Category Archives: Football

02.01.13
by

Rams win arbitration case, will St. Louis pay up?

A three-man arbitration panel ruled today in favor of the St. Louis Rams over the City/County of St. Louis, setting the stage for what will be either a major public payout for a renovated/new stadium or the Rams leaving Missouri altogether.

Last year, the Rams and the public agency (St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission) that runs the Edward Jones Dome presented different cases for what renovations would be required to make the Dome “top tier”, per the stadium’s lease. The Rams pushed to rebuild the roof and two-thirds of the stadium, a project that would cost up to $700 million. The agency’s offer was $128 million. Given the age of the facility and the number of new ones that have been built since, it only makes sense that the arbitration panel would rule in favor of the Rams. The St. Louis CVC now has 30 days to decide if it wants to go through with the renovations as specified by the Rams, or allow the lease to become year-to-year after the 2015 NFL season.

The ruling notes that for the Dome to be considered top tier, individual components of the stadium and the stadium as a whole would have to be among the top eight (quarter) in the league. The ruling doesn’t specify which stadia are top tier, but it’s not difficult to figure which ones would qualify in terms of amenities and fan experience:

  • Cowboys Stadium (2009)
  • MetLife Stadium (2010)
  • Lucas Oil Stadium (2008)
  • University of Phoenix Stadium (2006)
  • Reliant Stadium (2002)
  • Mercedes Benz Superdome (1975, renovated 2006 and 2011)
  • Ford Field (2002)
  • CenturyLink Field (2002)

This list could soon include the stadia for the 49ers and Vikings, raising the bar for the CVC in the process. The final determination date of top tier is March 1, 2015. Although the Rams are asking for lot, the simple fact of the matter is that they could’ve asked for more, like a fully retractable roof or Texas-sized scoreboards. Chances are, they would’ve been awarded it. That said, the ruling is pretty clear that what the Rams are asking for would propel “The Ed” to top tier status:

The Panel finds and concludes that The RAMS 2012 Plans will produce a First Tier stadium and that the CVC 2012 Plans will not. That is the Award of this Panel. There is no reason for the Panel to produce its own plan.

That last part is important, as it gives the Rams all of the leverage in future negotiations, should they choose to negotiate. The panel notes that it was left with a clear choice between one set of plans that would bring the stadium to top tier status and one that wouldn’t. One wonders if CVC had made a more accommodating offer, whether that would have been deemed acceptable by the panel.

The political phase comes next, and it promises to be juicy. There seems to be little public support for the cost and scope of renovations the Rams are asking for. In addition, the Cardinals could file a protest, considering that Busch Stadium was largely paid for with private dollars. The panel previously denied a CVC claim that the Rams pay for 49% of the project cost.

While the next decision is up to St. Louis pols, Rams owner Stan Kroenke has all the cards. Kroenke has repeatedly stated that he wants to keep the team in St. Louis, so an LA threat may not loom as large as it would for the Chargers, or even the Raiders. Still, AEG’s Farmers Field project should prove an effective stalking horse if Kroenke chooses to use it. Already there is some talk about the Rams moving to a new open air stadium, which could be located downtown or in the suburbs of St. Louis County. The Rams’ real goal may be to get a venue where they have control over all revenue streams, even if it means some sort of private contribution towards the stadium’s cost. In the end, a new stadium may be the only solution that works for both parties, since it wasn’t clear where the Rams would play while the renovations at the Dome happened (the project could take as long as three years).

The CVC uses the Dome as part of its convention facilities, and there may be a case to allow the Rams to leave for another stadium in the area because it’ll allow the CVC to open weekends that would normally be used for football games. That argument doesn’t seem to have legs, not when Indianapolis built a new stadium for the Colts and an expanded convention facility, and Atlanta is considering doing the same for the Falcons.

It’s not panic time for St. Louis Rams fans yet. But with Kroenke in such an advantageous position, no one can afford to play hardball with the man. The best they can hope is that Kroenke suddenly becomes magnanimous. Kroenke doesn’t have a track record of going all out for his teams (Rams, Denver Nuggets, Colorado Avalanche, Colorado Rapids, Arsenal), so don’t bet on him going all out for a new stadium.

01.25.13
by

Coliseum Authority raids scoreboard funds for Raiders study

I wasn’t able to attend this morning’s Coliseum Authority meeting. Thankfully for everyone, Steven Tavares of the East Bay Citizen was. And the story he got coming out of there was quite a doozy. The JPA approved a $1 million contract for additional studies on Coliseum City, which we figured would happen given the new pro-development makeup of the JPA board. What we didn’t see coming was just how the study would be paid for.

