Sports in Austin

[chinchaaa]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

And it's precisely the reason why I'll no longer support the effort to bring this team to Austin if they do not choose a location near DT. As someone on FB commented on some other subject who I don't know but loved his comment, regarding south Austin, he posted "What are we, chopped liver?

Besides the point is to see the skyline of Austin from the stadium. The Domain is far from having an impressive skyline. There are more impressive clusters of buildings in San Antonio than what's going up at the Domain. I'm sorry but it has a ways to go before really being Austin's 2nd DT. Its all apart of private development, not apart of the city grid such was made apparent from a recent news segment on KXAN where they were not allowed to film anywhere within the Domain premises. So your not going to allow our local news stations cover news stories about the Domain at the Domain? I'm just over it.

Guerro Park is my final stand in support.

Agreed. Really hoping there's something going on behind the scenes that will be a win for everyone.

[loonytoony]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

And it's precisely the reason why I'll no longer support the effort to bring this team to Austin if they do not choose a location near DT. As someone on FB commented on some other subject who I don't know but loved his comment, regarding south Austin, he posted "What are we, chopped liver?

Besides the point is to see the skyline of Austin from the stadium. The Domain is far from having an impressive skyline. There are more impressive clusters of buildings in San Antonio than what's going up at the Domain. I'm sorry but it has a ways to go before really being Austin's 2nd DT. Its all apart of private development, not apart of the city grid such was made apparent from a recent news segment on KXAN where they were not allowed to film anywhere within the Domain premises. So your not going to allow our local news stations cover news stories about the Domain at the Domain? I'm just over it.

Guerro Park is my final stand in support.

Butler was my first choice, Roy G second, then McKalla a distant third. It just makes sense to put it downtown or close to downtown. That said, getting park land approved is going to be a tough or impossible sell to the Austin public. The NIMBY's are just too strong in this town. I also don't believe PARD named any sites in South to begin with? Beyond Butler/Roy G.

I ultimately don't fault PSV for any of this - they made it abundantly clear Butler and Guerrero were their preferred options. It's completely on the Council. At any rate, if we get a team, I'm going to games regardless of location. Simply for love of the game.

[abigdeal]

I agree on being uninspired by McKalla. The promise of this site sounds just like the promise of every other stadium site in America that's off the beaten path and never comes to fruition. It also seems like a site that would appeal to the purists but wouldn't be much of an 'experience' for the causal fan.

[papertowelroll]

Originally Posted by chinchaaa

Agreed. Really hoping there's something going on behind the scenes that will be a win for everyone.

I doubt it. Is there even a single member on the council that actually seems FOR getting an MLS team? I mean MAYBE Adler, but from what I can tell he consistently caves to the loudest voices (ie: NIMBYs). Every other councilmember seems to be actively against it.

Nashville passed a $200M+ bond to build an MLS stadium. And these guys think that the city letting PSV use a piece of shit property for free should be enough all by itself? (not to mention the crap about making them pay for a rail station...)

My view is that the council has apparently determined that an MLS team brings zero value to the city. With that outlook I can't see how this could possibly happen.

[papertowelroll]

Originally Posted by We vs us

In the end, IMHO the argument for McKalla is this:



I still think PSV has a pretty strong incentive to be in Austin, and could choose McKalla and still come out on top. But it's distressing to see just how hostile Pool is to something that could be an incredible boon to her district and the city itself. I mean, seriously. If the city could put a singular attraction on top of a former brownfield in my district, I'd be ecstatic. Hell, I'd even offer to build them sidewalks to help the deal happen.

Is she just tone deaf or was she elected to be this way?

It really is ridiculous. I mean, I hate Ann Kitchen but I at least understand the basis behind her position. Her big money constituents don't want to deal with the traffic in an admittedly congested area. Okay, I would argue that is kind of selfish, but it at least based in logic.

But now we are against putting it in freaking North Burnet? Really? We don't want to ruin the wonderful ambiance provided by the run-down industrial sites over there or something? It really makes no sense whatsoever.

[abigdeal]

Originally Posted by papertowelroll

I doubt it. Is there even a single member on the council that actually seems FOR getting an MLS team? I mean MAYBE Adler, but from what I can tell he consistently caves to the loudest voices (ie: NIMBYs). Every other councilmember seems to be actively against it.

Nashville passed a $200M+ bond to build an MLS stadium. And these guys think that the city letting PSV use a piece of shit property for free should be enough all by itself? (not to mention the crap about making them pay for a rail station...)

My view is that the council has apparently determined that an MLS team brings zero value to the city. With that outlook I can't see how this could possibly happen.

The main problem is that the vast majority of the Council is anti-business across the board. It’s not limited to this issue. Was the same on sick leave, could be the same on Code Next.

I think Tovo would be pro-McKalla. Flannigan also. I’ve heard from a member that all of them are “in favor of soccer” as long as it’s not on parkland.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

And it's precisely the reason why I'll no longer support the effort to bring this team to Austin if they do not choose a location near DT. As someone on FB commented on some other subject who I don't know but loved his comment, regarding south Austin, he posted "What are we, chopped liver?

