Jump to content

Carolina Panthers


Recommended Posts

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't there need to be a good deal more hotel rooms available than currently are for a Super Bowl?  I have read in many different threads on this board that is one of the reasons Charlotte does not get as much convention business as it could.  Should all of the new stadium stuff come to fruition, I would hope that the 1,000 room hotel, along with several more others along the size of the Westin would be up and running by the 2030 date we are tossing around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


4 hours ago, cjd5050 said:

Are you serious Clark?  The high temp on Monday in Tampa will be 73.  The high in Charlotte will be 45.     The stadiums are not comparable because they are not located in the same climate.  

You clearly don't know what you're talking about here.  

What???? The weather in Tampa is different than the weather in Charlotte? Thanks for clearing that up. What I stated was that the stadiums are  similar, not weather. The only requirements to host the college football championship game is a stadium with a capacity of at least 65,000, which Charlotte  already has. There is no weather requirement.

You clearly already knew that though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, cjd5050 said:

If you're skeptical of the economic impact of tourism...I don't know what to say.   I was there for the Super Bown in 2003 and lived through at least 12 ComicCons.   They make race week here look small and cheap.  Mostly because it is.  

The reasons why San Diego didn't build a new stadium are many but one of the main reasons is even if the NFL would have guaranteed enough Super Bowls to have San Diego recoup its costs the people didn't want to even front the money to make Dean Spanos a penny more wealthy than he was.  You think George Shinn was disliked...not even a comparison.    Just like what Charlotte did with the NBA, if the NFL wants to go back to San Diego with a new owner I can guarantee they will build a stadium for hi...provided the two possible sites are developed by then.  Which of course was another one of the main issues.  

I lived in San Diego during all three Super Bowls (does that make my opinion 3 times more valid than yours?) and was a Chargers fan for years.  I'm just a guy but these folks seem to be credible on SB impact specifically and stadiums generally:

https://www.bisnow.com/national/news/economy/how-the-nfl-exaggerates-the-economic-impact-of-the-super-bowl-on-host-cities-70579

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/feb/02/super-bowl-houston-city-myth-economic-boom

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/economists-say-the-nfls-estimates-of-the-super-bowls-impact-on-a-city-are-laughable-8484519

https://news.stanford.edu/2015/07/30/stadium-economics-noll-073015/

https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2017-05-01/the-economics-of-subsidizing-sports-stadiums/

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/public-money-used-build-sports-stadiums

http://www.gfoa.org/sites/default/files/GFR_AUG_13_94.pdf

I do understand why you would believe the NFL though.  They have been so trustworthy on other issues (like player safety, for instance).

Edited by JBS
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JBS said:
 

If you're skeptical of the economic impact of tourism

lol.  Surprised you didn't put the Stanford study up top.   It's not like reports are ever written off the desired conclusion....  That dude has been working the circuit on that pitch for years.   

Do I think the NFL exaggerates numbers?  Of course, I do.  Only fools believe in the package of a study...going, either way, mind you.   But I stand by my position that if someone is skeptical of the economic impact of tourism then they are a moron.  

But hey,  if we want to start measuring everything on a scale where a 100% measurable and double validated return is provided....well I'd sign up for that but you might have a tough acceptance rate for the 'progressives'...

 

Edited by cjd5050
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 6:49 PM, Dale said:

Anatomy of a Financial Settlement ...

Working Girl: "Damn! These jeans are so tight I have to lie down to get them on. Hmm, wonder if the guys will notice ?"

Rich Old Guy: "Damn, girl! Did you have to lie down to get those jeans on ?"

Professional Woman: "Damn I look good in these jeans and smart as hell to boot"

Rich Old Guy: "Damn, girl!  Did you have to lie down to get those jeans on?"

Professional Woman: "Old beotch can't even get it up on regular...still gonna report his old ass to HR"

HR:" R-O-G, you can't say that it's unprofessional and disrespectful...so we still on for dinner tonight?"  slap on wrist...wash rinse and repeat

------

Professional Woman: "Damn I look good in these jeans and smart as hell to boot"

Dale: "Damn, girl!  Did you have to lie down to get those jeans on?"