How the Authority will pay the $1 million in total costs for the two studies also rankled some commissioners. According to Alameda County Auditor-Controller Pat O’Connell, the Authority will “short” a $3.5 million capital improvements fund previously earmarked for a new scoreboard at O.co Coliseum. The Oakland Athletics and the Authority have been in negotiations to replace the out-of-date scoreboards, said Goodwin, and Friday’s decision may negatively impact relations with the A’s, also in search of a new ballpark.

“What’s the message we’re sending to the A’s?” Goodwin asked. According to staff, the A’s estimate the costs of the scoreboards to be $4 million. “Well, it better cost closer to $2.5 million, if we do what we’re about to do,” countered Haggerty. The alternative, said O’Connell, would be to ask the Alameda County Board of Supervisors and Oakland City Council for addition funds, a move likely unpopular on both fronts.

Maybe the shortfall will force the JPA to buy used. Whether that’s enough to get improvements or not, it’s a clear indicator that the East Bay is going forward on Coliseum City, cost uncertainty and other tenant issues be damned.

Worse, the retractable roof concept appears to have gained traction, even though it will surely inflate the project’s price tag. Assistant City Administrator Fred Blackwell was careful to note that all three current tenants would get new venues under the plan, though as usual, how that would all come together was not articulated. Even the Raiders are not a given in terms of paying for their part of the study, as the NFL and team are fashioning their own – for a stadium only with little ancillary development.

Doesn’t this seem like a lot of flailing right now? This is despite having the project under consideration for the better part of three years. Many in Oakland are quite convinced that this is the vision for the city’s future. What of the teams? Aren’t they supposed to be partners in this? Aren’t they paying the freight? Apparently that doesn’t matter, not as long as one great redevelopment plan remains out there for someone to stake their political career to.

01.21.13
by

News for 1/21/13

Update 11:00 PM – Tomorrow at 2 PM Mayor Johnson will hold a press conference where further plans to keep the Kings in Sacramento will be unveiled, possibly including the disclosure of one or more assembled bidding groups for the the franchise.

NorCal has it pretty good these days in terms of sports. Unless you’re a Raider fan. Or the Kings fan. About the Kings…

