Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42
  1. #21
    snowinapril's Avatar
    snowinapril is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,404

    Re: Minnesota Poll: Most oppose new Vikings stadium

    I believe in a biased poll, it can be made to sway one way. Also, being 2-4 isn't going to help that poll.

    I say you have to look at the Cowboys stadium, that will be used for everything and it will be used to generate a ton of income.

    Go big (build a monster) or go home (stay in the dome).

    I don't think that the public is willing to go big.

    On the other hand, "the new Arrowhead" looks nice, renovation works sometimes. I didn't see it on the inside, saw it from Kaufman and thought Arrowhead looked nice from the outside compared to what I saw a few years back when I was there.

  2. #22
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,278

    Re: Minnesota Poll: Most oppose new Vikings stadium

    Zeus wrote:
    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=
    lmao, we don't know what the Vikings will do. Your poll question would be much more biased than this one.

    7 teams in the NFL have lower operating incomes in 2009.
    In 2010 the Vikings get stadium naming rights, and a new luxury suit(gridiron club), and have no lease payments. The new CBA is likely to make the Vikings much more profitable with lower salaries and more games.

    No other cities have offered to build Wilf a stadium. LA will, but they want half the team, which wouldn't make sense for Wilf. Would make much more sense for Jacksonville, Detroit, Oakland, Miami to move.

    http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_NFL-Team-Valuations_Value.html

  3. #23
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,602
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Minnesota Poll: Most oppose new Vikings stadium

    jmcdon00 wrote:
    Zeus wrote:
    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=
    lmao, we don't know what the Vikings will do. Your poll question would be much more biased than this one.

    7 teams in the NFL have lower operating incomes in 2009.
    In 2010 the Vikings get stadium naming rights, and a new luxury suit(gridiron club), and have no lease payments. The new CBA is likely to make the Vikings much more profitable with lower salaries and more games.

    No other cities have offered to build Wilf a stadium. LA will, but they want half the team, which wouldn't make sense for Wilf. Would make much more sense for Jacksonville, Detroit, Oakland, Miami to move.

    http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_NFL-Team-Valuations_Value.html
    There IS a threat of them moving - pretending that there isn't is denying the possibility (a mistake we made with two other professional teams in Minnesota).

    However, on the same note, I think that it is more likely that the Wilfs sell the team before they move it. This is where the real danger lies, because there are people like Ed Roski who want nothing more than to buy a team for the sole purpose of moving it.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  4. #24
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,278

    Re: Minnesota Poll: Most oppose new Vikings stadium

    NodakPaul wrote:
    jmcdon00 wrote:
    Zeus wrote:
    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=
    lmao, we don't know what the Vikings will do. Your poll question would be much more biased than this one.

    7 teams in the NFL have lower operating incomes in 2009.
    In 2010 the Vikings get stadium naming rights, and a new luxury suit(gridiron club), and have no lease payments. The new CBA is likely to make the Vikings much more profitable with lower salaries and more games.

    No other cities have offered to build Wilf a stadium. LA will, but they want half the team, which wouldn't make sense for Wilf. Would make much more sense for Jacksonville, Detroit, Oakland, Miami to move.

    http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_NFL-Team-Valuations_Value.html
    There IS a threat of them moving - pretending that there isn't is denying the possibility (a mistake we made with two other professional teams in Minnesota).

    However, on the same note, I think that it is more likely that the Wilfs sell the team before they move it. This is where the real danger lies, because there are people like Ed Roski who want nothing more than to buy a team for the sole purpose of moving it.
    Definetly a threat, but that doesn't mean it belongs on the poll question. It is definetly part of the discussion, and a real threat, but far from a sure thing.

  5. #25
    scottishvike's Avatar
    scottishvike is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Dunfermline
    Posts
    1,715
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Minnesota Poll: Most oppose new Vikings stadium

    Although I know it's not the only issue here it really pisses me off to see Jacksonville and Tampa playing in barely half full stadiums, if anyone "deserves" to go to LA LA land it's them not us.

  6. #26
    Traveling_Vike is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    885

    Re: Minnesota Poll: Most oppose new Vikings stadium

    These polls are ridiculous. The way the questions are phrased slant the answer toward the desired result.

    I am absolutely positive that the citizens of Minnesota are not against a new stadium for the Vikings. They would love to have one. They are just against paying for it.

    My Meeple is purple. What color is yours?

  7. #27
    purplejokr is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The Beach
    Posts
    126

    Re: Minnesota Poll: Most oppose new Vikings stadium

    NodakPaul wrote:However, on the same note, I think that it is more likely that the Wilfs sell the team before they move it. This is where the real danger lies, because there are people like Ed Roski who want nothing more than to buy a team for the sole purpose of moving it.
    One thing that Minnesota has going for it is the fact that they do well selling tickets. Most of the teams that get mentioned as potentially relocating to Los Angeles have an established ticket base in their current cities. With one exception, the Jaguars.

    The Jaguars cover over 1,000 of their seats with advertisements because they cannot sell those seats. If I were to bet on Roski and/or Magic Johnson buying and moving a team to Los Angeles, I would bet on the Jaguars.

  8. #28
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,916

    Re: Minnesota Poll: Most oppose new Vikings stadium

    Zeus wrote:
    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=
    Of course it was a poll conducted to get the desired response. Got me to read it, got you to read it, ........Isn't that what they do them for?
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  9. #29
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,916

    Re: Minnesota Poll: Most oppose new Vikings stadium

    purplejokr wrote:
    NodakPaul wrote:However, on the same note, I think that it is more likely that the Wilfs sell the team before they move it. This is where the real danger lies, because there are people like Ed Roski who want nothing more than to buy a team for the sole purpose of moving it.
    One thing that Minnesota has going for it is the fact that they do well selling tickets. Most of the teams that get mentioned as potentially relocating to Los Angeles have an established ticket base in their current cities. With one exception, the Jaguars.

    The Jaguars cover over 1,000 of their seats with advertisements because they cannot sell those seats. If I were to bet on Roski and/or Magic Johnson buying and moving a team to Los Angeles, I would bet on the Jaguars.
    Not sure if you knew this or not, the Jags have sold out every game this year.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  10. #30
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,916

    Re: Minnesota Poll: Most oppose new Vikings stadium

    NodakPaul wrote:
    However, on the same note, I think that it is more likely that the Wilfs sell the team before they move it.
    Never one to question your opinions on this. You know I think your the most informed poster on this site with respect to this issue, however, I have to ask.....

    Why do you think they will sell first?

    Atleast in our area, the housing market is on the upswing, new businesses are starting to open again, etc etc etc. Not to the level we saw pre-this-administration, but it is coming around.

    The Wilfs bought the team because they wanted to be owners, but they also bought it to exploit the opportunities that come with developing the area around the stadium.

    Why would they opt out of that?

    If anything, I anticipate them working some sort of 2 year extension with the evil entity called the Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission on the premise that stadium deal could/would get done. That would allow them a couple more years to do two things....1) Wait out the last issues with the economy and 2)Start researching alternate locations (if they already haven't).

    (Marrdro whispers "Bowershill VA" under his breath)
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Minnesota Vikings Stadium Drive
    By purpleandgold93 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-02-2009, 11:23 AM
  2. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 03-26-2008, 09:19 AM
  3. Walters: Minnesota Vikings' hopes for new stadium dip
    By COJOMAY in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-01-2008, 05:32 PM
  4. Minnesota Vikings stadium proposal
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-23-2006, 03:08 PM
  5. Minnesota Vikings New Stadium Discussion
    By nephilimstorm in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 07-05-2005, 05:22 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •