Greet Machine - I know!

< Let us consider the name | Main | Best Beatles Album >

April 19, 2007

I know!

I know! I know I haven't updated this god-forsaken site for quite some time. There is too much stuff to do and not enough time to do it. Here are some things I'd like to talk about, but haven't had the time to do so:

The differences in the stadium naming poll from this week's results compared with last May's results. People really seem to like Summit Field in both polls.
I went to see The Merchant of Venice last weekend at the Guthrie. It was without a doubt the most anti-semitic thing I have ever paid money to see. Wow. At times it was quite uncomfortable. Anyone else see it?
The new Vikings stadium designs/plans are coming out today. As always, they will probably be nice to look at, but all I have to say is "Show me the money!" I would be surprised if anything is done about the Vikings stadium before 2011. Very surprised.
Cheesehead Craig, Freealonzo, and I will be traveling to Miller Park in May to watch the Twins. Anyone else going to that? Maybe we could have a little Greet Machine get together in Milwaukee?
I was evacuated from my building yesterday here at the U (I work in Walter Library). That was an interesting experience. As you all know, nothing happened, thank goodness, but what a weird thing to have happen to you in the middle of a workday.

I would love nothing more than to expound further on all these topics. Maybe later!

Posted by snackeru at April 19, 2007 8:40 AM

Comments

I inserted this comment two minutes ago at the bottom of the previous string...so, I figured I would insert it here as well.

For Vikings purposes: I believe that TCF Bank Stadium is expanable to 60,000 on an individual game basis by adding temporary seats to the open end of the horseshoe. I am certain that was the original intent, but have not heard whether that was maintained in the final designs. Go Gophers!!!

STM, how do you feel about public financing of College Sports facilities?

Posted by: Derek at April 19, 2007 8:50 AM

I am making the trip down to Milwaukee in May also.

Going to the games on the 19th & 20th.

Posted by: Erik at April 19, 2007 9:43 AM

I think the name preference just means that your readers like beer. Myself included. :)

Posted by: The Tube at April 19, 2007 10:26 AM

I remember in high school, before we actually read The Merchant of Venice, my teacher spending about three days just reiterating over and over that Shakespeare was merely trying to capture the mood of his time and that he wasn't actually anti-Semitic.

Posted by: Will Young at April 19, 2007 10:45 AM

I'm going to Miller to see the Brewers, the Twins just happen to be playing that day too.

It could be a series between division leaders that weekend. Gonna be fun!

Posted by: Cheesehead Craig at April 19, 2007 10:58 AM

I like beer, but I voted for Summit Field out of appreciation for Summit specifically, as well as for Jiminstpaul.

Posted by: Snyder at April 19, 2007 12:18 PM

I thought Summit Field was in honor of Pat Summit, coach of the Lady Tennessee Vols.

Posted by: Freealonzo at April 19, 2007 12:40 PM

Regarding Derek's question about TCF Bank seating, see:

http://www1.umn.edu/stadium/features.html

TCF Bank Stadium™ will be a modern Division 1-A football stadium. It will be an open-air stadium with a horseshoe-shaped bowl and have a traditional collegiate look and feel. The field will be an all-weather artificial playing surface comparable to the Gophers existing indoor practice field.

The 50,000-seat stadium will include a mix of chair-back seats and benches, and will be designed to expand to 80,000 seats if needed in the future.

Proposed premium amenities will include 36 suites, 59 loge boxes (outdoor, rail-enclosed, small group seating areas), 300 indoor club seats, 1,000 outdoor club seats, and a large indoor club.

Posted by: Snyder at April 19, 2007 1:15 PM

The problem for the Vikings is that TCF Bank stadium would be expanded to 75,000 seats (sssh that number is a secret) by adding the seats to the upper bowl, not filling in the horseshoe.

I suppose they could add temporary seats to the open end of the stadium, but they would be lousy seats with no operations features such as bathrooms and concessions stands. The rest of the restrooms and concession stands would be sized to serve 50,000 not an extra 10,000 people so that end of the stadium would be severely stressed to serve the 10,000 fans. Also University-owned facilities don't serve alcohol which would be a big issue for the Vikes and their fans. So if Vikes play temporarily in TCF, it will probably be in front of 50,000.

I agree with the sentiment above, by the time 2011 rolls around the Vikings would love to have 50,000 watching a game live.

Posted by: Freealonzo at April 19, 2007 1:45 PM

HA - Best case scenario is the Vikes get their deal done and plan to start razing the Metrodome in 2009 when another Oputz oversight pushes "County taxpayers stadium" towards a 2011 opening date instead. Then the Twinkies can play in front of a half filled Midway Stadium.

Posted by: STM at April 19, 2007 2:00 PM

Thanks for all the "Summit Field" votes folks. I am sure everyone who has seen our humble little operation knows the chances of this are about as slim as seeing the Twins, post ALCS championship, pouring Summit Extra Pale Ale over each other, but I appreciate the thoughts. I will be sure to forward the final tally to the few Twins honchos I know and hopefully it will at least result in a few more Summit beer kiosks at the new ballpark.
Drink on.
-Jiminstpaul

Posted by: Jiminstpaul at April 19, 2007 2:24 PM

The County's silence on the stadium is deafening, don't you all agree?

Has the open meeting violation lawsuit been made public yet?

Does anybody have a clue yet how much Carl Pohlad is going to cough up.............? Seems to many of us that it is the public's right to know...........???

Posted by: mary at April 19, 2007 2:27 PM

Jiminstpaul --

I'll have you know that every time I go to a Twins game, only a Summit will do. But darn are they hard to find sometimes! The more the better -- keep it up!

Posted by: The Tube at April 19, 2007 2:36 PM

http://www.startribune.com/10136/gallery/1131536.html

Posted by: MOJO at April 19, 2007 2:43 PM

Mary at home 10 minutes after ordering a pizza from Pizza Hut:

"Pizza Hut's silence on when I get my pizza is deafening, don't you all agree?"

"Do you think the delivery guy ate my pizza or delivered it to the wrong house?"

"So how much you going to pitch in to pay for my non-existent pizza, Don't I have a right to know..........???"

STM at Mary's house 10 minutes after she orders a pizza from Pizza Hut:

"Mary, I hate pizza, and because I hate pizza you are a dumb ass for ordering a pizza from Pizza Hut."

"I bet that pizza you get has no cheese on it, it'll probably be cold too. What a dumb ass, you should know I hate pizza."

