Live data from Hacker News

Why a city should not build a stadium for an NFL team

reuters.com

111–120 of 290 posts

Re: Why a city should not build a stadium for an NFL team

#111
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's strategy, and in a broadcast (as opposed to attending a live event), there are commentators to explain it to the average viewer. There are also amazingly spectacular plays, which you can appreciate whether or not you understand the strategy. That doesn't explain why it's more popular than, say, basketball, though...

The problem with basketball as a spectator sport is that the marginal importance of any particular small piece of the game is small, and predictable. There may be awesome feats of athleticism and skill, but they really don't count for a lot, and by the end of the game, you could remove any one (or more) of them and the result of the game would have been the same. When you think about what makes, say, movies exciting,…

Basketball gets its popularity from the fact that it is really easy for people to play it themselves (every recess in school has a few hoops in use continuously, and every other driveway has a hoop in it or above the garage).

Re: Why a city should not build a stadium for an NFL team

#112

Between the scam of municipalities losing so much $$ on stadiums, how the stadiums cause urban blight sitting empty most of the time then causing major traffic headaches the other times, and the CTE injury rate, I can't fathom how football still exists today as a popular sport. Seems like the whole thing is a house of cards that needs to collapse.

> I can't fathom how football still exists today as a popular sport Your first three points make sense, but don't lead to this conclusion at all. People are not going to rationally say "football leads to traffic so I'm not going to watch it anymore." Football is entertaining, which is why it has an audience. Whether or not the negatives you outlined above are funded by the gov't is an entirely different matter.

It doesn't even have to be entertaining if it provides a tribal identity

Re: Why a city should not build a stadium for an NFL team

#113
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The social aspect can't be ignored. Football is typically held up as the quintessential American sport in many regions of the country. Those who don't proclaim their interest or love for it do so at the risk of being seen as outsiders and potentially treated as outcasts. This starts at a very early age for many Americans due to the close ties between the education systems and football programs. Starting while they're…

I think you nailed it. " They can be seen as a form of religion, in some sense. " In my family it was Sunday School with mom and then football with Grandpa and Dad. Football is kind of like drinking...even if you don't like it at some point it is easier to just pretend and fit in.

And if you do it enough, you might end up liking it anyway.

Re: Why a city should not build a stadium for an NFL team

#114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private company, go start yer own football league if you don't like it, etc.

non profit with tax breaks you mean

Any industry can form a similar nonprofit trade association. The members pay tax.

Re: Why a city should not build a stadium for an NFL team

#115
post #60
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why it exists as a popular sport anyways, it's 5 seconds of action followed by 30 seconds of two guys talking about it. The average football game has 11 minutes of action[1]. Everything but the last ~8 minutes of the 4th quarter is boring. Yet Americans love it. I don't get it. [1] http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240527487042812045750028...

As someone who recently moved to the US, should I first try to learn about American football, or about baseball?

Probably football if you're interested in contemporary culture, baseball if you're more interested in U.S. history. Baseball has more history and tradition associated with it, football is currently much more popular.

Re: Why a city should not build a stadium for an NFL team

#116
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NFL changed the ownership rules, and the Green Bay model cannot be repeated elsewhere. "The NFL does not allow corporate membership. Instead, it requires clubs to be wholly owned either by a single owner, or small group of owners, and requires that at least one owner owns a 1/3 stake in the team. The Packers are granted an exemption to this rule, as they have been a publicly owned corporation since before the rul…

The first thing I'd do is to take away the tax exempt status of the NFL.

The NFL is already planning to do this. Besides, the teams pay tax.

Re: Why a city should not build a stadium for an NFL team

#117

The Green Bay packers have an interesting approach to this problem, although it requires a fanatical fan base and special ownership provisions, and the fact that the team can't leave Green Bay (without a vote by the shareholders, who are all fans, which will never, ever, happen). When they want to improve their stadium, they issue stock and sell more season tickets. This works because Packers stock cannot be sold or…

I'm glad there are other Wisconsinites who don't give a shit about football. HELLO FRIEND That said, those of us in Brown County still got stuck with a 0.5% tax hike to pay for the stadium on sales tax, which I wouldn't mind so much except it stuck around about 4 years longer than it was supposed to. Being a resident close by I can attest to what the evidence says: The argument that stadiums augment the local economy…

How much tax does Packer County pay?

Re: Why a city should not build a stadium for an NFL team

#118
post #105

Douchebags. Got it. HAHA - yet again, criticizing GS on HN results in downvotes. So now we have to worry about GS VC shills on HN as opposed to just eglin shills on reddit?

Hard call to make. It is reasonable to ban teams whose owners are technically incapable of ever changing their (legal) mind about any future question.

Hey man, corporations are people! Except when it's inconvenient for other corporations, I guess.

Re: Why a city should not build a stadium for an NFL team

#119

I'm from St. Louis. The Cardinals also bilked > $500M towards their new stadium despite being the most profitable MLB team. The mayor went around telling everyone it was a good idea. Of course the touted economic benefits are usually an order of magnitude above reality. IMO basically capitalized on a huge inferiority complex.

From St. Louis as well. It was weird when the Rams left. There wasn't much of an attitude of how great of fans St. Louis has and what a betrayal it is. It was more resignation. "Well, we're St. Louis, what did we expect?"

Re: Why a city should not build a stadium for an NFL team

#120
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NFL changed the ownership rules, and the Green Bay model cannot be repeated elsewhere. "The NFL does not allow corporate membership. Instead, it requires clubs to be wholly owned either by a single owner, or small group of owners, and requires that at least one owner owns a 1/3 stake in the team. The Packers are granted an exemption to this rule, as they have been a publicly owned corporation since before the rul…

The first thing I'd do is to take away the tax exempt status of the NFL.

Didn't this already happen?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/28/nfl-tax-exempt-stat... NFL Voluntarily Ends Tax-Exempt Status

"Beginning with the 2015 fiscal year, the NFL's league office and management council will file tax returns as taxable entities."

Post reply on HN