Downtown Stadium a dream?

DadOf8 · 07-02-2005, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucky13

I agree wholeheartedly. Point by point.
I do prefer Murray over Sandy as it is more centrally located and accessable. Particullarly via Trax, where Sandy would require shuttles to/from the venue.
Fairpark is unacceptable! Absolutely unacceptable! :signgross :badair:

It seems to me that you're looking at it from a public transportation point of view. My favorite location is downtown SLC. I also think that's probably the most expensive location. I do believe hearing something about Dave Checkets preferring downtown SLC too. If this was the Utah Jazz we were talking about instead of RSL, I think they would probably get just about anything they wanted. The problem is that legislators are not looking at RSL as being on the same level as the Jazz and they probably wont until RSL shows that they can continue to bring in large crowds. What will bring in the large crowds? Well WCQs will do that, but RSL also needs to start winning. If someone had mentioned a new basketball arena for the Jazz back in 1980, they probably would have been laughed at. I know everyone wants to get out of RES as soon as possible, as do I, but I think realistically we may not have public support until RSL gains a reputation like the Jazz did. Of course, I could be wrong.

Section 37 · 07-02-2005, 11:03 PM

Dave Ckecketts has said he wants it downtown. He clearly has a larger view than any of us.

The team hired real estate people to find land which tells me they're not serious about Sandy or Murray or the Fairpark (which already have property lined up).

I don't see any reason to rush a stadium in a bad location (suburbs) because RSL deserves the best stadium in the best location.

A lame location in 2007 doesn't send a strong message.

A world class location in 08, 09, 10, sends a strong message.

After all, we're going to be bringing our kids and grandkids to this stadium. Do we really want to say in 20 years "yeah, this location isn't the greatest, but back in '07 we were really anxious and some people thought soccer would die, so..."?

Section 37 · 07-02-2005, 11:14 PM

I just read Neil's post in the Info section, and now I feel bad. Neil is right, we all have different ideas about this, but the point of this forum is to come together behind our team.
So, I'm sorry that I've been divisive on this, and I promise to be at every game in the new stadium wherever it is. And that's how I'll raise my children.
In the end, it's all about The Beautiful Game.

StarsOnSunday · 07-03-2005, 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Section 37

I just read Neil's post in the Info section, and now I feel bad. Neil is right, we all have different ideas about this, but the point of this forum is to come together behind our team.
So, I'm sorry that I've been divisive on this, and I promise to be at every game in the new stadium wherever it is. And that's how I'll raise my children.
In the end, it's all about The Beautiful Game.

(...and a sweet stadium)

Stucki · 07-03-2005, 12:45 AM

It would be nice if we got a prime location and a sweet stadium. But, I will be there regardless, happy that we have our own stadium.

Jim Umber · 07-03-2005, 09:17 AM

I agree (this represents a change) that downtown would probably be better. I have nothing against the Murray plan, except I don't think it will happen. I agree that Sandy is too far from SLC (even though it would be a LOT closer for me). I actually don't have a problem with the Fairpark plan. But again, I don't think it is being seriously considered by the team.

Whereever it gets put, that's where I'll be going for my soccer. The one thing we are all agreed on (or at least most) is that we need a SSS. Some people are adamant that it should be privately funded. I'll take it anyway I can get it.

Stucki · 07-03-2005, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Umber

I agree (this represents a change) that downtown would probably be better. I have nothing against the Murray plan, except I don't think it will happen. I agree that Sandy is too far from SLC (even though it would be a LOT closer for me). I actually don't have a problem with the Fairpark plan. But again, I don't think it is being seriously considered by the team.

Whereever it gets put, that's where I'll be going for my soccer. The one thing we are all agreed on (or at least most) is that we need a SSS. Some people are adamant that it should be privately funded. I'll take it anyway I can get it.

I think most of us would prefer downtown, but is there anyone who would stop coming to games if the stadium was in a place we didn't care for?

Aerick · 07-03-2005, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stucki

I think most of us would prefer downtown, but is there anyone who would stop coming to games if the stadium was in a place we didn't care for?

Maybe the fairpark, or Toelle! :P

I'd probably still go to some games, but not as many.

Jose Luis Luviano · 07-03-2005, 12:09 PM

Due to Neil's "This is not Bigsoccer" rule, this post is a lot shorter than I had planned to make it.

Fairgrounds area safer than people think.

Stucki · 07-03-2005, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jose Luis Luviano

Due to Neil's "This is not Bigsoccer" rule, this post is a lot shorter than I had planned to make it.

Fairgrounds area safer than people think.

I saw that article. There are many places in the valley that have myths surrounding them about safety. I live in one of them.