Jaguars New Stadium?

[Adam White]

Doing some quick research I found a study done by some university professor on this very subject.  Outside of a few venues, stadiums this size have very limited usage although NFL teams are trying to find a way to get more use out of them.  Bottom line, they are just to big for any other use.  Outdoor stadiums in the 10,000 to 30,000 seat range that had the most usage - from graduations to cheerleading camps to high school football championships to rodeos.

I think that was almost literally Tacachale's point. It's not the presence of the Jaguars that is keeping the stadium from being used more.

[Steve]

Doing some quick research I found a study done by some university professor on this very subject.  Outside of a few venues, stadiums this size have very limited usage although NFL teams are trying to find a way to get more use out of them.  Bottom line, they are just to big for any other use.  Outdoor stadiums in the 10,000 to 30,000 seat range that had the most usage - from graduations to cheerleading camps to high school football championships to rodeos.

I think that was almost literally Tacachale's point. It's not the presence of the Jaguars that is keeping the stadium from being used more.

Yes, exactly. In terms of usage, it's much easier frankly to accommodate non-home team usage in an arena or ballpark. For cities that have both a hockey tram and basketball team, you get about 80 home games during the winter months, then the capacity makes it much more attractive for concerts and such. Even baseball is easier than football because of the size (plus you have 81 home games), though the field layout makes it harder for things like concerts (not that they don't happen)

I love the Jags, but you'd be hard pressed to find a football stadium that isn't used more than 20 times a year total.

[Kerry]

Doing some quick research I found a study done by some university professor on this very subject.  Outside of a few venues, stadiums this size have very limited usage although NFL teams are trying to find a way to get more use out of them.  Bottom line, they are just to big for any other use.  Outdoor stadiums in the 10,000 to 30,000 seat range that had the most usage - from graduations to cheerleading camps to high school football championships to rodeos.

I think that was almost literally Tacachale's point. It's not the presence of the Jaguars that is keeping the stadium from being used more.

Yes, exactly. In terms of usage, it's much easier frankly to accommodate non-home team usage in an arena or ballpark. For cities that have both a hockey tram and basketball team, you get about 80 home games during the winter months, then the capacity makes it much more attractive for concerts and such. Even baseball is easier than football because of the size (plus you have 81 home games), though the field layout makes it harder for things like concerts (not that they don't happen)

I love the Jags, but you'd be hard pressed to find a football stadium that isn't used more than 20 times a year total.

Incidentally, this is one of the reasons I thought having an NBA team would have been a better fit for Jax than the NFL, but that is a dead subject.

[martt12]

More info on what's being discussed about the stadium. https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/jaguars-president-mark-lamping-on-the-stadiums-next-step

[pierre]

It comes down to this.

In the next couple of years, the Jaguars are going to ask for an extensive renovation of the stadium. One likely costing at least 500 million dollars.

Without that renovation, the team will move. That is not a question.

The city, and the state of Florida, will have to decide if they are willing to commit that amount of money to guarantee there will be an NFL team in Jacksonville beyond 2030.

I have a friend that works at the stadium. What he has heard is the plan would be to essentially knock down the upper decks and the ramps and rebuild them with a partial roof, similar to Miami. And that likely for one season the team would play home games in Gainesville or Orlando. The Bears, Seahawks and Vikings have played in college stadiums for a year or two while a stadium was being built or renovated.

[Steve]

It comes down to this.

In the next couple of years, the Jaguars are going to ask for an extensive renovation of the stadium. One likely costing at least 500 million dollars.

Without that renovation, the team will move. That is not a question.

The city, and the state of Florida, will have to decide if they are willing to commit that amount of money to guarantee there will be an NFL team in Jacksonville beyond 2030.

I have a friend that works at the stadium. What he has heard is the plan would be to essentially knock down the upper decks and the ramps and rebuild them with a partial roof, similar to Miami. And that likely for one season the team would play home games in Gainesville or Orlando. The Bears, Seahawks and Vikings have played in college stadiums for a year or two while a stadium was being built or renovated.

The partial roof thing would be appealing for the general public. Most of the recent renovations have been things that were limited in their appeal (club areas, etc.).

I'd say this - I'd have to hear the details to decide if I'm in favor or not. But, any investment anywhere near that amount of money would HAVE to come with a lease extension - and a significant one.

Additionally, I'd be okay with them in Gainesville for a year. I would not be excited about Orlando for a year.

[Papa33]

Will this ask be made before or after Curry leaves office?  Will this be attached (somehow) to pro JEA privatization PR?  I'm with sanmarcomatt, thanks for the memories indeed.

[Tacachale]

It comes down to this.

In the next couple of years, the Jaguars are going to ask for an extensive renovation of the stadium. One likely costing at least 500 million dollars.

