So is this playoffs thing good or bad for a new stadium?

It's a question I've been pondering lately. Does the team's success help or hurt the Rays' chances at getting a new ballpark any time soon?

On one hand, the city seems to be more excited about the Rays than ever before. And perhaps people are more willing now to help the team out.

But on the other hand, anyone who has been to one of the two playoff home games so far probably has noticed the great home-field advantage Tropicana Field presents -- and just how fun the place can be when it's filled up.

What do you think? Help or hurt?

*

Comments

[Frank]

Winning anywhere is good. Homefield advantage better. Economy is bad. Why is a new stadium still under consideration? I realize we need to consider future growth, but infrastructure improvements trump new homes for professional sports teams as the benefits are spread throughout the community.

[Cathy Wilson]

I think it proves the Dome to be more than adequate as a place to play baseball and that the Rays can win in the Dome. So...

My guess is that the road to the World Series, being played as it is in the existing stadium, will make it that much harder for ordinary tax-payers to understand why WE need to build a new house for the owners.

[Cathy Wilson]

I think it proves the Dome to be more than adequate as a place to play baseball and that the Rays can win in the Dome. So...

My guess is that the road to the World Series, being played as it is in the existing stadium, will make it that much harder for ordinary tax-payers to understand why WE need to build a new house for the owners.

[Bobby Fenton]

The question of whether the team needs a new stadium or not has nothing to do with the team's record or playoff fortunes. The Rays needed a new stadium the day this area was awarded a major league baseball team in 1995, and they still need one. Anyone who deosn't understand that is probably not worth taking the time to explain to. "Homefield advantage" is not what this is about.

[cindy]

I like the Dome. We have a good time in ther for the senioor heath fair. you shood see the paring lott how full it gets when Richard Simmons shows up. It is so full you cant even get in. Keep the Dome!!!

[Matthew]

Obviously the Rays do not need a new stadium to be a winning team. The "gimme a new stadium" is a ploy that has been used countless times by team owners. The only people to benefit from a new stadium are the owners themselves. They want us to spend our money on them so they can make more money. In this time of financial crisis it is obscene to even consider such a thing. There are far more important things in life than professional sports like:housing, keeping a job, medical care, food, gas for my car so I can get to work. Don't talk to me about "needs."

[Sabine]

Given the current economic climate, and the fact that the Rays tied the MLB season record for most home-field wins EVER, let's forget about a new stadium. Shut down the ABC, and let all those businessmen get back to their businesses. That's where they are needed in these dire times.

Go Rays!!! Win the World Series at home, and maybe even the owners will stop whining.

[Scaramouche]

Gee, Bobby,nothing like assuming the answer and then telling everyone else they "don't understand" if they think you are way wrong. You want a new stadium subsidy WHY? Your compelling reasons are not, in the present lexicon, very "transparent."

Here's the deal. The world economy is in a downward spiral. Municipalities will be in a deeper and deeper financial crack. Infrastructure that benefits ALL of us, sewers, bridges to SOMEWHERE, roads, and the things that produce "human capital" like schools, are wasting away or are actively being drained for special-interest projects, like billion-dollar baseball subsidies.

Smart people with a longer view of the survival of our country are pointing out the obvious imbalances in resource allocations (wrong industries supported, upward wealth transfer) that will produce enormous tensions and strains as the social contract gets renegotiated. Dumping a billion in scarce public resources into a single-use Coliseum for the profit of the owners of one favored set of gladiators isn't the best way to use that scarce resource.

Looks like for you, "what this is about" is more of the bread-and-circuses, make-the-rich-richer, give-them-a-swank-place-to-be-"seen" behavior that's dragged the rest of us into the present mess.

Why is it that the predators don't get it? If you bleed the prey species down far enough, you starve yourselves. The prey in this case being the taxpayers, the already heavily strapped taxpayers now being expected to shoulder several additional trillions in public liabilities through the many "bailouts" now under way and of course the billion a day dumped into the land wars in Asia.

Aaron, everybody loves an optimist. But the Times lives on advertising revenue. Do you think the paper will prosper and even survive if the businesses who provide that revenue dry up and blow away due to the combined effects of all the greed and stupidity that are already coming home to roost? Do you really believe, despite the bits you've recently put up about the subsidy scams and 'maintenance cost' surprises in other MLB-ridden cities, that a starry-eyed new stadium subsidy will do more than drag this area further down?

And Bobby, I bet the Rays owners have protected their capital well enough that if they want to do like the SF Giants owners and buy their own dam stadium, they can do it. It should be a lot cheaper, too, in a little while, as our economy "retracts" like a burned finger. And you can write them a check -- maybe they will give you shares of stock in the business. Which is more than the rest of us would get for any subsidy, or are getting in exchange for the TARPS being handed out in the most recent federal bailout.

