collapse

* Stud of Colorado Game

Tyler Kolek

21 points, 5 rebounds,
11 assists, 1 steal,
40 minutes

2023-24 Season SoG Tally
Kolek11
Ighodaro6
Jones, K.6
Mitchell2
Jones, S.1
Joplin1

'22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

NCSTATE is evil by wisblue
[Today at 08:50:52 AM]


Chicago bars for Fri game by Jay Bee
[Today at 08:27:25 AM]


2024 Transfer Portal by Spotcheck Billy
[Today at 07:22:54 AM]


2024 Coaching Carousel by The Sultan of Semantics
[Today at 07:02:21 AM]


Dallas bars tonite by Marquette Gyros
[Today at 06:59:41 AM]


Are we still recruiting anyone for the 24-25 season. by Jay Bee
[Today at 06:42:08 AM]


2024 NCAA Tournament Thread by Uncle Rico
[Today at 06:32:48 AM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: NC State

Marquette
81
Marquette vs

NC State

Date/Time: Mar 29, 2024, 6:09 pm
TV: CBS
Schedule for 2023-24
Colorado
77

Author Topic: New Stadium Imminent?  (Read 77812 times)

BCHoopster

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3173
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #25 on: April 21, 2014, 12:52:35 PM »
I understand your point, but The Al was part of a major fundraising campaign. I don't see how MU has the cash to make a donation large enough to make a difference without a campaign like that, and I doubt that's a priority for the next campaign.

There are avenues MU has to give and get the money back in a 25 year period, so get a loan for $25M.  Do something, it is as important to MU as the Bucks, so help.  I do not care who the coach is but playing in an NBA arena, particularly a new one will benefit the program.  It would be a showcase for any new recruits in the future.  Program has to move forward.

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #26 on: April 21, 2014, 12:58:15 PM »
Well, to be fair to pro-sports franchises, after they get their new facilities, they generally stay for a while (figure 15-20 years). I can't think of a team that received a taxpayer stadium and then bolted quickly. Maybe one of the hockey franchises down south?


The Charlotte Collesium was built for the Hornets, opened in 1988, and the Hornets moved in 2002.  (14 years.)


MU Fan in Connecticut

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3438
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #27 on: April 21, 2014, 01:07:20 PM »
Atlanta had the Thrashers leave, but the Hawks still used the stadium.

mu_hilltopper

  • Warrior
  • Global Moderator
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7403
    • https://twitter.com/nihilist_arbys
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #28 on: April 21, 2014, 01:09:14 PM »
The Bucks have more than a few fans. The casual Bucks fan has tired of this poorly run franchise. With new blood in ownership and hopefully front office, they could get this thing turned around.


Could you explain by what metric you could suggest "the Bucks have more than a few fans"?

I mean .. the obvious metric would be attendance, which has been in decline.  Perhaps you could measure TV viewing, which I don't have the figures on, but I'd imagine are awful.  (Who sits down and watches an NBA game, when their team was and is a non-contender, year after year?)

I imagine there may be some "old folks" who recall the successes of the Bucks from yester-year, but they are a dying breed.   I can't imagine significant chunks of <30 year olds who give a crap about the Bucks, replacing that dying breed, either.

And, and, and, far more importantly:  Who would support the Bucks when a new arena is built and ticket prices then double?

I hope no one is deluded into the concept that a new stadium is "necessary" for anything besides separating more money from fans.  (Every governmental meeting on this subject should begin with that disclaimer!)

Groin_pull

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1861
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #29 on: April 21, 2014, 01:13:53 PM »
Could you explain by what metric you could suggest "the Bucks have more than a few fans"?

I mean .. the obvious metric would be attendance, which has been in decline.  Perhaps you could measure TV viewing, which I don't have the figures on, but I'd imagine are awful.  (Who sits down and watches an NBA game, when their team was and is a non-contender, year after year?)

I imagine there may be some "old folks" who recall the successes of the Bucks from yester-year, but they are a dying breed.   I can't imagine significant chunks of <30 year olds who give a crap about the Bucks, replacing that dying breed, either.

And, and, and, far more importantly:  Who would support the Bucks when a new arena is built and ticket prices then double?