"Say Mary how much they charge you for that pizza that will never come? What? You're gonna pay $15 for a pizza? What a dumb ass, don't you know I hate pizza and that my wife and family are morons?"

Mary and STM 10 minutes after their pizza has arrived hot and with all their toppings:

"hmmm, this is good pizza!"

Posted by: Freealonzo at April 19, 2007 2:48 PM

Free at home. 2:30 in the afternoon;

"Purple haze all in my brain
Lately things just dont seem the same
Actin funny, but I dont know why
scuse me while I kiss the sky
Purple haze all around
Dont know if Im comin up or down
Am I happy or in misery?"

Posted by: STM at April 19, 2007 2:54 PM

Jiminstpaul,

Any plans to roll out Summit English Brown Ale???

Love the brew, esp. the Oaty Stout in winter.

I know I'll be pounding the ballpark authority about representing LOCAL, QUALITY brew at OUR park. While I know naming rights aren't in the budget for the gang at Summit, and I don't know the Twins arrangement for "official beer of the Twins" it's a budweiser i think... but you would think they would do a better job of reaching out to our friends off Fort Road.

I've often thought it unfortunate that the Brewers became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Miller Brewing... with so much good craft/micro in Wisc. and none of it offered at their yard.

By the way, the only topic that gets me as animated as baseball and stadiums and politics is my beer. so any and all beer chat is welcome.

Posted by: CJ at April 19, 2007 3:50 PM

By the way, the only topic that gets me as animated as baseball and stadiums and politics is my beer. so any and all beer chat is welcome.

Now yer talkin'! I'll start. Have you tried Flat Earth's brew yet? If you're unfamiliar with it, the brewery just opened a few months ago off of West 7th in St. Paul. They have a nice Belgian style pale ale right now.

http://www.flatearthbrewing.com/Page_2.html

Posted by: The Tube at April 19, 2007 4:22 PM

Ah shoot! No beer discussion, please! I can count on my 10 fingers the number of beers I've had in my whole life. I'm not against beer, I just know absolutely nothing about it!

How about a discussion on which is better: A&W or Mug or Dad's?

Posted by: Shane at April 19, 2007 4:27 PM

I'm not a hops lover myself... I like English Ales... but I'll try anything local... Surly has a few offerings that are worth a try as well.

Luckily i work in the part of St. Paul that has ALL of the bars pouring this new brew.

as for root beer shane... I favor Stewart's.

Posted by: CJ at April 19, 2007 4:32 PM

On root beers, I'd have to go with 1919.

For local (or at least MN) microbrew beers, I'd have to take Summit Pale Ale, though I did get to try Surly Furious recently and liked it a lot. My old local favorite was James Page Iron Range Amber Lager, which used to be located near my house, but I understand that's now brewed by Stevens Point Brewery. Still great stuff, though.

If anyone's looking for brew pubs to try, I heartily recommend Barley John's just off of 35W at County Road D - http://www.barleyjohns.com/

Posted by: Snyder at April 19, 2007 5:10 PM

If you're going to a Twins game at the Dome, on the west bank of the U is Minneapolis Town Hall Brewery. They brew all their own, have good pub fare, and a great scotch selection for the non-brew types.

it's not too far from there to the dome either, if you dont mind a walk on a nice day.

Posted by: CJ at April 19, 2007 5:18 PM

Mary: Pay no attention to the criticism here.

Most of these people's waist lines exceed their IQ.

They are mostly are baseball player wannabes that spend $100 for 2 hours of entertainment watching boys like them only more talented with a ball play a game.

Posted by: jeff at April 19, 2007 6:05 PM

Shane asks: How about a discussion on which is better: A&W or Mug or Dad's?

Personally I prefer Henry Weinhards. But then again if it is Henry Weinhards, I would prefer their Vanilla Cream Soda.

http://www.sodaking.com/product_info.php/products_id/160

Deafening silence from the county only to those who are not listening. On Tuesday they willbe voting on issuance of the revenue bonds, schematic designs, and the development agreement.

Posted by: pragmatic_cynic at April 19, 2007 6:15 PM

Just to clarify - the last statement by Jeff was NOT Jeff T. I firmly believe that Mary should pay CLOSE attention to the criticism here.

Jeff T.

Posted by: Jeff T. at April 19, 2007 7:12 PM

Not to leave Shane out of the discussion, but there are some really great breweries in town. the cool thing about the industry I work in is that all the brewers are one big family (it is the sales folks who have to go for each other necks). I personally know Mike at Town Hall, Bob at Great Waters, Todd at Surly (Todd was formally at Summit and actually trained me), Dave at the Herkimer (try his unfiltered pilsner), and the new guy Jeff at Flat Earth (he cut his teeth under Mike at Townhall), plus I know tons of folks at Schells, Gleuks (sorry boys but your not Minnesota biggest brewery, energy drinks don't count in my book, plus I hear the Dazzle Man actually gives away all his freebies), City in Lacross and many more in sconnie. Anyway, I am rambling but I am sure any beer you try from any of the above mentioned folks will be far and away better than your typical macro brew.
-Jiminstpaul

Posted by: Jiminstpaul at April 19, 2007 8:52 PM

How about a discussion on which is better: A&W or Mug or Dad's?

Mug is beyond awful. It takes like sugary crap.

While I can't count the number of beers I have ever consumed on two hands, I could probably count them on ten hands. If only I was Vishnu...

Posted by: Will Young at April 19, 2007 9:09 PM

I'm glad the Twins' ballpark is getting close to done, for the Viking's stadium, I just have a hard time supporting a stadium with a roof, no tailgating parking lots, or funding plans whatsoever.

Posted by: CTM at April 19, 2007 10:58 PM

That reminds me, I need to go out and get more Summit Pale Ale...

Posted by: Cheesehead Craig at April 19, 2007 11:46 PM

Another day...........and still nothing.

When does the taxpaying public paying the salaries of Hennepin County wheeler dealers get to find out just how bad Pohlad raked taxpayers over the coals?

Wonder how much the Pohlad family gave to their campaign?

There is a storm brewing in Hennepin. Taxpayers are asking why the secrets.

Posted by: Mary at April 20, 2007 6:51 AM

Mary - From Charley Walters column in today's Pioneer Press:

"The Twins could finalize a series of agreements with Hennepin County on Tuesday that would allow construction of the new ballpark to begin in August. Included are deals with Burlington Northern Railroad and a Twins-Ballpark Authority lease agreement. A horde of lawyers, by the way, are feasting on the transactions."