Without that renovation, the team will move. That is not a question.

The city, and the state of Florida, will have to decide if they are willing to commit that amount of money to guarantee there will be an NFL team in Jacksonville beyond 2030.

I have a friend that works at the stadium. What he has heard is the plan would be to essentially knock down the upper decks and the ramps and rebuild them with a partial roof, similar to Miami. And that likely for one season the team would play home games in Gainesville or Orlando. The Bears, Seahawks and Vikings have played in college stadiums for a year or two while a stadium was being built or renovated.

The city will come up with whatever pricetag it takes. No mayor wants to be the one who lost the Jaguars. The question will be what kind of deal the city secures in exchange for the investment. Another 30 year lease agreement would be good. The only limit will be how much we can actually bond, but I'm sure the Jags understand that (and also understand that the NFL's running out of cities that will pay this kind of money for a stadium). We do have the benefit of not totally starting from scratch - or worse, total demo and rebuild - since most of the stadium's bones are good.

It would be silly if the JEA sale were to go to this expense. What the hell would we sell in another 20 or 30 years when the stadium issue comes back again? The airport? Smarter to bond it against bed tax, sales tax, etc. that would be recurring as opposed to one time money.

In this light, it's interesting what happened in Atlanta when it lost the Thrashers and the Braves (Winnipeg for the Thrashers, the suburbs for the Braves). The mayor at the time, Kasim Reed, said the city was simply unwilling to match what Cobb County was offering for the Braves considering the city's other needs. He focused on the Falcons football and soccer stadium and the development surrounding it, saying the deal they'd worked out there was a revenue generator for the city instead of a drain, as the Braves stadium would be, and had a better chance of inspiring surrounding development and investment. People were upset but he showed that Atlanta is still Atlanta without the Braves playing downtown. When your city has so much else going on, you can be choosy.

[pierre]

It comes down to this.

In the next couple of years, the Jaguars are going to ask for an extensive renovation of the stadium. One likely costing at least 500 million dollars.

Without that renovation, the team will move. That is not a question.

The city, and the state of Florida, will have to decide if they are willing to commit that amount of money to guarantee there will be an NFL team in Jacksonville beyond 2030.

I have a friend that works at the stadium. What he has heard is the plan would be to essentially knock down the upper decks and the ramps and rebuild them with a partial roof, similar to Miami. And that likely for one season the team would play home games in Gainesville or Orlando. The Bears, Seahawks and Vikings have played in college stadiums for a year or two while a stadium was being built or renovated.

The partial roof thing would be appealing for the general public. Most of the recent renovations have been things that were limited in their appeal (club areas, etc.).

I'd say this - I'd have to hear the details to decide if I'm in favor or not. But, any investment anywhere near that amount of money would HAVE to come with a lease extension - and a significant one.

Additionally, I'd be okay with them in Gainesville for a year. I would not be excited about Orlando for a year.

It would definitely be with an extension of the lease. Probably 25 years or so.

[vicupstate]

How much Bed Tax is left to bond? Don't the Jags already get 2/3 of it now? Isn't what little bit of marketing JAX does come from the small percentage they don't already get?   

[Tacachale]

How much Bed Tax is left to bond? Don't the Jags already get 2/3 of it now? Isn't what little bit of marketing JAX does come from the small percentage they don't already get?

I think that's correct, but I believe you could raise the bed tax. You could sell it to the hotels that a new stadium will increase revenue, and of course it wouldn't affect any locals who aren't staying in a hotel. At any rate it should be bonded against something that's recurring so we're not selling off the Timucan Preserve next time it comes up.

[Steve]

It comes down to this.

In the next couple of years, the Jaguars are going to ask for an extensive renovation of the stadium. One likely costing at least 500 million dollars.

Without that renovation, the team will move. That is not a question.

The city, and the state of Florida, will have to decide if they are willing to commit that amount of money to guarantee there will be an NFL team in Jacksonville beyond 2030.

I have a friend that works at the stadium. What he has heard is the plan would be to essentially knock down the upper decks and the ramps and rebuild them with a partial roof, similar to Miami. And that likely for one season the team would play home games in Gainesville or Orlando. The Bears, Seahawks and Vikings have played in college stadiums for a year or two while a stadium was being built or renovated.

The city will come up with whatever pricetag it takes. No mayor wants to be the one who lost the Jaguars. The question will be what kind of deal the city secures in exchange for the investment. Another 30 year lease agreement would be good. The only limit will be how much we can actually bond, but I'm sure the Jags understand that (and also understand that the NFL's running out of cities that will pay this kind of money for a stadium). We do have the benefit of not totally starting from scratch - or worse, total demo and rebuild - since most of the stadium's bones are good.