I hope no one is deluded into the concept that a new stadium is "necessary" for anything besides separating more money from fans.  (Every governmental meeting on this subject should begin with that disclaimer!)

Fine. Then you won't mind when the Bucks move out of town in 2017. Just one less reason for anyone to pay attention to Milwaukee.

Canned Goods n Ammo

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
  • Ammo, clean shaven Ammo.
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #30 on: April 21, 2014, 01:15:07 PM »
Could you explain by what metric you could suggest "the Bucks have more than a few fans"?

I mean .. the obvious metric would be attendance, which has been in decline.  Perhaps you could measure TV viewing, which I don't have the figures on, but I'd imagine are awful.  (Who sits down and watches an NBA game, when their team was and is a non-contender, year after year?)

I imagine there may be some "old folks" who recall the successes of the Bucks from yester-year, but they are a dying breed.   I can't imagine significant chunks of <30 year olds who give a crap about the Bucks, replacing that dying breed, either.

And, and, and, far more importantly:  Who would support the Bucks when a new arena is built and ticket prices then double?

I hope no one is deluded into the concept that a new stadium is "necessary" for anything besides separating more money from fans.  (Every governmental meeting on this subject should begin with that disclaimer!)

Bingo. The NBA business model doesn't really work in a lot of cities, but they have a lot of teams.

What is the answer? More revenue streams.

How do you get them? Get a new (free) building that has even more places for people to spend money.

Does Milwaukee NEED an arena with a restaurant in it? No. There are dozens of restaurants a short walk away from the BC.

THE BUCKS need an arena with a restaurant in it so they can make more money. Hooray! Economic impact!

Canned Goods n Ammo

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
  • Ammo, clean shaven Ammo.
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #31 on: April 21, 2014, 01:21:52 PM »
Fine. Then you won't mind when the Bucks move out of town in 2017. Just one less reason for anyone to pay attention to Milwaukee.

I'm against an arena. Not because I want the Bucks to move, or because I think they are bad at basketball. Even if they were in first place, I wouldn't be in favor of the arena.

I'm against it because it doesn't make economic sense for a city that has enough economic issues.

You want to invest $300-500 million in private business growth? Do something really progressive. Do something that no other city is doing. Utilize Milwaukee's advantages (geography, freshwater, existing infrastructure, skilled labor force, etc.). Do something unique, that will work for Milwaukee and can't just be easily replicated by (insert city).

Don't build an arena, and call it "growth". Don't repeat the same cycle that everybody else is doing.

GOO

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1342
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #32 on: April 21, 2014, 01:24:17 PM »
Three sites appear most likely and in this order:

1. North of current BC in the former Park East space.  Pros:  Undeveloped so it is easy; keeps much of the infrastructure (parking, traffic flow) of the BC relevant; cheapest area to develop.  Cons:  Pushes facility further away from bars, restaurants and hotels; remains single use facility as won't be a part of a larger development project.

2. Tear down arena and MKE theater.  Pros:  Even more centrally located within the city; likely can be incorporated with convention center to create a more functional and larger space.  Cons:  More expensive to develop; Interests of more groups need to be considered

3.  Valley:  Pro: Potawatomi are far more likely to make a significant contribution if the venue is within walking distance of their properties  Con:  Doesn't really stimulate the city, it stimulates the casino; really hurts downtown business; Puts the NBA more in bed with gambling than they have been previously




Number 2 makes the most sense, but it won't happen as the BC is the one that gets torn down.  Marotta saying that the BC needs 100M over the next decade (or something to that effect) pretty much says what they are thinking.

The valley is too hard to get in and out of for an arena.  Only way it happens in the valley is if it is all private money = Potawatomi kicking in 200M for naming rights and as a donation.  Won't happen, unless there is some big back room deal with Walker connected to killing the Kenosha casino.  So the valley is probably out.

So, I agree that that ParkEast is where it goes.  The BC or US Cellular gets torn down, probably the BC.  Hard to believe.

I was very against the arena, but if the following is true, I am for it: 200M donated, 50M plus in naming rights, 50M plus in additional donations (corporate, private, and minority owners).  That leaves about 150M to finance and that can be done through a TIF that includes real estate and sales taxes in the immediate vicinity and generated at the arena.  Not a broad sales tax.

