(04-11-2022, 11:05 PM)Emeritus Wrote:

In history this has been a tough topic for Bengal fans and for the city to face. With the topic to become more relevant in the coming years I thought maybe its time for discussion. I don't know many workings on the deal between the county and the team but what I do know is that a lease is coming up. I also know that any team with this current roster and how they continue to build will be head over heels attractive to other cities. Lets look at this from a wide view of the regional relevancy. A move of that capacity brings $$$$$..... I mean a retractable roof stadium . Its thirty or more cities that are ready. Is Cincy ready for that? If you think Jerry's world was big there will be cities and global ready to build for "The Family"
It means nothing to most now but it will soon.
20 years is a thought and 5 is a blink.

(05-04-2022, 07:26 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I don;t think we will be going retractable.. from article below, i think with the positive inspection on PB.. we will renovate 

https://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/i-team/paul-brown-stadium-should-bengals-build-a-new-stadium-instead-of-renovating-the-old-one

(05-05-2022, 12:42 AM)Emeritus Wrote:

I'm not sure what the best outcome is in this scenario because the organization is in a position of power now with both the taxpayers and the decision makers in Cincinnati. The renovations will costs upwards of a half a billion over time coming out of a lease in 2026 which a presidential election is in two years. No politics just reference to time flying. I'm really 60/40 now that these numbers have come out so I'm personally pro new stadium for future revenue to the team and city." Slightly" I can also understand both sides of the argument when you look at inflation currently and the unknown factors of time itself. Its a fascinating debate that goes on in many cities for various reasons. They say that winning cures everything so its nice to get the practice facilities upgraded to a championship level. At least the business relationship between the team and the city seems to be working and fluid. Go Bengals!

(05-04-2022, 06:33 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well that renovation would have to include Natural Grass

(04-12-2022, 12:47 PM)J24 Wrote: Its going to be Renovated for the world cup in 2026 at the very least. No it won't be a dome!

(05-05-2022, 02:33 AM)Trademark Wrote: I hope they get a roof, cold games are absolutely miserable

(05-05-2022, 01:18 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: They are?

Say the city tells Mike Brown no. What's he going to do? The relocation fee for the teams moving to LA were $550m each. Is there even anywhere that is willing to pay 100% of the cost of giving Mike Brown a new stadium? Say he moves to a new city, and for the sake of conversation they agree to pay $850m of a new $1.4b stadium (the very deal that Buffalo just gave the Bills). That means Mike Brown is out $550m for his share of the new stadium and $550m for his relocation fee. 

He's now spending $1.1b on moving and the city if Cincinnati sells the naming rights of Paul Brown Stadium and it becomes Paul Brown's Viagra Dong Medicine Stadium. Did he win? Can he even afford $1.1b to move the team to a new city and new stadium without losing controlling interest in the Bengals? I don't think he can.

(05-05-2022, 09:48 PM)Emeritus Wrote:

After all this time of making team friendly deals for his organization after losing year after year.. Your now suggesting to me that Mikey can't get a deal with the county or another city for what he wants. After making an improbable run to a SB that energized a region! If you weren't laughing you'd be serious.

(05-05-2022, 10:47 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: It's a different time now from when the Paul Brown Stadium deal was made. Here's the NFL stadiums opened since 2010 by % of total cost being publicly funded...

Rams/Chargers: 0%
Jets/Giants: 0%
49ers: 9%
Falcons: 17%
Raiders: 38%
Vikings: 45%

...Mike Brown is going to have to pony up huge amounts of money if he wants a new stadium. If he wants to move, he'll have to pony up even more, so that threat rings hollow. Having a good run for 1 year out of 31 doesn't suddenly give you "a position of power" to get hundreds of millions/a billion dollars from taxpayers.

Nobody is going to look at the 11yr/$110b TV rights deal they just signed and think "oh hey, these guys need OUR tax dollars". That's not even counting all their tickets, merchandise, concessions, gambling money, sponsorships (the NFL got $1.8b in sponsorship money in 2021)...

In 2001, the NFL had about ~$4b in revenue. In 2019, that number was ~$16b, before the new $10b/yr TV rights deal. The tolerance for paying for stadiums for a league that will be raking in WELL OVER $25b/yr in revenue by 2023 is small and getting smaller every year.

(05-05-2022, 11:34 PM)Whatever Wrote: The Raiders are also a historically a cash poor team and had no issues coming up with their share of the stadium funds or relocation fees.  The other owners also go a lot easier on the cash poor teams when it comes to those relocation fees.  The Raiders paid half of what you're talking.  Not to mention that Brown could just build the stadium across the river or in another Ohio county and avoid relocation fees altogether while depriving Hamilton County of the tax revenue from the team and it's employees.  Team revenue is also going to jump with the new tv deal and he could sell minority shares(which would be a hot commodity right now) if he desperately needed quick cash.  Brown isn't stuck, by any stretch.  

It isn't going to come to that, though.  He doesn't want to move and the county doesn't want him to move.  Both parties have been working on an agreeable split of costs for awhile now.

(05-04-2022, 07:26 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I don;t think we will be going retractable.. from article below, i think with the positive inspection on PB.. we will renovate 

https://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/i-team/paul-brown-stadium-should-bengals-build-a-new-stadium-instead-of-renovating-the-old-one

(04-19-2022, 12:11 PM)MTBengalsFan Wrote: This discussion sure confirms why Montana has but 1.1 million people as the 4th largest state.