Stadium Discussion

[SanBartG]

There should be no public financing of this stadium at all. For me, its not about a lot or the amount that just right. No need for subsidies.

Here is the FOS post about the deal.

http://www.fieldofschemes.com/2014/...cer-numbers-total-city-subsidy-now-at-206-5m/

Feel as though you may, there almost certainly won't be a stadium without some tax incentives. We're talking about building in one of the most expensive cities in the world for an expansion team. Ownership probably isn't willing to shoulder the entire cost. If the city has no stake, you can more or less guarantee nothing will get done.

 

[Rimil]

There should be no public financing of this stadium at all. For me, its not about a lot or the amount that just right. No need for subsidies.

Here is the FOS post about the deal.

http://www.fieldofschemes.com/2014/...cer-numbers-total-city-subsidy-now-at-206-5m/

Like someone said, once you get into the multi-hundred millions, everything is negotiable. (**Making up numbers here**) If NYCFC could bring an annual 20mm of economic benefit to an area because some billionaire sheik decided to spend 200mm+ on a team then he is well within his rights to say 'hey my money is benefiting your city, it would be nice if you threw me a bone cause I have other towns that will'. In all honesty the the city should pay a subsidy up to the benefit he brings. Its a wash to the city and expansion of its economic prowess. But as always the numbers are projections and sometimes fall short. And then there are people who love to cover up one side of the equation and only point to the city subsidies and stir public anti-sentiment. Its a political shit show.

But to say there should be no public financing I would say not fair to the sheik and his investment. That he has to take all the risk and the city gets to passively benefit through sales tax and employment tax that his money brought to the city. Nope, not when your dealing with big players who can move their capital around at their discretion. You have to give a little to get a little. And then sometimes you get fleeced and give journalist more to write about.

 

[Jon]

I think the images speaks for itself on this topic...

 

[Gotham Gator]

There should be no public financing of this stadium at all. For me, its not about a lot or the amount that just right. No need for subsidies.

Here is the FOS post about the deal.

http://www.fieldofschemes.com/2014/...cer-numbers-total-city-subsidy-now-at-206-5m/

That's interesting stuff, even if it wrongly includes the city's write-off of parking garage receivables.

It appears that at the time of writing (2014), the Bloomberg administration was offering a property tax writeoff and a rent abatement. He estimates the total subsidies of $100 million (not including the garage receivables). That's a sizable subsidy overall, but not too far off what is reasonable.

I think the real drawback for DeBlasio is that he had just gotten elected as the guy who was going to start running New York for the benefit of the working men/women and not the plutocrats, so he couldn't sign onto a plan that could ever be construed (no matter how unfairly) as having big giveaways for the team. I suspect he could get away with the same deal much more easily now.

 

[NickFromAstoria]

I think the real drawback for DeBlasio is that he had just gotten elected as the guy who was going to start running New York for the benefit of the working men/women and not the plutocrats, so he couldn't sign onto a plan that could ever be construed (no matter how unfairly) as having big giveaways for the team. I suspect he could get away with the same deal much more easily now.

All he really needs is something that he can point to to say that he got that Bloomberg didn't. The 50 mini-pitches go a decent way to filling that need, although I'm sure that if he had his druthers they'd help subsidize some affordable housing similar to how they did in Manchester.

 

[Kjbert]

I have no hopes here

 

[Gotham Gator]

All he really needs is something that he can point to to say that he got that Bloomberg didn't. The 50 mini-pitches go a decent way to filling that need, although I'm sure that if he had his druthers they'd help subsidize some affordable housing similar to how they did in Manchester.

Yep, and I half expect to see something like that in the final announcement.

One thing I saw when looking through articles on the original deal is that Melissa Mark-Viverito was opposed to the plan. She is pretty powerful in the city, and could be causing a lot of problems behind the scenes even today.

 

[NickFromAstoria]

Yep, and I half expect to see something like that in the final announcement.

One thing I saw when looking through articles on the original deal is that Melissa Mark-Viverito was opposed to the plan. She is pretty powerful in the city, and could be causing a lot of problems behind the scenes even today.

She's term limited though, and since her original post-speakership plans fell through I think it's less likely she does anything to alienate the mayor if he comes to an agreement with CFG. (Then again she comes from an activist background so she can be a wild card)

 

[Gotham Gator]

(Then again she comes from an activist background so she can be a wild card)

That's putting it mildly.