Professional Woman: "Gonna report his ass to HR"

HR: "Sorry but you'll need to find work elsewhere and we're only legally obligated to state your dates of employment and incident will remain in confidential files". 

-----

Give it a try at your job.......unless you're the R-O-G

Edited by Durhamite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, cjd5050 said:

If you're skeptical of the economic impact of tourism

lol.  Surprised you didn't put the Stanford study up top.   It's not like reports are ever written off the desired conclusion....  That dude has been working the circuit on that pitch for years.   

Do I think the NFL exaggerates numbers?  Of course, I do.  Only fools believe in the package of a study...going, either way, mind you.   But I stand by my position that if someone is skeptical of the economic impact of tourism then they are a moron.  

But hey,  if we want to start measuring everything on a scale where a 100% measurable and double validated return is provided....well I'd sign up for that but you might have a tough acceptance rate for the 'progressives'...

 

It's very similar to the public transit  debate with respect to  economic impact (usage) versus public/taxpayer dollars invested.   A dome by all accounts is a worthy investment for Charlotte and the high growth Carolinas region.  It'll be the best/worst investment since light rail since it's such a polarizing issue.  In my opinion, any investment in the current stadium or another open-air stadium is a royal waste of money.  I think the Panthers ownership swap couldn't have come at a better time as new dome would seal the Panthers here for quite some time in addition  to numerous other events.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/5/2018 at 12:44 PM, mad_park said:

New Orleans is the exception and not the rule - They have unique culture,  good weather, good food, and the French Quarter.  Would the NFL Super Bowl committee really be clamoring to return to Charlotte to eat at Morton's and go to the Epicenter?

They might be.  Charlotte always punches well above its weight. That's what we do here. Probably has a lot to do with why you moved here from where ever. The city has proven time and time again that we succeed when others think we don't have a chance. I'll trust in that proven track record until it fails to prove me right.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, JBS said:

Really not even sure what the hell you are talking about.  You are the king of the straw man argument.

Right...says the guy who suggests his time in San Diego as a validation of his perspective but yet can't provide a single perspective of his own.  The conclusion of those studies was already determined before the study started.  They don't and never will look at the entire picture.  It's just an exercise to allow people like you something to link to rather than forming and expressing your own.   Because if you did you would actually have to stand behind it and that's something you have difficulty doing.  

There are lots of things these studies don't take into consideration.  Some datapoints because it's impossible to actually get data on it and other because it would change the outcome.   Still doesn't prevent idiots from parroting them because they agree with it.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jednc said:

They might be.  Charlotte always punches well above its weight. That's what we do here. Probably has a lot to do with why you moved here from where ever. The city has proven time and time again that we succeed when others think we don't have a chance. I'll trust in that proven track record until it fails to prove me right.

Qualities that make a city a 'great place to live' are often different from those making it a 'great place to visit'. 

I think a dome is the right way to go IF taxpayer funds are used, but I don't have the misconception that we'll become repeat hosts to big events like the Super Bowl or Final Four the same way New Orleans is.  I do think that a Charlotte dome could host plenty of regional events that would draw people and $$ into uptown Charlotte.

Per wikipedia: "In its 25-year lifespan, the Georgia Dome hosted over 1,400 events attended by over 37 million people."  A few thoughts on that:

