Jump to content

EDIT: Total cost to taxpayers? Bills select sports firm to represent ownership in building new open air stadium in OP, targeted for 2025


Recommended Posts

Posted
28 minutes ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said:

I'm surprised more people aren't talking about the overhang and what a terrible idea it is. You do realize there are going to be terrible shadows and sun spots, yes? There will be vision issues for players, and the broadcast will be unsightly. It's like they're getting every aspect of this decision wrong.

Yeah - I was watching a euro football match  earlier this week, and whichever stadium it was had an overhang.  The sun to shadow brightness difference made it hard to watch.  

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Posted

I will say the overhang is just a dumb idea. This isn't Miami or Dallas where the sun beats down relentlessly on the fanbase.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
4 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

This goes back awhile but I remember seeing that if they did build in OP there was a plan for building up the area around the stadium as well - hotels, restaurants, etc 

 

Hold on if a new stadium means the end of the Red Carpet Inn I object.

  • Haha (+1) 5
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, SirAndrew said:

I’m not sure why people think OP has some stellar infrastructure. It’s a bunch of two lane roads that lead to expressways. Most NFL stadiums are located next to multiple expressway paths. I’ve never had as much of an issue leaving a Sabres game, as I do Bills games or Darien Lake concerts out in the cow pasture. 

219

90

skyway

southwestern

big tree

 

tons of ways in and out.  And, now that I typed this, I wonder if it means that the skyway stays.  Hmmm. 

Edited by SectionC3
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
32 minutes ago, Beast said:

I will say the overhang is just a dumb idea. This isn't Miami or Dallas where the sun beats down relentlessly on the fanbase.

For those fans who complain about elements this is the happy medium because they aren’t getting a roof, retractable or otherwise.  Seattle doesn’t seem to have issues with their overhang.   

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said:

Yeah, this reeks of Pegula being in his feelings about his football team playing at his beloved university. Rather bizarre. It's 4 hours away. I'm only an hour and a half from Penn State, so it would benefit me tremendously (I'm 5 hours from Buffalo), but you can't make Buffalo fans travel 4 hours. Just utterly treasonous.

 

Oh, and your prefer Toronto?? Stop for a moment and think. PSU is driving distance from WNY. It's also massive stadium. If they were smart they'd sell the worst seats for $20 just to fill that place up. Imagine 105K Bills fans.

 

But are the Bills saying there isn't room to build next to the current stadium? All those lots? Can't fit in one stadium?

 

Posted
4 hours ago, Seasons1992 said:

 

I think it depends on how much ranch they may serve there, honestly. Ranch is a soft side, which in turn makes the user more soft; which in turn means the user wants less wind. Less ranch, more wind. 

 

Follow?


People that like ranch want a dome because they don’t like being outdoors in the elements. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Beast said:

I will say the overhang is just a dumb idea. This isn't Miami or Dallas where the sun beats down relentlessly on the fanbase.

Yep, I want the sun on me in Buffalo. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
58 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Oh, and your prefer Toronto?? Stop for a moment and think. PSU is driving distance from WNY. It's also massive stadium. If they were smart they'd sell the worst seats for $20 just to fill that place up. Imagine 105K Bills fans.

 

But are the Bills saying there isn't room to build next to the current stadium? All those lots? Can't fit in one stadium?

 

 

No, they aren't saying that. At least not currently.  Read it again. Their current lease at Highmark ends in 2023, so they will need to negotiate an extension or sign a new short-term lease. It's fairly clear to me they are simply saying IF they can't negotiate that extension/new lease with Erie County, they have some options. They named two of those options. But seriously, why wouldn't Erie County work  out a deal and make some money?  Don't be confused by the ignorant whining of some who simply can't think of anything to do other than complain.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted

Talking about playing games away from OP is just a negotiating tactic.  They'll play in the old stadium until the new one is built.