[Scaramouche]

And cindy, you are as ignorant and blind and selfish as the person you pretend to be. You want class and age warfare, you'll get it. Age and treachery beat youth and selfishness every time. Last time I checked, it's those rully smert yng ppl who has trbl, LOLLMFAO, wit speling an gramer.

[Thomas]

I can respect Bobby's opinion and the claim that the Rays "need" a new stadium. However, the people of St.Pete clearly do not "need" a new facility. The Dome works just fine for public.

If the Rays feel they "need" a new stadium - then the Rays can pay for the new stadium they "need".

Personally, I wonder if the team would change their mind on what they "need" if they had to pay their own tab.

[atrulyconcernedcitizen]

Scarmouche,

I always respect your opinions and your answer to Bobby Fenton is dead on, however you may be mistaken with Cindy.

I know you probably think she's a stadium advocate troll being sarcastic but there are two ladies who go all around town with Dome hats on...they attend all public meetings on the issue...and they sincerely enjoy the Dome's OTHER events besides baseball.
Listen it's hard for me to defend their literacy...and perhaps their taste..Richard Simmons?...whatever floats your boat I guess...but they are sincere and enjoy the Dome as it is presently configured.

As for Bobby Fenton I believe he too is sincere and well educated about the subject. I think he is simply alluding to the fact that the greedy SOB's who own sports...Jerry Jones and the rest..simply resort to blackmail and extortion to get their way (read new stadium at taxpayer expense) However Bobby while I respect your opinion it is at the end of the day...just that an opinion! The economy has all municipalities scrambling...many can't even borrow the money to keep up with their current infrastructure debts. Many truly needed projects...sewer...water systems..and such are having difficulty getting completed.
While I understand the principle of blackmail I tend to side more with the late great sportscaster Chris Thomas who frequently pointed out on his radio show that we have probably passed the "Golden Age" of sports. At the ripe old age of 60 I have seen it come an go. Baseball got along great without taxpayer funded stadiums before...and I suspect baseball is going to have to adjust and return to the "good old days". If you stop and think Bobby you'd realize that the mortgage payment on a new stadium is in the neighborhood of 20 million dollars annually...about the price of one really good player. I think Thomas has the issue pretty well nailed. The Rays can build their own stadium. They should be happy that we are giving them the land free and all the incredible tax breaks that go with it.

[Little Red Signs]

No new stadium until such time the Trop is truly "proven" to be deficient. Until then play ball under the orange juice sign.

[Bobby Fenton]

Sacramouche and a truly concerned citizen, seriously, get over yourselves. I'm aware of the current economic situation. We're not building this stadium tomorrow, first of all. Second of all, I'm only addressing the issue of the necessity of the new stadium, not how easy it will be to get one. They clearly do and always have - from day one. And yeah, I will go ahead and make assumptions. Anyone who is okay with having the #30 stadium out of 30 can call me whatever they want to.

I always laugh at how much government waste is out there that everyone lets slip by, and then something like this, which is actually a good thing for the community, draws out all of the naysayers like nothing else can.

They just prosecuted this porn guy, Max Hardcore. Is he a slimeball? Sure he is. But is he hurting anybody? Not really. But how much money went into that entire case being tried. A ridiculous not only of public money but also of time.

They do studies, STUDIES, of whether or not to put a light at some intersection because a few neighbors bitched and they drop six figures, and no one makes a peep.

That's my point.

So I repeat, anyone who doesn't see the need for a new stadium is a lost cause anyway. Have fun blaming all of the world's problems on the government and the economy just like everyone else is so fond of doing.

[Home field advantage]

The Trop is a special place. Every seat in the upper decks is more comfortable than the upper deck seats at stadiums like say Yankee Stadium-less crowded, cleaner and you do not feel like you getting ready to fall. By the way, OPEN UP THE UPPER DECK SEATS!!! Speaking of the Yankees-Ya' think all of the hubbub about the last days in the ol' stadium took their collective eye off the ball?! This is great because we know the Yankee organization will distract for another year yakking about the NEW stadium. Gee, I wonder if the credit crunch will impact their financing plan-you know-the one that relied on NYC to pony up for the bonds? A little insider like lending at a less than market borrowing rate?

