Thread: Minnesota Poll: Most oppose new Vikings stadium

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/10/21/outgoing-minnesota-governor-says-new-stadium-highly-likely/

Outgoing Minnesota governor says new stadium "highly likely


Tim Pawlenty, the two-term Minnesota governor who opted not to run for a third time, believes that the next governor of the state will be able to shepherd through the political process a new stadium for the Minnesota Vikings.

"I think it's highly likely, highly likely to get done because it has to," Pawlenty said Wednesday at a Chamber of Commerce event.

Purple Floyd wrote:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/10/21/outgoing-minnesota-governor-says-new-stadium-highly-likely/

Outgoing Minnesota governor says new stadium "highly likely


Tim Pawlenty, the two-term Minnesota governor who opted not to run for a third time, believes that the next governor of the state will be able to shepherd through the political process a new stadium for the Minnesota Vikings.

"I think it's highly likely, highly likely to get done because it has to," Pawlenty said Wednesday at a Chamber of Commerce event.

There is also this:

The latest results, based on interviews conducted last week, were similar to the Minnesota Poll findings in 2006, just days before the Legislature allowed Hennepin County to increase a countywide sales tax to help pay for the majority of a new Twins stadium. In that poll, only a third of respondents said the Twins needed a new stadium to replace the Metrodome, where both the Twins and Vikings had played since 1982.

Any time someone asks if they support a tax increase, the general response is usually no. A lot of this has to do with the fact that the public tends to think that a) taxes are too high, b) the government is misspending other taxes, c) spending money in one area will be robbing it from another more important one, and d) the need isn't there. Sometimes they are right. Sometimes they are wrong. But the problem is that the general public does not have the time (or usually the desire) to aducately research the issues and weigh the long term costs and benefits of the issues. So the public, especially in polls, will error on the side of caution and be opposed to any new government spending. The fact that 66% of the poll respondants said that the Vikings could stay in the dome shows that they aren't taking into account the fact that the Vikings cannot remain competitive with the dome revenue, and likely won't be profitable if revenue sharing is reversed with the new CBA. The dome simply is not a viable option - something 66% of the respondants fail to take into consideration.

I love having a representative democracy, mostly because if we allowed the general public to make all of our decisions we would fail as a government in a matter of years. The people we elect to office have the time and resources to research the pros and cons of an issue, and sometimes have to vote in unpopular ways for the better of the community. This is likely one of those times - even bankruptcy Tim knows it. The Vikings represent more than just a pro team to Minnesota - they are the most popular one ever in the state. And history has shown that the people of the state will later fork over more money to get a new team if the current one moves, so it is in the best interest of the state to find a solution to the stadium problem. I hope it is one that maximizes the benfite and minimizes cost to both the state and the team.

NodakPaul wrote:

Purple Floyd wrote:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/10/21/outgoing-minnesota-governor-says-new-stadium-highly-likely/

Outgoing Minnesota governor says new stadium "highly likely


Tim Pawlenty, the two-term Minnesota governor who opted not to run for a third time, believes that the next governor of the state will be able to shepherd through the political process a new stadium for the Minnesota Vikings.

"I think it's highly likely, highly likely to get done because it has to," Pawlenty said Wednesday at a Chamber of Commerce event.

There is also this:

The latest results, based on interviews conducted last week, were similar to the Minnesota Poll findings in 2006, just days before the Legislature allowed Hennepin County to increase a countywide sales tax to help pay for the majority of a new Twins stadium. In that poll, only a third of respondents said the Twins needed a new stadium to replace the Metrodome, where both the Twins and Vikings had played since 1982.

Any time someone asks if they support a tax increase, the general response is usually no. A lot of this has to do with the fact that the public tends to think that a) taxes are too high, b) the government is misspending other taxes, c) spending money in one area will be robbing it from another more important one, and d) the need isn't there. Sometimes they are right. Sometimes they are wrong. But the problem is that the general public does not have the time (or usually the desire) to aducately research the issues and weigh the long term costs and benefits of the issues. So the public, especially in polls, will error on the side of caution and be opposed to any new government spending. The fact that 66% of the poll respondants said that the Vikings could stay in the dome shows that they aren't taking into account the fact that the Vikings cannot remain competitive with the dome revenue, and likely won't be profitable if revenue sharing is reversed with the new CBA. The dome simply is not a viable option - something 66% of the respondants fail to take into consideration.

I love having a representative democracy, mostly because if we allowed the general public to make all of our decisions we would fail as a government in a matter of years. The people we elect to office have the time and resources to research the pros and cons of an issue, and sometimes have to vote in unpopular ways for the better of the community. This is likely one of those times - even bankruptcy Tim knows it. The Vikings represent more than just a pro team to Minnesota - they are the most popular one ever in the state. And history has shown that the people of the state will later fork over more money to get a new team if the current one moves, so it is in the best interest of the state to find a solution to the stadium problem. I hope it is one that maximizes the benfite and minimizes cost to both the state and the team.