  • Around the end of the AFC Championship Game, a flurry of reports from national sources had the purchase/sale agreement between the Maloofs and the Hansen-Ballmer group sewn up, with the paperwork being submitted as early as tonight. The price hasn’t budged from the oft-discussed figure: a $525 million valuation with the Hansen-Ballmer group paying for a 65% majority share, or $341.25 million. One new wrinkle is the Maloofs’ demand of a non-refundable $30 million deposit, which sounds like either pure desperation on the buyers’/sellers’ part or a sign that the move will be rubber stamped with it reaches the NBA’s Board of Governors. The remaining 35% of minority shares have not been arranged to be sold in any way except for a 7% chunk that will be sold in a bankruptcy proceeding. For their part, Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson and forces in Cowtown continue to work towards providing a counteroffer. It’s unclear if that counteroffer will get more than a cursory look. [Pro Basketball Talk/Aaron Bruski | ESPN/Marc Stein]
  • In the latest Matier & Ross column, there’s an item about John Fisher attending a Warriors game courtside with W’s owner Joe Lacob. “That prompted one East Bay mover and shaker to speculate that a deal might be in the offing for Lacob to buy the A’s,” a notion that was summarily shut down by Lew Wolff. Hmmm, who could that East Bay mover and shaker be? Perhaps someone who is working as a consultant for the Warriors to move the team to SF? Grasping at straws, anyone? [SF Chronicle/Matier & Ross]
  • Lew Wolff spoke at the Silicon Valley Business Journal’s Economic Forecast breakfast on Thursday. SVBJ had one choice quote from Wolff, “I want people in LA to say ‘the one place in California I want to build is San Jose.’ ” Wolff also joked, “Next time I’ll take on the pyramids instead of baseball.” Nonsense, Lew. You just have to be more of a dick to the other owners to get your way. [Silicon Valley Business Journal/Shana Lynch]
  • A little-reported story on this blog has ended rather quietly. That would be the ballad of Charlotte lawyer Jerry Reese, who filed lawsuit after lawsuit against the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County to prevent a AAA ballpark from being built there. Reese’s reasoning was that any such deal would impair the market’s ability to get a major league stadium deal done. After a judge threatened sanctions, Reese agreed to settle and drop all lawsuits, including those related to a AAA ballpark under construction in Uptown Charlotte. Charlotte is considered a somewhat overextended market for MLB to begin with so it’s hard to take such an effort seriously, but you can’t blame Reese for trying. [Charlotte Observer/Gary L. Wright]
  • No surprise that the Chargers will stay in San Diego at least through the 2013 season. Better to wait until the AEG sale happens (or doesn’t). [NFL.com/Dan Hanzus]
  • Cleveland Browns Stadium will now be known as “FirstEnergy Stadium, Home of the Cleveland Browns”. Poetic. [Cleveland Plain Dealer/Tom Reed]
  • The 49ers may hold off on selling naming rights to their stadium until the proper deal comes in. With all of the advance money coming in, they can afford to wait. One thing they don’t have compared to another unnamed stadium, Cowboys Stadium, is the sheer number of events held annually that can help draw enough attention for a company to justify the naming rights fee. I imagine that the 49ers will get a naming rights deal done before Super Bowl L in 2016, the better for a bidder to take advantage as MetLife will prior to Super Bowl XLVIII. [SF Chronicle/Matier & Ross]
  • One stadium is getting rid of its naming rights sponsor, Sporting Park in Kansas City, KS. They’re distancing themselves from Livestrong for obvious reasons. One not-so-obvious reason: the MLS All-Star Game will be held there this year. No need for a tarnished brand to represent the league in that manner. [Reuters/Simon Evans]
  • The Cubs have unveiled plans for their massive renovation of Wrigley Field. Besides the oft-reported newer, larger clubhouses, there will also be two large club areas behind the plate, expanded concourse areas throughout, and a patio in the left field corner. One new deal point is that the Ricketts family is willing to pay for the $300 million themselves as long as the City of Chicago/Cook County doesn’t start placing a bunch of restrictions on what the club can/can’t do at Wrigley. More night games, anyone? [Bleacher Nation]
  • Sports economist Andrew Zimbalist considers downtown Tampa the best place for a Rays ballpark. That won’t make the keep-em-in-St. Pete-crowd happy. [Tampa Bay Times/Stephen Nohlgren]
  • One community in Florida is having a tough time figuring out what to do with a stadium-related sales tax once the stadium is paid off. [Florida Today/Matt Reed]
  • It seems that the only way to introduce a new stadium concept in Las Vegas is to make it bigger and more ostentatious than the previous concepts. The UNLV Now concept has a $800-900 million cost attached to it. That seems very Vegas to me. The new wrinkle: a 100-yard long video screen stretched along one of the sidelines. Why put seats in the best place you could have a video screen there instead? [Las Vegas Sun/Ray Brewer]
  • The Oilers and the City of Edmonton are reportedly close to a new arena deal. Oilers ownership backed off a $6 million/year subsidy demand, which was a major sticking point previously. Instead, the team will be asking for more direct subsidies upfront. [Edmonton Journal/Marty Klinkenberg]
  • As the Kings prepare to leave their home of 25 years, another former Kings home may be up for demolition. That home is Kemper Arena, which was barely a decade old when the Kings moved from Kansas City to Sacramento in 1985. An effort is underway to save Kemper, spearheaded by the namesake’s descendants. Kemper Arena hosted the 1988 Final Four, numerous “home” games for the Kansas Jayhawks basketball team, and most ignominiously, the 1999 WWF event Over The Edge, during which Owen Hart plummeted 70 feet to his death from a malfunctioning harness. [KCTV-5/Chris Oberholtz]
  • According the Milken Institute, the South Bay is the #1 economic market in the country. SF/Peninsula is 36th, while the East Bay is 155th, below Vallejo-Fairfield and Fresno. Milken seems to attribute much a market’s economic power to its tech proliferation, which might penalize the East Bay, but if you look at the rankings, it doesn’t. [Milken Institute]
  • It what has to be considered your classic Friday afternoon bad news dump maneuver, Clorox announced that it’s selling its headquarters building in downtown Oakland for $110 million. The buyer is real estate firm Westcore Properties. Westcore is leasing back more than half of the building to Clorox, though the length of the lease was not disclosed. The news comes several months after Clorox relocated much of its R&D staff to Pleasanton. Now I can understand Clorox not wanting to deal with the overhead of being a landlord, and the company runs quite lean with a small cash position. But whenever you hear about similar sell/leaseback deals, they usually aren’t good. A similar deal was reported that very same day by Sony when the tech giant announced that it was selling its midtown Manhattan headquarters for $1.1 billion. The Maloofs sold and leased back ARCO Arena because they were low on cash. In other words, no one’s celebrating about this. [Oakland Tribune/George Avalos | Financial Times/Michiyo Nakamoto]

More as it comes. One quick viewing note: on most cable/satellite systems, NHL Center Ice is doing a free preview through the end of the month. Check your local provider.

