< 1979 vs. 2007 | Main | Another reason for optimism >

March 21, 2007

Conflicting points of view

Well, we are finally beginning to see some progress. However, and this has already been pointed out, we are seeing some conflicting attitudes from the principles involved. On the one hand we have the Twins. They seem to be optimistic and they are moving forward. We also have the Minnesota Ballpark Authority. They are also very optimistic. In addition, I have been informed that a high ranking official at the MBA is going on a week long family vacation to Disney World/Orlando FL. So, much like Bell in Florida, I doubt that anyone involved in this so deeply would be going to Florida on vacation if something hasn't been resolved.

And then we have the County. The County has the most to be concerned with at this point since they are the principle entity involved in purchasing the land. It is understandable that they should feel so ... is pessimistic the right word? Maybe cautious? They have to have complete assurance that the Twins will cover any cost overages on the land before proceeding. And while the Twins are now "taking bids" on land excavation, it appears very likely that an agreement has not exactly been signed yet. What can we make of this?

I think Ray pointed it out, but this is an obvious attempt by the Twins to put some pressure on the County. I am also confident that we can feel optimistic about this development as it appears likely the Twins will be bridging the gap. The County won't proceed without that assurance.

The HC Board meeting on the 27th will be a big day. For one thing, this stadium mess should be resolved by then. Also, the Board will be taling about the HC/Minneapolis Library merger. Lots of important issues to discuss. But back to the ballpark, next week is when we will get the nitty gritty on the upcoming agreement. It seems we need to be patient just a little longer.

But I am still very, very optimistic. I have no doubt, none whatsoever, that this will all work out.

• Also, and I agree with Freealonzo, 52 degrees on opening day in 2010 would be fine with me. In fact, I would be thrilled. 52 degrees is actually the average temperature for April 5 for as long as they have been keeping records in Minnesota, I suppose. The high last year on April 5 was 63 degrees. In other words, I don't think we have much to be worried about.

• Secondly, I have been challenged to another bet! And I just can't help myself. Zooomx has suggested a wager concerning which hockey team makes it further in the NCAA tournament: the Gophers or the Huskies. OK zooomx, I accept, as I think the Huskies are tanking it at this point and the Gophers are starting to hit their stride again. What are your terms, good sir? And anyone else want a piece of this action?

Posted by snackeru at March 21, 2007 8:39 AM

Comments

Okay, I'll quit "raining on your parade" right after this;

1.) Bell and the Twins only interest is in seeing progress. Now, I'm not saying they would fabricate "progress" where there is none, but they can create the illusion of more progress than what's actually been made.

The fact that Bell gave a terse "no comment" when asked if the Twins will cover any cost over runs on the land, is interesting. Why would he pass on the opportunity for a HUGE PR boost by announcing the Twins have increased their investment in order to see this through....hmmmm. If the Twins were going to be players, at any amount, over the 13.5M that's been offered and in addition to the 130M they're committed to already, why clam up? it doesn't make sense.

2.) I think most of the people that contribute to this blog, can't see the forest because of the trees.

I just don't understand "romanticizing" outdoor baseball to this extent. You must realize that the site and budget dictate that this stadium will fall woefully short of most peoples expectations. Clamoring for a new stadium, at ANY cost, is like my 6 year old whining for a toy everybody knows he'll be bored with after 15 minutes. He doesn't know why he wants it, nor does he care. He just wants it. He hasn't thought it through.

There's a big difference between "building it" and "building it right" unfortunately haste makes waste and the hasty nature of this "get a stadium at any cost" mentality put you Stadium proponents, the Twins and Hennepin County in a box.

If I'm going to be taxed, it better be worthwhile. Build it right or don't build it at all. If being outdoors is the difference between enjoying a game or not, what's wrong with the Saints? or any of the city league teams? or even little league? Evidently, to you "purists" it must take the combination of struggling to get into and out of a cramped stadium and dropping a hundred bucks+ in addition to being outdoors, to really enjoy the baseball experience.

Posted by: STM at March 21, 2007 9:31 AM

Reading between the lines indicates to me that everything is on track.

No way is Bell gonna come right out and say the Twins will cover the overruns (at least not until it is binding). As I've said before, the Twins would have to be MORONIC businessmen to send a message like, "don't worry Minnesota, if there's trouble with the Stadium, we'll rush in and pick up the tab!" Pohlad didn't get to be a Billionaire by advertising his willingness to write checks.