Posted by: Jeff T. at April 20, 2007 7:19 AM

I loooooove sugary crap like Mug's. My brother's keen on Sprecher. And dang if I'm not really thinking hard about trekking back to Milwaukee to catch that Brewers/Twins game... hmgh!

Posted by: Victoria Neau at April 20, 2007 8:50 AM

A couple of takes on some previous comments:

jiminstpaul - gotta say that i love twin cities craft/micro culture... we're not a bastion like portland, but we have a good environment where the brewers (as you say) are cordial and helpful

it's also nice because we dont really have a macro brewer in the state (though Glueck does produce a lot of macro-style). I've gotta count my blessings, because the number of people in this town pouring real beer seems higher than in some of the other places i've been. (lived in fargo and philadelphia)... but in Madison, it's all about craft/micro (New Glarus is something i've hopped the river for before)

As to the Vikings stadium plan... I love it from a design standpoint... but as a football stadium it makes no sense. if the rubes want to tailgate (ugh, why???) then give them the acreage in Anoka, Dakota, or outer Hennepin county to get blatto before a game. (i really, really dont get tailgating, never have)

I think the vikes should probably revisit the idea of a locale in the suburbs... the only reason the anoka county thing fell through was their funding formula was a terrible one. A TIF zone would have made that a go.

Posted by: CJ at April 20, 2007 9:33 AM

Jiminstpaul -- thanks for weaving all of the local brewers together. I also know Jeff from his days at Town Hall, and hope that he can add another facet to the local brewing scene. It's cool that you are all so close. Also, I'm loving the stuff Surly is putting out -- Furious is a fave right now. Also, so you don't feel left out, your Winter Ale is an all-time favorite of mine. The winter I discovered it, 2002 I think, was one I won't soon forget.

As for root beer, I'm going with Barq's. I was brought up on that stuff, and the only thing better is their cream soda. It's red!!! Of course, if you pull me into a honest to God A&W Drive-in with waitresses on roller skates, I don't think anything can top their root beer floats.

Posted by: The Tube at April 20, 2007 9:36 AM

Vikings stadium proposal--lots of sizzle, no steak. They took the "lets show them some pretty pictures and that will make them want to buy it approach."

I agree with those above who said to put it in a 'burb. That is a lot of downtown development/redevelopment for 8 days a year.

Posted by: pragmatic_cynic at April 20, 2007 10:52 AM

I tell you what, the Vikes organization showed way more class by showing as much or more of their grand plans than the Twinkies have shown to date. Ole’ tight fisted Carl must be pinchin’ pennies on the plans to make up for the land difference he’s gotta cough up for.

Meanwhile, Opat’s getting wood thinking about how he’s gonna top himself and get this plan started. I know, how about a tax? It’ll only be 9 cents on 20 bucks! C’mon, who can’t afford that? Heck, come to think of it, the Vikes are just as far in the process as the Twinkies are; just a bunch of drawings

Posted by: purplenurple at April 20, 2007 11:46 AM

Purplenurple is wrong on so many fronts, I'm worried that Sid Hartman might pick up on his thoughts and print them. To wit:

Twins - Approved by state/gov
Vikings - no bill in front of state/gov

Twins - Finance plan in place
Vikings - Not even a draft finance plan

Twins - Collecting sales tax $$$
Vikings - nada

Twins - Control of land for ballpark
Vikings - No land control for plans

Twins - Hired an Architect/Contractor
Vikings - No Architect/Contractor

Like someone said in the strib today, it took the Twins 11 years to get where they are today. To think Vikings can present pretty pictures and then begin to turn dirt within a year does not understand Minnesota politics.

Have a good weekend!

Posted by: Freealonzo at April 20, 2007 12:01 PM

Good take Freealonzo...and you forgot one more:

Twins: Playing in a football stadium helps public realize that they need a new stadium.

Vikings: Playing in a football stadium already, does not help the public realize they need a new stadium.

Posted by: Derek at April 20, 2007 12:32 PM

I'd bet anyone here an ice cold Boylan's* (your choice; Birch Beer or Root Beer) that the Vikes will get their deal done in less than 1/2 the time ole' smiling carl and his local brood got 'er done in. Why? THIS IS VIKINGS COUNTRY! any takers?

*By far the best root in the business.

Posted by: purplenurple at April 20, 2007 12:40 PM

That was not the Viking's stadium plan, that was MSFC's.

Posted by: Alex at April 20, 2007 1:20 PM

And so it begins. Only .09 on twenty bucks. I guess it's the same logic everybody here used to rationalize "Pohlad Park"

Posted by: STM at April 20, 2007 1:28 PM

This is simply ridiculous. The Viking stadium plan was labeled in the Star Trib as a "major step" towards a new stadium. But it was nothing but a bunch of drawings.

We're supposed to pay for a $1B Viking stadium and hotel complex for Ziggy? Time to call a spade a spade and this is bullsh*t. No chance in hell this gets through any legislative session. Vikings country my foot, there is so much apathy for that sorry franchise it's silly.

Posted by: Telemachus at April 20, 2007 1:52 PM

There is NO, i repeat NO political will at the capitol for this. i am also going to go out on a limb and say this about the next 10 years here in town. The Twins will be making this a baseball town, consistant excellence on the field, local athletes (Mauer, Perkins, Neshek), good people off the field, a new ballyard, and a game that's played more than 8 times a year.

combine that with the purple being DREADFUL for a period that will soon reach 10 years, insane ticket prices, a mediocre facility, a stadium fight, and frankly, the stark reality of a collection of 53 random dudes with no ties to the city... i think the time is right for this town to cease it's love of that purple squad. added to that is the gophers new palace of a college stadium... i just don't see the vikings as the draw they once were.

we'll see, and i'm sure there plenty of reasons i'm wrong about this. (namely the inexplicable draw to an unwatchable sports league) but that's my .02 and i really hope i'm right

Posted by: CJ at April 20, 2007 2:01 PM

The only thing "a"pathetic in this town was the turn out for the Twinkies stadium unveiling. The unfunded "bullsh*t" Vikes plan, as you call it, got MORE press than the Twinkies sweeping the Mariners for the 1st time in a decade. HA!

The Twinkies will be lucky to get on the front page for month what with the Draft, Wolves Draft, mini camp and training camp coming up. Most people in this town will check in with the Twinkies after the 4th of July AND THEN ONLY casually show interest as long as they're in it until the playoffs start.

