7/17 News

[AreliusIV]

RSL a two-headed dragon

Give RSL more time

Keep RSL at the U.

[montgjules]

The amount of misinformation out there makes me ill.

[Dadof3]

As we have all discussed a ton of times...RSL has only themselves to blame for all the misinformation...no pr.

[rabble-rabble]

I’m starting to get very frustrated over this whole mess. It seems there is just no communication between the two sides of this issue, just a lot of shouting at each other.

Today’s opinion page in the Tribune has 2 letters essentially stating that RSL should play a few more years at RES before funding a new stadium is considered. The reasons what this is not feasible have been stated over and over by team supporters, but largely ignored by the press and the general public (not to mention Jenny Wilson who you’d think as an elected official would take the responsibility to be a bit more informed since she is obsessed with the idea). Yesterday a KSL poll asking residents where RSL should play showed nearly half the respondents feel RES is the best place to play (RES decisively won the poll as Sandy and Fairpark were the other choices)

Seems to me we’ve had this sort of exchange between RSL and Joe Public over the last 18 months:

Joe Public: RES should be the long time home of RSL. The stadium is already there, so there is no need to spend money on a new stadium.

RSL: RES is not a feasible long term solution. The team cannot be profitable there as the rent is high, they have to pay parts of ticket sales and large parts of concessions sales back to RES, and they are not allowed to profit from selling beer.

Joe Public: It would save a lot of public money to use the stadium that is already up there. I attended some Utah football games there last fall and the stadium was very nice. After all, both football and soccer use a rectangular field.

RSL: RES is not a feasible long term solution. The seating area is far too large and spread out to be conducive to a loud atmosphere; the plastic field is not suitable for livestock grazing or playing soccer; sight lines are poor, and the width of the field is too small for soccer.

Joe Public: Why can’t RES just be the home for a while until long term public support is assessed?

RSL: RES is not a feasible long term solution. If the team continues to play there past 2007, RES will lose much of its tax exempt status and have to start paying considerably higher taxes on all events including Univ. of Utah football games. RES may be unwilling and/or unable to extend the RSL playing agreement beyond 2007.

Joe Public: Hey why all this talk about spending all this money on a new stadium when RES is a great place for both football and soccer teams to play? Let’s all share this stadium that is already there.

RSL: RES is not a feasible long term solution. When the franchise was granted by the MLS in 2004, it was done so on the condition that a commitment be made to build a soccer specific stadium in the near future. If plans for such a stadium are not realized soon, the league may likely force the team to relocate to another community which the league perceives has support for soccer through both attendance and public financial support.

Joe Public: Hey they just printed my thoughtful intelligent letter to the editor stating that all parties will be happy if RSL keeps enjoying playing at RES. I’m going to pat myself on the back for enlightening everyone with my well-informed opinion.

RSL (shouting now): WHAT PART OF RES IS NOT A FEASIBLE LONG TERM SOLUTION do you not understand? Aren’t you paying attention?


On the contrary (to play devil’s advocate for the other side for a moment) we’ve somewhat seen this other exchange between RSL and Joe Public over the same period:

RSL (spring 2005): The team desires (and the league expects us) to secure a site and start to develop a soccer specific stadium. We envision a modest stadium downtown. Cost is expected to be about $60 million. We need the public to pay about half of the cost, primarly to secure land, and the team will pay for the remaining costs of the stadium.

Joe Public: We don’t want to spend $30M. Let the team pay for everything themselves.

RSL (fall 2005): OK. We have a plan for Sandy where we’ll have a stadium, practice fields for the kiddies, TV studios, offices, a motel, etc. Cost is now $150M or so, we’ll pay for most of it, just need the $30M from the public for infrastructure and some of the land.

Joe Public: We don’t want to spend $30M. Let the team pay for everything themselves.

RSL (summer 2006): Well how about this. Tom Dolan has this plan for this huge development. Lots of new commerical activity with the cornerstone being the soccer stadium. We have $600M from private money committed to the project. ALL we are asking for is the $30M from the public for the infrastructure.

