willmb5 Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 that would be unbelievable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish50 Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 I hate domes. Seems like we JUST moved to Landover. All those families displaced just so we can bail after ten years? It was all farmland. No families were displaced. As a matter of fact, JKC built the community center that sits next to FedEX for the neighborhood. Try doing a little research before making false accusations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Am I right that Snyder would not have to pay for the land at RFK? Wouldn't the District just be able to turn it over to him in exchange for the benefits that a city stadium would provide? The city does not own the land. The Federal Gov. does. I believe the city was granted use of it originaly for the purpose of a stadium site. To change that the city would have to petition the Fed Gov from my understanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatboy41 Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 I think it's a great idea... I never really liked Fedex that much. I mean, I love the Skins, but I think Fedex sucks. It takes away a lot of personality the skins have. I think bringing the Skins back to DC is an amazing idea, I'm 10000000% for it. Then rip down Fedex and build houses there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatboy41 Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 does anyone know if there is a plan for just a dome or a roof that can go both ways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddub52 Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 I think 125k would be too many people. If people complain about the crowd not being rowdy enough at FedEx, wait until they add 33k nore seats. So many ppl would be sitting down. Then again maybe it would make ticket prices more affordable. Anyways, its all about staying one up on the Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UltimateSkins Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 125k? If we are in a dome that big and aren't the loudest stadium something is seriously wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borninblood Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 yea supposedly it will hold 125k and have a retractable roof so we can get superbowls in dc. I would be all for it as long as we have grass... none of that turf ****. AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! A retractable roof could have it's advantages too. In December if we play a team like Green Bay or New Enland we close it up. If we play Tampa or Jacksonville, open it up. That could give us a few extra wins. Me likey that idea! Anyone interested in participating in the process by commenting on future land use for the RFK Stadium site can contact David Zaidain -- davidz@ncpc.gov or 202-482-7200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatboy41 Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Man, I really really want this to happen! I was incredibly excited after I heard the news. Does anyone know when the plan is proposed to happen or has word on that not been shed yet? And, what are they planning to do with the Nats? Share the stadium, or will the Nats play out of their own stadium? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateCitySkin Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 A friend of mine told me this a couple months back and I told him he was full of **** and that I had my finger on the pulse. He said something that Snyder wanted to use that land to put up housing developments... whatever, I'd love for the skins to be back at rfk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxpower_I Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Because the difference is, DC taxpayers wouldn't be footing the bill with this one. Selling off the land at FedEx, a promised Super Bowl, and the egregious amount of dollars the Danny would make off of FedEx in the years we are building the new stadium would contribute immensely to the cost. Am I right that Snyder would not have to pay for the land at RFK? Wouldn't the District just be able to turn it over to him in exchange for the benefits that a city stadium would provide? I believe that the land RFK is on is actually owned by the Federal Government and is leased to the City for special purposes (ie. stadium). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxpower_I Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 The city does not own the land. The Federal Gov. does. I believe the city was granted use of it originaly for the purpose of a stadium site. To change that the city would have to petition the Fed Gov from my understanding. whoops, beat me to it. I will add this bit of information though: RFK Redevelopment Study Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsngibbs4life Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Because the difference is, DC taxpayers wouldn't be footing the bill with this one. Selling off the land at FedEx, a promised Super Bowl, and the egregious amount of dollars the Danny would make off of FedEx in the years we are building the new stadium would contribute immensely to the cost. Am I right that Snyder would not have to pay for the land at RFK? Wouldn't the District just be able to turn it over to him in exchange for the benefits that a city stadium would provide? well, according to someone in the other thread about this(obviously not official information), the city for which fed ex is built is going to pay a BUCNH of money to buy the land( they said it was something like 500 million, which, by the way is nearly the cost dallas' new stadium, theres is 670 million), so it would give tons of money to start the process with anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0mega Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 whoops, beat me to it. I will add this bit of information though: RFK Redevelopment Study Thanks. Interesting read. :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcees4life Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 the Skins should've never left DC in anyway. It's only right that they come back. I'm predicting that this will happen in the next 5-10 years. It's too much money for both sides to make for this not to happen. The stadium will seat at least 100,000 and have a retractable roof. Knowing Snyder's glamorous lifestyle, he'll want to have one regular season game per year with the roof closed and all others with the roof open. And i think this new Skins DC stadium thing is more realistic than what we all think it is. I mean, it was the top story on the city's