It would be silly if the JEA sale were to go to this expense. What the hell would we sell in another 20 or 30 years when the stadium issue comes back again? The airport? Smarter to bond it against bed tax, sales tax, etc. that would be recurring as opposed to one time money.

In this light, it's interesting what happened in Atlanta when it lost the Thrashers and the Braves (Winnipeg for the Thrashers, the suburbs for the Braves). The mayor at the time, Kasim Reed, said the city was simply unwilling to match what Cobb County was offering for the Braves considering the city's other needs. He focused on the Falcons football and soccer stadium and the development surrounding it, saying the deal they'd worked out there was a revenue generator for the city instead of a drain, as the Braves stadium would be, and had a better chance of inspiring surrounding development and investment. People were upset but he showed that Atlanta is still Atlanta without the Braves playing downtown. When your city has so much else going on, you can be choosy.

Interesting thoughts on Atlanta. Personally I think Atlanta picked wrong and should have prioritized the Braves (81 Games) versus the Falcons (10 Games). I realize the dome also brings things like CFP, Bowl Game, Final Four, etc, but I'd rather have a steady crowd of 25k 81 times a year.

[Tacachale]

It comes down to this.

In the next couple of years, the Jaguars are going to ask for an extensive renovation of the stadium. One likely costing at least 500 million dollars.

Without that renovation, the team will move. That is not a question.

The city, and the state of Florida, will have to decide if they are willing to commit that amount of money to guarantee there will be an NFL team in Jacksonville beyond 2030.

I have a friend that works at the stadium. What he has heard is the plan would be to essentially knock down the upper decks and the ramps and rebuild them with a partial roof, similar to Miami. And that likely for one season the team would play home games in Gainesville or Orlando. The Bears, Seahawks and Vikings have played in college stadiums for a year or two while a stadium was being built or renovated.

The city will come up with whatever pricetag it takes. No mayor wants to be the one who lost the Jaguars. The question will be what kind of deal the city secures in exchange for the investment. Another 30 year lease agreement would be good. The only limit will be how much we can actually bond, but I'm sure the Jags understand that (and also understand that the NFL's running out of cities that will pay this kind of money for a stadium). We do have the benefit of not totally starting from scratch - or worse, total demo and rebuild - since most of the stadium's bones are good.

It would be silly if the JEA sale were to go to this expense. What the hell would we sell in another 20 or 30 years when the stadium issue comes back again? The airport? Smarter to bond it against bed tax, sales tax, etc. that would be recurring as opposed to one time money.

In this light, it's interesting what happened in Atlanta when it lost the Thrashers and the Braves (Winnipeg for the Thrashers, the suburbs for the Braves). The mayor at the time, Kasim Reed, said the city was simply unwilling to match what Cobb County was offering for the Braves considering the city's other needs. He focused on the Falcons football and soccer stadium and the development surrounding it, saying the deal they'd worked out there was a revenue generator for the city instead of a drain, as the Braves stadium would be, and had a better chance of inspiring surrounding development and investment. People were upset but he showed that Atlanta is still Atlanta without the Braves playing downtown. When your city has so much else going on, you can be choosy.

Interesting thoughts on Atlanta. Personally I think Atlanta picked wrong and should have prioritized the Braves (81 Games) versus the Falcons (10 Games). I realize the dome also brings things like CFP, Bowl Game, Final Four, etc, but I'd rather have a steady crowd of 25k 81 times a year.

My understanding is it was tied to the specific conditions of the two stadiums. The Falcons deal generates direct revenue and the Braves deal would not. And while the baseball team has more games, it was not well located for that impact to spread around. There wasn't even transit access as I recall.

[Steve]

It comes down to this.

In the next couple of years, the Jaguars are going to ask for an extensive renovation of the stadium. One likely costing at least 500 million dollars.

Without that renovation, the team will move. That is not a question.

The city, and the state of Florida, will have to decide if they are willing to commit that amount of money to guarantee there will be an NFL team in Jacksonville beyond 2030.

I have a friend that works at the stadium. What he has heard is the plan would be to essentially knock down the upper decks and the ramps and rebuild them with a partial roof, similar to Miami. And that likely for one season the team would play home games in Gainesville or Orlando. The Bears, Seahawks and Vikings have played in college stadiums for a year or two while a stadium was being built or renovated.

The city will come up with whatever pricetag it takes. No mayor wants to be the one who lost the Jaguars. The question will be what kind of deal the city secures in exchange for the investment. Another 30 year lease agreement would be good. The only limit will be how much we can actually bond, but I'm sure the Jags understand that (and also understand that the NFL's running out of cities that will pay this kind of money for a stadium). We do have the benefit of not totally starting from scratch - or worse, total demo and rebuild - since most of the stadium's bones are good.

