Tepper Mentions Potential New Stadium Location

[raz]

8 hours ago, Shufdog said:

It was 60 degrees with sunshine and you had to seek shelter? Wow!

you ever been stuck on the sunny side of the stadium?   it can be unbearable while the shady side is freezing

[!stUp]

14 hours ago, NAS said:

Ok, Boomer.

 In US naval slang, ballistic missile submarines are called boomers.    Don't mess with Boomers.

[thefuzz]

19 hours ago, bigdog10 said:

What’s horrifying is a billionaire trying to sell the idea of a new stadium at a time when this team is mired in mediocrity with no foreseeable lifeline to drag us out of the muck (unless Cam really is Superman and can come back healthy). 
 

What’s horrifying is continually pushing the agenda of a new stadium without an ounce of communication as to how it would affect thousands of psl owners who have committed large sums of money to acquire those licenses and have paid top dollar for tickets through the few good and mostly bad seasons

whats horrifying is an expectation that this fan base will foot the bill for psls again or that this fan base will show up to games in a down year. If you think what Jacksonville does is embarrassing with the tarps over seats, just wait until we have a shiny new multi billion dollar stadium with about 40% of the seats occupied when the 3-7 panthers host the 3-7 bucs on a Sunday (maybe he will offer free redzone, in seat gambling, and free beer with the purchase of a ticket to fill it up).  

all of the above goes away with him establishing a winning culture around here first which is what (I believe) The Red was alluding to with respect to timing. He wants a new stadium, cool, give us a few years of winning football and you will have the fan support to back that project. 
 

I wish I could pie this even more.

Tepper has already started his dance with the local politicians....makes me sick.

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

I wish I could pie this even more.

Tepper has already started his dance with the local politicians....makes me sick.

Coming from a guy who's known to take people significantly less wealthy than him (which is most people) to dinner and stick them with the bill, should we be surprised?

Granted, he's also very generous and philanthropic, but he's known to be proud of his ability to not pay for things.

[Davidson Deac II]

IMO, it really doesn't matter how many wins or losses we have when discussing financing of a stadium.  NFL teams tend to go thru stages of being up and down.  New England was one of the worst franchises historically until Brady and Belichick came along, and they may become that again once those two leave.  That doesn't mean Boston or Mass wouldn't or shouldn't discuss partial public funding for the franchise.  And the same for us.  The question is or should be is public funding for an NFL stadium something the city or county should do.  If so, then the question is how much.  If not, then well the discussion is over.  But wins and losses shouldn't factor into the discussion.

[thefuzz]

14 minutes ago, Davidson Deac II said:

IMO, it really doesn't matter how many wins or losses we have when discussing financing of a stadium.  NFL teams tend to go thru stages of being up and down.  New England was one of the worst franchises historically until Brady and Belichick came along, and they may become that again once those two leave.  That doesn't mean Boston or Mass wouldn't or shouldn't discuss partial public funding for the franchise.  And the same for us.  The question is or should be is public funding for an NFL stadium something the city or county should do.  If so, then the question is how much.  If not, then well the discussion is over.  But wins and losses shouldn't factor into the discussion.

I disagree with this wholeheartedly.

If Tepper wants to think about it, have private meetings about it, speak with lenders about it, etc.....totally fine.  Understood, future planning for the business, totally get it.

However optics DO matter.  Since he got here he has been talking nonstop about new stadiums, trying to pry public money from local governments, plotting to be able to have leverage when he decides it's time to threaten to "move the Panthers" for said money, and bringing soccer to Charlotte....

 

All the while trotting out this garbage fire of a team and front office.

[Jon Snow]

If he wants a new stadium that's fine.  But taxpayer dollars should only be considered for the infrastructure around the stadium.  I'm fine will public money going into roads and rail systems to service the stadium and surrounding area but not on the stadium itself.  The public would benefit more for those things than a money pit that these stadiums become.

[TheMaulClaw]

On 11/20/2019 at 11:57 AM, Jeremy Igo said:

2 consecutive winning seasons and you can have a new stadium.

Even two 9-7 seasons with no playoffs?

[Davidson Deac II]

18 hours ago, thefuzz said:

I disagree with this wholeheartedly.

If Tepper wants to think about it, have private meetings about it, speak with lenders about it, etc.....totally fine.  Understood, future planning for the business, totally get it.

However optics DO matter.  Since he got here he has been talking nonstop about new stadiums, trying to pry public money from local governments, plotting to be able to have leverage when he decides it's time to threaten to "move the Panthers" for said money, and bringing soccer to Charlotte....

 

All the while trotting out this garbage fire of a team and front office.

Optics matter here on the board and to most of the rest of the dedicated fan base.  To decision makers, they shouldn't. If one believes that public money should be spent, then the only thing that should matter is whether it is in the city and county's best interest,  and at what point does the cost outweigh the benefits.  Whether the team finishes 10-6 or 6-10 should have zero impact on the discussion.  

[stirs]

Can't get fans in the seats of the old stadium?  Then build a new one, 4 times as expensive, then they won't mind that their team sucks.  It will be an "experience" and comfortable.  The wine and cheesers will eat it up

[1of10Charnatives]

51 minutes ago, Davidson Deac II said:

Optics matter here on the board and to most of the rest of the dedicated fan base.  To decision makers, they shouldn't. If one believes that public money should be spent, then the only thing that should matter is whether it is in the city and county's best interest,  and at what point does the cost outweigh the benefits.  Whether the team finishes 10-6 or 6-10 should have zero impact on the discussion.  

And when the city or state have many other needs that tax dollars are sorely needed for, only a strong proveable cost/benefit analysis showing measurable return to the taxpayers should sway in favor of public funds, given that the asking party is an extremely profitable private business. To the best of my knowledge no such cost/benefit analysis for sports stadiums exists because their proponents always lobby for them using non quantifiable arguments. 

You're a hedge fund manager. You're good with numbers. Prove it to me with math or build it yourself.

[Puddinhead]

So because I'm too lazy to look this up on my own, how old is the current stadium? And what is considered so fundamentally wrong with it such that an extensive refurbishment/modification isn't being considered, and only an entirely new building would suffice?

[Mr. Scot]

4 hours ago, Puddinhead said:

So because I'm too lazy to look this up on my own, how old is the current stadium? And what is considered so fundamentally wrong with it such that an extensive refurbishment/modification isn't being considered, and only an entirely new building would suffice?

A year younger than the team.

Pretty sure it unofficially got several years older when Jones finished the stadium in Dallas though.

(a lot of stadiums did)

[Car123]

In Europe, soccer clubs have been using the same stadium since the 1800's. They do renovate once in a while though. In the USA, we demolish a stadium after 25 years. What a waste of money. This is unacceptable.