01.18.13
by

No please, really, take your time Oakland

The Coliseum Authority released its agenda for the upcoming January 25th meeting. On the agenda is a procedural item of voting a new Chair and Vice-Chair. The other item, 6b, involves the following:

6b. Resolution of the Oakland Alameda County Coliseum Authority:
1. Waiving Competition and Authorizing Staff To Negotiate One or More Professional Services Contracts to Conduct

Studies for Site Planning and Development Scenarios, and to Create Estimates Of Building Budget And Profit And Loss Statements, For a Potential New Stadium and Related Development on Land Currently Owned By The Authority That Lies Within the Coliseum City Specific Plan Area, for a Total Amount Not To Exceed $500,000; and

2. Authorizing Staff To Competitively Procure and Negotiate One or More Professional Services Contracts to Conduct Studies of Revenue Potential and Market Demand From a Potential New Stadium and Related Development on Land Currently Owned By The Authority That Lies Within The Coliseum City Specific Plan Area, for a Total Amount Not To Exceed $500,000; and

3. Authorizing the Chair of the Oakland Alameda County Coliseum Authority to Execute Contracts for Services With Selected Consultants Without Returning to the Authority Board; and

4. Amending the Authority’s Budget to Allocate up to $1,000,000 in Available Oakland Alameda County Coliseum Authority Funding For These Purposes

Woah there, wait a second. Is the JPA really saying that it still has studies to complete? It needs to do financial projections and a development plan? And it’s executing this now without competitive bidding? You have got to be kidding me. This stuff was supposed to be done by now. Funding for Coliseum City was authorized in February 2010, almost three years ago. This is supposed to be the easy part.

Now, maybe the upshot is that the Raiders and JPA came to an agreement on a lease extension, allowing these funds to be freed up. But if anyone from the East Bay is looking for signs of progress soon, this certainly won’t help. At this rate the 49ers will have been at their Santa Clara stadium 7-10 years before anything gets built in Oakland. Also, note that the resolution says stadium in singular form. Will there be a two-stadium alternative, as some pols believe is the best option? Or are they talking about another multipurpose stadium? I can’t wait. Actually, I guess I can. I have no choice.

I suppose these “additional” studies can be completed by the end of the year. In a week full of unbelievable BS news in the sports world, this ranks up there, at least locally. Suspiciously, the JPA’s annual financials have not yet been released. They probably won’t show much in the way of funds spent on Coliseum City so far. This is so disappointing, and yet, par for the course. No wonder the Warriors plowed their own path. They can’t trust the JPA to make anything happen in a timely manner.

01.17.13
by

Two mayors, two different approaches

Some people are going to view this post as more piling on Oakland. It’s not. It’s a demonstration of what leadership is, and what it means to follow through. You’ve been warned.

—-

Many of the mayors throughout the country are in Washington this week to attend the US Conference of Mayors, where the big topic is gun violence and how to reduce it. The big fish at the event is Vice President Joe Biden, who President Obama tasked with developing a plan for gun control and other related initiatives.

In the face of increasing criticism over her effectiveness in handling the crime and murder rates in Oakland, Mayor Jean Quan left for the conference earlier this week. Her office says that she is “hoping to have conversations” on how to reduce the crime rate, which frankly, sounds like a bad excuse for taking a trip to DC for the inauguration. Maybe she’ll get some kind of commitment from someone in a federal capacity, but VP Biden’s team put together the plan and President Obama signed 23 executive orders without needing Quan to be in DC.

Also in DC for the conference is MC Hammer, who became an employee of the city’s Convention & Tourism Bureau last November. Hammer’s position is to promote tourism, which I have to imagine is a difficult sell when everyday there are headlines about one shooting or another. So there are two Oakland leaders in DC at the moment.

Now all of this would be little more than your typical Washington hobnobbing session if it weren’t for the actions of Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who abruptly canceled his trip to DC. Why would he cancel the trip even as he was scheduled to speak?