[atrulyconcernedcitizen]

Bobby,

You haven't adequately identified need.
If I read you correctly it's because of some ESPN or other poll that rated Tropicana 30th out of 30. I had originally assumed that you believed it was because of business considerations...the fact that at one time the Rays New York ownership could have just played one community against another to get a stadium which would undeniably increase their equity position DRAMATICALLY. As I previously stated however I believe those days are gone. And YES the economy DOES have a large bearing in this debate. If we were all trying to figure out how to divvie up huge surpluses...perhaps the Rays might get more consideration...however adding to deficits is hardly appealing. You make one argument a friend of mine tried using...there is so much waste in government spending already what's the big deal...are you REALLY using that argument...the government makes mistakes so what is another MISTAKE going to matter?
As for your non sequitor about Max Hardcore..I am in complete agreement with your position...however I'm not sure what a porno prosecution has to do with a baseball stadium other than I suppose you are using it to illustrate Government waste..OK..then by all means let's use that argument for whatever we desire...the government is already wasting money...why not give me a cushy million dollar job...like say...Carl Crawford...or Evan Longoria. I'm certainly not as talented as those two on a baseball field...I'd love to compete with them intellectually...but since the government is already wasting money what's the difference if they waste some on me?

Bobby you completely confuse "need" with desire. No rational human being can claim the Rays NEED a new stadium.
I respect your opinion that they may be able to connive, extort and get one. And there is no doubt, at least based on historical perspective that they would increase their investment value dramatically. However when they have literally doubled the value of their investment in just four years...when their profit has climbed in double digits in each of those four years(something I sincerely doubt your radio station can claim..or the MAJORITY of other businesses for that matter)...it is simply impossible to argue that they NEED a new stadium. When a large multitude of fans claim they LIKE Tropicana despite all the naysayers like you...and in obvious disagreement with other fans who want a Cadillac of a stadium, when the field obviously functions in a literal sense...THERE IS NO NEED!!!!
Remember again Bobby...nobody is opposed to allowing the Rays a new stadium IF they want to build it. The ALREADY GET FREE LAND AND incredible TAX BREAKS, again unlike your radio station or the vast majority of other businesses. So what we are talking about here is have we not learned any of the lessons of the Wall Street New York GREED? Again Bobby the Rays could PAY for their own new stadium for roughly the price of one good player!!!

[Thomas]

I think the citizen summed it up wonderfully: "need" versus "desire" is a very important distinction.

There is nothing wrong with the Trop. Who cares if some ESPN poll ranks it "30 out of 30" or whatever. I don't have an inferiority complex over it. So I would counter Mr. Fenton's assertion by saying that anyone who would argue that the public needs to provide the Rays a new stadium is a lost cause.

[Scaramouche]

Bobby, once again, you assume that your assertion blows away what should be a question (does Pinellas County NEED to give the Rays owners the money to build a stadium?) and is "the unarguable truth."

And other than because the former Masters of the Universe who own the team WANT a FREE new stadium to jump the value of their asset, why do they "need" one? Yes, "it" may not be built any time soon, but the skullduggers are slinking around as I write to set the stage so there's no way "the public" can stop the robbery.

It's a complex and inter-related world we live in. As with any ecological system, there's just so much energy to go around at a given time.

Take your example of STUDIES of traffic lights. Many of those are triggered after several people, often children, often pedestrians or bus stop standers, are killed at the intersection.

Yes, whiners with clout (usually the higher class neighborhoods) get lights and traffic revisions and speed bumps, and a bunch of other stuff at the expense of ALL the taxpayers. In the past, it seemed there was enough blood flowing through the public body to supply these sometimes wasteful items that you can anecdote into the next county. Do you argue that this is still the case?

And maybe that ABC, Inc., using back-door clout to settle all the issues without benefit of any public visibility or participation, is the fairest way to divvy up the economic energy?

There's lots of public waste. One of my favorite examples, there's thousands to pick from, is the $30 billion "V-22 Osprey program," by which the military-industrial, ah, "partnership" has come up with a crash-by-wire vertical takeoff airplane-sort-of-helicopter "transport aircraft." After years of "development," a statement by the Marines' CO that he didn't want the dng thing couse it wouldn't do the mission, it is "deployed" to Iraq only in the sense that a few of them are being flown around where they won't get shot at, supported by a huge cadre of private contractors and some Air Force people. All part of the $15 billion a month that's disappearing into the "war on terror."

The plane is essentially unarmored and unarmed, unlike the helicopters it was supposed to replace which can at least shoot back. The "program" survives because of where the manufacturing is located, in particular Senators' states and congressional districts, and because of the constituency that any of these shovel-money-into-it "programs" develops. What it represents is $30-plus-billion of Form 1040 tax dollars being dumped into one little area for the benefit of a few corporate types and certain shareholders who are getting rich off this wealth transfer. While GIs in 2003-4 had ineffective body armor, to the point that their families and churches held bake sales to buy them bullet-resistant garments that the troops we "support" were not allowed to wear because they were not "uniform." And there was "no money" or "low priority" for things like improved Humvee armor andMRAP vehicles that stand a chance against IEDs and EFPs made from US munitions "we" gave Hussein and were too dumb to police up during Shock and Awe. "Want" versus "need," if you will.

