urbanMSP

Call me a pessimist, but I do not see the new people's stadium "breaking the mold". First off, due to size, usage and climate, the stadium will be somewhat limited in what it can offer. I just don't see a giant sliding wall and retractable roof going in to the final design. Also, while 1B seems like a huge budget, that is a very competitive price in comparison to other NFL stadiums of late. I would argue that this site is one of if not the most urban of all NFL stadium sites, so maybe they can get slightly more innovative then normal, I just am tempering my hopes.

That being said, the MSP area certainly is more architecture/design conscious than most metro's, so hopefully HKS pushes the boundary on the stadium design concept

Call me a pessimist, but I do not see the new people's stadium "breaking the mold". First off, due to size, usage and climate, the stadium will be somewhat limited in what it can offer. I just don't see a giant sliding wall and retractable roof going in to the final design. Also, while 1B seems like a huge budget, that is a very competitive price in comparison to other NFL stadiums of late. I would argue that this site is one of if not the most urban of all NFL stadium sites, so maybe they can get slightly more innovative then normal, I just am tempering my hopes.

That being said, the MSP area certainly is more architecture/design conscious than most metro's, so hopefully HKS pushes the boundary on the stadium design concept

Well I'm basing my breaking the mold assumptions based on the submitted renderings. Neither are your typical NFL stadium even if they have to be massive sites with closed roofs. Retractable roof to me is not the mold breaking innovative feature anymore.

Le Seuer's first photo definitely has the viking boats built into the design.

Apologize for the slight detour here, but I wonder if anyone knows about the naming rights section of the new vikings stadium deal?

I remember reading that of the NFL teams, all but 1 actually kept 100% of the income from selling naming rights. Even though the teams generally rely on the taxpayers to foot the majority of the stadium bill

Wonder if minnesota legislators had enough sense to do some research and see that NFL naming rights stretch up to 20yrs/400M. This stadium wouldn't command that price, but still the the team in theory could recoup almost their entire investment just by slapping a neon company sign on the side. Leave the rest of us to cover the 700M or whatever is left

it looks just like the Metrodome

Let it be noted, I didn't say it... but I was thinking it.

That was my initial thought too. Cinnamon Metrodome with a garage door.

Apologize for the slight detour here, but I wonder if anyone knows about the naming rights section of the new vikings stadium deal?

I remember reading that of the NFL teams, all but 1 actually kept 100% of the income from selling naming rights. Even though the teams generally rely on the taxpayers to foot the majority of the stadium bill

Wonder if minnesota legislators had enough sense to do some research and see that NFL naming rights stretch up to 20yrs/400M. This stadium wouldn't command that price, but still the the team in theory could recoup almost their entire investment just by slapping a neon company sign on the side. Leave the rest of us to cover the 700M or whatever is left

This was obviously a major point of contention / negotiation during the stadium debates at the Capitol. In the end, the Vikings retained the naming rights for the stadium itself and the State retained naming rights for the plaza. I believe the rough estimate at the time was that stadium naming rights could fetch $10-$15mm annually. If anyone is still butthurt about this arrangement, feel free to express yourself here: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1053.

it looks just like the Metrodome

Let it be noted, I didn't say it... but I was thinking it.

That was my initial thought too. Cinnamon Metrodome with a garage door.

I solved the naming rights issue -- it can be sponsored by Cinnabon!!!

All things considered the naming rights issue is probably a wash anyway. If the city got the money, it likely would have just had to pay more of the tab anyway.

Let it be noted, I didn't say it... but I was thinking it.

That was my initial thought too. Cinnamon Metrodome with a garage door.

I solved the naming rights issue -- it can be sponsored by Cinnabon!!!

Or Maybe Pillsbury should try to cook something up...

In all seriousness, I always wished that if/when the Twins built a new stadium they would call it "Pillsbury Fields".....but alas.

If you want to see just how different Minneapolis approached the Vikings stadium issue than other cities, check out this story from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch about the future of the Rams' stadium. A quick back-story: The Rams have a clause that basically demands their current downtown stadium is dramatically improved (or replaced), otherwise the team is free to leave.

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/football ... 8ee75.html

It's fascinating how differently the discussion is framed.

What's amazing to me is that their stadium was built in 1995, and yet the City of Minneapolis got a lot of flack for wanting to rebuild their stadium -- one that was built in 1980! 1995 is less than 20 years ago though....I'm kind of surprised this is even a conversation in St. Louis. What is the minimum time frame for which a stadium can become obsolete -- 15 years? Wow!

So we can expect to be asked for another Vikings stadium by about 2030? Great.

No. St. Louis built a really sterile, cheap stadium and convention center in the mid-1990s to help lure the team from Los Angeles, and then the team had a vague clause in the contract stipulating that the stadium be among the top-third in the NFL by 2014 (something like that), which is why they are talking about this now.

This isn't an indication at all that the Vikings stadium would be obsolete by 2030.

No. St. Louis built a really sterile, cheap stadium and convention center in the mid-1990s to help lure the team from Los Angeles, and then the team had a vague clause in the contract stipulating that the stadium be among the top-third in the NFL by 2014 (something like that), which is why they are talking about this now.

This isn't an indication at all that the Vikings stadium would be obsolete by 2030.

So did we, it's called the Metrodome. The only difference I see is the clause to renovate.

the rams moved from LA so it's only natural the tie-in. i'd rather have the rams in LA.

the rams moved from LA so it's only natural the tie-in. i'd rather have the rams in LA.

The Rams actually began in Cleveland (if you can believe it!), and St. Louis had the Cardinals before the Rams, so it's only natural that the Cardinals be there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Louis_Rams

If you find that interesting, here is the entire NFL team history:

http://www.jimwegryn.com/Names/FootballTeams.htm

and cardinals began in chicago...

that st louis dome is sort of like target center. it was built too early to catch the wave of the amenity rich, lavish stadiums that came after.

LA will get a team, just a matter of time. too much private money out there salivating with their stadium proposal.

Although the conspiracy theorists would say the owners will keep LA empty so they can always play the "we'll move to LA" card. What city would they use for that if LA got a team?

they're running out of teams to use that ploy though. didn't jacksonville just sign a new lease? and buffalo too has some new stadium renovation coming with an eventual new facility long term.