Vikings, Governor Close to New Stadium Deal

**alarson** · 05-07-2011, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by Al_4_State

The economic blow that the Twin Cities would take by losing the Vikings is staggering, and its effects would last a long time.

This isn't about the government supporting a sports team for fun's sake, this is about keeping an economic cash cow, something that's incredibly important in the current economic climate. The Vikings are big business, and its never good for any area to lose that kind of business.

How much of that money actually comes in from out of state, and not just from minnesotans coming in from outside the cities? (important to ask when state money is involved)

**Al_4_State** · 05-07-2011, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by alarson

How much of that money actually comes in from out of state, and not just from minnesotans coming in from outside the cities? (important to ask when state money is involved)

I think I've read that almost 40% of Viking season ticket holders live out of state (generally Iowa and the Dakotas).

That's a lot of hotel rooms, and a lot of food/booze that people are buying on a weekly basis that wouldn't otherwise be there.

**Tornado man** · 05-07-2011, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by Cyclone06

The practice of owner's threatening taxpayer's to build new mega staduims has got to stop. The taxpayer's are already the people who pay for all of the other costs of the NFL (the cost to attend an NFL game is another discussion). The owners have to step up and do their part too. Do the owners benefit from owning an NFL team? They way owners talk, its like they think they are doing mission work for the betterment of everyone else.

That's fine, but all an owner has to do is threaten to leave, and the city/county/state will capitulate and fund the entire stadium.
Look what happened in KC - of the $550 million to remodel Arrowhead and Royals Stadium, the public is paying $425 mil in the form of a sales tax surcharge. Both owners hinted at looking elsewhere if the tax increase was voted down...

**Bobber** · 05-07-2011, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by RING4CY

They are the Minnesota Vikings after all. New stadium location doesn't have to be in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area.

It used to be the Minnesota Lakers. They don't have to stay in the state...

**Dryburn** · 05-07-2011, 04:32 PM

I think it will be good if they put the new stadium out in the suburbs. Hopefully, they will have more room for parking.....and Vikings fans can get back to the old days of tailgating they had at Metropolitan Stadium. Seems they kind of lost that at the Metrodome.

**RING4CY** · 05-07-2011, 06:58 PM

Originally Posted by Bobber

It used to be the Minnesota Lakers. They don't have to stay in the state...

True. I don't want to see the Vikings leave the state of Minnesota. I love the Bears-Vikings rivalry (most of my mom's side of the family are Viking fans.) But it's not like their tied down to the Minneapolis/St. Paul area if they can't get a location squared away, like Seattle or Indianapolis was when they went looking for new stadiums. Of course, I don't think there is any other area of Minnesota that is as populated as the Twin Cities area.

**CYKOFAN** · 05-07-2011, 07:26 PM

Sad this blackmailing of cities, states and their taxpayers goes on and on. Another case of welfare for the super rich.

**ricochet** · 05-09-2011, 12:51 AM

Originally Posted by Bobber

It used to be the Minnesota Lakers. They don't have to stay in the state...

Pretty sure it was the Minneapolis Lakers. They also had the Minnesota North Stars.

**mj4cy** · 05-09-2011, 07:44 AM

The Wilfs love Minnesota. I hope to see a deal soon. I'd prefer downtown, but heck I'll take a stadium anywhere. The Cowboys don't play in downtown Dallas, and they do just fine getting support/attendance.

**Al_4_State** · 05-09-2011, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by RING4CY

True. I don't want to see the Vikings leave the state of Minnesota. I love the Bears-Vikings rivalry (most of my mom's side of the family are Viking fans.) But it's not like their tied down to the Minneapolis/St. Paul area if they can't get a location squared away, like Seattle or Indianapolis was when they went looking for new stadiums. Of course, I don't think there is any other area of Minnesota that is as populated as the Twin Cities area.

The Minneapolis/St. Paul MSA has 3,200,000. Minnesota as a whole has 5,200,000. Outside of the Minneapolis area, Minnesota is pretty empty. Rochester is the next largest city with a population of ~ 110,000, which makes it smaller than Cedar Rapids or the Iowa side of the Quad Cities.

**cigaretteman** · 05-10-2011, 08:05 AM

Now Minneapolis has offered to pay 22% if it's at the Metrodome site:

Minneapolis leaders offered Monday to have the city pay 22 percent of the cost of a new football stadium for the Minnesota Vikings at the current Metrodome site, putting the longtime home of the team in competition with an offer from neighboring Ramsey County.
The Minneapolis plan throws in a sweetener by setting aside money to renovate the aging Target Center basketball arena, relieving what's a decades-long burden on property taxpayers in the state's largest city. Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak called the proposal "two stadiums for the price of one."
"In the long struggle to find a new home for the Vikings, and in the long battle to end stadium debates, today we have a game changer," Rybak said at a Capitol press conference.

Read more: Minneapolis making bid to keep Vikings stadium - NFL - SI.com