I can’t understand why stadiums cost in the billions of dollars nowadays.
This puts the state of Kansas on the major leagues sports map. Is it worth it? Does it make sense, in dollars and cents?
And yet with talk of how KC Missouri is losing the Chiefs, they will still be in the same metropolitan area.
KCMO is a dying city rife with corruption and crime and stupidity. However, Arrowhead is fantastic stadium. Still, probably needs a rebuild with a roof so they don’t have to play in 20 below weather.
Mozzouri lost the St. Louis Cardinals....now the Chefs.
Shoeless Joe from Hannibal, Mo. went to the Senators.
KS would be the smallest population state to have a Big 4 pro sports franchise located within its borders.
This idiotic cycle has been on repeat for decades. The myth is that stadiums make their host locations “world class cities” and that they create ancillary jobs (they don’t.)
After the Rams debacle, missouri said no.
The Razor (Gillette) was paid for by the team. They did get the state to make some local road improvements, but that was in everybody’s interest considering gameday (and Christmas) traffic in the area. The stadium is now a combination stadium-shopping center, and the area has become a shopping Mecca, so there is Christmas and other shopping in the area. The road improvements were justified.
Foxboro was suburban, semirural not a metropolitan area, but about equidistant from New England’s three largest cities.
Is the Kansas legislature simply guaranteeing the bonds, and will they be paid off by the team, or are they unwriting them, and subsidizing the team?