Likewise, no way is Opat gonna come out and say everything is fine until he has a binding agreement. He is in hot enough water already without taking ANY more chances. My guess is that HC and Opat have finally realized the value in "under-promising, and over-delivering". Regardless, even though he did say a deal isn't done, his recent comments are the most positive we've heard from him personally in months.

Again, just be patient and look forward to all the smug comments we'll be able to make to STM in the coming weeks...

Posted by: tato at March 21, 2007 9:41 AM

Madness has obviously never watched baseball outside on an 85 degree June day. No offense against the Saints, but the quality of baseball can't even be mentioned in the same breath as the Twins and MLB. But, you'd be surprised how many people go to Saints games just to enjoy some tailgating and outdoor baseball. But, the Saints, or city league teams, will never showcase the best baseball players in the world.

Posted by: Aaron at March 21, 2007 10:07 AM

Sitting upright in a plastic chair surrounded by toothless, sweaty, drunk morons (on 3 sides). Waiting in line to park, piss, eat, drink and leave, in addition to dropping a hundred bucks for cheap seats, parking and food to watch what amounts to less than 1% of a teams season (there's drama!) is only made worse by the thought of what else I could be doing on a rare 85 degree June day.

Posted by: STM at March 21, 2007 10:53 AM

I'm betting that post by Madness didn't offend anyone.

Posted by: Aaron at March 21, 2007 11:14 AM

What I'm looking forward to is learning about group sales opportunities in the new ballpark so that we can try and organize a Greet Machine celebration for Opening Day 2010.

Posted by: Snyder at March 21, 2007 11:40 AM

STM wrote:

"Sitting upright in a plastic chair surrounded by toothless, sweaty, drunk morons (on 3 sides). Waiting in line to park, piss, eat, drink and leave, in addition to dropping a hundred bucks for cheap seats, parking and food to watch what amounts to less than 1% of a teams season (there's drama!) is only made worse by the thought of what else I could be doing on a rare 85 degree June day."

Well if that's the case Madness, come out to the beautiful new taxpayer funded stadium instead of watching the game with your buddies in the basement!

Posted by: tato at March 21, 2007 11:46 AM

The comments that this will be done on the cheap and won't meet people's expectations are waaaaay off the mark. As someone who deals with design, just because something costs more doesn't mean it's a better experience.

Furthermore, anyone sandbagging the stadium with comments like 'the site is too small for a stadium' without even seeing the preliminary schematic designs should be disregarded.

Posted by: Alex at March 21, 2007 11:58 AM

Tato made my point above: I doubt the Twins will ever publicly announce they're picking up the land cost overruns. Although I suppose it wouldn't make much difference in condemnation proceedings, it would be a poor negotiating tactic. (Not that the Twins have been the best negotiators over the years!)

And the County is in the same boat. There may still be some behind-the-scenes pressure and wrangling, but I think the whole thing is pretty much settled by now. So everybody relax!

Posted by: spycake at March 21, 2007 12:05 PM

Despite Opat's latest comments, I've gonna get from them what the most optimistic posters got form the comments. Time to start thinking about the butterflies again, and this time LPII are not gonna be there to stomp on them.

P.S. How far will the Wild go in the playoffs?

Posted by: Continue The Madness at March 21, 2007 12:23 PM

Everybody is posturing for blame. That is what is going on. Nobody wants this on their hands.

Mark my words: it will never get built. The opposition has not even yet begun to fight. Wait until permits, environmental reports, etc. have to be issued (if it ever gets that far).

If you think the opposition and the greenies are going to sit and watch...oh oh. More importantly: Carl still has his wallet in his pocket and he is leaving the room.

Posted by: mary at March 21, 2007 12:48 PM

First, sorry Shane, although I agree with the 52 degree in April statement, it wasn't mine.

Second, I'm in on the bet. Goldy wins it outright, although I have SCSU in the Frozen Four losing to Notre Dame.