The things that KJ is referencing are his efforts to put together (in parallel) a competing ownership bid that would keep the Kings in Sacramento and an arena package that would be acceptable to David Stern and the NBA owners. KJ is working with a deadline of March 1st. Quan’s deadline for both the Raiders and A’s is effectively the end of the year, so she technically doesn’t have to act too swiftly. But it’s telling that while East and West Oakland are going to hell, Quan is in DC just a month after going to China. In both cases, she’s trying to find solutions, money, or both outside of the city. On the stadium front, Quan has created one task force or another and authorized money for a Coliseum City study which has not yet materialized. There isn’t much to show for Victory Court or Howard Terminal (so far) for that matter. Meanwhile, KJ is rallying forces in the Sacramento region to find a solution. It’s a stark contrast, and while there’s a good chance neither will be successful in the end due to circumstances beyond their control, it’s clear that there’s one mayor who’s trying, and another who’s simply asking for help and not actually doing much.

Then again, this is Quan’s last Twitter update (she’s more active on Facebook):

Welp.

01.16.13
by

Super Bowl Musical Chairs

In May the NFL owners are expected to award the Super Bowl L (50th Anniversary in 2016) to either Miami, or San Francisco/Santa Clara. The loser will get to square off with Houston for the right to host Super Bowl LI in 2017.

Officials in Miami are scurrying to make improvements at Sun Life Stadium that will make it continue to be viable for future Super Bowls including L/LI. Recently, the NFL had been hinting that Sun Life Stadium could end up out of the game’s regular rotation (every 5-7 years) if changes weren’t made. That’s possible now that the Marlins have left, allowing the Dolphins to remake the stadium as a football-only facility.

Improved viewing distances to the sideline and displays should make Sun Life Stadium more appealing

Improved viewing distances to the sideline and displays should make Sun Life Stadium more appealing

To accomplish those goals, the Dolphins plan to add seats along the lower level to reduce the 90-foot gap between the first row and sideline. They’ll also replace all of the existing seats, which will be colored turquoise instead of orange. (I think we’ve all learned over the years that orange seats don’t do well in the sun.) Sections in the upper deck corners will be reduced to accommodate large video board. Sun Life received two of the largest boards in sports a few years ago. Those will probably be moved with two others added. The big addition is a free standing canopy that will cover much of the seating bowl and upper concourse.

Will that be enough? While Miami is a veteran of putting on big events like the Super Bowl, it lacks ancillary features at Sun Life that could bring in more revenue, such as a convention center. South Beach is 18 miles away from the stadium, closer than the distance between the Santa Clara stadium and what is expected to be the media hub in downtown SF.

Dolphins owner Stephen Ross has pledged to pay for the “majority” of the project’s $400 million cost, with no new taxes as part of the promise. Some public funds could come from a sales tax rebate on items sold in the stadium. 8 of the 9 pro teams in Florida already receive this benefit. The Dolphins are the only ones that don’t. The team estimates that this will raise about $3 million per year, which would go towards debt service on the improvements for 30 years.. Additional funding could come from hotel taxes.

The 49ers and the City of Santa Clara are being asked to make their own concessions, though the requests are not of the stadium. Instead, the NFL wants the nearby Santa Clara Convention Center, Soccer Park (next to the 49er HQ), blocks of hotel rooms, and perhaps a cut of different revenue streams.

It’s all part of the laundry list of items the NFL usually asks for from host cities. The NFL has the leverage in this relationship, and their M.O. has always been to pit cities against other every year to get the best deal possible. We discussed this laundry list a year ago. The league asks for a lot, and in most cases, they get it.

Santa Clara is also unique in that it controls its own power utility, Silicon Valley Power. City backers have been quick to note this as a way to cut costs. However, the NFL could just as easily make demands of the City to extract the lowest possible cost for power during the week. Down in the Phoenix area, Salt River Power is giving a $1 million sponsorship for 2015’s Super Bowl XLIX, which includes numerous services the utility controls.

It’s also unclear how the Super Bowl could affect operations out of SJC on gameday. When planes take off during good weather, they head north before quickly turning east for the most part. If the weather is bad, SJC reverses its approach, having planes land from the north. That puts those planes rather low and – as I noticed over the Thanksgiving weekend when I flew in from SoCal – directly over the stadium.

Neither city should expect to get much in the way of direct tax revenues. They’ll be able to tout an immense amount of acute economic activity, and for most cities, that’s plenty.

Other cities are working to keep up appearances. Houston’s bringing in new scoreboards, while Charlotte is looking to state legislators to approve $125 million in improvements at Bank of America Stadium. The NFL sees this and loves it. It’s all part of the game to get The Game.

