Omaha Mayor Mike Fahey, Jack Diesing (president of CWS, Inc.), and the NCAA have announced they've signed a Memorandum of Agreement that promises to keep the College World Series in Omaha until at least 2030 . . . contingent upon the building of the new downtown stadium, of course.
So Fahey's Folly has reached fruition. I am surprised that the NCAA was willing to commit to a 20-year extension of the CWS contract (the present one expires after the 2010 CWS). I really thought the NCAA wouldn't be willing to commit for such a long time until after it saw how revenues and attendance would play out in the new facility. So I give myself an F on that score.
Still, the way this has developed merely reinforces my contention that Fahey and the NCAA had the deal in hand all along, despite everyone's protestations to the contrary. Fahey claimed he didn't want to give up on Rosenblatt Stadium until after he saw the numbers that made it financially imperative to do so. The NCAA says it had no preset preferences about anything except for need for whatever proposal Omaha presented to have "wide community support." CWS, Inc., through its president Jack Diesing, said it preferred to stay at Rosenblatt and re-re-renovate it until it became obvious that no such thing was going to happen.
But what has come about is exactly what Fahey said Omaha "needed" from the very first day he proposed the idea of building the new stadium. For that reason, I also give Fahey an F. He deserves it for his duplicity in the entire mess.
And while I have resigned myself to the facts of the situation, I will never attend a CWS game again. I have no interest in spoiling my lovely memories of great games in the pleasant summer breezes of Rosenblatt with the tears of good-byes. I have less than no interest in sitting in a concrete sauna in physical misery attending a game in the new facility.
BTW, one of the revenue streams to help pay for the new stadium is "naming rights." I know some corporate sponsor is going to pony up big bucks to get its name on the place, but it will always be "Fahey's Folly" to me.
Showing posts with label Local Sports and Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Local Sports and Politics. Show all posts
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Split, Splat, Fahey's Takin' The 'Blatt
As I predicted back in 2006 when it first came to light, Omaha Mayor Mike Fahey is pushing hard for the city to abandon Rosenblatt Stadium and build a new facility downtown, to seal his legacy and shore up the monied interests who are at present redeveloping "NoDo" (that's "North Downtown" to you and me) for their own economic benefit.
He is doing this, he says, because the total cost of re-renovating Rosenblatt is nearly identical to that of building new, and that therefore in the long run, building new is a better financial deal. He also claims this will ensure that Omaha can negotiate a 20-year contract to continue to hold the College World Series in Omaha, to the city's long-term financial and economic benefit.
I cannot quarrel with the facts and figures. I can quarrel with some of his assumptions and with some of the things he ignored in making this decision.
I am not opposed to a new ballpark per se. Rosenblatt is a wonderful place, but it does need more than mere renovation can feasibly provide. What I am opposed to is moving the stadium from the Rosenblatt site. Backers of the new stadium say that it will be more attractive and will give a view of Omaha's skyline [such as it is--Ed.] and will create synergy between the downtown hotels, the Qwest Center, and even the Old Market, by putting more entertainment options within walking distance of one another.
(1) Why would anyone prefer a view of Omaha's skyline to the wonderful, expansive, tree-filled vistas (and the Zoo) one sees from Rosenblatt?
(2) Why would anyone prefer to watch a ballgame in the middle of summer from a down-at-river-level concrete sauna to being up on a hill where the wonderful breezes make even the most humid day at the ballpark not just bearable, but enjoyable?
(3) Why would anyone enjoy playing a game in a ballpark where the pitching orientation is turned to show off that Omaha skyline when the players will suffer problems from the afternoon sun they wouldn't have if the field were oriented in the traditional direction?
(4) What's to guarantee that the NCAA won't just say "we don't do long-term contracts anymore--it's nice that you went to all the trouble, but all we're going to give you is another 5-year extension"? Fahey has been promising that a new stadium will guarantee Omaha keeps the College World Series for another 20 years. What's he going to say if and when this turns out not to be true? If I were the NCAA, I wouldn't care how long the CWS has been in Omaha--under current conditions, I wouldn't sign a long-term committment to play in ANY single location.
