Gillette Stadium

[F-Line to Dudley]

However Boston is a major market. For sports
it’s one of a handful of flagship markets. The Patriots are one of the 4-5 flagship franchises in the NFL. And the stadium is underwhelming.

How does this hurt the Pats franchise? What revenue streams is it depriving them of that are location-specific? As in: what seats are they not selling out every single game because they aren't in a publicly-funded stadium in the Boston CBD? What top-flight luxury box rates are they not commanding solely because of Foxboro? If Kraft had a dollar figure for how much Foxboro comparatively "hurt" him, we'd have been beaten over the head incessantly with it by his and the league's PR arms for a solid decade now. Where is it?

If you can't cite *something* as maybe-possibly evidence there, this is nuthin' but more 'feels' putting head-in-sand shouted on repeat.

Would not be sad to see it go the way of Turner Field

A...publicly-funded urban/CBD stadium...specifically abandoned...because it did not line owners' pockets with enough parking lot revenue...as the sprawling suburban offramp siting that replaced it? In other words: the biggest possible flaming red middle-finger cautionary tale for Bostonians to directly ponder when choosing whether to accept or reject stadium subsidies.

Well, OK then. I kinda doubt that example citation is doing quite the heavy lifting you think it is here, but yes indeed: "No! We don't want any repeats of Turner Field!" is a generally agreeable consensus. Thrilled we settled that.

Ideally: In 5-10 years you build a new Patriots stadium in Widett Circle or anywhere in South Boston / Seaport. If it can be done in a way that doesn’t become a gargantuan eye sore then consider adding a roof.

Note what ^this^ proclamation doesn't say:

• "...if it can be done in a way that ensures adequate ROI for the required public outlay."
• "...direct-addresses the ways and means other comparable public-subsidy urban stadiums failed to provide adequate community ROI, with $$$ compromises given-and-taken for ensuring fail-safes to the goal of realizing that ROI."
• "...ensures actionable follow-thru on the public infrastructure upgrade promises in a way that the Olympics '24 bid ran screaming from with its over-promise/under-deliver pap."
• "...provides superior land usage for its relative real-estate scarcity and for its relative subsidy than some other task-oriented usage" [see: movie theater annual attendance comparison example, and other multitudes therein]

Nope. Just damn the torpedoes, and build This Thing That I Personally Want for Bragging Rights I Personally Invented. La-la-la I can't hear you and your "why/how?" pleas.

Can we please at least be honest with ourselves that that's what this is all about? There's ceased to be any back-and-forth here...just the same thing shouted more stridently a few days and few more posts later.

On all the other parcels continue building the dense development that has been built in the past 10 years. To handle the autos - build a handful of DEVELOPMENT WRAPPED parking garages (IE Assembly)

"I know it's prolly gonna be real bad! I want it anyway! Stadium crack is addictive like real crack!"

You're tacitly acknowledging here that the dev practices around urban stadia overwhelmingly tend to be no-good awful for big cities. That they DON'T return the hype in urban reinvestment. That they leech HARD off the subsidy teat. That there are most likely many better-ROI things that could go there instead, and almost certainly higher priorities a city could pursue. And you don't care..."make somebody else bend over and deal with the problems it causes because I want my urbano-stadia crack!"

That is a hell of a hill to bleed on.

Obviously you need a subway line going going through the Seaport. That’s a given. If a stadium was built closer to Widett then you have Andrews right there but a commuter rail station could be built underneath it (with a NSRL you could have stadium express trains every game day but that’s for a different thread)

Foxboro doesn't have easy transit? It's had a game train since Season 1 when it first opened that runs from both the Boston and Providence directions and is routinely sold the hell out. We just upgraded it, just did an all-day service trial. It's got a fairly inexpensive upgrade study for 16 daily round-trips sitting on the books for a pretty cut-rate price, Kraft's expressed willingness to front $$$ for upgrading the actual station, and Regional Rail/Rail Vision pegging it for :30 all-day bi-directional schedules at :45 to/from Boston. Even had a private consortium in MetroWest tease some $$$ about adding a Worcester-Foxboro game train (probably a lot more feasible to re-study now that MassDOT owns and has done considerable speed upgrade work to the Framingham-Walpole line vs. before when the study was commissioned and it was negligently-maintained 10 MPH private track).