Good that she is term limited.

Worth adding that the GAL site is in her district.

 

[Gotham Gator]

Okay. That's it. No more posts.

Taking two weeks off. If we can all stay off the thread for two weeks, we will get that stadium announcement.

#2weeks2astadium

 

[mgarbowski]

Okay. That's it. No more posts.

Taking two weeks off. If we can all stay off the thread for two weeks, we will get that stadium announcement.

#2weeks2astadium

no reason not to keep going until midnight

 

[413Blue]

I think we should simply make up some random countdown until stadium announcement and act as if it a legitimate countdown. Let's do 210 days in honor of former superstars, Andrea Pirlo and Mix.

210 days. I'll try to update this thread daily so everyone knows when the announement will come. If we stick with it and say it enough, it has to come true. It's a pure grassroots movement that will pressure the club and City officials to come to terms!

 

[413Blue]

https://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2017/05/02/us-soccer-national-training-center

U.S. Soccer made a $46 million net profit off the Copa América Centenario last year and now has a surplus in excess of $100 million. So what is the federation going to do with some of that money?

Talks have begun at U.S. Soccer about building a new dedicated national training center that would be like the one France has at Clairefontaine and Italy has at Coverciano, though it is too early in the discussions to identify a location. StubHub Center in the Los Angeles area has been the national training center since it opened in 2003, but that facility has become crowded with the arrival of the NFL’s Chargers.

• WAHL: The story behind U.S. Soccer's greatest "What If?" moment

A new national training center would be a massive construction project and investment in the future of American soccer. It would come on the heels of the new National Training and Coaching Development Center being built by Sporting Kansas City, which is due to open in December and become an epicenter for the future of coaching education in the country while also boasting brand new training facilities

While it would be awesome to see this in NYC, for a number of reasons it won't happen I would presume. Weather, cost of land/construction etc. and the amount of space needed would restrict this from being done within NYC. However, it would be more convenient to have our training center in NYC than LA for our Euro based players. It would also give us a stronger sell with City officials to build a joint facility. Still don't see this being constructed in NYC, unless they build a joint training facility in Westchester or Long Island completely separate from the stadium.
My guess would be this get's built along the East coast, possibly in conjunction with a potential expansion team. One of the Carolina bids seems like a great partnership.

 

[sbrylski]

https://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2017/05/02/us-soccer-national-training-center


While it would be awesome to see this in NYC, for a number of reasons it won't happen I would presume. Weather, cost of land/construction etc. and the amount of space needed would restrict this from being done within NYC. However, it would be more convenient to have our training center in NYC than LA for our Euro based players. It would also give us a stronger sell with City officials to build a joint facility. Still don't see this being constructed in NYC, unless they build a joint training facility in Westchester or Long Island completely separate from the stadium.
My guess would be this get's built along the East coast, possibly in conjunction with a potential expansion team. One of the Carolina bids seems like a great partnership.

I also doubt it, but it's a lot more likely to be built in Harrison than the boroughs, if they look at the New York area.

 

[Kjbert]

Has to be in a better climate. San Diego makes more sense than New York. I do agree that the East Coast makes more sense.

Can they buy the land that the USSF is leaving with the Academy collapsing?

 

[Ulrich]

Has to be in a better climate. San Diego makes more sense than New York. I do agree that the East Coast makes more sense.

Can they buy the land that the USSF is leaving with the Academy collapsing?

Wherever it goes, it must have an international airport with flights to most major European cities. If it's on the east coast, the likely suspects, with good weather and either an MLS team or one vying, are: Atlanta, Charlotte, Tampa, and Orlando. Atlanta is a bit more centralized, but the climate of Florida would be best year round and prepping for CONCACAF games (with the humidity).

 

[snugglefarts]

It's going to be in Frisco, Texas.

 

[Falastur]

https://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2017/05/02/us-soccer-national-training-center


While it would be awesome to see this in NYC, for a number of reasons it won't happen I would presume. Weather, cost of land/construction etc. and the amount of space needed would restrict this from being done within NYC. However, it would be more convenient to have our training center in NYC than LA for our Euro based players. It would also give us a stronger sell with City officials to build a joint facility. Still don't see this being constructed in NYC, unless they build a joint training facility in Westchester or Long Island completely separate from the stadium.
My guess would be this get's built along the East coast, possibly in conjunction with a potential expansion team. One of the Carolina bids seems like a great partnership.

