Sports in Austin

[abigdeal]

Originally Posted by freerover

Leslie Pool is against the deal... shocker. She’s also telling people they have more time to negotiate terms because she either doesn’t understand the language or is deliberately misleading people as to the point behind an October date.

The Mayor made a pretty strong statement in favor yesterday. Either he picked this moment to show political courage for the first time, or he’s feeling like it’s a done deal.

[atxsnail]

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

The City wants a say in the design of the stadium? Oh shit! That's not good.

They just want it to be designed by Michael Hsu like everything else here

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by freerover

Leslie Pool is against the deal... shocker. She’s also telling people they have more time to negotiate terms because she either doesn’t understand the language or is deliberately misleading people as to the point behind an October date.

Even if the team turned around and left Austin or something else turned sour, the city is getting a FREE stadium out of this deal. What in the world are her arguments against this?!?

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by paul78701

Even if the team turned around and left Austin or something else turned sour, the city is getting a FREE stadium out of this deal. What in the world are her arguments against this?!?

Yes, I realize that there are going to be some costs associated with this. But y'all get the gist of what I'm saying.

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by atxsnail

They just want it to be designed by Michael Hsu like everything else here

is that true? curious.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by paul78701

Even if the team turned around and left Austin or something else turned sour, the city is getting a FREE stadium out of this deal. What in the world are her arguments against this?!?

I have never seen a pro sports team break a lease and move. Those agreements tend to be iron clad and moves happen once the leases are up 20-30 years after the stadiums are built.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by abigdeal

The Mayor made a pretty strong statement in favor yesterday. Either he picked this moment to show political courage for the first time, or he’s feeling like it’s a done deal.

Sad, but true.

[atxsnail]

Originally Posted by Dcbrickley

is that true? curious.

lol sorry no just a bad joke

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by freerover

I have never seen a pro sports team break a lease and move. Those agreements tend to be iron clad and moves happen once the leases are up 20-30 years after the stadiums are built.

Right, the Crew is potentially leaving Columbus, but they actually own the stadium (they're leasing it from themselves, sort of).

[Jdawgboy]

I can be content about MLS up at McKalla with a USL team at COTA. It will give residents south of the river a more convenient option to attend games. I'll definitely go see games there. If anything I'll watch the MLS games on TV.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

I can be content about MLS up at McKalla with a USL team at COTA. It will give residents south of the river a more convenient option to attend games. I'll definitely go see games there. If anything I'll watch the MLS games on TV.

Most people south of the river are closer and/or have a faster trip to McKayla than COTA. We are not talking about Dell Diamond.

[gabetx]

Originally Posted by freerover

Most people south of the river are closer and/or have a faster trip to McKayla than COTA. We are not talking about Dell Diamond.

Yup. COTA is a crap drive from mostly anywhere outside of Del Valle or anywhere west of 183 and north of Ben White. McKalla is more convenient for the vast majority of Austin.

[The ATX]

Plus it's USL. That would be like skipping a MLB game (if we had a team in Austin) and going to a RR Express game because it was a couple miles closer. I don't mean that as a Dis on the USL even though it sounds like one.

[GoldenBoot]

IF Austin does end up being blessed to get a MLS team. I don't know how a USL team would be able to survive, financially, long term. Especially if one has to schlep their way out to COTA to see a game.

In fact, even if the MLS does not come to Austin. I still don't know how successful a USL team, playing out at COTA, would end up being. They've got to fill that tiny "stadium" 17 times a season. Even as life-long player & fan of the sport, I'm not dragging my family all the way out there for sub-standard soccer.

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by goldenboot

if austin does end up being blessed to get a mls team. I don't know how a usl team would be able to survive, financially, long term. Especially if one has to schlep their way out to cota to see a game.

In fact, even if the mls does not come to austin. I still don't know how successful a usl team, playing out at cota, would end up being. They've got to fill that tiny "stadium" 17 times a season. Even as life-long player & fan of the sport, i'm not dragging my family all the way out there for sub-standard soccer.

this!

[Jdawgboy]

We can agree to disagree. I Don't consider getting up near the Domain convenient with the exception of late at night or early morning.

I'm not saying the location for a soccer team is better at COTA as it would be more preferable to be closer to Downtown but I would whole heartedly support a team at COTA.

[We vs us]

My good pals the Chicago Cubs lost a game to the Pittsburgh Pirates last evening in Pittsburgh, and as I was watching, I had a moment of clarity/grief regarding the Butler Shores proposal.



Virtually all of the MLS discussion grew out of the suspicion of sports as a business, but never really addressed sports as anything else. As cultural enrichment, or as community builder, or as architectural boon. Sports has the potential to do a lot of good things, but those good things were never any part of the discussion. In fact the talk was always about being hoodwinked (what untold Millions will PSV coerce us to give up without our knowledge?) or abandoned (how long till PSV leaves us, like it left Columbus?), never about how this is going to improve our city.