Foxboro has transit. Potentially really freaking good transit with an inexpensive tweak or two. I know you're attempting to throw shade at the degrees of difference between Boston and Foxboro...but, like, Foxboro isn't in a rough transportation spot. At all. It's in a good starting spot that figures to get way better in pretty short time.

As for Gillette; You downsize the stadium SIGNIFIGANTLY. Take off the upper deck and the visitors side second deck (build some sort of event space incorporate it as part of the downsized stadium.

And who's going to do that? Who's going to spend a shitload of money right-sizing Gillette? Not Kraft...us, because we "broke" its capacity by public-funding a bigger/better one in Boston. We don't get just one trip around the stadia-subsidy hamster wheel. Most cities/states that get bent over for funding a new one end up taking on the full slate of dispensation risk for doing something with the old stadium site. Boston already went through that with the Sox-Harrington ownership's new stadium pleas because the old Fenway's pending Historic Register application would've made it nigh impossible to tear down and redevelop into non-ballpark land usage. So we were going to get sacked with two stadium outlays: New Fenway...and propping up some desperate usage for the old one. What a bargain!

Repurposing the duplicated entrails is extremely seldom some newfound goldmine. It's more often double-trouble on the sunk cost.

You renovate the back of the property to become the Patriots training facility. Top of the line in every aspect. Similar to what a lot of teams have - their training facility away from their stadium.

Kraft already built world-class training fields n' facilities right behind Gillette. They have it...all of it. This isn't a missing ingredient. If we pay to move them to Boston, we're gonna get roped in to pay for them to have training fields inside Route 128 because "I wantz my ownz Auerbach Center too!" Speaking of multiple trips through that public payola hamster wheel!

The parking lots can be used for a lot of different things - added apartments and condos. A water park or general amusement park. Or even another casino (although I don’t think that would be a good idea)

...or, maybe this "Place" named after the "Patriots". Built on a different "former" stadium that interned for a few years there as supplemental "parking lots".

I know...totally far-out concept. Insane, probably. But I also hear it makes its owner some pretty decent day-in/day-out bank and he's really superduper satisfied with how it's coming along.

Relocation to Boston at public expense is a secret ingredient for TOD'ing Foxboro...how exactly???

*IF the Red Sox ever needed to do a MASSIVE renovation that forced them on the road for a year - Gillette could be retrofitted to be used by them.

Right...because we're totally through the looking glass on "Fuck it! Take all my taxes and buy something nice for yourself!" with the Pats that it's high time we crowbarred open that 20-years-shut Pandora's Box with the Sox too and got them whining about how we need to build them/renovate them something equally spectacular. The Sox will totally be modest too about after we're done slobbering over Kraft with the public treasury, I'm sure of that.


Jesus Christ...do you even realize a little bit how insane all of this is sounding?!?

 

[mass88]

Kraft is not building a stadium in Boston. He built Gillette almost completely with private money and has a cash cow there. Owns most of the parking lots, has built out a large retail/medical/hotel complex and is probably the envy of many owners for the setup he built there.

It's kind of a joke that Turner Field in Atlanta and Ballpark in Arlington were both 23-25 years old and replaced by brand new stadiums. It's always annoying when you rent a car somewhere and look at the receipt and see a stadium funding charge on the receipt.

By and large, the vast majority of stadiums for our pro sports teams were built with private money.

 

[NoShJFK]

How does this hurt the Pats franchise? What revenue streams is it depriving them of that are location-specific? As in: what seats are they not selling out every single game because they aren't in a publicly-funded stadium in the Boston CBD? What top-flight luxury box rates are they not commanding solely because of Foxboro? If Kraft had a dollar figure for how much Foxboro comparatively "hurt" him, we'd have been beaten over the head incessantly with it by his and the league's PR arms for a solid decade now. Where is it?

If you can't cite *something* as maybe-possibly evidence there, this is nuthin' but more 'feels' putting head-in-sand shouted on repeat.

Wait.. you don’t think the revenues would

be higher (and no, I don’t have the pre-requisite spreadsheet) if they had one of those massive stadiums like LA, Atlanta, Minnesota, Dallas?!