That's okay - as Twins fans, you gotta be used to second (or third) fiddle.

Posted by: purplenurple at April 20, 2007 2:04 PM

Well, I for one hope you are wrong. I am a big Vikings fan and have been all my life. I love the Twins and I love the Vikings too. I can understand if you don't like the Vikings, but I can't understand the desire to see them shrivel and die.

I will have more to say about this soon, but I agree with the fact that there is no political will, and that 10 years of them whining for a stadium will be painful.

But the thought of Minnesota without the Vikings is also painful. At least to me. There is enough room in my heart to give a little love to all the sports teams around here.

Posted by: Shane at April 20, 2007 2:07 PM

I dont have any desire to see that happen to the squad. I'm offering my view on what i see happening, i'm not ascribing a value to it. I think to large extent that would be terrible. (i would like this town to embrace the twins a bit more, but i won't be surprised if it doesnt happen)

I'm the LAST person wish the Vikings away, I still remember how upsetting it was as a young hockey fan to watch my North Stars team get taken away. I wish that on no fan.

my point was more analytic. the factors in this situation seem to indicate a period of decline continuing for the franchise. same with the wolves quite frankly.

that said, i think this effort by the MSFC is a non-starter. keeping the vikings in downtown makes NO sense. football needs the open space for tailgates, massive short-term crowds a few days a year, and ancillary development that is car-centered. it's place is in Blaine, Maple Grove, Lakeville, Bloomington, Plymouth, or Woodbury.

Posted by: CJ at April 20, 2007 2:26 PM

You may sense a decline in Vikes enthusiasm for now, but that's nothing that can't be corrected by one (3) game winning streak! The Twinkies would have to win 30 in row to match that feat and it STILL wouldn't create as much buzz.

I wish I knew how to type the sound the Vikes horn makes...but you get the idea.

Posted by: purplenurple at April 20, 2007 2:34 PM

I'm a Vikings/Twins fan as well, and I'll offer these points:

The Twins' sweep of Seattle got less press because they play roughly 50 series a year. When you have 10 times more games than football, not every game is front page news. And of course the Vikes stadium plan got more coverage -- if passed it would pump $1 billion dollars into downtown Minneapolis. That's not an indication of the lack of enthusiasm for the Twins.

The Vikes are hurting right now for three major reasons: 1) a losing product on the field that doesn't even offer the possibility of a big play threat; 2) a completely uncharismatic coach and front office that fails miserably at engaging the fan-base; and 3) a HUGE player-image problem with NFL players. Baseball has steroids, football has gun-toting thugs. I know that the VAST majority of players are great human beings, but perception is reality and that is not helping the NFL right now.

I think the economics of proposing a Vikes stadium are much more unfriendly. Twins Stadium = 81 games, 2 million fans, $500 million. Vikes stadium = 10 games, 700K fans, $1 billion. See the problem? I personally think that new football stadiums have gotten so expensive to build now that teams will have to make do with refurbishing existing venues. Even the threat of moving to LA is unrealistic given the cost of building out there.

Posted by: The Tube at April 20, 2007 2:43 PM

So the Twins would have to lose 10 in a row to equal the deafening "thud" sound the Vikes made after getting exposed by the Pats on MNF last season? ;)

Posted by: The Tube at April 20, 2007 2:45 PM

About the only thing I'll agree with Purplenurple on is that Boylan's makes a great root beer.

Purplenurple must be suffering some medium-term memory loss because the Twins ballpark unveiling got some pretty good media coverage, too.

The main reason the Vikings "plan" is getting coverage is all the uncertainty/speculation about how it's going to be paid for.

One thing I'm sure STM will appreciate is that several Hennepin County commissioners are already on record saying they won't be the public partner with the Vikings on this one, so it will be very interesting to see what sort of financing plan the Vikings actualy put forth. The metro-wide sales tax trial balloon they floated a few months ago lasted about five minutes before it got shot down...

Posted by: Snyder at April 20, 2007 2:53 PM

Talk about pathetic, the Vikes are worse than the T-Wolves.

But yet, according to purplenipple-clamp, they are so beloved that they are near the bottom of revenue teams and are among the lowest merchandise selling teams (that's some love there) and generally regarded as a laughingstock. How many years have the Vikes been wanting a stadium and it hasn't even come close to reality? Boy, that's some grand support you got there.

With all these facts, they want a $1B playground. Why? Because other teams have a nice stadium daddy and I gotta have one too! Waaa!

Posted by: Telemachus at April 20, 2007 2:57 PM

So the Twins would have to lose 10 in a row to equal the deafening "thud" sound the Vikes made after getting exposed by the Pats on MNF last season? ;)

While the ratio is correct, a 10 game skid in MLB = big yawn.

several Hennepin County commissioners are already on record saying they won't be the public partner with the Vikings on this one

Vikes don’t need em. The tax will be imposed on the whole state (since the Vikes are a state amenity) and that will, by default, include all the residents of Hennepin County. HA!

How many years have the Vikes been wanting a stadium and it hasn't even come close to reality? Boy, that's some grand support you got there.

Thanks to Rozelle’s letter, nobody’s had to worry about the Vikes leaving until 2011. Unlike the Twins, who couldn’t find a community that wanted them 10 years after their Metrodome lease expired! HAHA, the Vikes will be IN their stadium a year after their deal with the Metrodome lapses. Now THAT’S SUPPORT!

Posted by: purplenurple at April 20, 2007 3:20 PM

Shane (and all the other root beer lovers out there)-

How about Sprecher? They brew some decent beer and from what I understand their root beer and other sodas are so successful that they actually brew more soda than beer now. Another thing you can do is visit your local homebrew shop and pick up the extracts you need to make your own root beer at home. It is super easy and fun to do with your kids. We did it last year and had the best root beer floats (with home made hand cranked ice cream) last year on the 4th of July at the cabin. Start saving those 2 liter bottles now!
-Jiminstpaul

Posted by: Jiminstpaul at April 20, 2007 3:32 PM

Funny ... I didn't realize that the MINNESOTA Twins were a metropolitan amenity while the MINNESOTA Vikings are a statewide amenity. Care to clarify where the MINNESOTA Wild and MINNESOTA Timberwolves fall?

Statewide tax? You must be dreaming. I don't care how much fans in greater MN love their Vikes, there's no way Bob Johnson in Concordia, MN wants to pay more in taxes for a stadium in downtown Minneapolis. And you can bet the greater MN legislators won't be on board either unless they get bribed with crop subsidies or something like that.