Third, I've tried to ignore STM and his inane, deliberatively provocative statements. But I just can't anymore. STM, I'm confused, at one time you state that you're not spending any money in Hennepin County, but then other posts you complain about being taxed and the fact that you're being taxed gives you the right to complain. Which is it? The fact that you tried to equate Major League Baseball with the Saints or City ball shows that you're aren't a baseball fan. No big deal, then why come here and try to tell us, obvious baseball fans, that we are a bunch of dolts? I don't like to go to shopping malls, should I find a MOA web site and tell people there that visiting their local strip mall is the same thing? Finally by all accounts, a good, intimate, ballpark can be built at the Rapid Park site that won't be a bandbox. Will we find design issues with it? Will the Twins have to make compromises on the layout? Will we wish it had cheaper seats and colder beer? Yes to all and I am sure we will be discussing those issues and more at Greet Machine but to dismiss the ballpark design without seeing at the least the Schematic Plans makes me think you are even stupider that you come across in print.

Posted by: Freealonzo at March 21, 2007 1:03 PM

Shane-o, I've been away for awhile (in PA on political business) but i'm back in town and following this little saga.

From a political point of view, this is all about expectations. Which is why Opat is "urging caution" basically, he's doing the 'ol CYA shuffle just in case something queers the deal. The Twins are using rhetoric to push the parties to finally shake hands on a deal that they've basically agreed to. I haven't talked to the principles in awhile, but that's my view from the outside, having once been inside.

Bell's comments last night however were more than hyperbole... this ballpark is his ONLY real job right now. so if he's in FLA and they've set a date certain for the schematics... he's got to be 95% sure this is ready to roll.

As to the comment about activists and lawsuits trying to stop the deal, i reccomend you visit PETCO Park in San Diego, and get back to me on how that worked out for them. The local "activists" there spent huge chunks of time and money on futile lawsuits that never succeeded in causing more than a fuss.

The one thing i've learned about our "local activists" is that they are of two ilks: 1. find a fresh outrage each week, and then ignore it. 2. the more practical ones, who have much bigger priorities than stopping a ballfield.

In the end, it'll be the same 5 naysayers who've been there all along the way. They'll get their 2 minutes of tv time to rant and rave, and then everyone else will get down to the business at hand.

Posted by: BP at March 21, 2007 1:06 PM

Get back in the kitchen and bake us some cookies Mary!

Posted by: kevin in az at March 21, 2007 1:13 PM

if i were anyone who was going to comment on the "how far will the wild get in the playoffs" i wouldnt comment. stop the madness just wants someone to say they will win the stanley cup or get real far. he wants something else to bitch about so dont feed him your thoughts- just an opinion on my part. i will ask him myself. STM how far do you think the wild will get in the playoffs? let me guess, you think they will get swept or just wont make it past the first round correct you loser?

Posted by: victor at March 21, 2007 1:15 PM

don't feed the trolls! some people i guess just need a friend or anger management classes. it's sad. nothing to say but angry at their state of affairs. hitting enter and waiting fervently for a response to validate themselves.

opening day on the horizon!

Posted by: mullen at March 21, 2007 2:19 PM

Victor, that was "Continue the Madness" that asked for a prediction. CTM, I think they'll make it out of the first round, after that, who knows. I think They'll win the NW division, and should make for some great playoff hockey.

Posted by: JBN at March 21, 2007 2:25 PM

i hope you arent referring to me mullen cuz i want this stadium bad! i dont care if i have to pay extra tax or not. stop the madness is the one who needs anger management. i said that a long time ago. i am a happy person it just is annoying to read his/hers comments. was it me?

Posted by: victor at March 21, 2007 2:25 PM

Mullen-

You are, of course, right ("Don't feed the trolls")...

But sometimes its just too damn much fun to poke a little!!!

Posted by: tato at March 21, 2007 2:26 PM

my bad jbn. i forgot. he changed his name cuz he is going to "continue to be mad" cuz of the NEW STADIUM ! :) MAN I CANT WAIT for that first pitch in that park. the fresh grass, the open sky, the outdoor weather, the nice breeze on a warm day, the ladies in short shorts and tight shirts k i better stop.

Posted by: victor at March 21, 2007 2:29 PM

Quoting Mary:

Mark my words: it will never get built. The opposition has not even yet begun to fight.

Sorry, Mary, but that ship has sailed. The stadium was fought tooth and nail for over 10 years. Once this mini-saga involving the land purchase is complete, the stadium is a done deal. The time to fight the stadium was last year, so deal with it and move on, please.

I, for one, am looking forward to wearing sunglasses to a Twins game. Sign me up to sit next to the sweaty guy. For outdoor Major League Baseball, I don't care.

Curt in Grand Forks

Posted by: Curt Hanson at March 21, 2007 2:31 PM

Victor, I can't wait either. I guess, according to some people, there will only be 8,000 of us on opening day. I laughed my ass off when I read that.