Chopped liver, no.

But you're a minority of Austin. Of the overall Austin metro, you're a fractional small minority. You need to get over it. Stop "taking your ball and going home" if you don't get everything specially and uniquely positioned to your greatest benefit.

Butler shores is 4.3 miles away (as the crow flies) from the center of population of the metro.

McKalla is _also_ 4.3 miles from the center of population. It's actually probably better accessible to more people, given Butler shores awkward position and McKalla has way better transit connectivity.

Even for those south, unless you're in the loop of 71, McKalla is probably more accessible (if a longer drive).

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Besides the point is to see the skyline of Austin from the stadium.

No, the point is to watch a soccer match. An impressive view would be a bonus, but don't lose the forest for the trees.

I'd rather watch at McKalla then watch the Crew in Columbus on TV (which is rapidly becoming the only other option.

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Its all apart of private development, not apart of the city grid such was made apparent from a recent news segment on KXAN where they were not allowed to film anywhere within the Domain premises. So your not going to allow our local news stations cover news stories about the Domain at the Domain?

Which has dick-all to do with a soccer stadium. Don't conflate "The Domain" with the larger North Burnet Gateway area (which will have gridded city streets).

[The ATX]

This Statesman article sums up the Crew situation pretty well IMO.

http://www.mystatesman.com/sports/stuck-...dropped-the-ball/AkIVgwnNI1WIvULX5YrnZM/

[skylerspaeth]

Sorry if this was already posted, I'm new on this thread. But this needs to stop:
https://www.mystatesman.com/sports/socce...ing-stadium-list/TDZK2L5KcMrVE9etInh3RL/
We can't have our one half-decent remaining option cut from the list.

[abigdeal]

Parks board gonna parks board.

[futures]

I've said it before, but Roy G is worse than Butler Shores by a long shot.

For the people who seriously care about preserving parkland, Roy G is actually used by people, unlike Butler Shores. It also is MUCH more difficult to get to, and couldn't utilize downtown parking. The idea of people parking downtown and walking to the game would have mitigated traffic and allowed cars to come in and out from multiple streets.

But since Precourt blew the PR battle and let a few NIMBYs take control of the city's narrative, we're stuck with a few bad options.

McKalla / Domain actually makes more sense at this point.

[aschwab]

Until the team is willing to buy downtown land, it likely will never happen in the downtown area. They won't get parks regardless of how utilized they are currently. It is a death sentence for some of the city council's careers.

McKalla makes sense at this point. It is close to a bunch of restaurants and bars, even closer to a bunch more walkable breweries, close to transport, and close to a large population of people. Is it perfect? Of course not. It would be great to have it downtown. But, until someone is willing to pay for that, it won't happen.

[chinchaaa]

I wonder if there's a way Precourt could partner with the YMCA and take over that land? Maybe build a new Townlake YMCA as part of a new stadium on that land.

[MichaelB]

I got a bit turned off after some discussions with Avid Soccer fans in town. I was all about finding a place for this.. but they all said that this league is kinda known for milking a town and moving away.... as much as they wanted a team , none seemed to think it was wise for the city to put anything into it.

Any other soccer fans out there have the same experience?

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by MichaelB

I got a bit turned off after some discussions with Avid Soccer fans in town. I was all about finding a place for this.. but they all said that this league is kinda known for milking a town and moving away.... as much as they wanted a team , none seemed to think it was wise for the city to put anything into it.

They are?

Wouldn't this represent only the second team move in the entire >20 year history of the MLS (after San Jose to Houston)? And San Jose got a replacement team?

If that were the case, wouldn't Precourt have a broad moving permission, instead of an Austin-only exemption?


Edit: There's also 3 teams that simply folded. 2 of the 3 (LA and Miami) got or are getting a later expansion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Soccer

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by Novacek

They are?

Wouldn't this represent only the second team move in the entire >20 year history of the MLS (after San Jose to Houston)? And San Jose got a replacement team?

If that were the case, wouldn't Precourt have a broad moving permission, instead of an Austin-only exemption?


Edit: There's also 3 teams that simply folded. 2 of the 3 (LA and Miami) got or are getting a later expansion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Soccer

,.... it's why I'm asking.... thanks.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Chopped liver, no.

But you're a minority of Austin. Of the overall Austin metro, you're a fractional small minority. You need to get over it. Stop "taking your ball and going home" if you don't get everything specially and uniquely positioned to your greatest benefit.

Butler shores is 4.3 miles away (as the crow flies) from the center of population of the metro.

McKalla is _also_ 4.3 miles from the center of population. It's actually probably better accessible to more people, given Butler shores awkward position and McKalla has way better transit connectivity.

Even for those south, unless you're in the loop of 71, McKalla is probably more accessible (if a longer drive).



No, the point is to watch a soccer match. An impressive view would be a bonus, but don't lose the forest for the trees.

I'd rather watch at McKalla then watch the Crew in Columbus on TV (which is rapidly becoming the only other option.