Joe Public (shouting now): WHAT PART OF WE DON’T WANT TO SPEND 30 MILLION DOLLARS ON A SOCCER STADIUM DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND!? Are you hard of hearing?

I’m afraid that is where things stand now. Both sides on this issue feel they have clearly made their opinion clear and are not being listened to. I hope there is a solution, but am starting to lose confidence. Doesn’t help that the media is (from my own admittedly subjective point of view) very one-sided on the issue, nor does it help that many of the politicians have been “taking sides” supporting one city and opposing a different city with similar plans. I don’t even think a PR campaign from the front office at this point may salvage public opinion. Joe Public just doesn’t want to perceive that his taxes are paying for a stadium that he is unlikely to frequently visit and sees no benefit in it for him.

One thing is for sure. There is very probably no way the majority of the public is ever going to be in favor of this. The only way to convince the public of the virtues of a SSS is that somehow the project goes through, the team, the stadium, and the surrounding areas thrive and add lots of revenue to the community and the tax base, and then after years of success, the public will see “Hey we were wrong, what a great idea a stadium was! Thank goodness our enlightened officials knew what was best for us!” A problem there is that a politician with the vision and courage to see the potential long term benefits that will not be realized for a number of years isn’t going to win any votes in the near future by bucking current public opinion.

We had a similar situation here in Salt Lake back in the early 90s. LMH had sold the Golden Eagles hockey team after their attendance plummeted when they moved into the newly opened Delta Center. Attendance was down because the DC was simply a horrible hockey venue. Sight lines were attrocious, and the building was way too empty for smaller minor league crowds (especially when compared to their previous home in the Salt Palace which was one of the best damned hockey arenas ever.)

The Denver Grizzlies, looking for a new home as they would not be able to compete for fans with the NHL Colorado Avalanche coming to town, indicated they would be willing to move to Salt Lake if a hockey arena was on the way. The E Center was pretty much proposed to be built with public money (I don’t think the team paid a dime of construction costs) even though popular opinion was largely against it. The policians recognized the benefits down the road for having a new arena and went against the public will and decided to use public money to build it anyway. It probably helped things that the newspapers weren’t reminding us on a daily basis that the majority of the public was against a new arena.

Now the arena has been there about a decade. Lots of people enjoy hockey games, as well as many other events in the E Center. Businesses including restaurants, motels, and theatres, have sprung up in the area which is thriving. In hindsight, the politicians made the right choice and did what was best for the public, even though a minority of the public realized it at the time.

[neophyte]

Nice summary of the current standoff between Joe Public and RSL. 🕺 🕺 to rabble.

THe only thing missing are the tantrums of Checketts and the county council.

I'm beginning to seriously wonder if even a great deal would be feasible at this point because of the beating RSL has taken (and continues to take) in the press (much of it self-inflicted).

A frightening thought hit me this weekend. Ignore for a minute Checkett's reassurances that he wants to exhaust every option for SSS, and just look at his actions-- could he do anything more to try to have an excuse to get rid of the team? This thought is too cynical for me to endorse right now, but I still have this nagging feeling that NOTHING IN THIS MESS MAKES MUCH SENSE; not RSL FO's actions (read: mostly INaction), not Corroon, not Sandy, not SL Co Council, not Rocky (must get fairpark stadium!). So either there's a lot going on behind closed doors that we just don't know about (LHM involvement could help fill in some of the gaps), or people are just lying through their teeth.

I'm completely sick about the beating RSL and soccer have taken over this. I'm sick about the prospect of losing the pro soccer experience that my family and I have enjoyed and invested a lot in. It would be a huge loss to SL if we lose RSL's great community involvement, their players showing up to soccer practices, the MLS camps this summer, and so many other aspects of RSL that are far beyond the scope of what Utah Jazz have done in their sport.

And it's going down the tubes because people aren't doing a good job of what they are paid to do and what is in their best interest to do and do well.

:slobber:

[nsps]

A fourth trib letter, "Miller Should Come Clean":

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_4060673

[Newkidontheblock]

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=365138


hmm, the plot thickens