  • Only 5 of those 1400 events were Final Fours (3) or Super Bowls (2).  Approximately 250 of them were Falcons games (2 preseason + 8 reg season per year...add a few more for the handful of playoff games they hosted).  Of the other ~1100 events: some packed hotel rooms with out of town visitors (Peach Bowl, SEC Football Championship, SEC/ACC Basketball Tournaments) but most drew from people within a few hours drive of the building (concerts, Wrestlemania, evangelical events, high school football playoff finals).
  • 1400 events over 25 years is an average of 56 events a year. The Panthers outdoor stadium is used less than 15 times a year.  If the taxpayers pony up the money for this they need to let someone like Center City Partners have full access to rent the building out when it isn't being used for NFL games.
  • Some would gripe about the current arrangement where Charlotte only gets 5? events per year in BofA Stadium- but there have been years where they have struggled to use all of those dates. Weather and wear and tear on the natural grass are big limiting factors on the types and dates of events that can be booked in an outdoor stadium. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SgtCampsalot said:

Just imagine how much more expansive Third Ward could be if the Panthers left town and we got all that land back. It would practically be its own district!

Wesley Heights/West Third Ward... WeHeWeThi!

I wouldn't be surprised to see the new owners build a new training/practice facility outside of town - complete with a state of the art indoor practice field. We'll be playing indoors on Sunday, but our guys have been out practicing in freezing temps all week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, mad_park said:

Qualities that make a city a 'great place to live' are often different from those making it a 'great place to visit'. 

I think a dome is the right way to go IF taxpayer funds are used, but I don't have the misconception that we'll become repeat hosts to big events like the Super Bowl or Final Four the same way New Orleans is.  I do think that a Charlotte dome could host plenty of regional events that would draw people and $$ into uptown Charlotte.

Per wikipedia: "In its 25-year lifespan, the Georgia Dome hosted over 1,400 events attended by over 37 million people."  A few thoughts on that:

  • Only 5 of those 1400 events were Final Fours (3) or Super Bowls (2).  Approximately 250 of them were Falcons games (2 preseason + 8 reg season per year...add a few more for the handful of playoff games they hosted).  Of the other ~1100 events: some packed hotel rooms with out of town visitors (Peach Bowl, SEC Football Championship, SEC/ACC Basketball Tournaments) but most drew from people within a few hours drive of the building (concerts, Wrestlemania, evangelical events, high school football playoff finals).
  • 1400 events over 25 years is an average of 56 events a year. The Panthers outdoor stadium is used less than 15 times a year.  If the taxpayers pony up the money for this they need to let someone like Center City Partners have full access to rent the building out when it isn't being used for NFL games.
  • Some would gripe about the current arrangement where Charlotte only gets 5? events per year in BofA Stadium- but there have been years where they have struggled to use all of those dates. Weather and wear and tear on the natural grass are big limiting factors on the types and dates of events that can be booked in an outdoor stadium. 

The Georgia Dome was also downtown. Sebates mentioned a bunch of areas not in Uptown Charlotte.

An isolated suburban dome is going to be a non-starter for a lot of events. Any new stadium needs to remain in, or very close to the CBD.

He also mentions York County though. Any suburban county in Charlotte is not going to happen. They're highly republican areas that would likely vote against public funding, and beyond that, they don't have the tax base to support building a billion dollars (or even $500 million) for a football stadium.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Niner National said:

The Georgia Dome was also downtown. Sebates mentioned a bunch of areas not in Uptown Charlotte.

An isolated suburban dome is going to be a non-starter for a lot of events. Any new stadium needs to remain in, or very close to the CBD.

He also mentions York County though. Any suburban county in Charlotte is not going to happen. They're highly republican areas that would likely vote against public funding, and beyond that, they don't have the tax base to support building a billion dollars (or even $500 million) for a football stadium.

The highly republican Cobb County built the new Braves ballpark without a vote. Time Warner Cable Arena was build even though funding was rejected by Charlotte voters.

Funny, the Knights moved from Ft Mill to Uptown and the Panthers may move from Uprown to Ft Mill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ah59396 said:

Ugh.  Cam's going to be the Dan Marino of this era.  Incredible stats, never enough talent around him.  Got to one superbowl, lost to an ageing allpro (manning/montana).

Never get a superbowl.  i'm sad.

I ventured some time ago that the Super Bowl appearance may have been the highwater mark of the franchise ... an embarrassment ... and a harbinger of mediocrity to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.