I’m sure Gillette gets a lot of use based just off the fact it’s the home of the Patriots but it seems like common sense it would get a ton more use if it were in the city. Use as a function space and as a venue.

Not to mention...the potential for major events. Miami found that hosting the SB resulted in roughly $500m for local economy. Imagine hosting a SB, a CFP title game, NCAA final four. Come on...

A...publicly-funded urban/CBD stadium...specifically abandoned...because it did not line owners' pockets with enough parking lot revenue...as the sprawling suburban offramp siting that replaced it? In other words: the biggest possible flaming red middle-finger cautionary tale for Bostonians to directly ponder when choosing whether to accept or reject stadium subsidies.

Well, OK then. I kinda doubt that example citation is doing quite the heavy lifting you think it is here, but yes indeed: "No! We don't want any repeats of Turner Field!" is a generally agreeable consensus. Thrilled we settled that.

Turner Field was built off the back of the Olympics. It’s location wasnt the best. What I meant by Gillette going the way of Turner was simply a stadium that gets shelved after just 20 years of use.

Can we please at least be honest with ourselves that that's what this is all about? There's ceased to be any back-and-forth here...just the same thing shouted more stridently a few days and few more posts later.

Incorrect. This most recent post was really a vague look at how building a stadium in Southie/Seaport could be done and how I’d address a few obvious questions (What to do with Gillette? Parking issues in CBD without turning highly valuable land into parking lots?)

Foxboro doesn't have easy transit? It's had a game train since Season 1 when it first opened that runs from both the Boston and Providence directions and is routinely sold the hell out. We just upgraded it, just did an all-day service trial. It's got a fairly inexpensive upgrade study for 16 daily round-trips sitting on the books for a pretty cut-rate price, Kraft's expressed willingness to front $$$ for upgrading the actual station, and Regional Rail/Rail Vision pegging it for :30 all-day bi-directional schedules at :45 to/from Boston. Even had a private consortium in MetroWest tease some $$$ about adding a Worcester-Foxboro game train (probably a lot more feasible to re-study now that MassDOT owns and has done considerable speed upgrade work to the Framingham-Walpole line vs. before when the study was commissioned and it was negligently-maintained 10 MPH private track).

Foxboro has transit. Potentially really freaking good transit with an inexpensive tweak or two. I know you're attempting to throw shade at the degrees of difference between Boston and Foxboro...but, like, Foxboro isn't in a rough transportation spot. At all. It's in a goodstarting spot that figures to get way better in pretty short time.

I was unaware that they are trying out multiple daily trains from Foxboro but what was the norm - the 1 or 2 trains going to Foxboro from South Station is not something I’d consider easy. If I remember correctly they only have one train after the game and if you miss the train home and you’re screwed. Certainly not on the level of transportation infrastructure you’d get in Southie/Seaport ... hell it’s not even what you’d get in Revere, Waltham, Quincy.

If you had the NSRL built then that would make Foxboro more transportation friendly as you’d be able to get there from all over the state. Not just those on a few south of the city lines.

Currently the transportation arrangement is not good enough to get a good chunk of fans out of their cars. If you had a stadium in CBD - You would see significantly more.

Right...because we're totally through the looking glass on "Fuck it! Take all my taxes and buy something nice for yourself!" with the Pats that it's high time we crowbarred open that 20-years-shut Pandora's Box with the Sox too and got them whining about how we need to build them/renovate them something equally spectacular. The Sox will totally be modest too about after we're done slobbering over Kraft with the public treasury, I'm sure of that.


Jesus Christ...do you even realize a little bit how insane all of this is sounding?!?

You’re missing a big big big part of this. Who said the public has to pay for all this?

As I keep reminding you: Kraft was going to pay for the stadium in the late 90’s. He paid for Gillette. He has WAY more money now.

I doubt you’d need that much public investment beyond infrastructure.

Kraft is not building a stadium in Boston. He built Gillette almost completely with private money and has a cash cow there. Owns most of the parking lots, has built out a large retail/medical/hotel complex and is probably the envy of many owners for the setup he built there.