Posted by: JBN at March 21, 2007 2:32 PM

My only goal is make the realization of your irrational exhuberance so painful, that you can only escape it by thinking!

By the way victor, whoever reads this blog to you; you better have them read the "Wild" question again. That was from CTM.

Free - I'm sorry, what were the renderings and overlays we've seen already? Are you presuming that the "official" schematics won't even resemble what we've seen already?

mullen - You back from your stadium orgy already?

Posted by: STM at March 21, 2007 2:38 PM

JBN - You need reading lessons too. I said "8500 paid on opening day 2013"

Its a fact that after the initial curiosity wears off; attendance in all new stadiums opened since 2001 has fallen to their "pre new stadium levels" or less within 2 years after opening, so you'll have plenty of good seats in 2013.

Posted by: STM at March 21, 2007 2:43 PM

im sorry. continue the madness. i forgot u changed your name. theres a blog you should really look into. let me know if you want the address.

Posted by: victor at March 21, 2007 2:44 PM

jbn- they probably only sold 8000 season priority tickets for the new ballpark. i will be signing up soon so that will be 8001 :) it is going to be hard to get a ticket to that opening game i bet. we should all pitch in a couple of dollars so CONTINUE THE MADNESS can go. he would like that since he is such a tight ass.

Posted by: victor at March 21, 2007 2:46 PM

"Its a fact that after the initial curiosity wears off; attendance in all new stadiums opened since 2001 has fallen to their "pre new stadium levels" or less within 2 years after opening, so you'll have plenty of good seats in 2013."

Name your source. Broad statements without validation are meaningless.

The Twins have averaged around 25K per game since 2001 while playing in an inflatable toilet. So I'm not sure where you're getting 8,500 as a number for the Twins to "fall back" to.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teams/minnatte.shtml

Plus, how many of these teams you reference have moved from a crappy indoor stadium to a new outdoor stadium? Personally, I think that such a positive transition would prevent a similar "novelty let-down."

Posted by: The Tube at March 21, 2007 2:57 PM

STM-
u need to use the spelling and grammer tool before you post your comments. don't tell people they need reading lessons when your grammer and spelling is off.

Posted by: victor at March 21, 2007 3:01 PM

Attendance Figures:

Opening Day 2001 - 46K
Opening Day 2002 - 48K
Opening Day 2003 - 49K
Opening Day 2004 - 50K
Opening Day 2005 - 49K
Opening Day 2006 - 49K

www.baseball-reference.com

Posted by: The Tube at March 21, 2007 3:08 PM

Sorry victor, but reading "Stop the madness" when it says "Continue the madness" is way different than grammer or spelling.

The Tube - Wikipedia. It's awesome. Check out "MLB ballparks" and it lists them all, including the date they opened. Then you cross reference that agains CBS Sportsline attendance figures for the year they opened and then two years later. The two biggest ones were the Brewers (down 40%) and the Pirates (down 34%) from the "new stadium high"

Next time - YOU FIND IT. It's just as easy to Google stats for discrediting someone, as it is to provide links for support. Consider it a challenge. I wouldn't throw anything out there that can't be verified.

Posted by: STM at March 21, 2007 3:12 PM

There's a big difference between showing up on opening day when its a guaranteed 72 degrees and dry vs. the probable 40 degrees and wet in an outdoor stadium.

Posted by: STM at March 21, 2007 3:14 PM

the brewers and the pirates arent winning teams that is why the attendance is down--thats for any team in sports.

Posted by: victor at March 21, 2007 3:29 PM

STM-

Nice try, cherry-picking the Brewers and the Pirates, but let's look a little deeper:

Brewers average attendance in the 6 years SINCE Miller park opened: 26934

Brewers average attendance in the 6 years PRIOR to Miller Park open: 18406

Pirates avg attendance in the 6 years SINCE PNC Park opened: 23724

Pirates avg attendance in the 6 years PRIOR to PNC park open: 18445

Both parks opened in 2001. So much for your so-called 'facts'...

Posted by: tato at March 21, 2007 3:34 PM

Attn: Victor,

I'm NOT STM, nor have I ever been STM! I'm FOR the stadium, thus calling myself CTM to counter STM, whom I think is a tightwad looking for his/her last week or so of fame before it's all done for people with his position. I'm an avid Minnesota sports fan, the question about the Wild in the playoffs was to help Shane continue the message that we have nothing more really to worry about reguarding whether the balpark was going to get done. In fact the whole "LPII won't squash on my butterflies anytime soon" commen was directly geared towards a blog entry that Shane wrote in mid-feb.