01.07.13
by

Comparison of current (2013) CBAs

A few years ago I did a comparison of CBAs. Now that the NHL deal framework is in place, it’s time to update the table. Here’s what we have now.

MLB remains the only major pro sports league in the US/Canada that has no salary cap.

MLB remains the only major pro sports league in the US/Canada that has no salary cap. NHL cap and NBA salary floor figures are for 2013-14 season.

The untold story is league debt. The NFL is far and away the richest league, but it also has a massive amount of debt. In 2008 that figure was $9.5 billion and has only grown with the expensive new stadia in New Jersey, Arlington, and Santa Clara. MLB’s credit facility, which is meant as a short-term solution for teams, had $1 billion going into this summer and issued $300 million more since then. None of the leagues are in jeopardy because of their respective debt positions because in most cases, that debt is backed by long term TV deals. Individual teams are at greater risk due to the lack of revenue stability in weaker markets, which is frequently the case in the NHL.

Luxury tax structures implemented in MLB and the NBA have worked to reign in many free-spending teams. The NY Knicks are under the NBA’s luxury tax threshold for the first time in recent memory, and the Yankees are set to follow suit in baseball.

All of this goes to show that for all of the talk of economic parity in pro sports, there are instances of haves and have-nots everywhere. It’s unavoidable, and thanks to CBAs that will run for as long as a decade, it’s enshrined. Cheers!

12.27.12
by

Suggestion: Buy Used

Part of the game in the world of new stadia is the stadium improvements fund. It’s a set aside of stadium revenues from the partnership of team and city/county that is used to fix plumbing, lights, and seats. It’s also used in many cases to change other non-critical items that become obsolete over time, so that the partners can keep up with competitive venues and enhance fan experience. By enshrining the terms in a lease agreement, both sides can set proper expectations about what kind of maintenance and upgrades a venue will get over the short and long term.

To that end, the NFL stadia in Denver and Houston are getting fancy new LED displays as part of a $30 million audiovisual makeover. This makes sense both stadia are at least a decade old and display technology has advanced rapidly over the last several years. In Denver, the horseshoe shape at Sports Authority Field at Mile High means there are three boards of different sizes: one big board (27′ x 96′) on the open south end and two half-size boards in the north corners of the upper bowl. SAF@MH also lacks ribbon fascia boards, so one or two levels of LEDs are in the works there. Both the big displays and fascia boards will be capable of HD.

At least Denver’s displays are LED-based. Houston’s Reliant Stadium uses old CRT technology (like the Coliseum) and is finally moving into the 21st century with fully digital LED displays from Mitsubishi. The new displays will replace the old mix of incandescent, CRT, and static displays tucked under the stadium roof. When completed, each one will measure 52.5′ x 277′, officially longer and bigger than the center-hung boards at Cowboys Stadium (also built by Mitsubishi). Since the display is so long, only a portion of it will be used for replays, unlike Cowboys Stadium’s 16 x 9 boards. Despite that limitation, the new displays promise greater presentation flexibility for in-game information, video, and ads.

Compare that to what Raiders and A’s fans continue to live with at the Coliseum, and it starts to get depressing. Better than telling you, I’d rather show you via an infographic by reddit user dbeat.

nfl_scoreboard_sizes

Comparison of video displays in NFL stadia. Reliant Stadium’s new board will soon be the biggest. Denver’s is mid-sized. The Coliseum’s are among the smallest.

With the sad state of displays at the Coliseum and the cycle of change elsewhere, I got to thinking, What happens with the old displays? I’ve sent an inquiry into Denver’s Metropolitan Football Stadium District to find out (I’ll update here if I do). Some displays end up getting donated. Do they also get resold? LED lifespan is 50,000 hours, so unless you’re going for greater resolution the displays themselves should last the life of the stadium. Over 12 years at SAF@MH, it’s likely that the scoreboards were used only 500-1,000 hours per year.

Old displays at Denver stadium

Old display at Denver stadium

Denver would seem a prime candidate to get the scoreboards at a very good price. Why hated AFC West rival Denver? There are a few convenient reasons.

