Texas Rangers New Stadium Thoughts (Houston, Dallas: home, layoffs, taxes)

[RJ312]

The potential for a new Texas Rangers stadium in Arlington and not closer to Downtown Dallas is looking more realistic. Since there is some public money involved, Arlington voters will vote on it in November. I hope that the plan gets voted down, but I sense that it will not.

If the Rangers want a new stadium, I hope it is all privately financed. I oppose all public funding for stadiums.

I also think that stadiums should have a 30 year life span at minimum, and more like 40-50 years. Since Globe Life was opened in 1994, a 40 year life span would be 2034.

Now, on to the non-political part of this discussion. Dallas-Fort Worth has not been an exceptional market for Major League Baseball. In the city sports atmosphere, the Rangers have been somewhat of an afterthought. Dallas has always been a Cowboys first city, everyone else second. There are metropolitan areas where passion for the baseball team(s) nearly rivals the football team(s). New York and Boston come to mind first. Chicago is a possibility. St. Louis is a baseball first city.

There are two obvious problems with baseball in Dallas-Fort Worth, as far as gate attendance is concerned, which is a part of passion for the game. Both could have been resolved in 1972.

1. Inconvenient location for a lot of the populace
2. No roof, hot climate

Problem #1: Arlington was never a good choice for a stadium. Sure, it is closer to Fort Worth and I'm sure that people in Fort Worth and Tarrant County appreciate them being closer, but the stadium should have been in Dallas County, but consider population statistics at the time. According to the 1970 census, Arlington had a population of 90,000, Fort Worth was 393,000, Dallas was 844,000. Tarrant County was 716,000 while Dallas was 1.3 Million. Collin County was only 66,000. Point is, there was more population in Dallas County. The Cowboys were in Dallas County for nearly 50 years, spending the first 10 years or so at the Cotton Bowl (great centralized location, not great stadium) and then nearly 40 years in Irving (a location that is acceptable for Dallas County residents). The Mavericks have always had the home arena close to Downtown Dallas since they entered the NBA. Baseball has a lot of inventory, with 81 home games per year. For Dallas County residents, getting out to Arlington regularly in weekday rush hour traffic for a 7 PM or 7:30 PM PM game isn't that feasible. And since Dallas and now Collin County represent more of a population than Tarrant County, the stadium should be centered around what is best for Dallas County residents.

Problem #2: There has been ample opportunity to deal with the roof issue. By the time it was announced a team was coming to the Dallas-Fort Worth area, it was already known that outdoor baseball in Texas was not a good idea. The baseball team in Houston played outdoors from 1962-1964, before the Houston opened the Astrodome in 1965. Given that Dallas-Fort Worth didn't see an MLB game until 1972, there was ample time to build an Astrodome-like stadium for Opening Day 1972. Theoretically, that original domed stadium conveniently located in Dallas could still be viable today. The Astrodome was a multipurpose dome for both the Astros and Oilers, but Dallas could have had a baseball only dome. There would have been necessary renovations over time like replacing hard astroturf with the more friendly field turf when it came available around 2000, but a single sport dome can work. The Louisiana Superdome is a single sport dome that opened in 1975 and is still viable as there are no plans to replace it.

Since a dome was not built in the 1970s, there was an opportunity to build a domed stadium in the early 1990s, and it did not happen then either. That is a failure.

As it currently stands, given the heat and inconvenient location, I'm not going to many Rangers games. I'm open to going to early season games and late season games. The Rangers have been going to the playoffs in recent seasons, and October weather makes for good times at the ballpark (I would like to attend a playoff game). I would go to a stadium with a roof more often than the current stadium, likely just for weekend games. But maybe that increases my potential of going to baseball games by about 3 games a year, which is not a lot of economic utility. But on a scale of 7 million + people in the Metroplex, the numbers might be meaningful. However, broadcast contracts are a bigger part of the economic pie now than gate attendance. I will watch Rangers games on TV, but I don't run my life around when the Rangers play.

Other thoughts?

[ImpartialBias]

This is the first I've heard of them getting a new stadium. You're right though, the "old" stadium isn't that old at all. Spending more money on a new stadium at this point in its life cycle seems to be a complete waste of money to me. I'd be pissed if I lived in Arlington and it were my taxes paying for this.

[mm4]

When did spectators at southern sports venues become so fragile?

Or is this some owner's idea about funding a me-too trophy venue? The stadium was considered the sh- just two decades ago when it opened.

[Aceraceae]

It needs a roof. I actually go to games and July and August are ridiculous.

[Aceraceae]

Originally Posted by mm4

When did spectators at southern sports venues become so fragile?

Or is this some owner's idea about funding a me-too trophy venue? The stadium was considered the sh- just two decades ago when it opened.

Do you go to any of the games?