A lot of wasteful government spending, as we are seeing with all the recent bailouts, is allocated by the kind of "personal politics," on an even larger scale, that Ed Strongarm and the Rays owners are playing with our elected officials and staff, and the ABC people. To my jaundiced eye, the notion of a subsidy, a huge free subsidy, in terms of this area's net wealth, looks a lot like the kind of STUDIES waste you shout down, on a gargantuan scale.

Some neighborhoods can very well pay for their own improvements, and some places (often deed-restricted) do tax themselves for parks and sidewalks and swimming pools and public improvements, sometimes democratically and sometimes via the fiat of a "condo Nazi" board.

What is going on with the stadium looks to be the latter kind of deal, with the added feature that the improvements benefit mostly the owners of just one block in the subdivision, and that those few owners get to pick the pockets of everyone in the entire city for their own private pool, and charge admission to anyone else who wants to use it. When they can easily afford to buy their own, as the Giants ownership did in San Francisco not all that long ago. And they are getting rich, at last count, even after laying out the down payments and paying for upkeep, and even the ground lease for the site they have to pay at market value. No flippin’ gifts there.

This ain't Wisconsin, where Bud "Commissioner for Life" Selig snookered the WHOLE STATE into buying his outrageously priced playpen for the Brewers Owners, or New York with all that's turning up out of the slime beneath the Yankee and Dodger stadiums.

And I hope we as a community are not dumb enough to conclude that “playoff fever” somehow magically transforms into an “obligation” to "Give the Rays owners a huge amount of taxpayers’ money to build a stadium to jump the value of their asset even though they can afford to buy their own, and could still make a profit on it, as they have already admitted." People are griping for darn good reason about the now-visible and "SURPRISE!" costs of "socializing of risk" and "privatizing of profit" that is at the heart of the subsidy notion.

Looks like "the government" (that's sort of "the taxpayers," though there are a lot of hands dipping into any purse that is in motion in Washington) may end up with some ownership positions in the Great Wall Street Entities that crashed us all. Maybe, and I say that very advisedly, "maybe" there's a model there for the Rays Boys: in exchange for a billion dollars in public money (a huge capital contribution), maybe the community gets a large ownership share in the team.

And yes, the child's whine about some expensive toy, "BUT I WANT it," is not the same as a mature approach to what the kid actually NEEDS – food,, clothing, shelter, medical care, safe streets, a decent education.

But I doubt that you and I will ever agree on this issue. And I know as a long-time observant cynic that greed almost always finds a way to trump the Golden Rule and the needs of the many.

[Southside Girl]

Scaramouche writes,
"...the skullduggers are slinking around as I write to set the stage so there's no way "the public" can stop the robbery."

Fortunately, Scaramouche, POWW has launched a petition drive to collect signatures to place referenda on the NOV 2009 ballot. One question which protects waterfront parks from development and prohibits building large stadiums. The other question asks the voters if they should have a say in whether or not the city can spend public money to build sports facilities.

Its all explained on POWW's website. stpetepoww.com.

Scaramouche, go sign the petitions and get your friends to sign so that the public CAN stop the robbery.

[Sabine]

Why would they even "want" a new stadium. Don't they agree with their genius VP, Andrew Friedman?

http://www.tampabay.com/sports/baseball/rays/article843573.ece (whole article)

Executive vice president Andrew Friedman said he thinks the series will be decided by pitching and defense — "just like a number of our games were this year" — but also played up the advantage the Rays have of playing four of the games at Tropicana Field, where they were 54-24 (plus 3-0 at Disney) and are 2-0 in the postseason.

"The one thing that is obviously helpful to us is that over the course of the 162 games we were able to win home field advantage, which is a benefit for us," Friedman said. "And we do have a unique home field, which certainly creates an advantage."

[POWW!]

By the way, Southside Girl:

The purpose of the POWW referenda is the same as our purpose has always been: to Preserve Our Wallets and Waterfront.

The ballot questions both do this by giving Voters the right to vote on matters that significantly affect them.

The "Wallets" referendum requires a majority public vote, if the City wants to spend taxpayer money, or go into debt, to build a new professional sports facility. POWW believes the public should always have a say when such large expenditures of their money is contemplated.