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:

Problem is sabres games bring 20,000 people downtown 

 

Bills games bring 80-90,000 people To orchard Park.. there's tens of thousands of people who tailgate and don't go to the games

 

90,000 people downtown would cause havoc. 20k is manageable

You’re correct, Sabres games to Bills games is an apples to oranges comparison. Don’t get me wrong, a downtown stadium would probably be a traffic nightmare in Buffalo. I just don’t know how much worse. OP is not one of the better traffic situations in the league. There’s lots of NFL stadiums that have much better traffic flow. Difficulty in leaving the stadium is sometimes cited on reviews of Highmark that compare NFL stadiums. I can’t say how much of a mess downtown would be, but I think WNY folks are fooling themselves assuming OP has good game day traffic flow. 

Edited by SirAndrew
Posted
4 minutes ago, SirAndrew said:

You’re correct, Sabres games to Bills games is an apples to oranges comparison. Don’t get me wrong, a downtown stadium would probably be a traffic nightmare in Buffalo. I just don’t know how much worse. OP is not one of the better traffic situations in the league. There’s lots of NFL stadiums that have much better traffic flow. Difficulty in leaving the stadium is sometimes cited on reviews of Highmark that compare NFL stadiums. I can’t say how much of a mess downtown would be, but I think WNY folks are fooling themselves assuming OP has good game day traffic flow. 

I don't think anybody's saying op has really good game day traffic flow 

 

But when you compare it to the scenario of a downtown mob scene, it absolutely looks better

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
2 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

219

90

skyway

southwestern

big tree

 

tons of ways in and out.  And, now that I typed this, I wonder if it means that the skyway stays.  Hmmm. 

 

It is interesting that they just eased up on the "get rid of the Skyway" push recently.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

I don't think anybody's saying op has really good game day traffic flow 

 

But when you compare it to the scenario of a downtown mob scene, it absolutely looks better

That’s fair, I’ve just felt like OP was bad enough to ease my worries about a downtown stadium. Location and surrounding infrastructure would have determined the severity of traffic downtown. Obviously there was never a location selected, and there never will be. I’m not convinced downtown had to be a traffic catastrophe, if the team, state, and county could have gotten their act together. That’s honestly the biggest hurdle a downtown stadium faced. Cleveland has a downtown location that doesn’t suffer from worse traffic than OP. 

Posted

Rando on Twitter says he knows of land the Bills have checked into and it is very close to the  current stadium and would not involve the team needing to play elsewhere while it’s built 

  • Like (+1) 4
Posted
43 minutes ago, The Dean said:

 

No, they aren't saying that. At least not currently.  Read it again. Their current lease at Highmark ends in 2023, so they will need to negotiate an extension or sign a new short-term lease. It's fairly clear to me they are simply saying IF they can't negotiate that extension/new lease with Erie County, they have some options. They named two of those options. But seriously, why wouldn't Erie County work  out a deal and make some money?  Don't be confused by the ignorant whining of some who simply can't think of anything to do other than complain.

 

Sorry. Just in my mind it's "why wouldn't you work with the Bills?"  You give them a bridge lease until the new stadium is done, hopefully built next door while you keep playing in the old one. Is that not obvious? Am I missing something?

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Sorry. Just in my mind it's "why wouldn't you work with the Bills?"  You give them a bridge lease until the new stadium is done, hopefully built next door while you keep playing in the old one. Is that not obvious? Am I missing something?

 

 

I don't think you are missing anything. I assume this is just a warning by Pegula for negotiating purposes. It's hard for me to believe either side would be stupid enough to screw that up. They have to work together moving forward, right?  

  • Agree 1
Posted
6 hours ago, Hammers Lot said:

That's a pleasant thought. Have a nice day. 

 

I was kidding...hence the winkie guy at the end of the sentence.

Posted
11 hours ago, jethro_tull said:

The Chicago Bears played at the University of Illinois stadium in Champaign, IL. (2 hours south of Chicago) when Soldier Field was upgraded 

 

Which is still in the same state.

 

They are saying College Station PA or Toronto(which would really go over well)

 

Toronto doesn't even have a football stadium...Rogers Center was modified for baseball only giving the Argos the boot to the MLS soccer field(BMO Field) that seats about 30,000

  • Agree 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...