Posted by: The Tube at April 20, 2007 3:36 PM

A "name" does NOT a team make. Or, something like that. Are the Cowboys's America's team? I rest my case.

If the Twins were a State amenity, the STATE would've gladly stepped up to participate in this deal. They (the rest of the State) couldn't run fast enough, far enough away from helping the Twins. Heck, the Twinkies couldn't even get Anoka, Dakota or Ramsey County interested.

You watch, when it comes time to step up for the Vikes....they'll probably get IA, SD, ND and even western Sconny to pitch in! But we won't need em cause the Vikes will get buckets of money pouring in from outstate! (cue the horn!)

Posted by: purplenurple at April 20, 2007 3:44 PM

the Vikes will be IN their stadium a year after their deal with the Metrodome lapses.

Nipple-clamp, you are so deluded. There is no Viking stadium plan in place, nor is it even close to happening and with these billion dollar proposals being thrown out, it likely will not happen. All that was put out was pretty pictures of Ziggy trying to outdo Jerry Jones. That stadium won't happen as there's no way any Vikes stadium goes to a statewide (or TC counties) tax w/o a referendum. And that will fail miserably, ask any of the "gurus" here. The taxpayers will not and should not put up with it.

they are near the bottom of revenue teams and are among the lowest merchandise selling teams

As you said "Now THAT'S SUPPORT". Moron.

Posted by: Telemachus at April 20, 2007 3:45 PM

Take your revenue stats and stick 'em in your ear! The Vikes make more in a weekend then your Twinkies do all year.

See you in the NEW WINTER PARK in 2012. (I need that horn again)

Posted by: purplenurple at April 20, 2007 3:51 PM

"that said, i think this effort by the MSFC is a non-starter. keeping the vikings in downtown makes NO sense. football needs the open space for tailgates, massive short-term crowds a few days a year, and ancillary development that is car-centered. it's place is in Blaine, Maple Grove, Lakeville, Bloomington, Plymouth, or Woodbury."

That depends on the type of facility. If it's only a football stadium, then it belongs in the 'burbs. If it's a retractable roof facility, designed to host Final Fours and whatnot, it _must_ be downtown.

Posted by: Aelx at April 20, 2007 3:53 PM

I think the latter observation goes back to what was said about getting a Super Bowl, though. It doesn't make sense to throw a roof on it just to get one Super Bowl and a Final Four once a decade. The other roof-necessary events (Monster Truck pulls, dirt bike and snow mobile rallies, etc.) can continue to take place in the Dome. I don't think it's going anywhere.

Posted by: The Tube at April 20, 2007 4:16 PM

Purple,

I must say, you are quite optimistic about the Vikings' stadium chances. I do not think you realize your audience here. This is a group that has engrossed itself into the stadium debate for the last 10 years, and has gained a pretty good appreciation of how the process works (both with the Twins and observing stadium and ballpark issues around the country). If you think the Vikings' fight for a stadium will be any different than the Twins, then you are in for a surprise. While the Vikings are very popular in Minnesota, popularity does not equal dollars for a new stadium, as you will soon find out (and the Vikings already found out last year).

I personally hope they do build a new Vikings stadium, and do it downtown so that they can host other events. However, if you think that tooting your inaudible Vikings horn will make local and state legislators bend over backwards to give the state's beloved Vikings a new $1 billion stadium, you have a long, painful road ahead of you.

Even the Gophers had a struggle, and they had the benefit of touting that public dollars were going to a public institution (in contrast to the Twins and Vikings, who can only claim that public dollars were going towards an amorphous concept of an enhanced quality of life for the general population).

Even assuming that the Vikings had a financing plan (which they don't) and that it would be approved in this year's legislative session (which is highly unlikely, given the legislature's "indigestion" from last year's stadium and ballpark bills), getting a stadium built and open by 2011 would be pretty difficult logistically.

Despite these stated difficulties, welcome to the board... and good luck to the Vikings in their quest.

Posted by: The Rational Actor at April 20, 2007 4:26 PM

Don't forget that the University of Minnesota gave the state UMore park, as part of the Gophers stadium deal. I can't remember whether that made the state's contribution a net wash, or whether they still kicked in some dough.

Posted by: The Tube at April 20, 2007 4:29 PM

According to Forbes.com, which could well be suspect, but at least it'll be consistent since it's the same source for both teams, the Minnesota Twins have annual revenues of about $130 million and the Minnesota Vikings have annual revenues of about $170 million.

Posted by: Snyder at April 20, 2007 4:34 PM

Purple,

Why the hate for the Twins? Why must this be a Vikings-Twins war? I think most of us here (at least those not from Wisconsin!) are fans of both, and many (like the site proprietor himself) would like to see secure futures for both in Minnesota.

But it's hard for even the most "purple" faithful to deny that 1) there hasn't been much to brag about in Viking land at the moment and 2) after all the hand-wringing over a couple hundred million for the Twins stadium, finding a funding source for $700-800 million-plus is going to be a tall order. And since the cost of a new football stadium is much greater than that of a baseball stadium everywhere (note LA), there isn't even as strong of a relocation threat in the NFL, and certainly no contraction threat. It probably will happen, but probably not within the next year or two. I expect something will finally get approved closer to the Vikes' lease expiration (2011).

Posted by: spycake at April 20, 2007 4:40 PM

Professional sports watchers are so blaaaaaaa.....

Posted by: keekoo at April 20, 2007 4:43 PM

Professional sports watchers are so blaaaaaaa.....

People who take time out of their day to go to a site centered around things they don't like just to rip on the people there are so blaaaaaaaaaaa.....

Posted by: The Tube at April 20, 2007 4:47 PM

It doesn't make sense to throw a roof on it just to get one Super Bowl and a Final Four once a decade.

Additionally, there have been similar new facilities cropping up all over the country, and more in the works. Any new roofed stadium in Minnesota is going to face steep competition for these major events, further lessening their frequency.

Personally, I'd like to see a renovated Dome. It's a great place to watch a football game, and with only 10 games per year of 65,000 fans, pro football doesn't need the neighborhood and ancillary development that Wilf wants. I'm pretty sure you could trick out the Dome pretty nice, and annex a couple blocks next to it, for far less than $1 billion.

Posted by: spycake at April 20, 2007 4:50 PM

according to a source at the capitol:

"when the vikings made that announcement there was a collective groan to be heard throughout the building" - to say there is stadium fatigue is an understatement... the legislators are SICK of it.

