1 hour ago, roman totale XVII said:

This game is why the idea of a dome (wherever it is) needs to die. 

 

Not only that...but how about the streak of perfect sunny and 70 degree weather games this season? 

i Think the weather was an advantage for the browns. In normal weather the Steelers would have won.

Of all the 11 games this team has played this year, this win was the most damaging to the Haslem’s aspirations. The romanticism of football in it’s purest form was on full display tonight, in the backyard of where it was created. And everyone universally loved it. 
 

F@&k the Jimmy Dome.

4 minutes ago, marty15 said:

Of all the 11 games this team has played this year, this win was the most damaging to the Haslem’s aspirations. The romanticism of football in it’s purest form was on full display tonight, in the backyard of where it was created. And everyone universally loved it. 
 

F@&k the Jimmy Dome.

Except John Doss Channel 5 Sports reporter - He said after the game that this game is a perfect example of why you need a dome - He is Pro-Dome

7 hours ago, simplythis said:

Except John Doss Channel 5 Sports reporter - He said after the game that this game is a perfect example of why you need a dome - He is Pro-Dome

If that’s what you (Doss) came away from that game thinking, then being on Jimmy’s payroll must def be worth it.

As a football purist that was right up my street. As long as the wind is not a factor I find snow games great fun.

 

While one snowy game going in our favor is anecdotal and probably shouldn't make that much of an impact, it already seems like the vibe may have started to shift. The timing couldn't be worse for the Haslams, getting one of our only wins this year against the Steelers in a game where the weather was definitely a factor, it's not great for their case, even if, like I said, it probably shouldn't matter that much. 

 

Personally, I like football played in the elements. It calls back to the time when football was a tougher sport. But mostly, I'm for anything that reduces public expenditure. 

6 hours ago, simplythis said:

i Think the weather was an advantage for the browns. In normal weather the Steelers would have won.

you forgot one...  pickens said the snow and the refs...  but I believe the browns were playing on the same field, at the same time...   

11 hours ago, roman totale XVII said:

This game is why the idea of a dome (wherever it is) needs to die. 

Just extend the roof to cover a good portion of the seats (Leave DawgPound and some parts for those who the element) as Buffalo is doing and how most European soccer stadiums do.

2 hours ago, lockdog said:

you forgot one...  pickens said the snow and the refs...  but I believe the browns were playing on the same field, at the same time...   

Pickens is a loose cannon. He was called out by espn or nfl morning shows for standing still while Russell was scrambling out of pocket looking for anybody to come to save him by getting open.

16 hours ago, marty15 said:

If that’s what you (Doss) came away from that game thinking, then being on Jimmy’s payroll must def be worth it.

There is a difference between wanting a dome and being a guy like Darryl Ruiter advocating for Cuyahoga and Cleveland to fork over money to Jimmy's playground

I don't know if anyone has been following the Tampa Bay Rays plight but they were up for a vote by Pinellas County Commisioners to issue bonds to start construction of their new stadium and a hurricane came along and destroyed the Tropicana Field Roof which requires the Tampa Rays to move temporarily to a minor league field - George Steinbrennar field in Tampa.  Either Way The 300m vote on the bonds has been put off twice because Pinellas County has other pressing needs. Rays are also trying to back out of their deal. The Rays are going the route of the Oakland A's.  

But with Pinellas County having other needs their 300m in bonds vote is put off until 2025.

 

But on a local note - Jimmy Haslam is asking for 1.2B in Public Subsidies.

 

https://www.draysbay.com/2024/11/21/24302706/st-petersburg-city-council-new-stadium-bond-delay-expect-rays-to-withdraw

Right.

18 hours ago, simplythis said:

I don't know if anyone has been following the Tampa Bay Rays plight but they were up for a vote by Pinellas County Commisioners to issue bonds to start construction of their new stadium and a hurricane came along and destroyed the Tropicana Field Roof which requires the Tampa Rays to move temporarily to a minor league field - George Steinbrennar field in Tampa.  Either Way The 300m vote on the bonds has been put off twice because Pinellas County has other pressing needs. Rays are also trying to back out of their deal. The Rays are going the route of the Oakland A's.  

But with Pinellas County having other needs their 300m in bonds vote is put off until 2025.

 

But on a local note - Jimmy Haslam is asking for 1.2B in Public Subsidies.

