Thread: Wilf Says Vikes Will Stay

I hope he's telling the truth of today, as well as the future.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=citadel-2_380923_63&prov=citadel&type=story

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=knight-wilfpledgeshewouldntmovev&prov=knight&type=lgns

Quote: "While Red McCombs said the same thing -- perhaps more because of an ironclad lease that would cost millions in lawsuit fees to break -- Wilf is saying all the right things to ease the fears of Vikings fans."

I wonder what will happen after the lease is up.

The lease expires in 2011 if we want a new stadium something got to happen in the next two or three years. I'm just worried about the fact that the Vikings, Twins, and Minnesota college teams all want to get new places at the same time when the taxpayers don't want to pay for any of them.

I think that the Twins and the U of M should stay at the dome and be happy with what they got for a while. I went to a Twins game a few years ago and the place was empty. Also, I don't see a need to waste a decent stadium.

"PurplePackerEater" wrote:

I think that the Twins and the U of M should stay at the dome and be happy with what they got for a while. I went to a Twins game a few years ago and the place was empty. Also, I don't see a need to waste a decent stadium.

You're right, it is a decent stadium. The only problem is it doesn't have any cash makers. The only thing the owners are worried about are luxury sweets and other things they can make oodles of $ off of. The dome doesn't have a lot of that because its over 20 years old. That's the problem.

I hope Wilf is right though.

The chiefs could move to LA now.


From PFT:

CHIEFS SUDDENLY LOOKING TO L.A.?

Though it had been widely thought that either the Saints or the Vikings would be the team to fill the market vacated by the NFL ten years ago, there's a new team in line to pull up the teepees and roll to Cali.

The Kansas City Chiefs.

Per The Kansas City Star, new Chiefs chairman Clark Hunt recently told a group of politicians that, if renovations to the Truman Sports Complex are not completed, the team could very well vamoose.

The Chiefs are locked in to a lease that expires in 2014, but they would be permitted to am-scray if Jackson County defaults on its obligation to maintain Arrowhead Stadium.

Due to a lack of funding, a default could occur by late 2006.

The locals seem to be taking this seriously, since Clark Hunt is now firmly in control of the former AFL team that his father, Lamar, founded as the Dallas Texans before moving the organization to Kansas City in 1963.

“Clark's taken over, and there's some concern that Clark isn't as committed to Kansas City as Lamar,� said Bryan Pratt, a Missouri legislator.

The younger Hunt has yet to mention Los Angeles as a possible destination, but any team thinking about greener pastures would be nuts not to park in the nation's No. 2 market.

For one thing, the NFL has made clear its intention to put a team back in L.A. And given the growing disparity between high-revenue and low-revenue teams (scroll down for more), what owner wouldn't want to be in position to sell big-dollar luxury suites to hundreds of entertainment types with money to burn?

Another hidden benefit to moving the Chiefs to L.A. is that their membership in the AFC West means that, every year, the Raiders would come back to the town where they still have plenty of fans.

Good! As long as its not the Vikes I could care less who moves there.

It would be a shame to see the "Chefs" move. They have a good history and some great fans.

"PurplePackerEater" wrote:

I think that the Twins and the U of M should stay at the dome and be happy with what they got for a while. I went to a Twins game a few years ago and the place was empty. Also, I don't see a need to waste a decent stadium.

I think it was seattle that had the same problem with no one going to the games, but they built a new stadium and the place has been packed ever since. The only reason I dont go to the twins games more (I go to 4 or 5 a year) is because the stadium sucks for baseball.

I think a new stadium that has more of a baseball park feel would help the twins just like it helped the seattle. If you have ever gone to wrigley field you would know just what I mean. that stadium is old but it has the feel of baseball.

"smootpepper" wrote:

"PurplePackerEater" wrote:

I think that the Twins and the U of M should stay at the dome and be happy with what they got for a while. I went to a Twins game a few years ago and the place was empty. Also, I don't see a need to waste a decent stadium.

I think it was seattle that had the same problem with no one going to the games, but they built a new stadium and the place has been packed ever since. The only reason I dont go to the twins games more (I go to 4 or 5 a year) is because the stadium sucks for baseball.

I think a new stadium that has more of a baseball park feel would help the twins just like it helped the seattle. If you have ever gone to wrigley field you would know just what I mean. that stadium is old but it has the feel of baseball.

Yep, a new stadium would do wonders for our crappy attendance at twins games.

Check the attendance records of every team that built a new stadium and you will see a huge increase the year they opened the new stadium, no matter how crappy the team.

An awesome stadium with a good team like the twins, and we should get a great boost in attendance.

I hope that he is not fibbing

good post sir.