I would agree with a lot of what has been said about the NFL's situation. It's not as if a move/contraction threat is that serious. there are no markets right now to pick off the vikings. the only remote contender would be Portland, and there is almost no support for ANY stadiums there.

frankly, I don't see the Vikings having a very strong negotiating position right now. that said, one of the suburban counties could step up... but after seeing how they hung anoka county out to dry, and the electoral thrashing that the commissioners took over the issue, i doubt it.

Posted by: CJ at April 20, 2007 4:55 PM

The looked at something like this YEARS ago, I think, and Red issued a flat "No way in HE(double hockey sticks)." I would be interested to see them revisit that proposal in an updated and more thorough way. I'm not an architect/engineer, but I wonder how cost effective it would be to rip out all the seats, the roof, the outer-facing and the upper deck, and just rebuild up and out.

Posted by: The Tube at April 20, 2007 5:02 PM

I agree with Spycake. Back in 2001, when Red still owned the Vikes, MSFC proposed a Dome renovation that would have made it football-only and cost something like $250 million. Of course, that's going to be a lot higher now, but still far less than $1 billion.

http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/200112/18_khoom_stadium/

However, I have zero hope that the Vikings are going to suddenly accept a renovation proposal.

Interestingly, the cost for a retractable-roof stadium back then was estimated at $500 million and that's apparently doubled in six years.

While I agree with all those who are skeptical of a Vikings stadium coming to fruition soon, the sucky part of that is that by the time it does, and it will, it'll probably run about $1.5 billion.

Posted by: Snyder at April 20, 2007 5:02 PM

I think a Dome renovation makes the most sense. it could be the reverse of soldier field (where the new build killed the stadiums character) it could GIVE the dome some character.

I think if you rip the roof off, make the baseball seats permanent, enlarge and improve the suites, change around the upper deck, and put a new roof on it (retractor or no) you could sell it for about $450 million.

Posted by: CJ at April 20, 2007 5:10 PM

The Tube wrote: "I think the latter observation goes back to what was said about getting a Super Bowl, though. It doesn't make sense to throw a roof on it just to get one Super Bowl and a Final Four once a decade. The other roof-necessary events (Monster Truck pulls, dirt bike and snow mobile rallies, etc.) can continue to take place in the Dome. I don't think it's going anywhere."

Here's the problem: The Final Four won't be coming back to the Metrodome. The NCAA has said that the facility is insufficient, citing lack of restrooms, horrible circulation between the concourses, and so on.

Thus, renovating the Metrodome presents some problems.

1) You can't just take the roof off. One, the interior was never designed to be outside. It's not waterproofed, it doesn't have drains for storm water, and won't ventilate properly. Furthermore, the lights and audio systems all hang from the roof, meaning they would need their own, new structures to hold them up. Finally, the roof is a part of the entire structure--it helps hold the thing together. Taking it off means you'd have to shore up the exterior walls that hold up the upper deck, in all likelihood.

All of that doesn't address the fundamental problems with the Dome's design. Vertical circulation is handled by the outdoor ramps. To put that stuff inside with interior ramps, escalators, and so on would again require massive structural alterations. Other problems include lack of restrooms and cramped concourses, problems that can't be solved without major changes to the structure. And if you want to address the 'wants' of a new stadium, providing for some sort of club seating with a separate club level is essentially impossible. All of the new stadiums have separate concourses for club areas.

All of these costs add up real quick.

Bottom line: If you were to renovate, you'd still have the teflon roof, you'd pay a bunch of money, and still not improve the facility that much.

Now, I'm all in favor of letting the Vikes flounder in the Dome for a while. However, just to be realistic, renovating the Dome doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Posted by: Alex at April 21, 2007 10:42 AM

Thanks for the more detailed analysis of a Dome retrofit and the inherent complications. Do you have an engineering background?

Posted by: The Tube at April 21, 2007 11:25 AM

While I agree with all those who are skeptical of a Vikings stadium coming to fruition soon, the sucky part of that is that by the time it does, and it will, it'll probably run about $1.5 billion.

Exactly. (sigh)

Are there any estimates on how much the the Metrodome land is worth for possible use toward a suburban site?

Posted by: The Tube at April 21, 2007 11:27 AM

Thus, renovating the Metrodome presents some problems.

All of these costs add up real quick.

Bottom line: If you were to renovate, you'd still have the teflon roof, you'd pay a bunch of money, and still not improve the facility that much.

Now, I'm all in favor of letting the Vikes flounder in the Dome for a while. However, just to be realistic, renovating the Dome doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Posted by: Alex at April 21, 2007 11:43 AM

Alex,

There was already a comprehensive football renovation plan proposed for the Metrodome, which addressed all of the issues you mention. The roof was still fixed, but was raised to add a new level of club seats / luxury boxes, wider concourses, etc. (There used to be a old PDF floating around with more detail, but I couldn't locate it). Anyway, the cost was still significantly less than that of a new stadium. Although the Vikings have always doubted that point, I took that with a grain of salt, as they have always been the biggest critic of renovation for other reasons:

Perhaps most important to the Task Force was the fact that the Vikings are strongly opposed to
renovating the Metrodome as an alternative to a new stadium... The Vikings made it clear they would not contribute to a renovation and would not extend their lease at the Metrodome. -- from 2002 Stadium Task Force Final Report

As we've seen with the two Wilf plans, the Vikings don't just want a modern stadium -- they have had no trouble selling out the antiquated Dome for years. Wilf wants control of the parking and huge ancilliary development opportunities (what the heck are those adjacent skyscrapers in the new renderings?). But there really is no reason for the public to fund a new retractable roof facility, as there will exist two new outdoor venues (Twins & Gophers) practically within walking distance, as well as two modern arenas (Target Center and Xcel) for smaller indoor events. A fixed-roof, modernized Dome should easily meet both the community's and the Vikings' stadium needs.

Personally, I hope they can come up with a creative renovation compromise -- maybe secure Wilf some adjacent land for smaller-scale, Vikings-related development (think a permanent, expanded indoor/outdoor plaza). But since I can't recall the last time a pro sports team truly compromised on a stadium vision, I'm going to guess this won't happen.

Posted by: spycake at April 21, 2007 5:33 PM

I am not too excited right now about a new Vikes stadium. The way the HC board tried to kill Twins stadium with their incompetency, I can only look forward to the same stupidity and bungling of the Vikes stadium and the Vikes owners are not Minnesota people who will put up with it.

