|
 There are some outlandish tales of local communities getting
fleeced by their professional sports teams (we're looking at you,
Miami), but the situation here goes beyond the egregious use of
public funds to help subsidize pretentious stadiums for billionaire
owners.
This is about shameful waste.
Two perfectly useful stadiums are going to be reduced to rubble —
one just 17 years old (farewell, Turner Field), the other a mere 21
years into its existence (so long, Georgia Dome).
"I was just thinking," Victor Matheson, a professor of economics at
Holy Cross and specialist in the business of sports, said Friday,
"Turner Field is not as old as Miley Cyrus."
But let's go beyond my hometown. This should be a stern warning to
the rest of the country.
All those folks out there rolling their eyes and chuckling at
another round of mindless destruction in Atlanta need to be paying
attention — and keeping a firm grip on their wallets. Because rest
assured, there are plenty of owners out there looking covetously in
this direction, wondering how they can con their elected officials
into coughing up hundreds of millions to build them a new place to
play.
"Every owner in every major league sport has stadium envy," Matheson
said. "As soon as someone gets a better stadium, they want one,
too."
Construction of new stadiums and arenas slowed dramatically during
the Great Recession, but it looks as though things will be cranking
up again now that the economy is showing signs of improvement. The
NFL is already in the midst of another building boon, with new
stadiums on the horizon for the San Francisco 49ers next season, the
Minnesota Vikings in 2016, and the Falcons in 2017 — a $1
billion-plus retractable roof facility next to the Georgia Dome.
The NFL has one key advantage over the other leagues: Los Angeles,
the nation's second-largest market, is wide open since losing the
Rams and the Raiders in the mid-1990s. Talk about a convenient way
for the 32 teams to extort what they want from their current cities.
"As a public policy guy, I think that's terrible," Matheson said.
"As a business strategy, it's brilliant."
Now along comes the Braves, with their stunning announcement this
week that they will they spend only three more seasons in the
downtown stadium affectionately known as "the Ted" before moving to
a new $672 million facility in the suburbs.
[to top of second column] |
The bar has never been set this low: The Braves
will wind up playing only 20 years at Turner Field, which was
initially built as the main stadium for the 1996 Atlanta
Olympics. The city already is making plans to level the
50,000-seat structure that has been the scene of so much sports
history during its short history, from Muhammad Ali and Michael
Johnson at the Olympics to the Braves hosting a World Series and
an All-Star Game.
Never mind that Turner Field is younger than 13 other major
league parks. It's safe to assume many of those owners are
suddenly pondering their options, and not just those with
outdated parks in Oakland and Tampa Bay.
The Braves have turned back the clock, bucking the trend of
moving closer to the city by finding a wealthy suburban area,
Cobb County, that is willing to folk over $300 million in tax
money without giving its citizens so much as a vote. Apparently,
that's a better way to spend all that money than helping the
county's financially strapped schools, which had to impose five
furlough days this year.
Matheson said the city of Atlanta made the right decision in
letting the Braves go, since they'll be moving only 12 miles up
the interstate. But it's hard to give much credit to Mayor Kasim
Reed, who essentially had no choice after committing $200
million in city money to the Falcons' new stadium. If he
could've found another $300 million at the end of a rainbow,
chances are it would've wound up in the Braves' pocket.
Seriously, folks, what the heck is going on here?
There's absolutely nothing wrong with the Georgia Dome, which
even after those new stadiums open for Minnesota and San
Francisco will still be younger than seven other facilities and
is a 1990s contemporary of eight others. OK, so maybe a
retractable roof would be nice, given Atlanta's climate, but
that surely could've been accomplished by renovating the current
stadium for considerably less money (sorry, we don't buy the
consulting firm that claimed it would be just as costly as
building a new stadium).
Speaking of things we aren't buying, how about most of the
Braves' logic for moving to the 'burbs. They talk of easier
access, yet are leaving a city with mass transit for a county
that has none. They talk about traffic woes around Turner Field,
yet plan to build on a site with some of the metro area's worst
traffic congestion. They talk of what it would cost to upgrade
Turner Field, yet will spend even more on a new stadium.
But those are Atlanta's problems.
Let's get back to building-it-up-so-they-can-tear-it-down, coming
soon to your town.
You've been warned.
[Associated
Press; PAUL NEWBERRY, AP National Writer]
Copyright 2013 The Associated
Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