The "Waterfront" referendum requires a majority public vote for new development on waterfront parks, if the the development is not merely a same size/same use replacement of an existing structure or a small normal park amenity, like a bike rack, restroom, etc.

There is a section of frequently asked questions and answers on the POWW! website (www.stpetepoww.com ) to better explain the referenda.

[Paul]

So the Trop is 30th out of 30, dead last in stadium coolness. Who cares! I thought the purpose of the Rays was to play and win baseball games. Looks like the Rays are doing pretty dang good at baseball with our 'last place' stadium.

So, no, there is not a 'need' to replace the stadium. Heck, this ones not even close to being paid for by my / your taxes.

[Southside Girl]

Southside Girl thanks POWW for full explanation and for the 17Th draft - the final one - which will save our wallets and our waterfront!

[Pella]

If the Rays built a neat new stadium then they might not be the worst stadium out of thirty. They may move all the way up to 29th. Then there would be a new 30th stadium somewhere in America that would require their team to build a new stadium.

Once this team built its new stadium that would make the Tampa Rays 30th again.

Darn, such a vicious cycle. Another new stadium would have to be built for the Rays. Double darn.

Where does it end. There is always someone who needs to be building a new stadium regardless or not if they were all new to begin with or not.

This logic is rediculous.

[Jeo Baseball]

Interesting article in the Boston Globe about the eccentricities of the Trop. At least some other folks have noticed the Trop has a personality all its own and a real home field advantage.

The Rays front office should use that personality and market it to help build the "tradition" the team has lacked in the past... to create the tradition that other long standing teams have to their advantage. Instead they want to tear it down and start again...dump the only spec of a personality and tradition they have accumulated and build something new with no tradition attached to it. Do they not realize its "tradition" that draws fans in "old" baseball cities when times are bad for their teams? The Trop should be their hallmark for many, many years. It's our own quirky field and I for one love the noise when its filled.

"If you build it they will come" not only means building a field to play on, but a team. When the Rays finally put a team on the field we could all see and love baseball as never before at the Trop....and it works! Our quirky Trop that no other team is comfortable playing in...our loud noisy cowbell fans...our great Rays! Now that's great baseball!

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[Troy]

Jeo Baseball you don't get it. The value of the franchise improves with a new stadium. It would make it easier for the owners to flip it next year.

[home field advantage]

Now that the Rays are this close to winning the ALCS, I watch each game bittersweetly. This is a special time, in a special place with special people. Once this season is over, may it go on through the World Series, some of these fine players will leave. It will never be the same, and all the money in the world will not change that simple fact despite the anticipated arguments that the owners will make to St. Pete's taxpayers. All the money in the world that the owners could leverage from a new stadium would not keep all of the Rays here. It will be interesting to see which owners' pocketbooks have been impacted by the financial meltdown and who will be looking to unload assets (baseball team ownership). My guess is those negotiations are occurring now. Didn't some of the owners have Bears Sterns interests? And, why did they sell so timely?

[Scaramouche]

I guess the rule in life is always "Whatever I do is okay, whatever YOU do is DIFFERENT." Seems to apply especially to the "rich people" who go to the stadium to "be seen.'

See the article in the Times about what happens in the neighborhoods around even the Trop, before but especially after games? Blocking of the streets by "fans'" cars, incipient wars over spots in front of houses that only have on-street parking? And of course the lovely post-game habits of "fans" full of beer and stadium food and if the team wins those beer-muscle rowdies, who need to empty their bladders and bowels Right Now, whereever they happen to be. Just exactly like what happens around a lot of sports venues. But hey, if the team is winning, onlly a bunch of old ladies and prissy people are offended by finding "stuff" on their lawns and gardens. Hey, consider it free fertilizer! Whatcherbeef, buddy? You wanna make somthin out of it?

Rick the expert economist might recognize these things as "externalities," that's the nice euphemism for the increasingly well recognised notion that "socialization of risk, privatization of profit" ain't exactly playing within the base lines. One might hope that if the Star Chamber known as ABC, Inc. actually gets around to forcing a site selection on this area, it will be out in a big field somewhere, surrounded by parking lots, so the "fans" can make it to and from their cars without trashing the intervening neighborhoods.

But that's just one point of view.

[Rick K]

The question before the community will be this: is the community better off with the combined public/private investment in both a new waterfront stadium and a redeveloped Trop Field site, or without.

The people will ultimately decide.

[Scaramouche]

What was that thing about persistence in an untenable thought being the definition of one kind of insanity?

"Here we go, round again, singin' a song about the paired redevelopments, far away I know not where..."

Rick K is like a monster out of a Stephen King novel -- maybe "Kujo?" It's ... ALIVE!