DON'T COUNT! 

    Don't obfuscate, as you're wont to do. Both me and Gip are totally aware you can build a modern stadium inside the city limits. However- that's no longer the paradigm of many of the billionaire owners out to maximize their profits. A couple hotels and a mall that you have complete financial control over next to your stadium? CA-CHING!!!!  

    We've also said other than Burke Airport, Highland Golf Course, and maybe a potential site in the Flats- that's about it in Cleveland. Unless you want to tear up entire neighborhoods to build a new stadium.

    @dutch-oven said:

    minnesota vikings stadium.png

    Looks like plenty of room to develop right around that stadium. but other than Minneapolis- and I've already said once- no problems building a Dome where the average December\ January temperatures can run 5-10 degrees during a game, or well below zero. 

    But Centurylink and Lucas Oil are already 10 or more years old- that's about 1\2 of their life expectancy on the owners greed-o-meter. You can say tearing down First Energy is a possibility- but go look at the aerial views. It's landlocked by train tracks and a freeway to the south, docks to the west, Great Lakes Science Center and the Rock HOF to the east. I doubt you could develop much- even if the stadium wasn't there. Of course, you could dump a cubic mile or so of landfill into the Lake, and build it out North as far as you like, assuming you wouldn't run afoul of the EPA. 

    For sure- whatever Haslam decides he wants- he's going to get. The Browns are far too valuable an asset to NE Ohio to let them move anywhere else. The Modell move taught the area a lesson that won't ever be forgotten. 

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by

    @hoorta said:

    Don't obfuscate, as you're wont to do. Both me and Gip are totally aware you can build a modern stadium inside the city limits. However- that's no longer the paradigm of many of the billionaire owners out to maximize their profits. A couple hotels and a mall that you have complete financial control over next to your stadium? CA-CHING!!!!  

    We've also said other than Burke Airport, Highland Golf Course, and maybe a potential site in the Flats- that's about it in Cleveland. Unless you want to tear up entire neighborhoods to build a new stadium.

    Looks like plenty of room to develop right around that stadium. but other than Minneapolis- and I've already said once- no problems building a Dome where the average December\ January temperatures can run 5-10 degrees during a game, or well below zero. 

    But Centurylink and Lucas Oil are already 10 or more years old- that's about 1\2 of their life expectancy on the owners greed-o-meter. You can say tearing down First Energy is a possibility- but go look at the aerial views. It's landlocked by train tracks and a freeway to the south, docks to the west, Great Lakes Science Center and the Rock HOF to the east. I doubt you could develop much- even if the stadium wasn't there. Of course, you could dump a cubic mile or so of landfill into the Lake, and build it out North as far as you like, assuming you wouldn't run afoul of the EPA. 

    For sure- whatever Haslam decides he wants- he's going to get. The Browns are far too valuable an asset to NE Ohio to let them move anywhere else. The Modell move taught the area a lesson that won't ever be forgotten. 

    Precisely.

  • @hoorta said:

    Both me and Gip are totally aware 

    Desperate times call for desperate measures, I suppose.

    Doesn't get any more desperate than one hitching their debating wagon to ol' "Muddy Waters" Gipper… ? 

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by

    @dutch-oven said:

    Desperate times call for desperate measures, I suppose.

    Doesn't get any more desperate than one hitching their debating wagon to ol' "Muddy Waters" Gipper… ? 

    He hitches his wagon to me because he recognizes that I am right on just about everything I am saying.  And I know that you actually recognize that I am right about every thing I am saying, you just want to be contrarian about it.      Or, you are like those guys at the turn of the 20th century who turned up their noses at those horseless carriage contraptions and said they would never be the wave of transportations future. 

    I mean...you CAN actually ride a horse between Akron and Cleveland along Bridal Trails that are in the Cuyahoga Valley, but you are, now, today, better of riding a motor vehicle on Interstate I-77 to get there.   You can still build a stadium on a small downtown footprint of like 25 acres,  if you want to still oil your saddle in your stall.  

    A few of the things you mention have been that...maybe.   Although as H pointed out....seems like plenty of room to build around the Minnesota dome...and I know from being there that development can be had heading from there toward the river. Maybe not 200-300 acres, but there is a corridor there leading to the University.