I never said he would. I’m saying that’s what I would like to see happen: However, 10 years from now: if you gave Johnathan a plot of land in that area - I honestly think he’d prefer the option of the city and repurposing Patriot Place.

If you had NSRL and fast regional rail - then maybe he’s be more inclined to build newin Foxboro.

But of course I admit that’s merely rampant speculation on my part.

The closest thing I could see now would be a Revs Stadium. Which would require a much smaller footprint

 

[Scott]

Patriot's fans have never said that they want a dome. Actually, just the opposite. And in light of the debate over the Megaplex and the Olympics, it's likely that the taxpayer will tell Mr Kraft that he can move to Hartford before he gets any money.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

I'm not doing this anymore....'K, JFK? We covered all these points ad nauseam before:, and you're just pretending we didn't. Scream away, double-down away. But there's no sense in pretending this is an honest discussion when it's earplugs and "NO! NO! NO! But I beeee-liiiiiiiieve" every time obvious misinformation has to be confronted, every time inconvenient financial truths have to be confronted. There is no way with how hyper-superduper inflated NFL stadium valuations are that an urban stadium in this market could be built without massive public outlays. We're simply beyond that pale in hyper-inflation now. The subsidy is going to be non-optional for what you want us to do, it's going to be non-optionally HUGE, and the amortization is going to be non-optionally lousy because that's how the absolute mountain of receipts says it's been going lately with the league. So how much is your fervent belief worth us shelling out for as taxpayers? Put a nice round number on it so we can stop beating around the bush here with 'intangibles' yelling-past.

 

[HenryAlan]

IMO I don't think Gillette needs replacement, the once or twice I go a year it seems like a perfectly reasonable experience, and upgrading it isn't going to entice me to any more events than I already attend.

Yeah, exactly this for the vast majority of people who attend events at Gillette. I go a few times a year for various reasons, I think it's quite nice and well suited to how it is used. My view might be colored a bit by having grown up going to events at the decrepit Memorial Coliseum in Los Angeles, but I really don't see anything wrong with Gillette at all. And when it comes time to build a new stadium, build it right there. There is no suitable way to put a football stadium in a high density city, as such places cannot accommodate tail gate appropriate parking. Look at our density peers, none of them have downtown football stadiums. There is a reason for this.

 

[themissinglink]

Even if there weren't massive implications and difficulties with building a new NFL stadium in an urban area, I still wouldn't be in favor of the Boston Stadium idea. Gillette is fine and doesn't need replacement or relocation.

 

[Charlie_mta]

NIMBYs would render any stadium proposal in Boston DOA. It would be picked to death pretty quickly.

 

[Scott]

Well the NIMBY's might have a point sometimes. It is an obnoxiously loud private business. If I moved next to it I wouldn't have reason to complain but if it wanted to move next to me I would probably oppose it.

 

[NoShJFK]

I'm not doing this anymore....'K, JFK? We covered all these points ad nauseam before:, and you're just pretending we didn't. Scream away, double-down away. But there's no sense in pretending this is an honest discussion when it's earplugs and "NO! NO! NO! But I beeee-liiiiiiiieve" every time obvious misinformation has to be confronted, every time inconvenient financial truths have to be confronted. There is no way with how hyper-superduper inflated NFL stadium valuations are that an urban stadium in this market could be built without massive public outlays. We're simply beyond that pale in hyper-inflation now. The subsidy is going to be non-optional for what you want us to do, it's going to be non-optionally HUGE, and the amortization is going to be non-optionally lousy because that's how the absolute mountain of receipts says it's been going lately with the league. So how much is your fervent belief worth us shelling out for as taxpayers? Put a nice round number on it so we can stop beating around the bush here with 'intangibles' yelling-past.

I’ll be honest - you have a treasure trove of knowledge on a lot of topics relevant to these boards - admittedly well beyond my own. And I’ve learned quite abit from a lot of posts especially your responses to mine and others “crazy transit pitch” threads.

