1. Save 40-80% on great soccer jerseys. Shop today at BigSoccer Shop!

Revolution Stadium Groundbreaking "12-24 months" Part X

Discussion in 'New England Revolution' started by A Casual Fan, Jan 16, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Moderators: patfan1, SirFozzie
  1. A Casual Fan

    A Casual Fan Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2000
    Not sure what else there is to be said, but here's a place to say it.

    Parse, parse, spin, parse, parse, rephrase, spin, parse, parse.
     


  2. Crooked

    Crooked Member+

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    Country:
    United States
    The Don just spit straight in our eye...
     
  3. Brian in Boston

    Brian in Boston Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Location:
    MA, RI and CA
    "The Krafts are deeply committed MLS owners. They have been struggling to try to find a way to manage and justify privately financing a soccer stadium when they have a privately financed stadium up the road. It’s not optimum. They recognize that. They also recognize, as Jonathan Kraft has said many times, we have to get a stadium deal done. But it has to make economic sense. The Krafts have to make a good business decision. And for them to put $100-plus million into a stadium and lose more money than they’re losing now, I’m not sure I could even be an advocate of that. That being said, they’re committed. There are discussions going on that Bilello is having regularly. The amount of money they’re spending on stadium development and research, the amount of work they’re doing is significant." - MLS Commissioner Don Garber

    History shows that there is no reason to believe that either the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, or a Bay State municipality, is going to directly invest public dollars into construction of a facility to house a major-pro sports franchise. That being the case, it falls to the Krafts to bear the responsibility for ponying-up the dough necessary to actually build a soccer-specific stadium for the New England Revolution. Therefore, what would the Krafts regard as a "good business decision" that "make economic sense" and allows them to move forward in their efforts "to get a stadium deal done" for the Revs? Well, short of having public dollars invested directly into facility construction, it seems most likely that the Krafts would be angling for a community to cut them a sweetheart deal on the price of land acquisition, or leasing. Therein, lays the problem.

    There's been talk - TALK - about getting a soccer-specific stadium for the Revolution built in the Greater Boston urban core for going on eight years. It seems obvious that despite playing footsie over siting and building of a soccer-specific stadium for the Revolution, communities - including Boston, Somerville, and Revere - are no more interested in cutting the Krafts a break on land acquisition costs than they are over directly investing public funds into facility construction. Otherwise, if the Krafts were truly willing to pick-up the cost of construction, you'd have to believe that there would be shovels in the ground by now.

    Which then begs the question, if - as Jonathan Kraft recently told New England Soccer Journal - stadium development and research has "already cost the Kraft Group more than seven figures" and "will only grow more expensive along the way", and if the Krafts recognize that they "have to get a stadium deal done" in order to establish the Revolution as a truly successful entity, why don't they just bite-the-bullet and spend the millions of dollars that they're currently pouring - less than successfully, it would seem - into "survey[ing] possible avenues for a stadium" on paying market-rate for land?

    I've said it before and I'll say it again, if the Krafts truly want to get a soccer-specific stadium deal built, than they're going to have to pay for both stadium construction and land acquisition. I understand why they'd want to try and secure the sweetest possible deal that they can for themselves. That's just good business sense... and BKIASB. That said, I simply do not see a marketplace that has steadfastly refused to subsidize the siting and construction of facilities for its MLB, NBA, NFL, and NHL teams suddenly acquiescing to a Major League Soccer franchise's request that they do so. Frankly, I don't believe for a moment that the Krafts aren't aware of this. After all, they ultimately had to privately finance construction of Gillette Stadium on their own, going so far as to agree to reimburse the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for the cost of infrastructure improvements that the state made around the facility. They know the score.

    I'd be willing to bet that their hesitancy to bankroll the entire project themselves is, at least partially, based upon the fact that they harbor doubt as to whether a soccer-specific stadium based in the Greater Boston urban core is going to be - at least on its own - the game-changer they so often make it out to be. Realistically, if they're not willing to invest the money necessary to significantly improve every aspect of the Revolution's operation, any bump that a new stadium provides the team's fortunes is going to be temporary.

    In other words, without a public entity being willing to subsidize a significant percentage of some aspect of the stadium-development portion of the Revolution, successfully operating a Major League Soccer 3.0 franchise may well be too rich for the Krafts' blood.
     
  4. Alan

    Alan Titanium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 1999
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    So, you're saying, we're all being strung along by the fully informed and aware KSG cabal, who on a semi regular basis, repeat the same stale SSS propaganda, to those still willing to listen.
     


