Months after promising to release its financial records, Real Salt Lake has finally given the public a glimpse at its plans for building a new stadium in Sandy - but the blueprint is raising even more questions. This week on Utah NOW we're asking, what's next in the effort to keep professional soccer in Utah?
I can't wait to hear what bill has to say!
Posted by Gina , Sunday July 15th, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
boon-dog-gle - noun
A government project funded out of political favoritism that is of no real value to the community or the nation.
Posted by Waste , Sunday July 15th, 2007 @ 7:21 pm
I loved what Bill Allred had to say (especially the pie in the sky comment!). I completely agree that this is just too big of a gamble, and I hope that the taxpayers don't end up footing a giant bill.
Posted by Lisa , Sunday July 15th, 2007 @ 7:24 pm
No real value to the community? In just it's first two years Real has brought the US-Costa Rica match with over 45,000 attending. Probably the majority were from out of state,including a large number from Costa Rica (judging from the singing of their national anthem). The Real Madrid had similar attendance numbers. These two matches alone brought thousands into the state who may not have ever had a reason to come to Utah. Also people and businesses thinking of relocating look at what entertainment is available, with pro sports being a big draw. Real's management may leave something to be desired, but the product is well worth the investment of public dollars.
Posted by Mike K, Sunday July 15th, 2007 @ 11:20 pm
I may be biased, but I thought Bill's editorial was very well spoken and well put. It introduced a lot of facts and issues that, frankly, I would not have thought of nor was aware of. If I may be so bold as to offer one piece of criticism, based on a very unknowledgeable point of view - What is the average number of concert goers to a SLC stadium (E-Center, Delta/Energy Solutions Center, Rice-Eccles) show, and how many are there per year? Is 17,000 a very high expectation? I really just don't know and am curious as to the answer.
Posted by Atropos , Sunday July 15th, 2007 @ 11:21 pm
Why keep this initiative from going to the polls? Why are they leaving the public out of the discussons for this stadium? It almost seems as if they know they dont have the public support (and the overwhelmingly dont) so they kept it from going to a vote so they could try to manipulate and bribe the lawmakers. RSL is a mediocre at best team in a soccer league that is not even comparable to the many other soccer leagues in the world. Sorry Mr. Checketts but RSL will NEVER have the success the Jazz have had.
Posted by Chanse , Sunday July 15th, 2007 @ 11:22 pm
I agree with Bill's comments regarding the concerts; isn't the need for a big venue the reason that the Usana Amphitheatre was built? If the proposed stadium hosts up to 20 concerts a year, presumably outdoors during warmer weather, wouldn't that negatively affect the West Valley venue that was recently completed? There are not 20 big shows drawing 15,000+ fans that are currently skipping the Salt Lake area every summer, so someone will be losing out. It seems to me that RSL's projections seem a little far fetched. I too hope that the team is a success, but I think that their financial backing is far from being in order.
Bill's comments may have been a little too far on the pessimistic side, but his points are valid and I think he expressed similar views of many constituents.
Posted by Erik , Sunday July 15th, 2007 @ 11:23 pm
(Your comment will need to be approved by the Utah NOW staff before your comment will appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
First name: *
Last name: *
Email address: *
Your city: *
To prevent "e-mail spam", please copy the text you see in the graphic into the textbox below:
Please type what you see in the graphic above:
Previous show, 11.17.06
« What's the impact of the 2006 elections?
Next show, 12.22.06
Faces of Christ »