I was very against it, but if for 150M they can get an arena and keep the bucks, with billionaire owners who want to win, I'm for it.

klyrish

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 543
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #33 on: April 21, 2014, 01:27:20 PM »
Worse case senario is new area is built and Bucks move to another city.

Bucks to VT?

wadesworld

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 17384
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #34 on: April 21, 2014, 01:33:30 PM »
Do they then just put in a parking structure where the BC will be torn down to use for the new arena and the US Cell?  Restaurants and a parking structure?
Rocket Trigger Warning (wild that saying this would trigger anyone, but it's the world we live in): Black Lives Matter

77ncaachamps

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8457
  • Last of the Warrior Class
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #35 on: April 21, 2014, 01:35:33 PM »
What's the likelihood that the new arena could be completely privately funded?
SS Marquette

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #36 on: April 21, 2014, 01:35:51 PM »
I'm against an arena. Not because I want the Bucks to move, or because I think they are bad at basketball. Even if they were in first place, I wouldn't be in favor of the arena.

I'm against it because it doesn't make economic sense for a city that has enough economic issues.

You want to invest $300-500 million in private business growth? Do something really progressive. Do something that no other city is doing. Utilize Milwaukee's advantages (geography, freshwater, existing infrastructure, skilled labor force, etc.). Do something unique, that will work for Milwaukee and can't just be easily replicated by (insert city).

Don't build an arena, and call it "growth". Don't repeat the same cycle that everybody else is doing.



Ayup.  Well stated.  

wadesworld

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 17384
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #37 on: April 21, 2014, 01:37:03 PM »
What's the likelihood that the new arena could be completely privately funded?

The only way that would happen is if Kohl says $100 million right now, hoping that with $200 million already committed the public would vote to fund part of it, and when they don't he just says, "Well, here's the rest of what you need."  Which is not impossible.  But very unlikely.
Rocket Trigger Warning (wild that saying this would trigger anyone, but it's the world we live in): Black Lives Matter

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #38 on: April 21, 2014, 01:38:14 PM »
What's the likelihood that the new arena could be completely privately funded?


By whom?  And what would their motivation be?

Groin_pull

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1861
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #39 on: April 21, 2014, 01:39:19 PM »
The comments here are exactly why a new arena will never get built in Milwaukee. The taxpayers won't pay a dime.

That's okay, because this will be a win-win-win for everyone involved.

Each taxpayer gets to avoid paying about $10 a year in a potential sales tax to fund a new arena.

The new Bucks owners get to move to a thriving market.

And the NBA gets to move out of a dying, rust belt town that most people couldn't find on a map.

See...everyone should be happy.

77ncaachamps

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8457
  • Last of the Warrior Class
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #40 on: April 21, 2014, 01:40:47 PM »

By whom?  And what would their motivation be?

I was thinking of the SF Giants stadium (ATT) which was completely funded with private funds.

This way they could leverage the City for location and channel the municipal funds (meant for the arena) toward improving the surrounding neighborhood, instrastructure, etc.
SS Marquette

Marquette_g

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 678
  • Gonna Get Some Cold Cuts Today
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #41 on: April 21, 2014, 01:43:20 PM »
The comments here are exactly why a new arena will never get built in Milwaukee. The taxpayers won't pay a dime.

That's okay, because this will be a win-win-win for everyone involved.

Each taxpayer gets to avoid paying about $10 a year in a potential sales tax to fund a new arena.

The new Bucks owners get to move to a thriving market.

And the NBA gets to move out of a dying, rust belt town that most people couldn't find on a map.

See...everyone should be happy.

I really wish they would have made the Miller Park tax a "sports and entertainment" tax so we would have some path for ongoing funding of projects like this and others which are sure to arise over the next few years.  

I for one hope that it does get done, although any sort of public funding is going to be difficult.  

Canned Goods n Ammo

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
  • Ammo, clean shaven Ammo.
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #42 on: April 21, 2014, 01:46:55 PM »
The comments here are exactly why a new arena will never get built in Milwaukee. The taxpayers won't pay a dime.

That's okay, because this will be a win-win-win for everyone involved.