Posted by: Jimmy Jack at April 21, 2007 9:13 PM

County: Twins' extra donation for stadium is confidential

Minneapolis Star Tribune (subscription), MN - 23 hours ago

Hennepin County said Friday it would not disclose how much more money the Minnesota Twins have agreed to contribute to help build a new stadium in downtown ...

What total BS Crass these Commissioners have plus I just heard on sports channel that there is no deal in hand with the Twins.

Posted by: jeff at April 21, 2007 9:45 PM

Spycake, HELL NO to a fixed roof stadium, if it should be done cheap, it should be done cheaper than that (NO ROOF AT ALL!!!!!)! Screw the Final Four, and Screw hosting the Super Bowl. We had to wait 10 years to host a Super Bowl in that Fiberglass roofed mistake, only for it to be obsolete to host Super Bowl 5 years later! NO FIXED ROOF (or ANY roofed) stadium for the Vikes, if it's going to be done, it should be done right, in suburb (-Hennepin County), on lots of land for tailgating parking lots, with NO ROOF WHATSOEVER! This is football, not sissyball!

Posted by: CTM at April 22, 2007 12:24 AM

Spycake, HELL NO to a fixed roof stadium, if it should be done cheap, it should be done cheaper than that (NO ROOF AT ALL!!!!!)! Screw the Final Four, and Screw hosting the Super Bowl!! We had to wait 10 years to host a Super Bowl in that Fiberglass roofed mistake, only for it to be obsolete to host Super Bowl 5 years later! NO FIXED ROOF (or ANY roofed) stadium for the Vikes, if it's going to be done, it should be done right, in suburb (-Hennepin County), on lots of land for tailgating parking lots, with NO ROOF WHATSOEVER! This is football, not sissyball!

Posted by: CTM at April 22, 2007 12:24 AM

Posted by: CTM at April 22, 2007 12:46 AM

Well stated spycake. the renovation plans have kicked around for years.

while i sympathize with CTM's call for a suburban stadium, but my take is that the political will would emerge more quickly if they plan was for a renovation.

but the belief that a second new football-only facility will get funding fails to comprehend the BIG selling point for the Vikings bid, and that is a big indoor space for events. you get a lot more mileage politically by pitching things like super bowls, final fours, tractor pulls, billy graham events, and motocross as additional options.

right or wrong, and whether it makes money or not really doesn't equate. i will say that one of the big gripes from the anoka county residents was that it seemed like Wilf was using the stadium as an excuse to build a bunch of other stuff. it looks like that again here... that's not going to help the odds of political support. (that said, I LOVE the winter garden idea)

Posted by: CJ at April 22, 2007 2:03 AM

Spycake,

I've seen the Dome renovation plans, and I'm also skeptical of the cost estimates. I'd love to see more detailed designs and see how they planned to solve the major issues with the Dome. Looking what you'd have to do and the benefits received, building from scratch may be a better proposition.

Honestly, I think the MSFC is the biggest sticking point. The MSFC had the distinction of being one of the few public stadium entities to actually make money. Unfortunately, them doing so completely hamstring their tenants. All of the renovation proposals involve 'extending' their lease, and while I'm sure some renegotiation would happen, that's a big problem.

Posted by: Alex at April 22, 2007 9:51 AM

CTM -- I was speaking of a Dome renovation, in which case it might be easier to keep the roof than to weather-proof everything indoors. Plus, from a public perspective, have that large of a structure with a roof would be more valuable than essentially duplicating the Gophers stadium a mile away. Obviously, if they build from scratch, no roof is fine by me.

Alex -- Good points. Unfortunately, the Vikings pretty much squashed all renovation talk before it even got started. It makes sense from their perspective to push only the "best" plan in their eyes, but they've already sort of violated that idea with the Anoka-to-downtown switch, and their current proposal is basically a non-starter without a funding source anyway.

Posted by: spycake at April 22, 2007 10:46 AM

Some interesting notes:

For the newly proposed Vikings stadium, the Strib puts the cost of the roof itself at $200 million. Meaning the stadium, parking, land, etc. will cost $754 million.

And today, Sid Hartman says the Vikings are committed to paying a third of the cost sans roof. So, doing the math, the Vikes are probably talking about a $250 mil contribution, similar to the Anoka deal.

But where are they going to find a public entity willing to pay $500 million for another roofless football stadium in Minneapolis? Much less another $200 million for a roof? Hindsight might quickly say another combined Vikings-Gophers stadium would have been the best solution...

Posted by: spycake at April 22, 2007 10:54 AM

Spycake, the Vikings and U of MN worked together for a couple of years on a joint stadium. The U eventually backed out after it became crystal clear that the Vikings were only interested in a pro-style stadium that the Gophers would be allowed to play in 6-8 times a Fall. There was no upside for the Gophers.

Now this was during the Red McCombs regime. Who knows how it would have turned out with Wilf. But who know what anything is going over there right now.

Posted by: freealonzo at April 22, 2007 11:10 AM

Regarding the Vikings plan, the only positive they have right now, is that they have a governmental body (the MSFC) on thier side. However, as has already been stated, they have no partner to help fund this. The city can't/won't, the state won't right now, and Hennipen county has said they won't.

There is zero chance this year. For this to have any chance next year the Vikings need to up thier contribution to a minimum of 50% of the cost with a roof. 33% won't get them anywhere. The NFL is a much healthier league where several teams have built thier own stadium or made very % contributions. Having a headline of "Ziggy offers $550 million towards stadium" staring them in the face will make legislators at least consider it.

Then after they've made that clear, they have three choices: Go back to HC with the higher contribution and see if they'll reconsider, go to the state with a specific funding plan made up of palatable sources (rental car tax, memeorbilia tax, lottery scratch off, etc.) or 3: Reconsider one of the suburbs.

Personally, I think they screwed up big time when they told Anoka County to go jump in the lake. There they had an entity ready to give them a large contribution. All they had to do was remove any state funding and go get it rubber stamped by a legislator that had to justifiable reason to say no. But they chose to let it go.