Well said. After reading the article I can only assume that they did not poll anyone who has ever been to the dome. Whenever I read comments on the Strib website that follow an article on the stadium issue I'm amazed at how uninformed the respondents are. The Vikings are not only the most popular team in the state, they are the 4th most popular NFL team according to a Nielsen study. People will also travel to see new stadiums. That can bring in extra tourism dollars to the state.

Minnesotans had better get this stadium done soon. The Wilf's will leave if that stadium is not built. Look at the other teams that have left. I don't know exactly what needs to be done, but get it done or my Vikes are leaving, no question.

I hope Pawlenty is right. It will suck having to choose between being a puker or a bores fan. I guess if they leave maybe I will go with the Detroit Lions as my team. The lesser of three evils.

Pawlenty thinks the new governor will get us a stadium?

Ha!

Why didn't Pawlenty do it?

The new governor will have more problems than Pawlenty due to the debt left by Pawlenty and is actually LESS likely to get us a stadium because of that.

Pawlenty was just preaching the message that the choir wanted to hear.....not addressing reality.

The silver lining is that this recession makes it less likely that anybody is going to be offering sweet stadium deals anywhere in America.

That could slow things down for a while.

Infidel wrote:

Pawlenty thinks the new governor will get us a stadium?

Ha!

Why didn't Pawlenty do it?

The new governor will have more problems than Pawlenty due to the debt left by Pawlenty and is actually LESS likely to get us a stadium because of that.

Pawlenty was just preaching the message that the choir wanted to hear.....not addressing reality.

The silver lining is that this recession makes it less likely that anybody is going to be offering sweet stadium deals anywhere in America.

That could slow things down for a while.

Agreed on the last part. It is much tougher to sneak a couple hundred million than it was a few years ago.

I have yet to see a proposal from any city offering a stadium to an nfl team. The L.A. deal was D.O.A. Basically they'll build a stadium, as long as they get half the revenue from the team, which aint going to happen.

jmcdon00 wrote:

Infidel wrote:

Pawlenty thinks the new governor will get us a stadium?

Ha!

Why didn't Pawlenty do it?

The new governor will have more problems than Pawlenty due to the debt left by Pawlenty and is actually LESS likely to get us a stadium because of that.

Pawlenty was just preaching the message that the choir wanted to hear.....not addressing reality.

The silver lining is that this recession makes it less likely that anybody is going to be offering sweet stadium deals anywhere in America.

That could slow things down for a while.

Agreed on the last part. It is much tougher to sneak a couple hundred million than it was a few years ago.

I have yet to see a proposal from any city offering a stadium to an nfl team. The L.A. deal was D.O.A. Basically they'll build a stadium, as long as they get half the revenue from the team, which aint going to happen.

I could see a deal being worked out where the team pays half. Honestly, I think that is the most fair solution to use half private and half public funds. I also realize that the negotiations will likely make concessions one way or the other, like using public funds for 60% and private for 40%, and having private cover all cost overruns. Either way, both the state and the team want a deal done, and it will get done.

NodakPaul wrote:

jmcdon00 wrote:

Infidel wrote:

Pawlenty thinks the new governor will get us a stadium?

Ha!

Why didn't Pawlenty do it?

The new governor will have more problems than Pawlenty due to the debt left by Pawlenty and is actually LESS likely to get us a stadium because of that.

Pawlenty was just preaching the message that the choir wanted to hear.....not addressing reality.

The silver lining is that this recession makes it less likely that anybody is going to be offering sweet stadium deals anywhere in America.

That could slow things down for a while.

Agreed on the last part. It is much tougher to sneak a couple hundred million than it was a few years ago.

I have yet to see a proposal from any city offering a stadium to an nfl team. The L.A. deal was D.O.A. Basically they'll build a stadium, as long as they get half the revenue from the team, which aint going to happen.

I could see a deal being worked out where the team pays half. Honestly, I think that is the most fair solution to use half private and half public funds. I also realize that the negotiations will likely make concessions one way or the other, like using public funds for 60% and private for 40%, and having private cover all cost overruns. Either way, both the state and the team want a deal done, and it will get done.

Don't disagree with any of that. I'm just saying cities aren't lining up to give the Vikings what they want.

I've been saying it for a couple years now, no stadium deal should be put in place before the new CBA is released. The CBA is essentially what the NFL will be, the state would be foolish to invest in something that is likely to radically change in the next 12 months. Everything from player salaries, to blackout restrictions, number of games, etc all need to be considered before making an investment.

Could you imagine the outrage if we spend a large chunk of money to keep an NFL franchise and they don't even play football in 2011?

Marrdro wrote:

In the latest Star Tribune Minnesota Poll, two-thirds of Minnesotans say the Vikings should stay in the Dome. An even larger majority oppose public funding for a replacement.

Minnesota Poll: Most oppose new Vikings stadium

More good news. Don't read unless you want to get madder than you already are from the game last night.

Did you notice that the never ask the question with the alternative being that, if a stadium is not built, the Vikings will move?

I sure did. This is a poll conducted simply to get the response they got.

=Z=