oh yea - take nothing for granted - and honestly - given the performance they have put on already between the town hall the and marketing around Queens- they are going at this HARD
At this stage of the process for Barclay's Center, there was already a unified opposition including many community leaders and politicians. There were already many lawsuits winding through the courts. The NIMBYs in Queens (who I assume are mostly blue-collar and/or immigrant) seem nowhere near as high-profile as the whinerbaby Park Slope yuppies with money, influence, and gigantic sticks up their asses. But I would expect some politicians to make a play against the stadium at some point soon, not out of any genuine opposition but rather to grab concessions. They'll also be at the ribbon-cutting ceremony wearing big smiles.
Right - i felt that Barclays had a much more unified opposition but also this is a stadium for Soccer in a soccer loving community -i just think opposition is truly outnumbered by support.
When there will be the deal with City Hall ( maybe in February ), this does mean that the stadium will be 100% built and that it will be only necessary to wait about 6 / 9 months ( ULURP process ) to begin the construction ?
No - reaching a deal with City Hall does not mean that the stadium is 100 percent getting built - although its a Great step forward. The deal with city hall means that the league and the city have an agreement on the stadium but it all depends that ULURP process. IT can still fall apart during that process.
But IN THEORY is it possible for the MLS to put a NYC team soccer in MLS for March 2014 at Citi Field having only the deal with City Hall ( February 2013 ) ? If the MLS will announce the 20th team for 2014 ( in the temporary venue, of course ), I think that this decision there will be not after April or May 2013 ( 10 months before of the begin the 2014 MLS season ) ; therefore when the ULURP process will have away by the end. What could be the solution ?
In theory - yes - likely - NO - the more i think about it and now that I see politicians saying use Citi Field for soccer...the more I think MLS will want shovels in the ground before they decide to play at Citi Field on a temp basis.
Have to agree 100% here. There is no way MLS agrees to play in a temp venue until they have started building a stadium of their own. I hope that is the lesson learned from the Metros and Giants Stadium.
Very much agreed on this. This is part of what I was saying before. The politicians have changed the calculus on how that arrangement would have worked. If MLS starts making plans for using Citi Field as a temp venue before they have their own venue, they'll be crippling themselves, especially now. I'm not even sure I want to see that at all, but even if I did, they definitely cannot do it until they have construction workers on the ground in Queens and are actually well on the way to building a stadium. If they start playing in Citi now, then they better get used to it bc they'll still be playing there ten years from now.
But if FOR EXAMPLE there will be the shovels on the ground by next October, IN THEORY Garber could to put this NYC team as 20th team in March / April 2014 at Citi Field ? Could be sufficient 5 or 6 months to choose the players ?
If there's one takeaway from today, it is that the Mets, as always, got a great big unlubricated ********ing.
I believe "New York Mets" comes from the Latin term for taking it up the rear with a rusty railroad spike.