To sum it up, I'm NOT STM, I want this ballpark done so the only weight on my shoulders stadium-wise is the Vikings.

Posted by: Continue The Madness at March 21, 2007 3:42 PM

Huh? I thought an outdoor stadium was supposed to help attendance? I was lead to believe that the complete lack of atmosphere in the dome is what caused attendance to suffer.

So, what you're saying is; that if you win, it doesn't matter where you play, attendance goes up and if you lose, it doesn't matter where you play, attendance goes down.....interesting.

Well, I hope the Twins win every year because if they lose in combination with having 1/3rd of their games in much less than ideal conditions, they'll be lucky to average 18k paid per game.

Tato - A 6 year sample!?! why stop there, why not go back to the 70's? I mean, YOU'RE not slanting any facts by pulling in the 2 years after the strike season, when NOBODY cared about baseball, right? I simply looked at the year they opened and 2 years after. The numbers don't lie. Also - San Diego down 15%, Philly down 15% and Cincy down 18%.

CTM - victor is the putz trying to explain away his lack of comprehension by implying we're the same person. You're doing a good job holding up your moniker.

Posted by: STM at March 21, 2007 3:47 PM

I can't wait until we can have discussions about weather Ulger should have sent the runner with 1 out in the bottom of the 7th in a 1 run game!!

Posted by: JBN at March 21, 2007 3:49 PM

"I wouldn't throw anything out there that can't be verified."

And I'm just supposed to take your word for that? Ummm ... no. You're the proponent of a fact, you back it up.

Everyone: it's "grammar" not "grammer". No one comes out of that mud-fest looking good.

The weather: my you are pessimist! It's rarely a nice day in June (if that's what your reverence for an 85 degree day reflects), and it's almost always 40 degrees and precipitating in April. Do you live in the same state I do? And, if the weather is really THAT BAD, do you not have a jacket? If a little bit of inclement weather is going to stop you from going to a game or doing whatever it is you "do," then you need to either A) grow a pair and get over it, or B) move to Arizona.

Posted by: The Tube at March 21, 2007 3:55 PM

I don't care if you "grow a pair" or not. Sitting in a cold damp stadium to wittness 1 of 81 games is just stupid.

And yes, April does suck most of the time. Or are you too young to remember the reasons they brought up for building the dome in the first place? Nobody went to the games at the Met because it was too cold and too wet.

And I'm not going to "back up" my facts. Ignorance is bliss. You choose to remain dumb, that's your call. It takes 3 seconds to dispel anything I represent as fact, that isn't. If you can't, then it's true!

Posted by: STM at March 21, 2007 4:02 PM

STM-

I picked 6 years because that's all the data that is available on the Pirates and Brewers new parks (duh).

Okay, per your suggestion, let's go back to the 70's:

Avg attendance for the Brewers in the TWENTY-SIX years prior to Miller Park opening (that oughta dampen the effects of the strike years): 17915

Avg attendance for the Pirates in the TWENTY-SIX years prior to the open of PNC Park: 17008.

Damn! Those new stadiums are looking better all the time!

Any more questions, brainiac?

(Tip: don't ask questions you don't know the answer too...)

Posted by: tato at March 21, 2007 4:05 PM

I just saw this story on the Pioneer Press website, just wondering if Soucheray is out of a loop or what? Did he not watch the news last night, or catch the game on TV or the radio? Why is this story even on twincities.com

http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_5482986

Posted by: Continue The Madness at March 21, 2007 4:09 PM

Fist of all, it was sarcasm, bone head. Unless you really do think 70's attendance is as relevant as "post strike" era? and the population in those cities hasn't changed at all since then either, right?

Posted by: STM at March 21, 2007 4:12 PM

Be nice to my Brewers now. :)

Posted by: Cheesehead Craig at March 21, 2007 4:26 PM

STM-

You're right. The population in the Milwaukee and Pittsburgh MSA's HAS changed since the 70's: those are both rust belt cities where the population has DECLINED.

Milwaukee 1970: 717,099 2005: 578,887
Pittsburgh 1970: 520,117 2000: 334,563

Overall, the Milwaukee MSA has grown slowly, and the Pittsburgh MSA is down significantly over the same period, indicating to me that there is likely little effect on Baseball attendence.