  • If the two north boards are put together into one board, the result is that each of the boards (north/south) measure 27′ x 96′. That would fit very nicely into the Coliseum’s existing scoreboard frames, which are about 40′ x 140′ not including the arched caps. Whether they’re each used as one contiguous display or split into two, it can work well while retaining static signage panels that currently populate the surround.
  • Since the both the Coliseum’s and SAF@MH’s old displays were manufactured by Mitsubishi’s Diamond Vision unit, it stands to reason that there will be some degree of interoperability.
  • Both the A’s and Raiders would welcome additional advertising opportunities on crisper displays.
  • SAF@MH’s monochrome scoreboards are also being replaced and even those would be an upgrade on what the Coliseum has.
  • As a secondhand product, the displays could be acquired at a significant discount, perhaps $1 million or less.
  • If the Coliseum is to be used for only 5-6 more years, it makes little sense to spend tens of millions on new displays.
coli-scoreboard_twilight-cropped

Current CRT video board and scoreboard system at the Coliseum

Seems like a decent idea, right? The difficulty comes when working among the Coliseum Authority, the Raiders, and the A’s. It would make sense to put something like this into a five year capital improvements plan. How it gets paid for, and how new revenues get divided, is the tough part. Divvying up signage revenue has long been a sticking point in the relationship, with the A’s getting the lion’s share of in-stadium revenue since the 1995 renovation. With all leases expiring, there’s a chance at a clean slate in negotiations. Would Lew Wolff forego an A’s-tilted ad revenue deal in order to get five fairly hassle-free years and opt-outs on a lease extension? Sounds like a deal point to me. It’s just a suggestion.

12.24.12
by

Mount Davis specifications

With all this talk of lease extensions, I decided to go back into the original 1995 lease the A’s had at the Coliseum (for my own edification). The document, which was signed by Wally Haas as he was selling the team, goes over two specific scenarios: what happens for the A’s if the Raiders return, and what happens for the A’s if the Raiders don’t return. That latter part will be covered soon. For now, take a look at the language that eventually resulted in what we now know as Mount Davis, the 10,000-seat, 90-skybox grandstand in the outfield. The language is copied verbatim, typos and all.

B. CENTER FIELD GRANDSTAND STRUCTURE PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION

Design Intent:

Constructed in the 1960s, the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum has its origins in the symmetrical, reinforced concrete modernist style engineering structure that was prevalent throughout this period. Of these parks, Oakland is singularly the best baseball park. This is a great place to see a game with the fan close to the action and comfortable in spite of the facility’s size. Seating surrounds the field, is intimate and humanly scaled. Circulation reinforces one’s location and orientation to the field at all areas nd levels.

The proposed centerfield grandstand structure must reinforce this environment. It cannot be a monolith looming over the outfield fence. Other than the playing field, it will be the natural focus of the stadium. Therefore, the structure’s size, shape and mass must provide a positive contribution to the stadium’s overall design.

Mass:

Mitigation of the structure’s mass, vacant stadium seating and vacant luxury boxes must be part of the overall design concept. The upper level seating shall be covered in the baseball configuration, this level and potentially elements of the vertical elevation shall incorporate team graphics, back-lighted advertizing signage and regional artwork to break up and reduce the structure’s scale. These elements shall become an integral part of the structure’s overall appearance. However, mitigation cannot rely on coverings and signage alone.

The structure shall relate to the existing stadium’s size and proportion, not exceeding it in overall height. This structure shall incorporate league scale design elements: a diverse, articulated, angular building profile with strong shadow lines, which diminish the overall mass of the structure. It shall present an appropriate character of scale, proportion, facade detail and material to compliment the park. The structure shall also incorporate small scale design elements to enhance the seating, circulation and the overall pedestrian environment through texture, materials, color and detail.

Scoreboard and video boards shall be placed on the structure for optimal baseball viewing. These will include:

• A scoreboard/message board fully populated scoreboard, zone mapped and broke out as required for both video and text display.
• A separate video board.
• A manually operated out-of-town scoreboard.

BART Entry:

This must be an appropriate statement of entry, creating a welcome statement with a sense of place, even though it is not the main entry to the stadium. The BART bridge shall terminate at a formal gate and lead to a roomy concourse(s). The plus 33 concourse should connect flush with the rest of the stadium at that level or by ramp. The plus 6 level must be continuous around the entire stadium. The BART entry shall present a pedestrian scaled environment low height lighting, attractive street furniture with integrated signage, attractive fencing to screen from view the slew/industrial beyond and mitigation of the overhanging upper deck structure. These pedestrian areas shall be part of a cohesive circulation system that leads the visitor to all services, facilities and concessions stands.