Which has dick-all to do with a soccer stadium. Don't conflate "The Domain" with the larger North Burnet Gateway area (which will have gridded city streets).

Several hundred thousand people I think is more than a small minority. It also has some of the worst traffic in the city precisely because of the rapid growth. We have the densest corridors (South Lamar, Riverside). Not sure why your attacking me over my displeasure with McKalla, I'm clearly not the only one who isn't smitten with the location. The vast majority from what I've seen and heard are not exactly jumping up and down for that site. I also don't think settling for a site simply for the sake of getting an MLS team is a good idea either and McKalla would be just that.

Maybe when people like you give south Austin it's due credit, then maybe I'll shut up but reality is we are Austin, Culturally more Austin than anything at the Domain which feels like a different city.

And to be clear, I don't have a problem with a location north of the river, but it would benefit entertainment venues DT if the stadium was located fairly close, not 8-10 miles away. Just because McKalla is 4.5 miles from the center of population doesn't make it an ideal spot in terms of easy access to DT entertainment venues, at least Butler Shores and Guerro Park did. And no it wouldn't be easy to get there from the southside. It is a pain to get up there.

Just saw an article from the Statesman that the USL franchise is moving forward at COTA (Oh thank goodness it's on the Southside...) I will be quite content with them at this point. At least the location is established as well as the facilities in terms of the soccer field. It may not be the top tier league but at this point, It's starting to feel a lot cleaner going that route than the MLS mess which has pitted many residents in Columbus against Austin not to mention all the smack coming out of San Antonio. On top of that there is blame to go around with both the city council and Precourt Ventures which could push harder or look into buying land as an option. If he wants to move his team to this city then put in the investment to show that Austin means as much as he has said it does.

[Jdawgboy]

Here is the link.


http://www.statesman.com/sports/soccer/e...-league-for-2019/mcTHfbFmheJCxKdkpczl4L/


A couple of quotes from the article:

PSV has crawled along, suffering setbacks in its pursuit and not releasing a plan of attack after losing its desired destination, Butler Shores Metropolitan Park, to neighborhood pressure. The franchise is still pursuing a move here for 2019. The team would play in an undetermined temporary home.

“I’ve been fully rooting for the Crew to come here,” said USL Austin general manager Roberto Pinto da Silva Jr. “We were getting late for 2019. Now we’re in awkward spot.

“When this came about, we told (the) USL we thought it would be resolved by January, and then we would request a move to another market. It just doesn’t seem like the Crew are making any movement, so our focus should be on putting a team on the field.”

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Several hundred thousand people I think is more than a small minority.

Several hundred thousand people, in a metro of 2 million, yes is a small minority. That's how numbers work. That's what, like 15% or so?

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

We have the densest corridors (South Lamar, Riverside).

Uh, Guadalupe/Lamar is the densest corridor.

https://capmetro.org/uploadedFiles/New20...antitative%20Evaluation%20Memorandum.pdf

(well, technically 15th is, but most don't really consider that a "corridor" just downtown)

S Lamar or Riverside aren't even close. Congress actually is pretty close.

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Not sure why your attacking me over my displeasure with McKalla, I'm clearly not the only one who isn't smitten with the location.

I'm not "attacking" you over displeasure with McKalla. I'm "attacking" you over your clear statement that you wouldn't support anything at all in north Austin.

"And it's precisely the reason why I'll no longer support the effort to bring this team to Austin if they do not choose a location near DT. "

Which is blatantly hypocritical, especially your willingness to support a USL team that really is in BFE.

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Maybe when people like you give south Austin it's due credit, then maybe I'll shut up

I'll give South Austin its due credit. I just won't give it disproportionate credit.

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

but reality is we are Austin, Culturally more Austin than anything at the Domain which feels like a different city.

Ah, there it is. No, you're not that special.

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

And to be clear, I don't have a problem with a location north of the river, but it would benefit entertainment venues DT if the stadium was located fairly close, not 8-10 miles away.

And we're supposed to choose a location based on how it would "benefit entertainment venues DT"?

And a location at McKalla would "benefit entertainment venues in the north". So what?

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Just because McKalla is 4.5 miles from the center of population doesn't make it an ideal spot in terms of easy access to DT entertainment venues, at least Butler Shores and Guerro Park did.

Guerroro Park is a 2 mile walk from DT (minimum, the very corner).

Butler is closer to downtown (slightly) but is actually ~2 miles from most "entertainment venues" (traditional sixth, Rainey, Red River, etc.).

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

And no it wouldn't be easy to get there from the southside. It is a pain to get up there.

Anywhere actually outside of the 71 loop southside is going to be driving anyway. For them, McKalla actually is probably easier, given the highway access.

[Jdawgboy]

Look I'm not going to argue every point any longer because it is pointless. You don't seem to care about the health and vitality of the heart of this city which is the DT area and Central Austin. Oh and tell that South Austin isn't so special to those along SoCo, or South 1st and see what their response is.


It's arguments like this that also make me less inclined to support MLS. I'd rather not get into a heated exchange over this. If USL moves forward then so be it. It's time to move on to more important things.