That might be good for the fans and for generating more interest throughout the state, but a very bad situation for the players. I think it's better to keep the team in one stadium so the team can generate some type of consistency in terms of playing on their home turf. Teams that have to travel around (such as the NBA's Hornets, NFL's Saints, MLB Mariners (when the roof broke at the Kingdome) tend to have a hard time finding consistency at home cause every game is at a different place. It's almost like playing on the road with your fans in the stands. The fan support would be great, but I have to think playing on different fields would take a toll somehow. But then again, they did win their first true road game already, so maybe not. But I just think it's better for the team to have a consistent home for all 16 games.
The Fire were about 2 weeks from playing in Milwaukee for a year and a half. Playing in another market for a season might not be an impossibility.
The problem in Dallas wasn't necessarily that the games were at a high school stadium. It's that there was no beer. It's that the field was a joke. It's that the whole thing had a bush-league vibe to it. But most of all, it's that the team didn't have to move there in the first place. At least with Naperville, the team could rationalize it to the fans by pointing out that Soldier Field was being renovated and that they didn't have a lot of choice in moving there. But the Cotton Bowl was just as viable a home venue as it had always been.
Easy. Buy a ticket to this year's game against Houston and get a free ticket to the Chiefs game against Oakland. What do you mean that doesn't count? Look Chivas said they sold 90,000 for their game against LA last year so this counts just as well. Anyway just relax. It is this thing called a joke. You guys out there need to have a sense of humor every once and a while about this situation. SJ had no sense of humor and look where that got them.
MatchNight commentary: Reynolds: Wizards Hiatus a Flight of Fancy Reports of Possible Suspension of Operations No More Than Baseless Speculation http://kc.matchnight.com/kcdefault.cfm?page=ARTICLE&show=18744
There's probably more than that. I would love to see them at William Jewell College or at one of the Shawnee Mission Schools - they can get around 20,000 in - although about 14.5 seated.
This may actually be a good solution. These locations are far enough apart that they could target people who may only go to 2 games a year anyways. Could create a better profile for the team accross Missouri . A game or 2 in St. Louis might not be a bad idea as well. Sadly its looks like the KC gang are going to have a touch season or two while this all plays out.
Are the Arrowhead renovations being done in stages? Would a Gillette Stadium-style "everyone sits on one side of the stadium" thing be out of the question? During baseball/MLS season?
In the late 90s the seats in the lower bowl (or at least a good number of them) were replaced. That work did not prevent the Wizards from using Arrowhead. However, the upcoming changes will involve expansion of the concourses and possibly a fair amount of "invasive" work on the stadium that would make allowing crowds - into even part of it - problematic. I'm guessing that, push come to shove, that Lamar Hunt would make Arrowhead available to the new owners in 2007. That said, everything I'm hearing and guessing leads me to believe that a Naperville/Southlake solution will be employed even if Arrowhead is available. Yeah, it'll suck, and I wouldn't be surprised if capacity was in the 10k (tops) territory. What it will do, however, is basically do away with all the $5 "Zard Yard" tickets and other promotional tickets. The new owners will be basically starting the franchise over, but at least with a hard base of 6-9k fans that they can cater to for two seasons before "relaunching" the franchise in the new stadium. By the time the team moves into the new stadium, all the fans addicted to ultracheap tickets will be gone.
I'd still go to a game if they sold no beer. I'd just sneak in a bottle of Bacardi and buy a extra large Coke. I do that at Dodgers game all the times. Hmm....3 beers at $8.50 each, or a small bottle of rum ($6) and one large coke. Saves me the money. True fans find a way to still get buzzed and see the game.
I normally bring in a six pack in my son's diaper bag. Buy one, then fill up whenever I go to the bathroom.
Are you serious? Assuming this is a serious question, it hasn't happened. But if it doesn't happen, the Wizards won't be in Kansas City in 2007, in which case nothing in this thread matters. There is, however, plenty of reason to believe that a stadium will be in place. Just visit the Wizards forum, or read the other applicable threads in this one for complete details. If you're asking facetiously, let me know so I can negrep you.
Hmm...maybe I should have kids soon so I can do the same. Well, we all seem to be powerless in terms of putting pressure on someone to build a stadium. I think the best we can hope for is that KC continues to have a great season, establishes great fan support, hopefully these fans start voicing their wishes for a new stadium and some investors out there listen and are able to strike up at deal with the city/county for help in financing.