Jump to content

Bills announce 30-year deal for new $1.4 billion stadium in Orchard Park


RaidersAreOne

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, The BILLievers said:

Yeah I'd prefer a dome as well but oh well. Seems like it was a lot more expensive and wouldn't truly be used in the offseason as much as other stadiums. Buffalo also doesn't have the infrastructure to host a Super Bowl or Final Four so I think that took it off the table. 

On a more positive note, the stadium is rumored to be designed like Tottenham's new soccer stadium that is open air but all the seats are covered. Elements would still play a factor but fans wouldn't really be rained on, snowed on or be affected by crazy wind. It's essentially a dome with a hole cut over the field of play lol. 

5700.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=forma

Reminiscent of the old Dallas Cowboys stadium.  I got to see it every week in the opening credits of the show "Dallas."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like Tennessee is also on the path to getting a new stadium.

So that leaves:

Jacksonville

Cincinnati

Carolina

Denver

Chicago

Cleveland(Maybe?)

Tampa(Maybe?)

With potential stadium issues in the near-term. I think all of those except the first two are large enough markets where they should be able to figure things out without too much trouble.

I would throw New Orleans and Baltimore in there due to age but it seems like they are content to extensively renovate the existing venues.

Edited by DigInBoys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, D82 said:

That stadium capacity is...wow. You'd think they would want more seating so they could use the stadium for larger events (like a Super Bowl). 

Weird. 

There is no chance in Hell the SB would ever be hosted in Buffalo regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, fretgod99 said:

It’s obscene the amount of money cities agree to pay for these.

It's a terrible system you have over there.

Build us a stadium or we take the team elsewhere shouldn't be allowed.

Teams make enough money to build these stadiums themselves.

Edited by DTMW78
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, D82 said:

But he won't spend to bring in players who could put the team over the top...

Exactly. The perfect owner would shell out for both, but few perfect owners exist in the NFL.

Maybe Robert Kraft. (Materially, not morally.) Or the Rooneys. 

3 hours ago, DTMW78 said:

It's a terrible system you have over there.

Build us a stadium or we take the team elsewhere shouldn't be allowed.

Teams make enough money to build these stadiums themselves.

"Sports today is deals, always deals. Tax abatements, luxury boxes, a bigger slice of the concessions pie, land ... deny [an owner] these goodies and he'll skip town.
Is it good business? Sure, but let's not forget that these are the same men who often shroud themselves in the public interest, seeking antitrust immunity in Congress and in the courts when it suits their purposes. And yet they are just as quick to raise the protective umbrella of free enterprise when a sweeter deal awaits them down the road."

-Howard Cosell

 

Edited by y*so*blu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, y*so*blu said:

Exactly. The perfect owner would shell out for both, but few perfect owners exist in the NFL.

Maybe Robert Kraft. (Materially, not morally.) Or the Rooneys. 

Not to keep harping on my dude, but you left his name off your short list. 

The Cowboys deal had ~$500m (I am reciting this off memory, might be wrong) in public funding. It was all muni bonds, which means Arlington put it on a credit card and only owed the interest. The stadium/revenue was so great, it paid off all the bonds ~15 years early as well as created enough funding for the Rangers new stadium. 

The building of the stadium itself ran over projected estimates by several hundred millions, Jerry wrote a check. 

 

Then he went and built a practice facility that cost just as much as the stadium...

 

Edited by Matts4313
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, DigInBoys said:

It looks like Tennessee is also on the path to getting a new stadium.

So that leaves:

Jacksonville

Cincinnati

Carolina

Denver

Chicago

Cleveland(Maybe?)

Tampa(Maybe?)

With potential stadium issues in the near-term. I think all of those except the first two are large enough markets where they should be able to figure things out without too much trouble.

I would throw New Orleans and Baltimore in there due to age but it seems like they are content to extensively renovate the existing venues.

I just heard from a interview with Joe Ellis that the new owner of the Broncos team will have 'new stadium' at the top of their list of things to consider.

Im not sure I understand why....Ive been to that stadium 2-3x and it is great. Its 20 years old but still feels modern and has great unique design for a outdoor stadium. In a great location downtown and has the 6th largest capacity in the NFL. The last thing I think of when Ive been there is 'old and outdated' like I do with the Browns stadium.

Why do they need a new one is beyond me.

 

Edited by AkronsWitness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad it's going to remain an open-air stadium. Seems like they're going the way of the do-do with the financial thinking these days. The conspiracy theorist in me also gets a buzz that in football world as we get more analytical, folks will just want to see everyone play in more controlled, and "quantifiable" conditions. I can't imagine the Packers or Steelers forgoing their historical identities and playing in a dome in the future. I hope the 49ers never suffer the same fate either. 

Edited by TecmoSuperJoe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/28/2022 at 2:39 PM, AkronsWitness said:

Thats the same argument Browns fans/media have been making for the past 5 years.

Dome vs. Open Air.

New school vs. "Football is meant to be played outdoors you child"

We can host more events vs. "Football is meant to be played outdoors you child"

The weather off the lake sucks for everyone vs. "Football is meant to be played outdoors you child"

The city could make so much more money with a dome vs. "Football is meant to be played outdoors you child"

I feel it fiscally irresponsible to the city to not build a dome.  If taxpayer money pays for any portion, the design should be maximized for revenue generation.

  • Like 2
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.

×
×
  • Create New...