But at times, especially in this thread you come off remarkably condescending with this how dare you see things differently than me. The sky is blue is a FACT. The election was NOT stolen is a FACT. Disney World is in Florida is a FACT. Facts are indisputable. But opinions are just that .. opinions. It is my OPINION that an elite franchise like the Pats play in a serviceable but mediocre stadium. It is my OPINION that a decade from now when they consider a massive renovation or a new place - a new place in the Southie area would be most enjoyable for the fans and consequential for the franchise. It is my OPINION the value of the franchise and their contribution to our states economy would rise dramatically. I could be wrong. I could also be right. It’s a hypothetical. We’ll never know.

 

[jklo]

NIMBYs would render any stadium proposal in Boston DOA. It would be picked to death pretty quickly.

When they were proposing this the Seaport was largely parking lots.

 

[Charlie_mta]

When they were proposing this the Seaport was largely parking lots.

That's true, but I'm thinking there isn't anywhere now in Boston that would be smooth sailing for inserting a major league stadium. I can't think of a location that wouldn't ignite a lot of controversy.

 

[jklo]

That's true, but I'm thinking there isn't anywhere now in Boston that would be smooth sailing for inserting a major league stadium. I can't think of a location that wouldn't ignite a lot of controversy.

Suffolk Downs might have worked for the Revs.

 

[NoShJFK]

That's true, but I'm thinking there isn't anywhere now in Boston that would be smooth sailing for inserting a major league stadium. I can't think of a location that wouldn't ignite a lot of controversy.

You’re absolutely right. In fact controversy aside there aren’t many areas that would work for a stadium PERIOD.

For the Patriots, the only place in the city proper would likely be the Seaport/Southie/Widett. For Greater Boston (inside 128) I’m sure there a few areas. Like just off 128 in Waltham, or just inside of 93 in Quincy. But neighbors would have their say of course.

For the Red Sox the controversy would be more about getting rid of Fenway. And the problem now is a whole neighborhood has sprung up that lives off of Fenway. So moving the team out of there would be like ripping an engine out of a vehicle or brain out of a person. TO me there only chance now is to tear it totally down and build from scratch on that property and play elsewhere for a year.

For the Celtics I think it wouldn’t be so bad. If they wanted a basketball specific arena I think the Seaport would actually work but there are a few other areas around that would work but now that the Garden has been redone and the neighborhood is totally revamped - why would they ever build new? Yes they’d control concession and parking revenues (which they don’t have cause Jacobs owns the Garden) but they’d also incurre a lot of debt as well.

THE REVS on the other hand need a stadium.
They are a laughing stock in that league which is growing and thriving. Suffolk Downs would work, Wonderland would work, the Lynnway might work, maybe the showcase property in Revere, Assembly would be ideal. The Revs stadium needs a much smaller footprint than a Sox or Pats stadium. It’s ridiculous it hasn’t been done yet

 

[mass88]

You’re absolutely right. In fact controversy aside there aren’t many areas that would work for a stadium PERIOD.

For the Patriots, the only place in the city proper would likely be the Seaport/Southie/Widett. For Greater Boston (inside 128) I’m sure there a few areas. Like just off 128 in Waltham, or just inside of 93 in Quincy. But neighbors would have their say of course.

For the Red Sox the controversy would be more about getting rid of Fenway. And the problem now is a whole neighborhood has sprung up that lives off of Fenway. So moving the team out of there would be like ripping an engine out of a vehicle or brain out of a person. TO me there only chance now is to tear it totally down and build from scratch on that property and play elsewhere for a year.

For the Celtics I think it wouldn’t be so bad. If they wanted a basketball specific arena I think the Seaport would actually work but there are a few other areas around that would work but now that the Garden has been redone and the neighborhood is totally revamped - why would they ever build new? Yes they’d control concession and parking revenues (which they don’t have cause Jacobs owns the Garden) but they’d also incurre a lot of debt as well.

THE REVS on the other hand need a stadium.
They are a laughing stock in that league which is growing and thriving. Suffolk Downs would work, Wonderland would work, the Lynnway might work, maybe the showcase property in Revere, Assembly would be ideal. The Revs stadium needs a much smaller footprint than a Sox or Pats stadium. It’s ridiculous it hasn’t been done yet

Why does that make them a laughing stock? A soccer specific stadium is not a requirement to be a top class soccer team. Right now they're the top team in the eastern conference. In 2020 they made it to the conference finals.

