GaryPinC Posted September 7, 2013 Posted September 7, 2013 Cleveland's stadium is right on the waterfront, no dome, do they complain because the wind is too cold? It's a sweet view of Lake Erie and there's lots of attractions, restaurants and stuff to keep it busy there year round. I'd love to have playoff football in a snowstorm with snow rippin off the lake. Have rail service goin downtown to ease on the parking problem. But no, we get another dumb park that will be desolate all winter. Better yet do nothing ... It's great sightseeing looking at all those ancient grain towers and rusty vacant factories. Seriously? Have you actually been down there and inside Cleveland Stadium? If you are way up in the nosebleeds and on the corners you can get a bit of a lake view but otherwise it's like any other stadium. The endzones are parallel to the lake so you really don't get much of any view. The wind in Cleveland is seldom like the winds in Buffalo, even next to the lake. There are not lots of restaurants down there, no stand alone ones I can think of. The rock and roll hall of fame and science museum are what bring people down there, and other than a couple special events, that's about it. The area is cut off from the main city by the shoreway (highway) and the rail lines. The stadium spends the majority of the time shuttered until football season rolls around. It's a basic NFL stadium not some multibillion football and entertainment complex. There's also a lot of port authority docks and buildings on 2 sides of the stadium for that "industrial look".
yungmack Posted September 7, 2013 Posted September 7, 2013 I'm sorry but anywhere is better than Orchard Park. I believe the effort to regionalize the team is hamperd by the Ralph's location. I always felt that the selection of Orchard Park, some forty years ago was based on its proximity to Buffalo's more affluent suburbs. Regionalization is the only solution to keeping the Bills in Western NY. Therefore the location of the stadium should be based on accessablility from not only Buffalo, but Rochester, Syracuse, and yes even Canada. The original site was supposed to be Lancaster but a NIMBY movement deep sixed it. Orchard Park was the "consolation" location. BTW, the original design was for a domed stadium but the politicos decided it was too expensive. It did get built finally in New Orleans.
chris heff Posted September 7, 2013 Posted September 7, 2013 The original site was supposed to be Lancaster but a NIMBY movement deep sixed it. Orchard Park was the "consolation" location. BTW, the original design was for a domed stadium but the politicos decided it was too expensive. It did get built finally in New Orleans. The original Dome which was doomed due to corruption, was suppose to be downtown somewhere.
JohnC Posted September 7, 2013 Posted September 7, 2013 :lol: :lol: There are plenty of military installations in Texas that are built and staffed with taxpayer dollars. Because of that there are also plenty of civilian jobs that materialized because of that investment. Recently after the tragic chemical explosion in a Texas town a lot of federal funds flowed into that area to help with the rebuild. It is a fact that a lot of federal funds flowed into the Gulf area after Katrina. I don't recall that area screaming that I don't need federal assistance. But when it came to helping the east coast after Hurricane Sandy a lot of the Texas and southern delegations voted against federal aid for that devastated region. The oil industry is a very big and important industry in Texas. They get a lot of special tax breaks which in reality is a public subsidy.Agriculture is also a big industry in Texas. You don't think that they don't receive subsidies? When there is a major drought the devastated farm industry clamors as much as any other region for federal help. Texans may think they are an independent breed but they have their hands out just like most others. When it comes to helping people in need I'm all for it. When it comes to investing in infrastructure I find it to be a wise investment. Just a friendly response to a very engaging southern bell.
