Tomorrow is Stadium Decision Day

Hi Champ,

I didn't realize the vote was coming up... thanks for the heads up. FYI, I think it was the Giants who said "no loan no stadium," but I'm sure Woody is backing them up or they wouldn't have said it.

Last I heard, the two teams are looking for $600,000 though, correct? Their argument is that since each team in the NFL gets $300,000, because they're two teams, they should be entitled to $600,000. Perhaps I'm wrong...

 

I think it will get approved but only with certain concessions by the players union. I've read they are looking to allow the salary cap to be somewhat limited for the next X number of years if it is passed. The big argument from the smaller market teams was due to the amount of money this stadium will generate, the salary cap will explode. This is a win/win for the NFL so somehow it will get done IMO....

 

Each team gets 150 million, so they want 300 million (150 per team). I think the most the NFL ever loaned out to 1 team was 75M though.

 

Actually they are looking for 300 MILLION, rather than the typical 150 MILLION most teams get per the G3 pact....

 

Oh... yeah... sorry. Had my zeroes wrong.

 

Here's the article I read the other day.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/giants/story/477159p-401455c.html

Owners to vote on $300M Giant-Jet stadium loan


NFL owners will vote Thursday on the Giants' and Jets' request for a $300 million loan from the league, a vote that likely will determine whether their new $1.2 billion stadium in the Meadowlands gets built.
The vote will take place in Frisco, Tex., a Dallas suburb. Three-quarters approval is needed: 24 out of 32 votes. The stadium is considered crucial to the financial future of both franchises, and their ability to compete against teams with new money-making stadiums, because of the extraordinary revenues it will produce compared to Giants Stadium. The teams are asking for double the usual $150 million loan. The G-3 stadium loan program was set up per team, not per stadium.

The big-market Giants were at the forefront of television revenue sharing more than 40 years ago because it was for the good of the league. It's expected owners will return the favor all these years later and approve the project. But it's not a given. The additional revenue will drive up the salary cap without all of the revenue shared among the 32 clubs, so this has developed into a big market-small market issue.

Asked by the Daily News last week where he stood on the Giants' and Jets' request, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said, "We are working with the two clubs, the union and our other 30 clubs on the economic challenges of trying to do that. It is a significant project that has significant economic challenges and we're working with them and trying to find the right solution for all parties."

He added, "I do believe stadium construction is important ultimately, but they have to be done correctly."

The SportsBusiness Journal reported yesterday that the NFL Players Association has offered to reduce the salary cap by $800 million over the first 15 years of the stadium. It's to the union's benefit for the new stadium to get built because the additional revenue will find its way into the pockets of the players and more than offset the salary cap reduction.


Gary Myers

 

Hey, while I'm reminded, don't forget to get your playoff money in. I've got to scrape up $1163.... always a bitch around the holidays.

 

Yeah, I hear you. My wife wasn't happy when I passed that little bit of info to her as I grabbed the checkbook....

:grin:

 

Okay, yeah, that was it. $300M... double the usual $150M. I think the "double" argument flies and since the Jets and the Giants have never voted against anyone else's request, the speculation awhile back was that it would be approved.

 

If we don't go, I always want the check back from them. The hell with that, I'm not tying up $1163 (interest free) for the next 8 months.

They're charging me $125 per seat for the Playoff game and $165 for the Championship game.

 

Yeah, it will probably go through mainly because of the "you scratched my back, now I'll scratch yours" factor.

But from what I've read, a lot of small-market owners are unhappy, partially because giving away so much money depletes the G-3 fund down to almost nothing; partially because the rules of the current CBA dictate that giving the Jets and Giants this much money would result in higher player salaries.

But do at least 9 owners feel that way? Possibly. Who the hell knows anymore.

 

I think it would be myopic for other owners to deny the loan solely based on higher salaries, knowing when they're turn comes to build a stadium, they'll need our vote and we could make the same argument. Higher salaries are always going to be there for one reason or another. I just don't see them having any legitimate reason to vote this down and you know the NFL will be pushing it big time, so there'll be a ot of pressure to approve it.

 

I hear you. That's another gripe of mine too, though. You've got to get that money in so damned early.

Still, if we make the playoffs, there's nothing more exciting than sitting in that stadium in January.

 

Yet, Mara's statement several months ago was pretty emphatic and unambiguous. In fact, it was so blunt I remember thinking, "Whoa, this guy is like, giving them an ultimatum here." He pretty much laid it on the line and said, "No $300M, no stadium."

 

So this would mean the Jets would no longer be "tennants" Everything would be 50/50 and it wouldn't be named "Giants Stadium."

Would of loved NY, but this would be nice.

 

Yes, of course. Perhaps you weren't around amid all the discussion and press coverage of the stadium. The deal is, it's a 50-50 split, completely shared. The only deviation from a completely equal split is that the Giants wound up with a practice field near the stadium, which is what they wanted. We wound up wit 20+ acres up in Florham Park for our practice facility, which is a far superior and classy location IMO.