leading 6:00 pm news broadcast and i doubt very seriously that they will just throw out this story if it didn't have any substance to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsngibbs4life Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 After watching the new clip, the only thing that I dont like about the idea is the fact that it would be a dome, and not a retractable roof. I would HATE for our team to play in a dome. We really need to keep our play outside, and at the least, make it a retractable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoGood28 Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 After watching the new clip, the only thing that I dont like about the idea is the fact that it would be a dome, and not a retractable roof. I would HATE for our team to play in a dome. We really need to keep our play outside, and at the least, make it a retractable. If it is going to be a straight up dome and not a retractable roof, they can just scrap the whole thing for all I care. The Redskins do NOT play in a dome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoVaSkins21 Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 I would love for the Skins to come back to DC. They never should have left. I don't like the idea of a retractable roof because Snyder wants a super bowl here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsngibbs4life Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 If it is going to be a straight up dome and not a retractable roof, they can just scrap the whole thing for all I care. The Redskins do NOT play in a dome. exactly, it just seems like there is no point for it. But who knows, hopefully that news cast was just bs'ing about that. After all, I have a feeling that dannyboy would want to make a revolutionary stadium. Retractable roof makes the stadium more state-of-the-art. Plus, with a dome, it would probably limit the ammount of seats possible. With a retrac roof, im sure he could add more seats(which would of course equal more money for him, so why not do it?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 If the land has always been leased to DC for stadium use only; than DC really messed up when they chose to let the Redskins move. Also it makes sense to have a retractable stadium. Sooner or later all stadiums will be that way. Why, because of the fans. Which was a major mistake on the part of the Patriots, but they did exactly what I thought the Redskins should have done a decade or so ago...build a new stadium in your parking lot. Fans will hate it for a year or so, but the results will be worth it. Its obvious most of you havent even attempted to look at the blurbs about the Cowboys new stadium. Last I read it will seat 75k. Not to mention most of you havent taken a look at the Cardinals new stadium with a retractable roof and a natural grass field. Parking ? Are you kidding me ? Most people will take the train to the stadium. How many people park at MCI ? Tailgating you say ? Hmm... There will certainly be plenty of parking available, so it wont be as dramatic a difference as most feel. However, those parking passes will be costly, mainly because people like to set up a typical location. When I come to games I wouldnt have to buy a parking pass, I could stay at any hotel in town and take the train...right freakin' there. To me that was one of the best things about RFK. I could care less about a SB in DC. I lived in Atlanta when the Olympics came to town and it screwin' sucked. The only bright spot was all of the roads were in amazing condition. The traffic, and the idiots arent worth it to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TODD Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 well, according to someone in the other thread about this(obviously not official information), the city for which fed ex is built is going to pay a BUCNH of money to buy the land( they said it was something like 500 million, which, by the way is nearly the cost dallas' new stadium, theres is 670 million), so it would give tons of money to start the process with anyway Well if they could anything close to that much money, a guaranteed Super Bowl would be enough incentive for Danny to pay for the rest... if it were even necessary. Costs of other retractable roof stadiums: Reliant Stadium (Houston): $352 million Ford Field (Detroit): $430 million University of Phoenix Stadium (Arizona): $450 million I can't believe Dallas' stadium will cost $200+ million more than the one in Glendale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateCitySkin Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 well it'll reduce my commute from 45minutes to the stadium to 25 minutes... no complaints here... gotta loveliving in dc. =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyman Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Yawn. Total political grandstanding. No one who owns their own stadium is going to trade that control and independence for having to answer to elected politicians...watching their team (and business) become a ping pong ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kappaluvacee Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Yawn.Total political grandstanding. No one who owns their own stadium is going to trade that control and independence for having to answer to elected politicians...watching their team (and business) become a ping pong ball. And there was the light. I had serious doubts about the story when itwas first posted since the stadium is relatively young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjlax Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 This discussion does sound like some serious bull. Adding another 35K seats? Hell, the upper deck is rarely full now (sold out, but rarely full). Just how far away can fleas be before you're not even in the stadium anymore? Remember, unlike a Michigan or some place like that with 100K seats, there will be at least two columns of suites since all that money goes to Snyder. Before long, the stadium would be taller than the Capitol, a no-no in Washington architecture. The area around the current RFK could absolutely NOT handle 125K, it could barely handle 55K fans. Even if there were any real truth to this (rather than just speculation), it would only prove the point that ownership doesn't care about the fans, but simply a way to make more money. Renovate FedEx... provide walkways (like Vegas) that would allow pedestrian traffic without blocking the exits out of lots and onto the Beltway, improve people movers to upper deck, gut the inside of the stadium to improve offerings to fans, upgrade the audio and video, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.