Doesn't it kind of contravene the spirit of a national training centre for it to be built in conjunction with a team? The point of a training centre is not just to have some usable facilities for anyone who wants to book it to use, it's to provide a nationally-run and nationally-focused academy producing top talents for the national side. It's supposed to be neutral and non-club-affiliated in order to stand as the central hub of academy training. If you then make that facility a partnership with a specific club then don't you open up the USSSF to all kinds of accusations of bias?

Imagine this scenario: Player A lives in City B, which has an MLS team, but City B FC have an academy which still operates on the basis of pay-to-play, and Player A cannot afford the fees. Under MLS rules, teams have an exclusivity area which prevents other MLS teams from poaching their talent from under their noses. Player A - as an outstanding talent - is, however, eligible to join the elite USSSF National Academy in City C, which has been built in partnership with FC City C. Player A graduates and USSSF, in accordance with the terms of their agreement with FC City C, encourages him to sign for FCCC, where he qualifies as Homegrown. City B FC now find that FCCC has managed to poach a player from their city in contravention of the rules by virtue of FCCC's exploitative partnership with the national federation, and takes them to court.

Surely a national team centre would have to be non-affiliated for just this kind of reason?

 

[Ulrich]

Doesn't it kind of contravene the spirit of a national training centre for it to be built in conjunction with a team? The point of a training centre is not just to have some usable facilities for anyone who wants to book it to use, it's to provide a nationally-run and nationally-focused academy producing top talents for the national side. It's supposed to be neutral and non-club-affiliated in order to stand as the central hub of academy training. If you then make that facility a partnership with a specific club then don't you open up the USSSF to all kinds of accusations of bias?

Imagine this scenario: Player A lives in City B, which has an MLS team, but City B FC have an academy which still operates on the basis of pay-to-play, and Player A cannot afford the fees. Under MLS rules, teams have an exclusivity area which prevents other MLS teams from poaching their talent from under their noses. Player A - as an outstanding talent - is, however, eligible to join the elite USSSF National Academy in City C, which has been built in partnership with FC City C. Player A graduates and USSSF, in accordance with the terms of their agreement with FC City C, encourages him to sign for FCCC, where he qualifies as Homegrown. City B FC now find that FCCC has managed to poach a player from their city in contravention of the rules by virtue of FCCC's exploitative partnership with the national federation, and takes them to court.

Surely a national team centre would have to be non-affiliated for just this kind of reason?

Unless I'm mistaken, the USSF training center is used specifically for national team activities - it's not used as an individual academy that anybody can join, rather a location for each pool of age-group NT players to gather at when camps are conducted.

In the past, it was at a Chula Vista - using the USOC facilities - and then it was moved to Carson, Ca in a partnership with the (former Home Depot) StubHub Center (LA Galaxy) in 2003. This helped to cut down on overhead because facilities were shared and the USSF didn't need them every day of the year. Additionally, these locations were used because most of the US coaches were based in CA (Bora, Sampson, Klinnsman) and it was convenient to fly to Central America. Bucking the trend, when Arena first managed, he was with DCUnited and the MNT had a lot of camps on the east coast rather than go to a Chula Vista.

I guess one could argue that it provided an unfair advantage to the LA Galaxy, but really USSF was just another tenant paying rent and using the facilities. Any team could conceivably do that for the extra revenue. Personally, I think that if an MLS club wants to enter into a partnership with USSF, and in doing so have essentially a cathedral for training albeit one that is not 100% their own, then I have no problem with it. I would expect their stadium to also be used as a "national" stadium for many games. If not for the Field Turf at Mercedes-Benz in ATL, I could see Atlanta being the landing spot as that would be a ridiculously amazing venue for high profile matches, convenient to the West coast & Europe, a monster airport with routes everywhere, and perfect weather for training.

 

[Kjbert]

They should probably have it in Houston. Massive airports. Cheap land. Hot weather. Easy to South and Central America. Big connection hub to Europe.