Depends on the team you're watching. This guy's been bringing sexy back to baseball down my way for a couple of years now. But if you're forced to watch the Giants I can understand why sexy and baseball would seem mutually exclusive.
They're not. It's not one of the cities the A's are exploring. When they relocate, they're going to relocate, out of NorCal. Vegas is the prohibitive favorite.
Yeah, it's still a basketball town. Reminds me during the team open tryouts in year one when a sports reporter referred to players as "the Republics." edit: changed "them" to "players"
A lot of interesting things said and not said here. First, says Sacramento is still an interesting market that they want to be in, but unfortunately the investment scenario is going to prohibit it. Second, San Diego is one they would like but basically admitted defeat that its not realistically viable in the immediate future. Third, Phoenix, again.......is not said. What an unambitious, uninteresting ownership group. Finally, Vegas. Vegas is real, and TL/DR version, they have two owners; one they like more than the other (Bucks owners), and one whose plan they like more than the others (Kephart). Bucks owners want to use the Raiders stadium, Kephart wants to build on Cashman site. MLS does not want to use the Raiders stadium and doesnt seem they will be wanting to award a franchise unless its Cashman. So MLS is using Kephart's Cashman plan to coax the Bucks ownership into that line of thinking. If the Bucks ownership group keels and goes with the Cashman plan instead of Raiders stadium, I think they're in. Additionally, the tone of Don seemed to be that Sac and Las Vegas have nothing to do with each other, and each is still in play. One has nothing to do with the other.
Sacramento has the team, the fanbase, and the stadium location... they're just missing the MOST IMPORTANT THING, which is a "whale" billionaire owner. They're not getting in without it. And if they don't get one soon, other markets that DO have a whale backing their bid, like Vegas, are likely to pass them. There's really no taking sides here. Without a billionaire, they're not getting in, and rightfully so. One of the best things MLS has going for it is the financial muscle of their ownership groups, no MLS player has ever missed a paycheck, which is why many want to come here. Meanwhile Boavista still hasn't paid the transfer fee for Reggie Cannon. The league has enough billionaire owners holding it back (clears throat), they're not letting some local Chevy dealership owner into their elite billionaires club. Hell Burkle IS a billionaire and still had to pull back because a lot of his money is in hospitality which was hit hard by Covid. So Sac better go find a whale and fast, "continuing to search" for one doesn't mean much. Las Vegas has emerged as a leading MLS expansion candidate after Ron Burkle declined to move forward with proposal to bring an expansion team to Sacramento. The city of Sacramento and the owners of USL Championship side Sacramento Republic continue to try and recruit a primary investor, but when asked if any candidates had emerged, Garber said, "Not at this time." Garber added, "Sacramento isn't as active as it was over the last couple of years, but I still think Sacramento will be a good MLS market." Reached by telephone, Sacramento Republic president and GM Todd Dunivant said, "We continue to search for a lead investor, we continue to be active. We continue to believe Sacramento is a great market for MLS." I think they had been leading on their fans that they were close, and Garber's honest response followed by Dunivant's generic (as opposed to the positive statements they've been feeding their fanbase) statement is a sobering moment. They fan feed their fans bull about how they're close to the finish line but an ESPN reporter would then want more information that they couldn't provide. Some comments from the SacRepublic subreddit: https://old.reddit.com/r/SacRepublicFC/comments/padgr6/don_garber_speaks_on_mls_to_sacramento/ "I’m assuming that Sac Republic has reached out to all potential lead investors and all have said some variation of “No”. I doubt anyone is going to wake up and change their mind. So the deal has to change. Either the mayor will have to modify the Railyards plan and/or the Republic will have to fold and allow a new investor to create his/her thing.. Maybe someone can help me, but I haven’t seen an example of a similar situation like this working out positively." "This is very sobering and seems to contradict what we have heard from the FO." "I think the front office has no choice but to say it's going to work out. I fear it all falls apart the moment they admit it's over. Attendance already sucks, I think it might get even worse." "“We continue to search for a lead investor” seriously how long have they been looking for a lead investor. You would think someone would have stepped up by now. Maybe they can’t find one." "Lack of any meaningful major corporate presence in Sacramento is this region’s Achilles heel. You need deep pockets AND ties to the community, as the Burkle fiasco demonstrated."
What about the good ole fashioned tax-funded stadium possibility? I dont know sacramento local politics well enough, does that have a hope and a prayer if attached to something like "downtown infrastructure"?
Is the cost of the stadium the deal breaker? I would think it is just as much the franchise fee plus required expenditures to compete in the league.
I would think a 225-300 million dollar stadium taxpayer covered would certainly galvanize a prospective owner into action. That would mean they are only responsible for the expansion fee
After all the research showing that funding a stadium with public money NEVER pays off, it would be crazy for any govt in California to do so.
Exactly how does one calculate "paying off" though? I would guess there are intangible benefits like making the region a little more attractive to live in, a little higher-profile nationwide perception of the municipality, which in turn draws businesses, not to mention some kind of increase in quality of life for the people that attend events in the stadium, which is difficult to assign a number to, etc. Not sure how you put a price on all of those things, multiplied over say 30 years?
Therein lies the point too, the community benefit angle. I think Sacramento should make it a package deal and make it part of an infrastructure package for other stuff too (bridges, roads, rail, etc). It makes it a bit more appealing than "just a stadium". Infrastructure bills are all a sudden all the rage these days. Catch the wave while its high, strike the iron while its hot, all that stuff
You are still asking voters to pay for a quarter billion dollar stadium for some billionaire(s). People here aren't that dumb..
Then there's the on-going operating expenses someone needs to want to take on and build a business around.
Sacramento funded about 1/2 of the Golden 1 Center through a public bond and parking increases and other development funds. The city was to contribute something like $30M+ to surrounding infrastructure already for the soccer stadium and can move some pieces around to throw in another 15-20M. The big carrot, absent public financing, is ownership would be gifted 17 acres adjacent to the stadium for development. Regardless, I don't know how much appetite there is to fund even a portion of another stadium. It feels like that may be a hard hill to climb but I may be wrong. There's also the question of how the stadium set back may impact the development of the entire railyards project. That's a big plot of land that won't be developed and generating income by 2023, as originally planned.
and that last paragraph is the key thing think. The city of Sacramento is big time bummed about that. They were very eager for that to go forward and know it is a valuable project for so many reasons. I think there could be a degree of open mindedness to it. There is so much more going into the rail yards than the stadium, but it is the key fixture. Sacramento wants this
And yet Santa Clara stupidly took the bait on a clear scam to build one of the ugliest stadiums in the worst possible location. Californians and Americans at large, are incredibly stupid.
Don't know about that. They're in discussions with the university and the university has been willing to let the team take their gameday revenue, which is always a key consideration for a team. He doesn't close the door at all in those comments.
You mean like the joy we get in attending Quakes games since their return to the Bay Area? What about the decrease in our quality of life for all but 2012? - - - - EDIT - - - - And that crummy virus I caught after the Vancouver game was no quality of life booster.