Would it be nice if they had a stadium sized better for soccer? Sure. But the fact that they don't have one doesn't make them a laughing stock. Things could be worse, they could always rebrand the team to some foolish European knockoff name like Inter Miami, Real Salt Lake, or Sporting KC.

 

[Brattle Loop]

The sky is blue is a FACT. The election was NOT stolen is a FACT. Disney World is in Florida is a FACT. Facts are indisputable. But opinions are just that .. opinions. It is my OPINION that an elite franchise like the Pats play in a serviceable but mediocre stadium. It is my OPINION that a decade from now when they consider a massive renovation or a new place - a new place in the Southie area would be most enjoyable for the fans and consequential for the franchise. It is my OPINION the value of the franchise and their contribution to our states economy would rise dramatically. I could be wrong. I could also be right. It’s a hypothetical. We’ll never know.

Not sure about the wisdom of going from long-time lurker to poster in this thread, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Your stated opinion about a new Boston stadium for the Patriots dramatically increasing their contribution to the state's economy isn't really an opinion at all. It's a hunch that, whether you intended it or not, comes off as heavily influenced by your stated dislike for Gillette. The economic impact of the Patriots (at Gillette) is an empirical fact. The potential economic impact of Gillette-by-the-Seaport is something that can be empirically projected, if there was actually a proposal that could actually be studied. Your opinion is that it would provide a significant benefit to the state (and to the Patriots organization for that matter) without actually providing any facts to support that assertion. The only economic benefit that it would actually bring to the state is if it drove either more development or brought in more events that currently can't be hosted here. Maybe I'm venturing into the world of opinion here, but I'm having a hard time seeing where in Boston there's a site that's crying out for development "if only we had a football stadium".

The other fact of the matter is that Kraft and the Patriots are never going to build a stadium just to make an internet forum happy, or a city for that matter. If you're basing your assertions about economic benefits on this new stadium bringing in more events, that doesn't happen in a vacuum. The Krafts aren't going to build a stadium in the hopes that they attract a Final Four now and again, or to go into competition with the BCEC down the street, and they're double-plus not going to do it if it actively harms the Patriots. If they'd wanted Gillette to have a dome, it'd have a dome.

All of which glosses straight over the fact that the Krafts own Gillette, they own the parking lots, they own Patriot Place. They don't own a large and conveniently-located parcel in Boston. Sure, the Widett bowl isn't an ideal candidate for a lot of kinds of development, so that's a possibility, but it's accessibility is atrocious. Someone has to pay for the infrastructure to even build a stadium there, and it's not going to be the Krafts. No team owner anywhere is going to abandon a stadium they own (or the prospect of a new stadium they own) on land they own for a pipe-dream of a stadium they'd have to build with their own money on land that they may-or-may-not own (is the state just gifting them the air rights?), and they're certainly not going to do it if on top of paying for the new stadium, they have to pay for all of the infrastructure so that people can actually get to the stadium.

The only way any team owner would ever do that is if the numbers made sense financially. If you have to build a stadium anyway, and this thread is on Gillette's hypothetical replacement, no one is going to look at Gillette v2 in Foxboro at X cost or Boston Stadium at Widett at X+Infrastructure cost and pick the second option, at least not without a bevy of numbers telling them the financial upside is that worth it (your opinion is that it would be, I decline to accept that opinion as a fact because it isn't one). Meaning, the only way this would actually happen is if the cost to the Krafts was equal to or lesser than keeping or replacing Gillette in Foxboro, and since there's no land or infrastructure issues there, the only way that would actually happen is if someone other than the Krafts picked up the tab for bringing Widett Stadium into the same cost universe as Foxboro, and the only people who'd be in a position to do it is the state, which brings us back to where we started. The only reason the state should do something like that is if the outlay of public money would bring back more than goes out. In your treatise on what is and isn't fact you opine, obliquely, that it would. I, respectfully, would prefer to see some factual information to back that up before the Commonwealth shells out any more tax dollars.

At the end of the day stadium projects aren't about the fans, they're about money. Making an argument based on preference that at best obliquely engages with the actual financial questions that really drive these things is a recipe for some pretty blunt back-and-forth. It would be nice if the Patriots were like "let's do this thing for our city out of the goodness of our hearts", but they aren't, and wishing that was the case isn't going to get a stadium built or get this thread anywhere other than stuck in the weeds.