Each taxpayer gets to avoid paying about $10 a year in a potential sales tax to fund a new arena.

The new Bucks owners get to move to a thriving market.

And the NBA gets to move out of a dying, rust belt town that most people couldn't find on a map.

See...everyone should be happy.

You're fighting facts with an emotional appeal. Don't do that.

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #43 on: April 21, 2014, 01:47:33 PM »
I was thinking of the SF Giants stadium (ATT) which was completely funded with private funds.


I literally just read this last week.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2002/oct/22/privately_built_pacific/

Notice that they specially mention that Milwaukee couldn't do this.  And that even they could never do this today.

Any public financing IMO is going to have to be a combination TIF type district, and something like a hotel tax.  And perhaps some direct funding of infrastructure by the state, county or city.  

WarriorPride68

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1922
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #44 on: April 21, 2014, 01:50:34 PM »
MU could always share the cell with UWM  ;D
« Last Edit: April 21, 2014, 01:53:08 PM by WarriorPride68 »

Tums Festival

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1283
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #45 on: April 21, 2014, 01:51:36 PM »
I don't remember seeing this brought up anywhere, and it's perhaps not really a doable idea, but if the Bucks move why can't Marquette play at Miller Park? There's precedent for hoops being played in a domed baseball stadium (out Sweet 16 win over Kentucky in 1994 was at Tropicana Field in Tampa) and Marquette's season fits nicely into the Brewers off-season. Don't know why a raised floor wouldn't work in the outfield area.
"Every day ends with a Tums festival!"

BCHoopster

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3173
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #46 on: April 21, 2014, 01:55:09 PM »
The comments here are exactly why a new arena will never get built in Milwaukee. The taxpayers won't pay a dime.

That's okay, because this will be a win-win-win for everyone involved.

Each taxpayer gets to avoid paying about $10 a year in a potential sales tax to fund a new arena.

The new Bucks owners get to move to a thriving market.

And the NBA gets to move out of a dying, rust belt town that most people couldn't find on a map.

See...everyone should be happy.


You are right and wrong, I think it is for every $10.000 you spend here, it is $10 in tax.  Another point about keeping a $100M dollar business is that the salaries of the total franchise has to be at least $70M a year, so the state gets $7M of that at least.  So over 20 years, that is another $140M they get back from the Bucks, not including the tax on all the food and drinks.

ChuckyChip

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 461
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #47 on: April 21, 2014, 01:56:48 PM »
I don't remember seeing this brought up anywhere, and it's perhaps not really a doable idea, but if the Bucks move why can't Marquette play at Miller Park? There's precedent for hoops being played in a domed baseball stadium (out Sweet 16 win over Kentucky in 1994 was at Tropicana Field in Tampa) and Marquette's season fits nicely into the Brewers off-season. Don't know why a raised floor wouldn't work in the outfield area.

Miller Park can only be heated 20 degrees warmer than the outside temperature...that might not work well in December and January.

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #48 on: April 21, 2014, 01:57:18 PM »
I don't remember seeing this brought up anywhere, and it's perhaps not really a doable idea, but if the Bucks move why can't Marquette play at Miller Park? There's precedent for hoops being played in a domed baseball stadium (out Sweet 16 win over Kentucky in 1994 was at Tropicana Field in Tampa) and Marquette's season fits nicely into the Brewers off-season. Don't know why a raised floor wouldn't work in the outfield area.


1.  The atmosphere would suck.

2.  The Brewers start getting their field ready sometime in January or February.  They don't want a basketball floor sitting there.

Tums Festival

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1283
Re: New Stadium Imminent?
« Reply #49 on: April 21, 2014, 02:05:44 PM »
If I remember correctly, new ownership was the catalyst for the Brewer's resurgence.  Once the Selig's were out and a new outlook (and $$$) were involved, it totally changed the public's view (and support) of the franchise.

Kohl is a HORRIBLE meddler in the operations of the team.  He makes the late George Steinbrenner look like a disinterested party.  Once he is gone, my guess it's addition by subtraction and an improved product on the court.

The Bucks were a successful franchise for many years until Kohl took over and canned Don Nelson. It's been so long ago though most people probably don't remember that era.
"Every day ends with a Tums festival!"

 

feedback