When I saw that view from PNC Park and how beautifully it showcases its city -- indeed, how much other buildings had to have been conscious of it when they were built -- it really pointed up how much a Butler Shores stadium would've beautified our city, and given it an iconic view. There're always problems to iron out with any site -- obviously traffic would've been probably the first of a few. But even with a mediocre stadium, that view alone would've been a defining Austin view, and would've been one of the first things a TV viewer would see of our city.

And a view is a view is a view, but it's one of the things that we didn't discuss. We talked a lot about the pros and cons (mostly cons) of losing our shoreline to a freeloading developer from out of town, but never about how a stadium could make it better.

Anyhow, McKalla Place is fine, and Austin needs a team, and it will be a good stadium, but we missed something monumental when we passed up Butler Shores . . . and have missed something monumental all along as we've been discussing it.

[smith_atx]

Originally Posted by We vs us

My good pals the Chicago Cubs lost a game to the Pittsburgh Pirates last evening in Pittsburgh, and as I was watching, I had a moment of clarity/grief regarding the Butler Shores proposal.

Virtually all of the MLS discussion grew out of the suspicion of sports as a business, but never really addressed sports as anything else. As cultural enrichment, or as community builder, or as architectural boon. Sports has the potential to do a lot of good things, but those good things were never any part of the discussion. In fact the talk was always about being hoodwinked (what untold Millions will PSV coerce us to give up without our knowledge?) or abandoned (how long till PSV leaves us, like it left Columbus?), never about how this is going to improve our city.

When I saw that view from PNC Park and how beautifully it showcases its city -- indeed, how much other buildings had to have been conscious of it when they were built -- it really pointed up how much a Butler Shores stadium would've beautified our city, and given it an iconic view. There're always problems to iron out with any site -- obviously traffic would've been probably the first of a few. But even with a mediocre stadium, that view alone would've been a defining Austin view, and would've been one of the first things a TV viewer would see of our city.

And a view is a view is a view, but it's one of the things that we didn't discuss. We talked a lot about the pros and cons (mostly cons) of losing our shoreline to a freeloading developer from out of town, but never about how a stadium could make it better.

Anyhow, McKalla Place is fine, and Austin needs a team, and it will be a good stadium, but we missed something monumental when we passed up Butler Shores . . . and have missed something monumental all along as we've been discussing it.

Agree. There were so many pros for the city in that location that they would've outweighed the cons very quickly.

[ATXboom]

Originally Posted by We vs us

My good pals the Chicago Cubs lost a game to the Pittsburgh Pirates last evening in Pittsburgh, and as I was watching, I had a moment of clarity/grief regarding the Butler Shores proposal.



Virtually all of the MLS discussion grew out of the suspicion of sports as a business, but never really addressed sports as anything else. As cultural enrichment, or as community builder, or as architectural boon. Sports has the potential to do a lot of good things, but those good things were never any part of the discussion. In fact the talk was always about being hoodwinked (what untold Millions will PSV coerce us to give up without our knowledge?) or abandoned (how long till PSV leaves us, like it left Columbus?), never about how this is going to improve our city.

When I saw that view from PNC Park and how beautifully it showcases its city -- indeed, how much other buildings had to have been conscious of it when they were built -- it really pointed up how much a Butler Shores stadium would've beautified our city, and given it an iconic view. There're always problems to iron out with any site -- obviously traffic would've been probably the first of a few. But even with a mediocre stadium, that view alone would've been a defining Austin view, and would've been one of the first things a TV viewer would see of our city.

And a view is a view is a view, but it's one of the things that we didn't discuss. We talked a lot about the pros and cons (mostly cons) of losing our shoreline to a freeloading developer from out of town, but never about how a stadium could make it better.

Anyhow, McKalla Place is fine, and Austin needs a team, and it will be a good stadium, but we missed something monumental when we passed up Butler Shores . . . and have missed something monumental all along as we've been discussing it.

Agree... unfortunately fear mongering vocal minorities drive all decisions in this city. It's like putting a governer on a Lambo.

[hookem]

Epstein, developer push MLS stadium idea at COTA
https://www.statesman.com/sports/soc...HjiBeEOTuiZpK/

I feel like this pretty much confirms that COTA wasn't so much concerned about competition for a USL team there, but rather about the competition of another 20K music venue being built in town. The money they would lose not hosting 15-20K concerts at the 360 Ampitheater is much more important than the money they would gain by hosting 3K attendance USL games. I'm kind of conflicted about this because the concerts are probably by far the most profitable thing at COTA, and without out them (or with significantly less of them), I don't know if it would survive. Perhaps they can make an agreement that the McKalla stadium wouldn't be used for concerts (except maybe the small outside venue).