Program Elements:

Program elements shall be considered which influence the massing and appearance of the building. The outfield fence shall maintain its general configuration, 8 feet high padded, 300 down the lines, 375 at the power alleys and 400 at deep centerfield. An asymmetrical angular fence is encouraged. The 5000 “bleacher” seats shall be as close to the field as possible. These seats must have unobstructed sight lines of the field consistent with the existing seating areas. This seating shall be continuous behind the fence, interrupted only by the batter’s eye. The batter’s eye shall match the existing 40 feet high x 96 feet wide; height to be confirmed. Best efforts will be made so that the first row of seating shall be no more than four feet above the top of the fence, possibly separated from the fence with landscaping.

Two years after the structure was completed, Steve Schott and Ken Hofmann sued the Coliseum JPA over lost revenue related to the Mt. Davis addition and the compromising of the Coliseum as a baseball venue. The parties eventually settled, resulting in the sweetheart lease the A’s currently have.

12.22.12
by

“Temporary”

So what does “temporary” mean anyway?

For Lew Wolff, it means five years after 2013 spent at the Coliseum, followed by what he hopes is a smooth move to San Jose.

For Mark Davis, it means five more years at the Coliseum while a new Coliseum and village are built next door.

For the Coliseum Authority (JPA), it means… well, they haven’t exactly articulated what that means, have they? It may mean one new stadium, or two. It means having the Raiders and A’s pay more to stay temporarily at the Coliseum in order to reduce the subsidy Oakland and Alameda County currently pay to keep the place running. How much more? We don’t really know. It’s a delicate balancing act. In the previous post I alluded to Davis and Wolff not wanting significantly higher rents at the stadium, yet that’s exactly what will be required if the JPA is to reach its goal of offsetting costs better.

The Merc’s John Woolfork and the Chronicle’s John Shea have dug into the lease matter more, getting reaction from local pols.

Woolfork found that the lease extension talk started in July 2011, when A’s President Michael Crowley first requested a lease extension. With the negotiations going very slowly, the surprise is the MLB tried to help act as an intermediary in the discussions but was rejected by the A’s.

Shea’s big find was that Wolff, while preferring to stay in Oakland over a move to a “temporary home venue”, admitted that “there are options” for such a transitional home.

Those two new pieces of information are huge. Whether or not you believe Wolff is bluffing with the temporary venue idea, he just played that card. He’s thinking about it. And you can bet that he has at least one location in mind. It’s out of the standard team owner playbook. Many will feel that the A’s are locked into the East Bay thanks to territorial rights, and that more than anything should dictate how the A’s and MLB act. Most of the time, these positions are merely negotiating ploys to extract concessions. Playing the temporary venue card is a sure sign of desperation, which Wolff has displayed for some time. If it forces MLB to act on his request or the JPA to commit to a Raiders stadium that would remake the Coliseum complex (per the letter), it will have been well worth it. If it results in a “mutually beneficial” five year lease, it buys everyone time to figure out the next step.

There is a value proposition in play. In the short term (the length of the extension), the A’s will be averse to a lease that hurts their revenue position. For instance, the Warriors’ lease at Oracle Arena had the team pay $7.5 million for the 2011-12 season. That figure includes revenue sharing of club seat and suite sales, which helped finance the arena. The A’s rent for 2012 is $1 million, and they get to keep parking and some ad/concession revenues. If the A’s were forced to pay something closer to what the Warriors pay while giving up revenue, that’s up to a $10 million hit to team revenue, or -6% or so annually. Suddenly the lease extension isn’t just a matter of convenience, it’s a real question of cost-benefit. There is a point at which it costs too much to stay at the Coliseum, especially if there are no agreements on improvements to the old stadium such as scoreboards or even plumbing (those resources would be used on new stadia). I don’t think the A’s should get the sweetheart deal they’ve been on since 1995, but this seems like too much considering the age and state of the Coliseum.

That’s how the specter of a temporary home comes closer to being real. If the A’s are faced with having to forego $10 million in revenue each year for five years, would it make sense to invest that money in a different option? A temporary option?

One more to consider: If you attended a Warriors home game this year, you probably noticed the lovely, brand new high-definition, center-hung scoreboard. It’s part of an $8 million improvement plan at Oracle Arena that was implemented to upgrade technology. Half of the project was paid for by the W’s, and the rest was split between the JPA and AEG, the new arena operator. The bidding process for a new operator for both the Coliseum and Arena included a requirement that the winning bidder pay for improvements at Oracle Arena. The vendor for the arena’s technology package? Cisco. For whatever reason, there was no request to make any additional improvements to the Coliseum. New anything at the Coliseum could help convince either of the tenants to stay.