As I predicted in 2006, it's already a done deal, however, even if all the problems I note materialize. If an entirely new stadium is a "must have," I'd prefer to see Rosenblatt razed and the new stadium erected on the Rosenblatt site. But that's already been taken off the table. The Mayor says we'd lose the CWS for the year or more it would take to do that, and once we lose it, it's never coming back. But he and his study committee didn't show any facts or figures or statements from the NCAA to bolster that. It's just another assumption on the Mayor's part.
And now the Omaha Royals, Triple A farm team of the Kansas City Royals, may not stay--either in an Omaha-abandoned Rosenblatt or in the new stadium. I wonder, especially now that the big league Royals are winning again, if we can afford to lose the Omaha Royals forever for the sake of getting the two-week influx the CWS brings.
Even more, I wonder if the citizens of Omaha will support the CWS in a new stadium they way they always have at Rosenblatt. For the first two or three years, everyone will be enchanted by the new facility, I think. We all like our shiny new toys. Once "Reality" sets in about (1) the humidity with no breeze, (2) the afternoon sun problems due to the field facing the wrong way, and (3) the hassle of the locals having to drive to NoDo and pay $10 (or more) to park per game, however, I suspect that disenchantment with Fahey's Folly will grow . . . and the NCAA may move the CWS elsewhere due to lack of fan support. Indianapolis and Oklahoma City, to name just two, would love that.
In that case, we'd be out something like $140 million, the CWS, and the Omaha Royals. Talk about an economic disaster for the city and the entire metro area!
He is doing this, he says, because the total cost of re-renovating Rosenblatt is nearly identical to that of building new, and that therefore in the long run, building new is a better financial deal. He also claims this will ensure that Omaha can negotiate a 20-year contract to continue to hold the College World Series in Omaha, to the city's long-term financial and economic benefit.
I cannot quarrel with the facts and figures. I can quarrel with some of his assumptions and with some of the things he ignored in making this decision.
I am not opposed to a new ballpark per se. Rosenblatt is a wonderful place, but it does need more than mere renovation can feasibly provide. What I am opposed to is moving the stadium from the Rosenblatt site. Backers of the new stadium say that it will be more attractive and will give a view of Omaha's skyline [such as it is--Ed.] and will create synergy between the downtown hotels, the Qwest Center, and even the Old Market, by putting more entertainment options within walking distance of one another.
(1) Why would anyone prefer a view of Omaha's skyline to the wonderful, expansive, tree-filled vistas (and the Zoo) one sees from Rosenblatt?
(2) Why would anyone prefer to watch a ballgame in the middle of summer from a down-at-river-level concrete sauna to being up on a hill where the wonderful breezes make even the most humid day at the ballpark not just bearable, but enjoyable?
(3) Why would anyone enjoy playing a game in a ballpark where the pitching orientation is turned to show off that Omaha skyline when the players will suffer problems from the afternoon sun they wouldn't have if the field were oriented in the traditional direction?
(4) What's to guarantee that the NCAA won't just say "we don't do long-term contracts anymore--it's nice that you went to all the trouble, but all we're going to give you is another 5-year extension"? Fahey has been promising that a new stadium will guarantee Omaha keeps the College World Series for another 20 years. What's he going to say if and when this turns out not to be true? If I were the NCAA, I wouldn't care how long the CWS has been in Omaha--under current conditions, I wouldn't sign a long-term committment to play in ANY single location.
As I predicted in 2006, it's already a done deal, however, even if all the problems I note materialize. If an entirely new stadium is a "must have," I'd prefer to see Rosenblatt razed and the new stadium erected on the Rosenblatt site. But that's already been taken off the table. The Mayor says we'd lose the CWS for the year or more it would take to do that, and once we lose it, it's never coming back. But he and his study committee didn't show any facts or figures or statements from the NCAA to bolster that. It's just another assumption on the Mayor's part.
And now the Omaha Royals, Triple A farm team of the Kansas City Royals, may not stay--either in an Omaha-abandoned Rosenblatt or in the new stadium. I wonder, especially now that the big league Royals are winning again, if we can afford to lose the Omaha Royals forever for the sake of getting the two-week influx the CWS brings.