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 7, 2013 Posted September 7, 2013 (edited) There are plenty of military installations in Texas that are built and staffed with taxpayer dollars. Because of that there are also plenty of civilian jobs that materialized because of that investment. Recently after the tragic chemical explosion in a Texas town a lot of federal funds flowed into that area to help with the rebuild. It is a fact that a lot of federal funds flowed into the Gulf area after Katrina. I don't recall that area screaming that I don't need federal assistance. But when it came to helping the east coast after Hurricane Sandy a lot of the Texas and southern delegations voted against federal aid for that devastated region. The oil industry is a very big and important industry in Texas. They get a lot of special tax breaks which in reality is a public subsidy.Agriculture is also a big industry in Texas. You don't think that they don't receive subsidies? When there is a major drought the devastated farm industry clamors as much as any other region for federal help. Texans may think they are an independent breed but they have their hands out just like most others. When it comes to helping people in need I'm all for it. When it comes to investing in infrastructure I find it to be a wise investment. Just a friendly response to a very engaging southern bell. It is because that area (Texas) has something to offer. You don't invest in polishing a turd that people bypass anyway. I know this sounds harsh. BUT, what does BFLO have to offer. Hydroelectric is modernized now. It can be shipped anywhere. Thank you very much falling water now do some work for somebody farther away. I am sorry to be such a Debbie Downer. I am not being negative as much as am trying to get people to wisen up and realize that the region has to offer something of tangible benefit. Not just pretty lights on a decaying grain silo that people will bring their coolers chucked full of goodies bought @ Walmart. Make no small plans my friends... Bring the road through BFLO, not around it! That means tap into the huge Southern Ontario and East Coast markets. Have an answer to: Why do you want to shuffle off to Buffalo? Even if that answer is: The road makes me. That will be a start! Oh... John C. I agree with what you are saying. The military complex very much props up a lot of regions. Edited September 7, 2013 by ExiledInIllinois
BUNCH OF MULARKEY Posted September 7, 2013 Posted September 7, 2013 Seriously? Have you actually been down there and inside Cleveland Stadium? If you are way up in the nosebleeds and on the corners you can get a bit of a lake view but otherwise it's like any other stadium. The endzones are parallel to the lake so you really don't get much of any view. The wind in Cleveland is seldom like the winds in Buffalo, even next to the lake. There are not lots of restaurants down there, no stand alone ones I can think of. The rock and roll hall of fame and science museum are what bring people down there, and other than a couple special events, that's about it. The area is cut off from the main city by the shoreway (highway) and the rail lines. The stadium spends the majority of the time shuttered until football season rolls around. It's a basic NFL stadium not some multibillion football and entertainment complex. There's also a lot of port authority docks and buildings on 2 sides of the stadium for that "industrial look". Yes I have been there and Pittsburgh and It reaffirms my belief that the stadium should be downtown in the city that the team represents. Cleveland's lakefront district has come a long way and is no where near finished being developed. The stadium is modest and rightfully so. City's like buffalo and Cleveland don't need cowboys stadium. Lets face it, if we get a new stadium the price will have to be reasonable. Get it done reasonably and keep the team here! Ideas about building in Niagara Falls, Amherst, hamilton, Leroy, or the parking lot of the Ralph are crazy IMO. They are the BUFFALO bills...
yungmack Posted September 7, 2013 Posted September 7, 2013 There are plenty of military installations in Texas that are built and staffed with taxpayer dollars. Because of that there are also plenty of civilian jobs that materialized because of that investment. Recently after the tragic chemical explosion in a Texas town a lot of federal funds flowed into that area to help with the rebuild. It is a fact that a lot of federal funds flowed into the Gulf area after Katrina. I don't recall that area screaming that I don't need federal assistance. But when it came to helping the east coast after Hurricane Sandy a lot of the Texas and southern delegations voted against federal aid for that devastated region. The oil industry is a very big and important industry in Texas. They get a lot of special tax breaks which in reality is a public subsidy.Agriculture is also a big industry in Texas. You don't think that they don't receive subsidies? When there is a major drought the devastated farm industry clamors as much as any other region for federal help. Texans may think they are an independent breed but they have their hands out just like most others. When it comes to helping people in need I'm all for it. When it comes to investing in infrastructure I find it to be a wise investment. Just a friendly response to a very engaging southern bell. Every state in the Old Confederacy except Texas gets more federal money than it pays in federal taxes. It has always been that way. The states in the South there were originally colonies were subsidized from their founding and were never a "paying concern." They continue to remain on the dole. However, the worst offender is Alaska which gets back a great deal more than it pays in. Interestingly enough, all of those are so-called "red states," bastions of "rugged individualism" and "free market" worship. And the one state in the Old Confederacy that's begun paying in more than it receives back - Texas - is now trending towards becoming a "blue" state. If you throw in the Plains and western Mountain states, all of which get generous "benefits" from the federal government in the form of farm, timber, water, oil and gas, and a zillion other subsidies, and all of which are equally "red" and "individualistic" states, it looks like the biggest "Welfare Queens" are the very states that trumpet the most about "doing it on your own." BTW, if all those states are running a credit line with the federal government, then who actually is making up that shortage? Why, all the "blue" states like New York and California. All those around here who espouse Republican, Tea Bagger, Limbaugh nonsense might want to think about this conundrum.