[Aceraceae]

Originally Posted by RJ312

The potential for a new Texas Rangers stadium in Arlington and not closer to Downtown Dallas is looking more realistic. Since there is some public money involved, Arlington voters will vote on it in November. I hope that the plan gets voted down, but I sense that it will not.

If the Rangers want a new stadium, I hope it is all privately financed. I oppose all public funding for stadiums.

I also think that stadiums should have a 30 year life span at minimum, and more like 40-50 years. Since Globe Life was opened in 1994, a 40 year life span would be 2034.

Now, on to the non-political part of this discussion. Dallas-Fort Worth has not been an exceptional market for Major League Baseball. In the city sports atmosphere, the Rangers have been somewhat of an afterthought. Dallas has always been a Cowboys first city, everyone else second. There are metropolitan areas where passion for the baseball team(s) nearly rivals the football team(s). New York and Boston come to mind first. Chicago is a possibility. St. Louis is a baseball first city.

There are two obvious problems with baseball in Dallas-Fort Worth, as far as gate attendance is concerned, which is a part of passion for the game. Both could have been resolved in 1972.

1. Inconvenient location for a lot of the populace
2. No roof, hot climate

Problem #1: Arlington was never a good choice for a stadium. Sure, it is closer to Fort Worth and I'm sure that people in Fort Worth and Tarrant County appreciate them being closer, but the stadium should have been in Dallas County, but consider population statistics at the time. According to the 1970 census, Arlington had a population of 90,000, Fort Worth was 393,000, Dallas was 844,000. Tarrant County was 716,000 while Dallas was 1.3 Million. Collin County was only 66,000. Point is, there was more population in Dallas County. The Cowboys were in Dallas County for nearly 50 years, spending the first 10 years or so at the Cotton Bowl (great centralized location, not great stadium) and then nearly 40 years in Irving (a location that is acceptable for Dallas County residents). The Mavericks have always had the home arena close to Downtown Dallas since they entered the NBA. Baseball has a lot of inventory, with 81 home games per year. For Dallas County residents, getting out to Arlington regularly in weekday rush hour traffic for a 7 PM or 7:30 PM PM game isn't that feasible. And since Dallas and now Collin County represent more of a population than Tarrant County, the stadium should be centered around what is best for Dallas County residents.

Problem #2: There has been ample opportunity to deal with the roof issue. By the time it was announced a team was coming to the Dallas-Fort Worth area, it was already known that outdoor baseball in Texas was not a good idea. The baseball team in Houston played outdoors from 1962-1964, before the Houston opened the Astrodome in 1965. Given that Dallas-Fort Worth didn't see an MLB game until 1972, there was ample time to build an Astrodome-like stadium for Opening Day 1972. Theoretically, that original domed stadium conveniently located in Dallas could still be viable today. The Astrodome was a multipurpose dome for both the Astros and Oilers, but Dallas could have had a baseball only dome. There would have been necessary renovations over time like replacing hard astroturf with the more friendly field turf when it came available around 2000, but a single sport dome can work. The Louisiana Superdome is a single sport dome that opened in 1975 and is still viable as there are no plans to replace it.

Since a dome was not built in the 1970s, there was an opportunity to build a domed stadium in the early 1990s, and it did not happen then either. That is a failure.

As it currently stands, given the heat and inconvenient location, I'm not going to many Rangers games. I'm open to going to early season games and late season games. The Rangers have been going to the playoffs in recent seasons, and October weather makes for good times at the ballpark (I would like to attend a playoff game). I would go to a stadium with a roof more often than the current stadium, likely just for weekend games. But maybe that increases my potential of going to baseball games by about 3 games a year, which is not a lot of economic utility. But on a scale of 7 million + people in the Metroplex, the numbers might be meaningful. However, broadcast contracts are a bigger part of the economic pie now than gate attendance. I will watch Rangers games on TV, but I don't run my life around when the Rangers play.

Other thoughts?

I took my wife and daughter to the ALDS playoff game last year and they spent a good amount of time in the concourse area. Blistering.

[mm4]

Originally Posted by Aceraceae

Do you go to any of the games?

I went to the ones at the older stadium, and the ones before the Senators came to town from DC.

[loves2read]

I just wonder what the electric bill is
Can they make solar power important aspect of any new stadium?
This is as much about Jerry World as anything

[RJ312]

Originally Posted by Aceraceae

I took my wife and daughter to the ALDS playoff game last year and they spent a good amount of time in the concourse area. Blistering.

Even October is no guarantee of tolerable conditions. That blistering hot stadium puts a damper on enthusiasm for baseball here.

[lpepping]

I like that they are talking about building a covered stadium finally. But it would only increase my likelihood of attending marginally because it is so far. I attend one game every year or two. With the covered stadium that might increase to a couple few games a year.