Even more, I wonder if the citizens of Omaha will support the CWS in a new stadium they way they always have at Rosenblatt. For the first two or three years, everyone will be enchanted by the new facility, I think. We all like our shiny new toys. Once "Reality" sets in about (1) the humidity with no breeze, (2) the afternoon sun problems due to the field facing the wrong way, and (3) the hassle of the locals having to drive to NoDo and pay $10 (or more) to park per game, however, I suspect that disenchantment with Fahey's Folly will grow . . . and the NCAA may move the CWS elsewhere due to lack of fan support. Indianapolis and Oklahoma City, to name just two, would love that.
In that case, we'd be out something like $140 million, the CWS, and the Omaha Royals. Talk about an economic disaster for the city and the entire metro area!
Monday, May 21, 2007
Rosenblatt and Guildenstern Are Dead
Have you been following the latest local political dust-up? Omaha Mayor Mike Fahey and several important businessmen want to build a new baseball stadium in North Downtown (a/k/a NoDo), near the Qwest Center and the new riverfront development. Rosenblatt Stadium, on South 13th Street, next door to the world-class Henry Doorly Zoo, is to be abandoned, apparently.
Pressure comes from several directions to support this. The new stadium would be smaller, which would improve the attendance figures (and hence revenues) of the Omaha Royals, Triple A farm team for the Kansas City Royals. The new stadium would have all the latest amenities, including luxury boxes, thus improving the city's revenues. Creighton University could play its home games there, making for an easier, shorter trip from campus to ball park than the student-athletes have to endure now. [And if you cannot feel the sarcasm dripping from that statement, either you have no clue about Omaha geography or I am losing my touch.--Ed.] The out-of-town guests who come to the College World Series every year would have a much more cohesive experience, as their commute from their hotels to the new stadium would be easier. Plus the locals would have to use the Qwest Center's parking lot . . . again adding to the city's coffers. Finally, the zoo would now have room to expand. In its present configuration, its expansion is apparently blocked by Rosenblatt's presence.
What no one connected with the proposal is saying, however, is how this would be a more efficient use of money than re-re-re-renovating Rosenblatt. Building a new stadium is estimated to cost $50 million dollars. Making Rosenblatt 100% state of the art would cost much less--plus the history of the place would be preserved. Besides, what do the powers that be at the NCAA and the College World Series have to say about this? They regularly sell out all the games at Rosenblatt. A new, albeit smaller, stadium, surely cannot please them, despite the suggestions that temporary bleachers can be helicoptered in for the CWS games and then removed again once the CWS is over. I know as a CWS fan, I'd not be happy paying more (as I am sure I would have to) to sit in temporary bleacher seats. That strikes me, as a fan, as being more than a bit of a rip-off.
What of the complaints of the Omaha Royals that Rosenblatt is just too big? They wouldn't have that problem if they'd field a better team. The Royals had no trouble at all regularly selling all the available seats in the mid-80s . . . which is the last time both the Omaha and Kansas City incarnations of the Royals were winning.
And what of all the renovations already made to Rosenblatt to keep the CWS here? That includes the destruction of several homes along the east side of 13th Street. These homes were razed to improve the landscaping around the side of the stadium that most people see first. The human cost of that was huge. At the time, most of us (including many of the homeowners whose homes were taken) thought it was a worthy and noble sacrifice for the sake of keeping the CWS in Omaha. But to abandon Rosenblatt just a few years later makes it a cruelty to the people whose homes were taken.
Further, Rosenblatt is up on a hill, and it's pleasant to attend games there even in the hottest of Omaha summer weather. A new stadium, farther north and down by the river, would be a sauna . . . except in the luxury boxes, I suppose. Nor would a new stadium be nearly as charming, even if the "Road to Omaha" sculpture is moved to the new stadium's entrance area.