That's alright, though. Even though your amateurish attempt at providing statistical evidence got shot down in flames, I encourage you to try again (we all know you're full of crap, but it's really fun to definitively PROVE it!!!)

Posted by: tato at March 21, 2007 4:28 PM

Ah no. My "statistical evidence" stands. Attendance dropped significantly in 2 years or less after the new stadium honeymoon.

And as far as "unsubstantiated" stats go, here are the facts!

http://recenter.tamu.edu/data/popmd/pm5080.htm

Bottom line, Milwaukee MSA up 100k since 1970. PUTZ!

Posted by: STM at March 21, 2007 4:35 PM

"And I'm not going to "back up" my facts. Ignorance is bliss. You choose to remain dumb, that's your call. It takes 3 seconds to dispel anything I represent as fact, that isn't. If you can't, then it's true!"

So you get to make random statements that we must accept as true because, for some unknown reason, you are worthy of that deference, and our insistence that you provide evidence of these assertions means that we are ignorant and dumb and can only achieve your level of knowledge through some effort; you won't do it for us. Your naive assessment of "proof" would be laughable if it weren't so sad. Get over yourself!

There's a Martian Disneyland on the southern pole of Mars. Prove me wrong ... you have three seconds.

Posted by: The Tube at March 21, 2007 4:40 PM

STM-

Apprantly my statement "overall the Milwaukee MSA has grown slowly" slipped right by you. I suggest you read a little more carefully.

Also 100K growth in 30 years equals a gross 6.67% growth, or 2 tenths of a percent annually.

Baseball attendance, on the other hand, has grown far more. I guess those 100,000 new folks LOVE baseball. ESPECIALLY since the new stadium was built.

Oh... by the way... you conveniently ignored Pittsburgh. What's going on there? PUTZ! (no backs and crosses don't count!)

Love, Tato (aka, the smarter one)

Posted by: tato at March 21, 2007 4:48 PM

"My "statistical evidence" stands. Attendance dropped significantly in 2 years or less after the new stadium honeymoon."

That's not what you were arguing -- this is what you were arguing:

"Its a fact that after the initial curiosity wears off; attendance in all new stadiums opened since 2001 has fallen to their "pre new stadium levels" or less within 2 years after opening."

County Stadium 2000 - 19,427
Miller Park 2003 - 20,992
Miller Park 2006 - 28,835

"The world is made up for the most part of morons and natural tyrants, sure of themselves, strong in their own opinions, never doubting anything."

- Clarence Darrow

STM, you could be a combination of both.

Posted by: The Tube at March 21, 2007 5:00 PM

Oh -- for citation:

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teams/brewatte.shtml

Posted by: The Tube at March 21, 2007 5:01 PM

The same tired arguments that STP is making were made against building the Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul. Nobody would attend after the first year or two, bad location, etc., etc., etc. Boy, that has been a miserable failure, hasn't it?

It took losing the North Stars to show people what they were missing with NHL hockey and they have responded with six years of sell outs.

It took 30 years of playing baseball in a depressing dome to show people what they were missing with outdoor baseball. I believe they will respond with years of outstanding attendance, just like at the X.

Posted by: Jeff T. at March 21, 2007 5:42 PM

Sorry about that - I meant STM, not STP!

Posted by: Jeff T. at March 21, 2007 5:43 PM

Soooo coming within 1500 paid isn't close enough? how does that justify building a new stadium? shouldn't the attendance be much higher if the "experience" is sooo much better?

My point is proven by your stats. Thank you. Oh by the way;

http://www.msss.com/http/ps/life/life.html

There's no Disneyland on Mars. That wasn't so hard.

And as long as you're into quotes; "A fool and his money are lucky enough to get together in the first place." Gordon Gekko

Posted by: STM at March 21, 2007 5:44 PM

c'mon you guys...if you ignore the troll, he'll go away...maybe he'll go help mary make us some cookies????

Posted by: kevin in az at March 21, 2007 5:45 PM

No, 1500 isn't close enough. If you're going to make assertions they had better right. Yours was wrong.

Your point is not proven by my stats because 6 years after the stadium was built, attendance is up 50%.

Your link says nothing about Disneyland. According to your above-stated logic, because it isn't flatly refuted it remains true.