JohnC Posted September 7, 2013 Posted September 7, 2013 :lol: :lol: I'm sure you are aware that the stadium that Jerry built would not have been built without public expenditures and subsidies. I respect him for putting in a lot of his own cash but the project doesn't happen without the taxpayers' support. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-05/in-stadium-building-spree-u-s-taxpayers-lose-4-billion.html
bbb Posted September 7, 2013 Posted September 7, 2013 Every state in the Old Confederacy except Texas gets more federal money than it pays in federal taxes. It has always been that way. The states in the South there were originally colonies were subsidized from their founding and were never a "paying concern." They continue to remain on the dole. However, the worst offender is Alaska which gets back a great deal more than it pays in. Interestingly enough, all of those are so-called "red states," bastions of "rugged individualism" and "free market" worship. And the one state in the Old Confederacy that's begun paying in more than it receives back - Texas - is now trending towards becoming a "blue" state. If you throw in the Plains and western Mountain states, all of which get generous "benefits" from the federal government in the form of farm, timber, water, oil and gas, and a zillion other subsidies, and all of which are equally "red" and "individualistic" states, it looks like the biggest "Welfare Queens" are the very states that trumpet the most about "doing it on your own." BTW, if all those states are running a credit line with the federal government, then who actually is making up that shortage? Why, all the "blue" states like New York and California. All those around here who espouse Republican, Tea Bagger, Limbaugh nonsense might want to think about this conundrum. So, you're saying stadium in Orchard Park?
Lurker Posted September 7, 2013 Posted September 7, 2013 BUT, what does BFLO have to offer. Keep thinking that way. And let the supposed 'hot spots' that people flock to, lemming-like, get more and more congested. I like my elbow room...
Bufcomments Posted September 7, 2013 Posted September 7, 2013 If not in the Falls how about a new stadium by UB? Lot's of access. A little closer to Rochester. The Bulls could share withe Bills. Lot's developement nearby already. PTR I thought about this in another thread ill try and find it. Expand UB's staduim or built one near it and use St. John's still for training camp
DJasper Probincrux III Posted September 8, 2013 Posted September 8, 2013 For 2 dollars? Seriously, for prime land along the waterfront??? I swear politics is a MOFO. Something smells fishy about this whole deal and I bet a stadium has nothing to do with it. It's a giant Superfund site. Think about all the industry that's gone on on that acreage over the years. The park is a good way to develop without breaking actual ground. Nasty nasty stuff under that ground. Ditto Bethlehem Steel, massive Brownfield. The original Dome which was doomed due to corruption, was suppose to be downtown somewhere. FWIW - if the Bills built that dome they would have moved away 25 years ago when it became obsolete like the Astrodome and was unable to be renovated like RWS has been to extend it's lifespan.