 

[stick n move]

Why does that make them a laughing stock? A soccer specific stadium is not a requirement to be a top class soccer team. Right now they're the top team in the eastern conference. In 2020 they made it to the conference finals.

Would it be nice if they had a stadium sized better for soccer? Sure. But the fact that they don't have one doesn't make them a laughing stock. Things could be worse, they could always rebrand the team to some foolish European knockoff name like Inter Miami, Real Salt Lake, or Sporting KC.

What youre saying is true, and reasonable.... but in us soccer fandom at least when it comes to stadiums everybody points to the revs as what not to do. Look at any vid about mls stadiums and they literally reserve a spot to shit on the revs every time. "Yea our stadium isnt great but at least were not the revs."

It is getting kind of ridiculous at this point when places like Orlando have brand new soccer specific stadiums and we dont even have a proposal yet. Kraft did just build a new training facility, and thats great and all, but its time to sack up and get this done. For a place that loves sports as much as Boston and has so many historic franchises with so many championships its honestly an embarrasment at this point. Boston is a top tier sports city, we need to get this done.

 

[Brattle Loop]

What youre saying is true, and reasonable.... but in us soccer fandom at least when it comes to stadiums everybody points to the revs as what not to do. Look at any vid about mls stadiums and they literally reserve a spot to shit on the revs every time. "Yea our stadium isnt great but at least were not the revs."

It is getting kind of ridiculous at this point when places like Orlando have brand new soccer specific stadiums and we dont even have a proposal yet. Kraft did just build a new training facility, and thats great and all, but its time to sack up and get this done. For a place that loves sports as much as Boston and has so many historic franchises with so many championships its honestly an embarrasment at this point. Boston is a top tier sports city, we need to get this done.

Out of curiosity, given that I know basically less than nothing about MLS and its stadiums, does Gillette's non-soccer-specific nature (or its location) actually deter fans from attending and/or diminish the Revolution's revenues to the extent that a new soccer-specific stadium would make financial sense as opposed to simple preference? I'm all for world-class sporting facilities, but not on the public dime.

 

[JeffDowntown]

Out of curiosity, given that I know basically less than nothing about MLS and its stadiums, does Gillette's non-soccer-specific nature (or its location) actually deter fans from attending and/or diminish the Revolution's revenues to the extent that a new soccer-specific stadium would make financial sense as opposed to simple preference? I'm all for world-class sporting facilities, but not on the public dime.

The Revs are in the bottom 1/3 of attendance among the MLS clubs. They don't fill the 20,000 seat "soccer capacity" at Gillette. I have to think part of that is location -- many soccer fans in the Boston area are in transit centric neighborhoods -- Gillette is a huge inconvenience. Also the teams that pull strong attendance have real soccer stadiums, so the fan experience is better. Markets like Atlanta, Seattle, Cincinnati, Portland, Toronto and Orlando all pull significantly more MLS fans the the Revs. Certainly seems there would be significant upside in a properly located (T heavy rail location), well designed soccer stadium.

 

[mass88]

Out of curiosity, given that I know basically less than nothing about MLS and its stadiums, does Gillette's non-soccer-specific nature (or its location) actually deter fans from attending and/or diminish the Revolution's revenues to the extent that a new soccer-specific stadium would make financial sense as opposed to simple preference? I'm all for world-class sporting facilities, but not on the public dime.

For 2019, the Revs drew more fans than teams with soccer specific stadiums - Colorado, Houston, Chicago, Dallas and Columbus. If you put a competitive product on the field, which they have last season and this season, fans will come out. This is the case for pretty much every team/sport. Look at 2018 - they drew more fans than teams with soccer specific stadiums - Philadelphia, Columbus, Dallas, Colorado, Chicago and Houston.

Some people feel building an urban stadium will suddenly make the team more relevant and draw in more fans. I think they might also lose some fans, namely those that come from Rhode Island and Connecticut. It's an easy in and out of Gillette for Revs game and parking is free. One of the nice things Revs have is tailgating, an American twist on the gameday experience.