  5. MLSFan123

    MLSFan123 Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    Millis MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    The ironic thing is that if the Krafts ever sold and buyer wanted to stay in state he might have to build as rent could kill him.

    As we have said before, with out some massive public help in land and or the stadium itself, financially it does not make much sense for the Krafts which is why progress of any kind is impossible to find.
     
  6. Mike Marshall

    Mike Marshall Member+

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2000
    Location:
    Woburn, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    You know... I wonder if the Krafts have ever considered renovating an existing facility.

    For example... if the Krafts have $100 million to spend on stadium construction, could they go to a school such as Harvard or Boston College and say, "We'll give you $100 million to upgrade your facility. But in exchange, you have to give us naming rights; you have to give us a certain percentage of dates per year that we can rent the facility out to the Breakers or for concerts, etc. We'd also get all of the parking and concessions for our events and we wouldn't pay rent."

    And maybe they could reach that sort of deal with a local high school, or something.
     
  7. RevsLiverpool

    RevsLiverpool Member+

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Location:
    Boston
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Country:
    United States
    There's not an existing facility in the GBA that could be renovated to be a suitable 20k seat professional soccer stadium. Our choices are a too-narrow-for-pro-soccer Harvard Stadium or Alumni Stadium at BC and a too small and very outdated Nickerson Field with a capacity of 10,400. White Field in JP, Dillboy in Somerville, Parsons in Brookline - none are suitable for the revs.

    Besides: did I read this right that you're suggesting the revs move from being a second tier citizen in Foxboro to a second tier citizen in a Boston stadium that isn't soccer specific?

    Doesn't moving from a 10 year old stadium into 75+ year old non-ideal facilities defeat the whole idea of owning own soccer specific stadium?
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2014
  8. Achowat

    Achowat Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    Revere, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    You heard him, XII-XXIV threads and we'll have a stadium. Keep posting, boys!
     
  9. ToMhIlL

    ToMhIlL Member+

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 1999
    Location:
    Boxborough, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    Those quotes Monty posted in the old thread are such tired cliches that could have been spouted several years ago. They could load those into one of those Staples buttons and every time the subject comes up, just push and you get a random sampling of one of those quotes.

    "That was easy!"
     
  10. rkupp

    rkupp Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2001
    I don't think this is a valid assumption - especially when none of us really knows whether any of these options are still in play or not.

    The three main options that have gotten the most press all have legitimate possible explanations about why they haven't been able to progress to a yes or no decision - i.e., mass transit plans/decisions, casino licensing decisions, competing/cooperating development projects.
     
  11. Minutemanii

    Minutemanii Member+

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2005
    Location:
    Abington MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    Joe Curtatone is on WBUR right now and he talked about Assembly Sq. Development. Not a whiff, not a sniff, not a nugget, not a morsel, not the shadow of a dead-pigeon-which-starved-to-death of mention of a Rev's SSS.
     
  12. abecedarian

    abecedarian Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Location:
    SSSomerville
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    I continue to be skeptical of Wonderland's viability, from a public-transit standpoint. I know I've alluded to this before, but I just took the trouble to look up some numbers. The key point about Wonderland is that it's at the terminus, so all traffic coming in is coming in from a single direction. And the throughput numbers are not that encouraging, at least not to me.

    The MBTA says that the so-called "crush capacity" (i.e., 1.5 square feet per passenger) of the newer Blue Line cars (which represent most of the fleet these days) is 145. With a six-car train, that gets you 870 passengers per trip. If you can manage to run a trip every five minutes (which I doubt), you'd get just over 10,000 fans delivered to Wonderland in the course of an hour. If, however, trips run every seven minutes, then you're closer to 7,500 fans per hour.

    That means, for a hypothetical 25,000-person stadium, between 15,000 and 17,500 fans would have to get there some other way -- by car, by boat, by bus, by foot, by donkey cart -- or come on the T outside the hour I've allotted. This to me looks like a recipe for disaster. I know those roads pretty well, and there are times and the day and week when they're already jammed. Saturday, for whatever reason, is always difficult. It's inconceivable to me that you could introduce 5,000 more cars into the equation, and not have a carmaggedon.

    Best-case scenario, it's just at the outer edge of manageability. But for those of us looking for a stadium with quick-and-easy access, I'm not sure this is it. The other possibility, I guess, is that the stadium gets scaled down -- PPL Park sized (18,500), as opposed to Red Bull Arena sized (around 25,000). Not sure how I feel about that. Big picture, of course, it's better for the club of they can fill more seats, and sell more expensive lemonade.