PromoTheRobot Posted September 8, 2013 Posted September 8, 2013 Where does UB play now? http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_at_Buffalo_Stadium
PromoTheRobot Posted September 8, 2013 Posted September 8, 2013 4) PTR's UB idea is intriguing, maybe The Bulls would then go div1 with football and that would get SUNY bucks along with other state funding in the mix. UB has been D1 since the 90's. It's just that they have sucked for every year but one. (2008) Don't blame you to think they weren't. Believe it or not I have read things that say UB is quietly being considered for the Big 10. Before you burst out laughing, they are not being considered based on their athletic prowess. There are two reasons: 1) If UB rebranded as New York State U they could become the flagship state athletic program. The Big 10 would love to have a footprint in NY. Did you know UB games are on AM 1130 in NYC? 2) UB is an AAU school...American Association of Universties. Why does this matter? All B10 schools are AAU members. It's an elite designation. If you read the a Buffalo News you might have read some hub bub over UB pushing the NEW YORK part of their name. PTR
Bills fan since 87 Posted September 8, 2013 Posted September 8, 2013 UB wearing the "new york' on their jerseys makes them look silly. I see what they are going for but its a loooooong reach.
GaryPinC Posted September 8, 2013 Posted September 8, 2013 Yes I have been there and Pittsburgh and It reaffirms my belief that the stadium should be downtown in the city that the team represents. Cleveland's lakefront district has come a long way and is no where near finished being developed. The stadium is modest and rightfully so. City's like buffalo and Cleveland don't need cowboys stadium. Lets face it, if we get a new stadium the price will have to be reasonable. Get it done reasonably and keep the team here! Ideas about building in Niagara Falls, Amherst, hamilton, Leroy, or the parking lot of the Ralph are crazy IMO. They are the BUFFALO bills... I've lived here in Cleveland for over 20 years and and still don't know what you're talking about. That area around the stadium hasn't changed much since the rock hall and science museum got built years ago. I agree that it's better the stadium is built downtown but not on the lake. The stadium, rock hall, and science museum are pretty isolated with the port authority loading docks to the immediate west and north of the stadium. To the east is Burke-Lakefront airport which kills any further development in that area. To the south is the highway and rail lines. The most they've done is develop the Voinovich park area north of the rock hall but that's just a park. They are trying to turn the west shoreway into a boulevard but the loading docks are going nowhere so there's little usable, expandable waterfront areas right there. But the bottom line is that Cleveland Browns stadium is there simply because it has been for a long time. It will play no significant role in any development in that area. It simply doesn't get used enough. Put a stadium downtown with proximity to the waterfront but not right on it. It's a waste of your waterfront space.
John in Jax Posted September 8, 2013 Posted September 8, 2013 Just read the linked story in the OP, and nowhere does it talk about a stadium possibly being built there. So this thread is posted in here because there are rumors of the possibility that a stadium may be built there!? Now that is pretty funny stuff.
GaryPinC Posted September 8, 2013 Posted September 8, 2013 UB has been D1 since the 90's. It's just that they have sucked for every year but one. (2008) Don't blame you to think they weren't. Believe it or not I have read things that say UB is quietly being considered for the Big 10. Before you burst out laughing, they are not being considered based on their athletic prowess. There are two reasons: 1) If UB rebranded as New York State U they could become the flagship state athletic program. The Big 10 would love to have a footprint in NY. Did you know UB games are on AM 1130 in NYC? 2) UB is an AAU school...American Association of Universties. Why does this matter? All B10 schools are AAU members. It's an elite designation. If you read the a Buffalo News you might have read some hub bub over UB pushing the NEW YORK part of their name. PTR Have you been reading The Onion?
PromoTheRobot Posted September 8, 2013 Posted September 8, 2013 Have you been reading The Onion? http://www.ubfan.com/board/index.php?topic=14071.0
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 8, 2013 Posted September 8, 2013 Keep thinking that way. And let the supposed 'hot spots' that people flock to, lemming-like, get more and more congested. I like my elbow room... Exactly, I totally agree w/the elbow room comment. That is the positive side of the equation for BFLO. This is one of the reason with where I settled... Best of both words. It is an old rust belt area with its drawbacks but, there is room to breath.
Recommended Posts