Nonetheless, despite the large and vociferous outcry against it, I suspect that the building of the new stadium is a done deal. Fahey wants his legacy, the financiers want their vision of the riverfront, and the money is probably already in place. The SAC Museum (renamed the Strategic Air and Space Museum) got moved from its historic home in Bellevue because the powers that be [i.e., those with the money--Ed.] wanted it to be nearer Interstate 80 for easier tourist access, historical accuracy be damned. They got their way because they refused to finance enclosed display spaces for the historic planes unless the museum relocated. And they lost a tremendous amount of local support from the large US Air Force (active duty and retired) community in Bellevue . . . but they think their success in increasing tourist dollars has more than compensated for it. They're probably right, darn it.
I hate to see Rosenblatt go, though. No matter what amenities are built into a new stadium, there is no way it will be as charming a place to watch a ball game as is "the Blatt."
Pressure comes from several directions to support this. The new stadium would be smaller, which would improve the attendance figures (and hence revenues) of the Omaha Royals, Triple A farm team for the Kansas City Royals. The new stadium would have all the latest amenities, including luxury boxes, thus improving the city's revenues. Creighton University could play its home games there, making for an easier, shorter trip from campus to ball park than the student-athletes have to endure now. [And if you cannot feel the sarcasm dripping from that statement, either you have no clue about Omaha geography or I am losing my touch.--Ed.] The out-of-town guests who come to the College World Series every year would have a much more cohesive experience, as their commute from their hotels to the new stadium would be easier. Plus the locals would have to use the Qwest Center's parking lot . . . again adding to the city's coffers. Finally, the zoo would now have room to expand. In its present configuration, its expansion is apparently blocked by Rosenblatt's presence.
What no one connected with the proposal is saying, however, is how this would be a more efficient use of money than re-re-re-renovating Rosenblatt. Building a new stadium is estimated to cost $50 million dollars. Making Rosenblatt 100% state of the art would cost much less--plus the history of the place would be preserved. Besides, what do the powers that be at the NCAA and the College World Series have to say about this? They regularly sell out all the games at Rosenblatt. A new, albeit smaller, stadium, surely cannot please them, despite the suggestions that temporary bleachers can be helicoptered in for the CWS games and then removed again once the CWS is over. I know as a CWS fan, I'd not be happy paying more (as I am sure I would have to) to sit in temporary bleacher seats. That strikes me, as a fan, as being more than a bit of a rip-off.
What of the complaints of the Omaha Royals that Rosenblatt is just too big? They wouldn't have that problem if they'd field a better team. The Royals had no trouble at all regularly selling all the available seats in the mid-80s . . . which is the last time both the Omaha and Kansas City incarnations of the Royals were winning.
And what of all the renovations already made to Rosenblatt to keep the CWS here? That includes the destruction of several homes along the east side of 13th Street. These homes were razed to improve the landscaping around the side of the stadium that most people see first. The human cost of that was huge. At the time, most of us (including many of the homeowners whose homes were taken) thought it was a worthy and noble sacrifice for the sake of keeping the CWS in Omaha. But to abandon Rosenblatt just a few years later makes it a cruelty to the people whose homes were taken.
Further, Rosenblatt is up on a hill, and it's pleasant to attend games there even in the hottest of Omaha summer weather. A new stadium, farther north and down by the river, would be a sauna . . . except in the luxury boxes, I suppose. Nor would a new stadium be nearly as charming, even if the "Road to Omaha" sculpture is moved to the new stadium's entrance area.
Nonetheless, despite the large and vociferous outcry against it, I suspect that the building of the new stadium is a done deal. Fahey wants his legacy, the financiers want their vision of the riverfront, and the money is probably already in place. The SAC Museum (renamed the Strategic Air and Space Museum) got moved from its historic home in Bellevue because the powers that be [i.e., those with the money--Ed.] wanted it to be nearer Interstate 80 for easier tourist access, historical accuracy be damned. They got their way because they refused to finance enclosed display spaces for the historic planes unless the museum relocated. And they lost a tremendous amount of local support from the large US Air Force (active duty and retired) community in Bellevue . . . but they think their success in increasing tourist dollars has more than compensated for it. They're probably right, darn it.
I hate to see Rosenblatt go, though. No matter what amenities are built into a new stadium, there is no way it will be as charming a place to watch a ball game as is "the Blatt."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)