I just wonder what the relative costs of building versus buying might be. I know; no one wants to keep the old joint, but I'm indulging in some wishful thinking because I love RFK. Control of the building was always the issue. Given a choice, how many people here would pick ownership of RFK, as is, over a new playpen?
DCSEC can't sell RFK due to some 99 year lease deal with the Federal gov't, IIRC. Besides, DCSEC won't let their main reason for existence be sold. Why would the city government need DCSEC to run the Armory alone. United deserves and needs a SSS.
I personally would be all for DCU buying RFK out from under DCSEC (especially right NOW so we can tell boreball to go to hell!!!), but I agree it will never happen. I did think that RFK was supposed to be brought down after we got our own stadium (this was prior to bb coming to town). Anyone else know more? -dave
No way I'd want DCU to buy RFK. Lets get our own joint. Have you seen the renderings of the Fire's new place at Bridgeview? F'ing gorgeous! That is what I want for us, and I am sure our new place on the river will be even better!
I had a conversation with the new DCSEC head Mark Tuohey a few weeks ago and he said the stadium needs to come down as it has some serious structural issues. They're going to shore it up for the the next 3 yrs for baseball/soccer but that's it. K
There you go then. They let DCU have it and it's a win/win. We have a great stadium with a rich history for a few more years until the Barra and Nest bring it crashing down around us with all the bouncing They continue to profit and save on demolition costs -dave
This has come up in some old post articles, IIRC the cost of the truly needed long term repairs to RFK would be more than a new stadium.
And after the first year in the new place, i'm sure i'll love it as much as I do RFK. Right now i'll support RFK as long as it can hold us -dave
As they say, no United game is complete without hearing someone scream "Look out Jose" as they dodge falling concrete!