It would be silly if the JEA sale were to go to this expense. What the hell would we sell in another 20 or 30 years when the stadium issue comes back again? The airport? Smarter to bond it against bed tax, sales tax, etc. that would be recurring as opposed to one time money.

In this light, it's interesting what happened in Atlanta when it lost the Thrashers and the Braves (Winnipeg for the Thrashers, the suburbs for the Braves). The mayor at the time, Kasim Reed, said the city was simply unwilling to match what Cobb County was offering for the Braves considering the city's other needs. He focused on the Falcons football and soccer stadium and the development surrounding it, saying the deal they'd worked out there was a revenue generator for the city instead of a drain, as the Braves stadium would be, and had a better chance of inspiring surrounding development and investment. People were upset but he showed that Atlanta is still Atlanta without the Braves playing downtown. When your city has so much else going on, you can be choosy.

Interesting thoughts on Atlanta. Personally I think Atlanta picked wrong and should have prioritized the Braves (81 Games) versus the Falcons (10 Games). I realize the dome also brings things like CFP, Bowl Game, Final Four, etc, but I'd rather have a steady crowd of 25k 81 times a year.

My understanding is it was tied to the specific conditions of the two stadiums. The Falcons deal generates direct revenue and the Braves deal would not. And while the baseball team has more games, it was not well located for that impact to spread around. There wasn't even transit access as I recall.

Yea the location of Turner Field is odd. It's downtown, sort of. The area around the stadium isn't great and MARTA is just far enough away that it's not a great walk. They have a bus shuttle but that takes time. In terms of local revenue I'm not sure the details; you may be right.

[fieldafm]

It comes down to this.

In the next couple of years, the Jaguars are going to ask for an extensive renovation of the stadium. One likely costing at least 500 million dollars.

Without that renovation, the team will move. That is not a question.

The city, and the state of Florida, will have to decide if they are willing to commit that amount of money to guarantee there will be an NFL team in Jacksonville beyond 2030.

I have a friend that works at the stadium. What he has heard is the plan would be to essentially knock down the upper decks and the ramps and rebuild them with a partial roof, similar to Miami. And that likely for one season the team would play home games in Gainesville or Orlando. The Bears, Seahawks and Vikings have played in college stadiums for a year or two while a stadium was being built or renovated.

The city will come up with whatever pricetag it takes. No mayor wants to be the one who lost the Jaguars. The question will be what kind of deal the city secures in exchange for the investment. Another 30 year lease agreement would be good. The only limit will be how much we can actually bond, but I'm sure the Jags understand that (and also understand that the NFL's running out of cities that will pay this kind of money for a stadium). We do have the benefit of not totally starting from scratch - or worse, total demo and rebuild - since most of the stadium's bones are good.

It would be silly if the JEA sale were to go to this expense. What the hell would we sell in another 20 or 30 years when the stadium issue comes back again? The airport? Smarter to bond it against bed tax, sales tax, etc. that would be recurring as opposed to one time money.

In this light, it's interesting what happened in Atlanta when it lost the Thrashers and the Braves (Winnipeg for the Thrashers, the suburbs for the Braves). The mayor at the time, Kasim Reed, said the city was simply unwilling to match what Cobb County was offering for the Braves considering the city's other needs. He focused on the Falcons football and soccer stadium and the development surrounding it, saying the deal they'd worked out there was a revenue generator for the city instead of a drain, as the Braves stadium would be, and had a better chance of inspiring surrounding development and investment. People were upset but he showed that Atlanta is still Atlanta without the Braves playing downtown. When your city has so much else going on, you can be choosy.

Interesting thoughts on Atlanta. Personally I think Atlanta picked wrong and should have prioritized the Braves (81 Games) versus the Falcons (10 Games). I realize the dome also brings things like CFP, Bowl Game, Final Four, etc, but I'd rather have a steady crowd of 25k 81 times a year.

My understanding is it was tied to the specific conditions of the two stadiums. The Falcons deal generates direct revenue and the Braves deal would not. And while the baseball team has more games, it was not well located for that impact to spread around. There wasn't even transit access as I recall.

Yea the location of Turner Field is odd. It's downtown, sort of. The area around the stadium isn't great and MARTA is just far enough away that it's not a great walk. They have a bus shuttle but that takes time. In terms of local revenue I'm not sure the details; you may be right.

If you haven't been to Atlanta in the past few years, you wouldn't recognize the Summerhill neighborhood. Most of the Georgia Avenue storefronts are occupied and there are quite a few new apartment buildings, townhouses and bungalows that have been constructed.  Georgia State is about to construct a new basketball arena on the parking lot where the original Turner Field used to be.