    To the extent that this whole exercise is about compromise, maybe these are compromises we live with.
     
  13. NHFootyFan

    NHFootyFan Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Location:
    Outside Concord NH
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Let's try this:

    Assume the Krafts are willing to finance a $100 million stadium. So debt payments might be in the neighborhood of $2 million a year. I'm posting from a tablet and I'm too lazy to crunch out a realistic estimate, but work with me people.

    If we wanted to make Gillette a more attractive venue for the Revs, what could be done, and how much would it cost per year?

    For openers, what would it cost to subsidize 2 round trip trains from south station to Gillette on match days? Say, 2 hours and 30 minutes before kickoff and 30 and 90 minutes after kickoff?

    What would it cost to put some real effort into marketing the revs properly, with real media buys for advertising and serious outreach and marketing to that untapped urban core market?

    Finally, what would three genuinely quality DPs cost?

    The point being, make gillette more accessible, proper promotion, and a better team on the pitch should bring in more people....with a target of consistently filling the lower bowl for almost all matches, weather and mid-week aside.
     
  14. LongDuckDong

    LongDuckDong Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Club:
    FC Schalke 04
    Country:
    United States
    Yeah, the blue line runs at 5 minute headways during rush hour, however I'd be shocked if they couldn't run them at 2.5 minute headways with peak demand. Many Boston transit lines used to run at 1:45 minute headways. So I'd say 15,000 to 20,000 fans/hour might be in the realm of possibility. Then you have the possibility of building a special event commuter rail platform which would add to the capacity.
     
  15. Achowat

    Achowat Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    Revere, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    Or, y'know, just stop the train that already abuts the property and let people get off
     
  16. revsrock

    revsrock Member+

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 1999
    Location:
    Boston Ma
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    It would be if ever done 1hr before kick off and 30 mins after.

    Cost would run about $30,000 a game to mbta plus expenses per train. Which means 2000 fans a game per train. Then also get permission from CSX to use the tracks and probably have to psy them off also.
     
  17. MLSFan123

    MLSFan123 Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    Millis MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    Not sure what level DP you are referring to but Bradley and Defoe will cost about $85m when contracts are complete. $20m of that will be covered by league.
     
  18. abecedarian

    abecedarian Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Location:
    SSSomerville
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    2.5 minutes? I'm sorry, I don't believe that. What's your basis for saying that?
     
  19. LongDuckDong

    LongDuckDong Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Club:
    FC Schalke 04
    Country:
    United States
    Most subway lines have the ability to run at such headways. You can use the minimum safe headway equations to make an educated guess. It really depends on how close the blocks are. Considering many of these lines have a history of running at 1.75 to 2 minute headways before the fancy electronic signalling systems were even available, I'd say 2.5 to 3 minutes is reasonable. I doubt that's sustainable for more than an hour, but it seems possible in a peak ridership scenario.
     
  20. Mike Marshall

    Mike Marshall Member+

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2000
    Location:
    Woburn, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    So, there's not some High School football stadium out there somewhere that the Revs could upgrade? Sort of what the Chicago Fire did for a couple of years in Naperville while Soldier Field was being renovated... only bigger, and more permanent.

    Not if it draws more fans and allows the owners to make money.
     
  21. LongDuckDong

    LongDuckDong Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Club:
    FC Schalke 04
    Country:
    United States
    This is New England. Towns spend money on schools, not high school football stadiums.
     
    Craig P, joegrav and a517dogg repped this.
  22. abecedarian

    abecedarian Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Location:
    SSSomerville
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    I don't care about "most subway lines," I care about the Blue Line. Do you have any actual evidence that they can run the trains that fast, or is this just supposition on your part?
     
  23. LongDuckDong

    LongDuckDong Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Club:
    FC Schalke 04
    Country:
    United States
    Do you have an actual evidence that 5 minutes is the fastest they can run the trains?
     
  24. abecedarian

    abecedarian Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Location:
    SSSomerville
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    It's your assertion that they run faster than that, so it's on you to prove that they can, not on me to prove that they can't.
     
  25. LongDuckDong

    LongDuckDong Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Club:
    FC Schalke 04
    Country:
    United States
    It's you're assertion that they can run no faster than 5 minutes, so it's on you to prove that your statement is true just as much as it's on me to prove my statement is true. You're position is not the "null hypothesis." We've both established affirmative positions that require proving.

    Neither of us have proof that our positions are correct, however I explained why I think trains can run with shorter headways. Why is it that you think trains cannot run with shorter headways?
     
Moderators: patfan1, SirFozzie
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page