Royals

[Sparko]

Downtown baseball? The Royals have great fans and crappy ownership. Kaufman's conception of drawing fans from the midwest was the right call. I love the current venue and think it wise to respect the integrity of its heritage. Bring back the rail system and make it possible to visit safely first at least. Billionaires are swayed by shiny objects and ego. There is no point threatening cities constantly. Frankly, plantations should be a thing of the past

[pdub]

PLAN REJECTED
More than 58 percent no.

Ruh roh to the Royals staying in KC.
I doubt the Chiefs move though.

I think ultimately if you want some tax dollars you need to unlink Chiefs renovations from Royals rebuilds…and pitch better offers.

[Back2Lawrence]

Nashville seems logical for the Royals

[jfish26]

PLAN REJECTED
More than 58 percent no.

Ruh roh to the Royals staying in KC.
I doubt the Chiefs move though.

I think ultimately if you want some tax dollars you need to unlink Chiefs renovations from Royals rebuilds…and pitch better offers.

It’s fascinating - the plan failed because the Royals stepped on every take in a 500 mile radius. But the objectively worse part of the plan was the Chiefs side.

I expect the Royals will still end up downtown.

I think the Chiefs and Kansas are gonna make batty eyes at each other.

[Back2Lawrence]

Fish thanks for the longest read I can remember on a message board minus my synopsis of the Tuby thread.

In that,my favorite (the most laughable) part is the fact that the Royals and Chiefs ‘promised’ over 40 years to make contributions in the sum of $226 million dollars to help the community.

So in 40 years, two franchises are going to pay less than what the Chiefs are paying Mahomes in base salary over 10? (Which would be more in 2024 dollars). I know, I know, Mahomes’ contract wasn’t fully guaranteed.

This crap has become beyond laughable, and should be pointed at as nothing short of grotesque.

[jfish26]

I don’t think, in a vacuum, it’s the teams’ obligation to make contributions to the community at all.

But if you ask the community to front a bill for a construction project that is for your benefit, the math changes.

But again, this shouldn’t be read as a flat rejection of billionaire handouts (however pro or con any of us might be on that). This was a rejection of a billionaire handout for one project that was changing in major ways right up to the last days before the vote, and another project that was hilariously and egregiously upside-down for the community.

In other words, if this was “no,” it was really more “no, go try again.”

[pdub]

I mean, if this means moving the Chiefs to Kansas in 7 years, i'm all for it.
30 minutes from Lawrence to the Legends.
Piss off MIZZOU? Hell yea.

[jfish26]

I mean, if this means moving the Chiefs to Kansas in 7 years, i'm all for it.
30 minutes from Lawrence to the Legends.
Piss off MIZZOU? Hell yea.

I would handicap the Chiefs' outcomes as:

65% - Stay at Truman Sports Complex with a massive handout
30% - Kansas
4% - Other Missouri
1% - Leave the metro

Those first two numbers would be a hell of a lot closer to each other, or maybe even flipped to a degree, had the Chiefs' proposal here been something different. For better or worse, I think Clark desperately wants to stay in the home his father built. And I think Missouri will not want the shame of letting TWO football teams bolt in a 15 year span.

[pdub]

Yea, I think ultimately they'll stay at Truman.
The Chiefs are different than the Rams...they have a very strong loyal fanbase.

[jfish26]

Yea, I think ultimately they'll stay at Truman.
The Chiefs are different than the Rams...they have a very strong loyal fanbase.

And, at least as importantly, ownership that doesn't seem like it has a foot out the door. It's also relevant that Kansas City is ascending, and even when the Rams' nonsense happened, St. Louis was clearly on or about to be on the descent.

[Sparko]

In a vacuum, teams don't need to be "owned" by billionaires. Revenue sharing and cities should be able to manage their franchises. Baseball is a $700M guaranteed contract mess as it is. And there is nothing wrong with the K. It is about a product that has about a 25-year hibernation problem. Salary cap. Revenue sharing. No more extortionist threats. The Royals made plenty of money in a terrible year last year.

[jfish26]

In a vacuum, teams don't need to be "owned" by billionaires. Revenue sharing and cities should be able to manage their franchises. Baseball is a $700M guaranteed contract mess as it is. And there is nothing wrong with the K. It is about a product that has about a 25-year hibernation problem. Salary cap. Revenue sharing. No more extortionist threats. The Royals made plenty of money in a terrible year last year.

I'm sorry, but the K's location is HORRIBLE. It's a joke, and no serious city should have baseball in a place like where the K is.

I would love to see a city make a real run at owning a team - not like the silly Packers thing, but for real.

However, the market and public policy forces that make teams worth what they are worth means that a team CANNOT be worth as much to a city as they are to a private business enterprise (as just one of many examples, a city does not realize tax benefits from paper operating losses being used to offset tax obligations arising out of other businesses).

What I'm saying is that, in the case a city is bidding against a private buyer, it would not make rational sense for the city to outbid the private buyer.

I'm not arguing for or against - in fact I would LOVE to see a truly city-owned team - but I don't see how that can be responsibly done where a city simply does not get the same value from a team as the private buyer would.