Posted by: David H at April 22, 2007 7:48 PM

In my opinion, below is the Vikings best chance for something to happen in the central metro anytime soon:

Go back to the Fairgrounds:

$954M
- Less $201 by ripping off the roof
- Less the Vikings contribution of $450M (which would presumably include $150M from a revised version of NFL G-3) I know this is probably way more than they want to contribute, but if they want a stadium, this is the way.
- Less the $58M proposed to add parking facilities in Mpls. because the Fairgrounds already has parking.
- Less new parking revenue generated in the city of St. Paul: $50M over 30 years (I am guessing here at 10,000 cars times 10 games times $30 per game to get to $3M per year and time value it back to $50M)
- Balance paid for with a county tax like the one we are using in Hennepin. This tax would need to generate about half what the Hennepin tax needs to generate, which should be possible.

We could have the State Fair concessions stands open for tailgating. We could hold all our State Fair events at the new facility. It could be possible.

In any event, the Vikings will be waiting a while. Vikings have been trying for seven years already. Twins had to try for ten years. I figure the over-under on the Vikings is 12 years in case you are still betting out there.

Posted by: Derek at April 23, 2007 11:54 AM

Fairgrounds? I'm imagining some interesting lawn-parking arrangments... but I assume no preseason games could be played at home in late August, and no games Labor Day weekend? Plus, the necessary tax rate would have to be significantly higher in St. Paul and Ramsey county (as we learned from various Twins proposals). The food selection would be much improved, though.

Less the Vikings contribution of $450M (which would presumably include $150M from a revised version of NFL G-3) I know this is probably way more than they want to contribute, but if they want a stadium, this is the way.

This is the biggest stumbling block of every plan. I believe the Vikings' proposed $280 million contribution to the Anoka plan already included the $150 million loan from the G-3 fund.

And ditching the roof, although it brings the price down and would likely be acceptable to the team, makes the stadium much less useful to a public financier (witness the Anoka County troubles).

Posted by: spycake at April 23, 2007 2:04 PM

There is plenty of parking at the Fair. It accommodates over 100,000 people a day during the fair, and that is when most of the grounds are not available for parking. When the fair is over, there will be plenty of more parking available.

Most often, the season starts the weekend after Labor Day, so, rarely would a game have to be purposely scheduled on the road to start the regular season. Preseason games can just be scheduled on the road for the last two games each year. And, I bet they could have a Friday night or Thursday night preseason game during the fair if they had to. Preseason games take place throughout the week. And, if this is the only roadblock, they would get it figured out.

Hennepin County is providing almost $400M to the Twins project at 3 cents on $20. If Ramsey County did 3 cents on $20, they should be able to provide funding for $200M, right? I don't know the answer to this question, but they have at least half the purchasing power over there, right?

Yes, the Vikings proposed contribution to Anoka County stadium did include the G-3 money. But, this stadium is also more than 40% more expensive. So, simply translating that percentage over would mean a $400M contribution to the project.

The roof thing could be presented to the legislature the same way the Twins did it. "If you want a roof, there should be some State money. If no State money, no roof."

The Metrodome could continue to host large indoor events, but they would probably have to tear it down without a major tenant.

Posted by: Derek at April 23, 2007 2:25 PM

I believe we reviewed this link at this site quite some time ago, but the attached link shows the orientation of all MLB ballparks. Only AT&T, Yankee, and RFK are situated in the exact same direction as us. And, according to the MLB rule at the top, very few are exactly in line with desired standards...

http://www.ballparks.com/baseball/index.htm

Posted by: Derek at April 23, 2007 3:14 PM

As someone who lives across the street from the fairgrounds... from my cold dead hands.

I love my neighborhood in St. Paul, even the 10 days a year with the fair. but I'd be deep in the cold, cold ground before I'd back putting the Vikings Stadium there... it makes NO sense at all.

among the GIGANTIC Problems with the site.

1. no real location for the stadium footprint - you either level the grandstand, or eat the parking lots, or devestate the grounds

2. no access to quality transportation options, no good in/out roads - you think traffic during the fair is bad, just wait for 70,000 streaming out after an NFL game... no thank you - nearest freeways are HWY 280 HWY 36/35W and I-94 all are more than 2 miles away.

3. local activists - you've obviously never met St. Paul's 4th Ward... they'd beat this thing to death

4. the parking is TERRIBLE during the fair - and that's why 60% of fairgoers TAKE THE BUS FROM THE MALLS!

5. the area around the fairgrounds is not set up for this... not even close, every year we gird up for the fair... and it takes a month to recover

there's so much more, but this is the basics

Posted by: CJ at April 23, 2007 4:56 PM

Professional sports player and player wannabe's need to form a cooperative, sell shares, and build their own stadiums with investor money.

The leagues should dictate that 20% of every player's pay along with 5% of every administrator's pay goes to create a pool and organization that could raise financing on its own, borrow it out for stadium proposals, and get rid of this stupid idea that taxpayers need to build stadiums for games a few like to "watch".

Posted by: krek at April 24, 2007 8:00 AM

Shane, I can understand the desire to step back from blogging for a while but what about your commenters? I have an idea. Every day make a simple post and then let the rest of us fire away.

For example on Wednesday you could post: How about those Twins? Friday post: Can't wait for the new ballpark. Monday Post: Wow, what an interesting NFL Draft... You get the picture. You could probably schedule a whole months worth of every-other-day posts and then let them drop automatically. Whaddya think?

Posted by: Freealonzo at April 24, 2007 8:30 AM

Thanks for the info CJ. I spoke with a contact I have at the Vikings last night. He mentioned that the Vikings have done a study of the Fairgrounds site.

- You are right, they would indeed have to level the grandstand for the stadium.

- Transportation was surprisingly not as big a concern. Most games are Sundays, when there is little traffic, and they would be able to mitigate the traffic snarl by shutting off stoplights and bringing in police to run the traffic, and using the buslink to the U campus.

- He did say that the city of Falcon Heights and the local politicians would have been very hard to win over. They didn't so much mind the Vikings, but rather didn't want the loud concerts, truck and tractor pulls, and other loud events.

- He mentioned that the parking situation was actually a good situation. There are thousands of surface spaces. It wouldn't be a problem at all.

Still, you are right that there are challenges, but there would be with ANY site. The St. Fair Council is also against a Vikings stadium as well. However, despite all this, most at Winter Park still have it on their radar, but they consider downtown Mpls their top choice.

Posted by: Derek at April 24, 2007 1:27 PM

I'd be interested in knowing more about how the Golden Gophers will be impacted, if at all, by the new ballparks/stadiums. Once I get more info I will be sure to cover this on http://www.bigten-fans.com and then syndicate to http://www.collegesports-fans.com for added exposure.

Posted by: Mike at May 4, 2007 12:06 PM

April 19, 2007

I know!

Comments

Post a comment