Some Pics Of The New Vikes Stadium

**V-Unit** · 01-16-2008, 10:29 PM

On the site of the current Metrodome. Blah! construction can't start till 2010. Blah! It's not approved yet. Blah!

**BadlandsVikings** · 01-16-2008, 10:32 PM

"V" wrote:

On the site of the current Metrodome. Blah! construction can't start till 2010. Blah! It's not approved yet. Blah!

Someone will convince Wilf to move in 2011 Blah!

**Zeus** · 01-16-2008, 11:03 PM

"Garland" wrote:

I know some peopel dissagree but I still like the idea of a retractable roof. Have it open for the football season but if we wanted to host a indoor event or evan a Super Bowl ion Mid january the roof coluld be closed as needed. Some people have the idea that retractable roof means domed stadium and no outdoors but I am missing where they get the idea. If the roof is open isn't it outside?

What people fail to understand is that the decision to have the roof open or closed will NOT be up to the Vikings.

For example - if the conditions in Minnesota on a Sunday in December were like they were in Green Bay last weekend, the NFL would tell them to close the roof.
Houston has seen this at Reliant Stadium on a number of occasions already.

=Z=

**COJOMAY** · 01-16-2008, 11:05 PM

"Zeus" wrote:

"Garland" wrote:

I know some peopel dissagree but I still like the idea of a retractable roof. Have it open for the football season but if we wanted to host a indoor event or evan a Super Bowl ion Mid january the roof coluld be closed as needed. Some people have the idea that retractable roof means domed stadium and no outdoors but I am missing where they get the idea. If the roof is open isn't it outside?

What people fail to understand is that the decision to have the roof open or closed will NOT be up to the Vikings.

For example - if the conditions in Minnesota on a Sunday in December were like they were in Green Bay last weekend, the NFL would tell them to close the roof.
Houston has seen this at Reliant Stadium on a number of occasions already.

=Z=

You are absolutely right Zeus. The Vikings will not even own the stadium. It will be owned by the Metropolitan Sports Commission. The Vikes will just lease it like they do now with the Metrodome. And Wilf will be putting up a ton of money to own nothing. But he'll make it back on increased seating and more luxury boxes.

**Marrdro** · 01-17-2008, 07:08 AM

"TheKnuck" wrote:

so are these just more designs or are they gonna actually build something?
anyword if it's approved?

I do believe it will be built or at least something pretty close to the artists rendering.
There has been to much money put into the design efforts to scrap them.

Question still remains where will it be built. Nothing is approved to build in MN.

**MindFreak** · 01-17-2008, 07:20 AM

It's too bad we don't have enough people in office, that have the balls, sack, or just the simple smarts to see that the state would make money from something like this down the road, couple that with the fact that we are bandwaggon, and fairweather, and those of us that are passionate about our team we love so dear are just too few at the moment

**VikingMike** · 01-17-2008, 08:25 AM

IMO, the retractable roof is worth the extra $200M, but who knows what the actual cost will be...rarely does it end up coming in at or under the estimate.

**NodakPaul** · 01-17-2008, 09:08 AM

"Zeus" wrote:

"Garland" wrote:

I know some peopel dissagree but I still like the idea of a retractable roof. Have it open for the football season but if we wanted to host a indoor event or evan a Super Bowl ion Mid january the roof coluld be closed as needed. Some people have the idea that retractable roof means domed stadium and no outdoors but I am missing where they get the idea. If the roof is open isn't it outside?

What people fail to understand is that the decision to have the roof open or closed will NOT be up to the Vikings.

For example - if the conditions in Minnesota on a Sunday in December were like they were in Green Bay last weekend, the NFL would tell them to close the roof.
Houston has seen this at Reliant Stadium on a number of occasions already.

=Z=

I don't believe that is true at all.
From everything I have read, the Texans choose whether or not to have the roof open on game day.
The only time that I am aware of that the NFL had a say in the roof was the 2004 superbowl - obviously since the NFL is hosting the superbowl, not the team.
I googled and did not find one single instance of the NFL forcing Houston's hand in regards to the roof on a game day.

To be honest, if cost is an issue, I would rather go for an enclosed stadium over a retractable roof.
An open air stadium, IMHO would be disastrous to ticket sales in Minnesota once the initial excitement wore off (in about three or four years).
We couldn't even sell out the much smaller Met when the Vikings were perennial super bowl contenders.
What makes anyone think that we could sell out a larger open air stadium in this day of HDTV considering we haven't been a realistic contender for a decade?

**NodakPaul** · 01-17-2008, 09:08 AM

"COJOMAY" wrote:

"Zeus" wrote:

"Garland" wrote:

I know some peopel dissagree but I still like the idea of a retractable roof. Have it open for the football season but if we wanted to host a indoor event or evan a Super Bowl ion Mid january the roof coluld be closed as needed. Some people have the idea that retractable roof means domed stadium and no outdoors but I am missing where they get the idea. If the roof is open isn't it outside?

What people fail to understand is that the decision to have the roof open or closed will NOT be up to the Vikings.

For example - if the conditions in Minnesota on a Sunday in December were like they were in Green Bay last weekend, the NFL would tell them to close the roof.
Houston has seen this at Reliant Stadium on a number of occasions already.

=Z=

You are absolutely right Zeus. The Vikings will not even own the stadium. It will be owned by the Metropolitan Sports Commission. The Vikes will just lease it like they do now with the Metrodome. And Wilf will be putting up a ton of money to own nothing. But he'll make it back on increased seating and more luxury boxes.

Very few teams own their stadium outright.

**Marrdro** · 01-17-2008, 09:11 AM

"NodakPaul" wrote:

"COJOMAY" wrote:

"Zeus" wrote:

"Garland" wrote:

I know some peopel dissagree but I still like the idea of a retractable roof. Have it open for the football season but if we wanted to host a indoor event or evan a Super Bowl ion Mid january the roof coluld be closed as needed. Some people have the idea that retractable roof means domed stadium and no outdoors but I am missing where they get the idea. If the roof is open isn't it outside?

What people fail to understand is that the decision to have the roof open or closed will NOT be up to the Vikings.

For example - if the conditions in Minnesota on a Sunday in December were like they were in Green Bay last weekend, the NFL would tell them to close the roof.
Houston has seen this at Reliant Stadium on a number of occasions already.

=Z=

You are absolutely right Zeus. The Vikings will not even own the stadium. It will be owned by the Metropolitan Sports Commission. The Vikes will just lease it like they do now with the Metrodome. And Wilf will be putting up a ton of money to own nothing. But he'll make it back on increased seating and more luxury boxes.

Very few teams own their stadium outright.

And yet most want the Wilf Ownership group to pay for this one out of thier own pocket.