[japhy]

I had lunch with a friend today who might know something. He says Austin TX, has already contacted the Royals. He thinks the Royals will move to Austin. Austin is the 10th largest city by population in US and the only one in top 10 without an MLB, NFL for NBA team.

Hang onto your KC Royals hats and shirts, they could be collectible memorabilia soon.

[KUTradition]

that would be sad

[Sparko]

Austin would need an indoor facility and the Astros will not let it happen. Florida teams are next on the conveyor belt anyway. But again, enough with the extortion. I have to laugh when Fish goes full on corporatist. The fan experience at Royals stadium is excellent. The Chiefs have sold out since the 80s. There is also parking and a lot of amenities that we didn't used to have. Have you seen some of these Riverfront Park Fenway Commisky fields? The Nationals stadium was an awful little band box requiring a long walk from the metro. Improve the experience around the K. Admit that a commuter park makes good sense absent infrastructure downtown. I have watched the Royals since 1969. I still remember their musical fanfare on Channel 9. Royals stadium was always an awknowlegment that fans drive from a large geographic zone from the dakotas to Oklahoma and Arkansas. A good, consistent product like the 70s would fix all the problems.

[jfish26]

Austin would need an indoor facility and the Astros will not let it happen. Florida teams are next on the conveyor belt anyway. But again, enough with the extortion. I have to laugh when Fish goes full on corporatist. The fan experience at Royals stadium is excellent. The Chiefs have sold out since the 80s. There is also parking and a lot of amenities that we didn't used to have. Have you seen some of these Riverfront Park Fenway Commisky fields? The Nationals stadium was an awful little band box requiring a long walk from the metro. Improve the experience around the K. Admit that a commuter park makes good sense absent infrastructure downtown. I have watched the Royals since 1969. I still remember their musical fanfare on Channel 9. Royals stadium was always an awknowlegment that fans drive from a large geographic zone from the dakotas to Oklahoma and Arkansas. A good, consistent product like the 70s would fix all the problems.

Not trying to be a corporatist at all. I, like you, have been to a lot of parks. I personally feel that the experience is simply better in the ones that are part of the fabric of a downtown, which also means they are just part of the fabric of summer life generally.

I don't think baseball should be like, or aspire to be like, football - I don't think baseball should be something you necessarily have to plan a month in advance, or something that is logistically complex. When I lived in Minneapolis, for example, it was pretty damn nice to be done with work for the day and realize you can walk right over and catch a game.

Frankly, baseball desperately NEEDS to lower the barriers to participation. The blackout rules have to go. Stadiums should be designed with at least some areas allowing in-and-out (and back in). Things like the pitch clock help.

I love baseball to death, and my FAVORITE thing about it is the ubiquity - it's there, 6.5 nights per week, low stress, and is literally the soundtrack of summer. Make it MORE accessible and enjoyable, not less.

[Sparko]

I don't doubt your love. You and PDub have been with me here in the down years. But remember, there was a million people in blue in 2015. I love Royals stadium. With Boulevard and brisket, we already have the best fan experience. I sat in the Pepsi Porch area and loved it. Not a bad seat, plenty of parking, room in the stands. I was twisted in knots in DC and Houston. San Antonio too--watched a game in the Alamo Dome

[Back2Lawrence]

The city would make oodles and oodles more money with a downtown park.

Besides concession prices, Nats park is great.

If Royals dont get new stadium, they are fine, without question. I’d still say Nashville over Austin. Would be closer to every division foe that way, too. Except maybe minneapolis, but that’s about equidistant I think.

[Sparko]

I'd say a quarter billion dollars a year is oodles. Not sure where all this downtown largesse comes from. There are 81 games for a team that traditionally underperforms.

[jfish26]

I'd say a quarter billion dollars a year is oodles. Not sure where all this downtown largesse comes from. There are 81 games for a team that traditionally underperforms.

But this is sort of the point - responding also to your previous posts, as a stadium for watching and playing baseball, Kauffman is (in its present state) close to as good as it gets. It's the right size, with great sightlines and the right balance of seating options and price points and extras. It's a lovely place to bring kids or plan events.

It's a lovely location for a handful of Sundays (and one-ish Monday) every football season.

But the location is bad for baseball.

Being smack in the middle of the afternoon commute route away from the center of the city, it's not something that is realistic to just go do on a weekday whim, or even for business. There are no bars or restaurants around it, so you have to plan to tailgate (or to get gouged inside and stand at a small table or eat in your seats). If you want to do something afterwards, that requires more planning/effort (and more driving, perhaps not ideal from a public safety standpoint). Out of town guests must be ferried to a hotel, again, more planning/driving.

You are being sold magic beans by anyone who tells you that a stadium will fully pay for itself. That is false.

However, downtown baseball certainly comes closer to doing that than football-location baseball. And, in my opinion, even setting aside economic concerns, downtown baseball makes for an experience that is MUCH more accessible to more fans, particularly midweek.

I think concerns about parking are massively overstated, and frankly we in Kansas City need to get over ourselves on things like that if we want Kansas City to continue its ascent away from the Omaha/Des Moines/Oklahoma City set, and toward the Denver/Minneapolis/Austin set.