Your selection of quotes is interesting in that whereas Clarence Darrow is a monumental figure in U.S. legal history, Gordon Gekko is a fictional character from a 1980s movie that gets screwed. And, judging by the quality of your comments, I would say that it fits you.

Posted by: The Tube at March 21, 2007 5:51 PM

My point is absolutely proven by your stats! after 6 years, attendance has nothing to do with the stadium and everything to do with performance on the field. That's why I limited my analysis to the 3 year period (year built and 2 years later) people aren't just suddenly realizing there's a new stadium after 6 years! what a stupid position. You know my exact point. Read it again; "pre new stadium levels or less" pick a year and find one that matches closer for you. I didn't ever say the year immediately preceeding opening, because that could be an anomaly based on hype. Check out 2 or 3 years before, if necessary.

Here's a quote from a monumental figure for you;

"Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak (or in your case, start typing) and remove all doubt" Mark Twain

There is little doubt about you.

You either are dense or are trying to be dense. The point is simple, you're applying too much and stretching to prove your point.

If there isn't life on Mars, there can be no Disney land. It's called reasonable deduction. A concept that's proven to be out of your grasp.

Like I said; finding proof to discredit false facts is easy, as I've proven. You can hold to whatever position you want. It's your credibility.

Posted by: STM at March 21, 2007 8:00 PM

Cue the crickets.........chirp chirp chirp

Posted by: kevin in az at March 21, 2007 9:14 PM

Shane,

How about we take in a Twins game and the loser buys the beer. If I win, you wear a SCSU sweater and post the picture on your site. If you win, I will wear a U of M sweater with a sign "Gophers rule!" which you can also post on your site.

Either way, I will take care of the tickets since I feel I owe you for your work on this issue, and my slam on the library last week.

Posted by: zooomx at March 21, 2007 10:42 PM

Shane, speaking of libraries, when are you going to weigh in on the book banning attempts of Huck Finn in your own town of residence. Don't these people know that Shane Nackeru(d) famed stadium blogger and defender of libraries is amongst their midst?

Posted by: Freealonzo at March 22, 2007 7:26 AM

Sigh. Arguing with you, STM, is pointless because it's a never-ending cycle. Clearly you know very little, but insist that you know it all. As a result, who are we to point this out to you when you are infallible, and we are not?

Good day, sir.

"Shane, speaking of libraries, when are you going to weigh in on the book banning attempts of Huck Finn in your own town of residence."

My $.02 -- trying to ban Huck Finn is ridiculous. If these people have a problem with the "n-word," maybe they should first direct their attention to the popular music industry before trying to censor a great American author.

Posted by: The Tube at March 22, 2007 9:56 AM

Anyone ever sat in a retractable-roof stadium? In Milwaukee, which is a beautiful stadium by most accounts, the only way to know you are actually outside is to look straight up. It is like sitting in a soup can. The glass outfield wall is awful. Outfields should be open.

I would rather sit in 52 degrees (or colder) at the beginning and end of the season than to sit in a retractable stadium heated to 70 degrees. No one has better weather between Memorial Day and Labor Day than Minnesota. I was in Detroit for a WS game this year and it was barely above freezing, and that was just fine by me. And, in looking at the almanac, we have almost the exact same temps and precipitation as Detroit during the baseball months.

Many cold-weather cities have open-air facilities because it is fiscally more responsible and the fans want it: Colorado, Cleveland, both Chicago, Detroit, both New York, and Boston to name them. Retractable stadiums are more expensive, less attractive, less economical, and less fan-friendly to the purist.

And, let's not lose sight of the fact that the number one reason long-time visitors of this site want a stadium is not for the stadium itself, but so that we can enjoy Twins baseball for years to come. It is the best run franchise in our State, and heck, one of the best in all pro sports. They have given us much joy over the years, and promise to deliver more in the years to come.

Derek

P.S. I am sick of the roof, and will never long for the days of a roof again. Ever. Same with my Gopher football!!! Let the weather in!!!

Posted by: Derek Robertson at March 22, 2007 10:15 AM

YES!!! WHAT HE SAID!!!!!

Posted by: kevin in az at March 22, 2007 10:33 AM

It's about time you give up, Tube. Before you get further exposed!

Posted by: STM at March 22, 2007 12:36 PM

(chirp chirp chirp)

Posted by: Wing-nut at March 23, 2007 9:37 AM

eXTReMe Tracker
View My Stats