Saturday, May 11, 2013

Utter nonsense

I finally had a chance to see the "plans" such as they were released to the public for the stadium improvement.  Included items were:
  • Removing the lower bowl on the visitor side, and re-pouring concrete to make it permanent and closer to the field
  • Re-doing part of the lower bowl on the home side and both endzones, including some new concrete
  • Replacing seats in the lower bowl
  • Replacing most of the seats in the upper bowl; removing some number of them
  • Adding new video display boards
  • Adding a partial roof
  • (and as Stu Gotts reminds me) HD lighting
What did you notice about that list?   There's NO INFRASTRUCTURE.  The stadium itself is sound, this is about changing the seating and nothing more.

Yeah, maybe the seats are old and need to be replaced.  And perhaps there is a need to re-pour the concrete on the visitor side, based on the retractable seating for the Marlins.  But does it *have to be* done?

And the new video boards?  Didn't Wayne replace those just 6 years ago?

The roof - whatever.  Sure it might be nice.  But its not a must-have, certainly.

So its a ruse to get public funds to create new seats, and thus make more money for him.

Now we can look forward to more "woe is me" from him, and a lot of arm twisting saying he needs this, or boo hoo, he might have to move.

And once again....they ain't moving anywhere - that's just more bluster.

sigh....its just utter nonsense.


Like This Article ? :

9 comments

avatar

The only true "must have" is upgrading the lighting... needed for HDTV broadcasts

avatar

Yeah, thanks. I left that one out. My bad!

HD Lighting is actually "rented" for night games, as odd as that sounds....in the end, Ross will probably have to foot the bill for that one - I can't imagine the break even on that is very many games.

avatar

You didn't know this? It has been clear from the get go that the re-design is for the improvement of the stadium as a viewing venue for the fans. That's the reason the NFL is resisting going to Miami - the venue is not conducive. The seating is too far away; the fan experience is poor; the stadium is easily among the bottom 3 in the NFL. Only Alameda might be a worse venue. Sorry, but any Dolphin fan should want their stadium to be among the best in the NFL, not the worst. Your complaint here is vacuous.

This has been discussed many times on many Dolphin discussion boards. It's about seating being closer to the field; it's about better fan experience. Also, by the way, such things are not zero sum games - it benefits both the fans and the owners. Just like the iPhone or iPad or laptop you used to write this mess benefits both yourself and the company you purchased it fun. Guess what? Businesses are in it for a profit but they know that their long term survival means offering a good experience (esp. in sports) for their patrons. That happens to be true for the design of this website on which you are writing, by the way. Ultimately such a complaint above is hypocrisy.

avatar

You didn't know this? It has been clear from the get go that the re-design is for the improvement of the stadium as a viewing venue for the fans. That's the reason the NFL is resisting going to Miami - the venue is not conducive. The seating is too far away; the fan experience is poor; the stadium is easily among the bottom 3 in the NFL. Only Alameda might be a worse venue. Sorry, but any Dolphin fan should want their stadium to be among the best in the NFL, not the worst. Your complaint here is vacuous.

This has been discussed many times on many Dolphin discussion boards. It's about seating being closer to the field; it's about better fan experience. Also, by the way, such things are not zero sum games - it benefits both the fans and the owners. Just like the iPhone or iPad or laptop you used to write this mess benefits both yourself and the company you purchased it fun. Guess what? Businesses are in it for a profit but they know that their long term survival means offering a good experience (esp. in sports) for their patrons. That happens to be true for the design of this website on which you are writing, by the way. Ultimately such a complaint above is hypocrisy.

avatar

Fans are the Phins customers... if giving them a better experience is what Ross is after, great... but he needs to use his own money. There is no benefit for the taxpayers in any of this. South Florida doesn't need those types stadium upgrades to draw tourists in February for a Super Bowl.

avatar

why is the cost 350 million bux. the cost doesn't make any sense for what they are upgrading.

avatar

1) Whether one likes or hates the improvements, it should be non-negotiable that when the public has a chance to make their voice heard on a matter that would affect their lives as greatly as the referendum would, politicians should let them do so.
2) I could be wrong, but IIRC, the 'Phins never portrayed the stadium's infrastructure as unsound. Rather, everything I've heard them say about the renovations and upgrades is that they were needed to make a competitive bid for the SB and possibly other sporting events. If so, this is a strawman.
3) Ross has been adamant that while HE will not sell the team, he cannot guarantee what the next owner (either through sale of the team or Ross' death) will do. Definitely a strawman.

avatar

Stanford J Young - I was aware of what the Dolphins were asking for, but I hadn't read the info provided by the phins. It (naturally) backed up what we know.

My problem is that our local reporters seem to forget this and take it at face value that this was somehow "needed" rather than "desired"...they need to take a step back and stop being shills for the owner. To be fair, its not all of them, but its enough to draw national attention to this being necessary in order to remain viable.

The team's success will decide on how well fans react, and whether they come out to games. And how profitable the owner is.

BTW, saying my "complaint" is hypocrisy indicates you don't read my work (or at least my recent work). "This mess" is one of the few places you will see facts that are counter to the media (and team's) representation of events.

avatar

One more comment: maybe Dolphins should want their stadium to be the best. But this is among the rare few stadiums that are entirely, 100% privately owned. It should not be incumbent on the community to fund something because the owner wants it. If the public owned a stake in it, then I would agree that perhaps they consider public funding.

Vacuous? No....