What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Your new Los Angeles Vikings

Re: Your new Los Angeles Vikings

WeWantMore said:
Not here nor there really, but I wonder if the bolded is true. Say you're a fan of a team in Minnesota, but you've never even been there. Do you really care where they play?
Click to expand...

Kind of. The amount of irritation that has to pile up for a team to move is enough that if the Sharks up and left for Quebec City, Kansas City, or Seattle (and it wasn't clearly a Phoenix level community failure), I'd probably either find a different NHL team or drop the sport on a pro level for a few years.
 
Re: Your new Los Angeles Vikings

An update from an ESPN blog:

The state House of Representatives formally took up the bill at 3 p.m. ET, but debating the stadium bill has proved difficult given the volume of chants from fans just outside the chamber walls. Eventually, according to onlookers, House Speaker Kurt Zellers asked that the doors remained closed so the debate could be heard by all members.

If you're following the play-by-play on Twitter or via the House's closed-circuit feed, you know that members approved an amendment that increased the Vikings' share in the $975 million project from $427 million to $532 million. It's doubtful the Vikings would go for that change, but it's important to note that amendments are always subject to negotiation when a final bill is drafted. It wouldn't be surprising to see the bill changed in other ways as well.

In the end, however, the goal for stadium supporters is to continue to push the ball down the field. In the end, that would mean approval in some form from the House and moving on to the Senate. Again, the House could be hours and hours away from a final vote. Stay tuned.
 
Re: Your new Los Angeles Vikings

I liked the lady that basically wanted the NFL to violate their own existing TV contracts.

You know, we should all spend a few hours a week watching our state/local/national politicians just so we're reminded about the absolutely idiotic things they say.

Edit:
@johnkriesel

One of my colleagues just talked about the fact that the NFL was looking into having a cable network. News flash: they launched it in 2003.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Re: Your new Los Angeles Vikings

5mn_Major said:
If you're following the play-by-play on Twitter or via the House's closed-circuit feed, you know that members approved an amendment that increased the Vikings' share in the $975 million project from $427 million to $532 million. It's doubtful the Vikings would go for that change, but it's important to note that amendments are always subject to negotiation when a final bill is drafted. It wouldn't be surprising to see the bill changed in other ways as well.
Click to expand...

Given how much of Wylf's 'contribution' comes form stadium naming rights and the NFL, Wylf can gfh if he doesn't want to up the Vikings' ante.
 
Re: Your new Los Angeles Vikings

Now to the Senate..

$515 million is what Zygi will pay..that has to be one of the highest amounts an owner has put forth?
 
Re: Your new Los Angeles Vikings

MavHockey14 said:
Now to the Senate..

$515 million is what Zygi will pay..that has to be one of the highest amounts an owner has put forth?
Click to expand...
No, the stadiums that are 100% privately funded - including the $1B+ Dallas stadium and the stadium, coincidentally, that's being proposed in LA - have more money put into them by their owners.
 
St. Clown said:
No, the stadiums that are 100% privately funded - including the $1B+ Dallas stadium and the stadium, coincidentally, that's being proposed in LA - have more money put into them by their owners.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't the problem have been solved already if the cheapskate had just said Fu-- it and built a new stadium himself?
 
Re: Your new Los Angeles Vikings

bigmrg74 said:
Wouldn't the problem have been solved already if the cheapskate had just said Fu-- it and built a new stadium himself?
Click to expand...
It solves the states problem of needing a stadium. But then he would have to pay out of pocket or through investors. Why do that when you can get some suckers (either in MN or CA) to pay for it for you.
 
Re: Your new Los Angeles Vikings

XYZ said:
The one banner that included "Don't become the 3rd Dakota" was somewhat amusing, at least.
Click to expand...
Heh. It's probably already bad enough being West Wisconsin. :p
 
Re: Your new Los Angeles Vikings

I'm a longtime Vikings fan and hope they stay, but the amount of money put into stadiums now is just beyond ridiculous. How about knocking down the Mall of America and just rebuilding the Met?
 
Re: Your new Los Angeles Vikings

The Senate now dealing with the crucial issue of who gets first crack at a hypothetical MLS team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top