 

https://www.draysbay.com/2024/11/21/24302706/st-petersburg-city-council-new-stadium-bond-delay-expect-rays-to-withdraw

And the other thing is, we are quite lucky in Cleveland in that the principal city of the region and a large sum of its suburban footprint lie heavily in the same county and completely in the same state.  A lot of these other markets' principal cities have equally competitive neighboring counties and states fighting them for their assets and creating leverage for these teams i.e. Tampa/St. Pete, Maryland/Virginia, Kansas/Missouri etc. What do we have here, Summit County and a possible stadium site 30 miles from Downtown? Another smaller suburban county taking a huge risk and issuing hundreds of millions in bonds and paying for all sorts of infrastructure improvements? Yeah it doesn't make sense, but then again a lot of what goes on these days doesn't make any sense....

Edited November 23, 2024Nov 23 by snakebite

On 11/21/2024 at 9:34 PM, simplythis said:

i Think the weather was an advantage for the browns. In normal weather the Steelers would have won.

 

But this IS normal weather for the AFC North. This aint the SEC baby!!!

On 11/21/2024 at 10:16 PM, snakebite said:

As a football purist that was right up my street. As long as the wind is not a factor I find snow games great fun.

 

 

The Ghost of Phil Dawson laughs at stadium wind haha. 

On 11/22/2024 at 4:18 AM, Ethan said:

Personally, I like football played in the elements. It calls back to the time when football was a tougher sport. But mostly, I'm for anything that reduces public expenditure. 

 

Right. And if the roof can be shown to justify the added public expenditure then great....but so far has anyone seen any credible evidence the JimmyDome (haha love that one) will draw a significant number of events?  

6 hours ago, surfohio said:

 

The Ghost of Phil Dawson laughs at stadium wind haha. 

 

You might want to let Phil know that he's dead. 🤣😆

1 hour ago, Paul in Cleveland said:

 

You might want to let Phil know that he's dead. 🤣😆

RIP Phil and Wade Boggs 

Pretty cool article about the debacle which is this new stadium. https://share.newsbreak.com/a1cursae?s=i16

1 hour ago, Growth Mindset said:

Pretty cool article about the debacle which is this new stadium. https://share.newsbreak.com/a1cursae?s=i16

Agree with Brent Larkin in general, especially if funding a new or refurbished stadium in Cleveland can be tied to addressing any debt owed on the stadiums used by our 2 pro-Cleveland franchises.  We were surprised to see that Dee Haslam is on the Exutive Board of the Greater Cleveland Partnership - dang those Haslams are shrewd - or Grinches given the Holiday season.

 

The Greater Cleveland Partnership’s waffling on this issue is a total abdication of corporate responsibility. Not all parts of a region are equal. And without a vibrant downtown, all of Northeast Ohio suffers. If the GCP lacks the courage to defend its most vital neighborhood, businesses who pay dues to support it are wasting money that could be better spent elsewhere. Dee Haslam is a member of the GCP’s executive committee.

 

On Nov. 14, the GCP offered up this nothingburger to me: “GCP is committed to both a world-class lakefront and a world-class stadium. We are actively engaged in discussions with public, civic and private leaders towards a solution that delivers long-term and lasting benefits to downtown, the city, and the region.”

To be fair, I wouldn't say the Browns really contribute to an exciting downtown. The stadium and Muni lots are so cut off that they might as well be in a different zip code, and I doubt the revenue from a bump in hotels and restaurants, if any, is greater than the tens of millions the city/county pour into the existing complex every few years.

4 hours ago, Growth Mindset said:

Pretty cool article about the debacle which is this new stadium. https://share.newsbreak.com/a1cursae?s=i16

Gosh reading those comments, is there anywhere else in this country who's regional residents absolutely hate the center city/downtown like NEO? These people seem like they want every good thing left in Cleveland moved out into the burbs and Cleveland truly turn into deserted ghost town

12 minutes ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

Gosh reading those comments, is there anywhere else in this country who's regional residents absolutely hate the center city/downtown like NEO? These people seem like they want every good thing left in Cleveland moved out into the burbs and Cleveland truly turn into deserted ghost town

Maybe all these commentators, you know the people you usually like to ignore, should all go out together and build a campfire on the Richfield Colosseum site. Because that ended up working so well.  And of course, when compared to Cleveland Brook Park is like heaven on earth.

Edited November 24, 2024Nov 24 by Htsguy

1 hour ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

Gosh reading those comments, is there anywhere else in this country who's regional residents absolutely hate the center city/downtown like NEO? These people seem like they want every good thing left in Cleveland moved out into the burbs and Cleveland truly turn into deserted ghost town

Yes...i know people in NJ who can see NYC from their living room. They never go to NYC and have nothing good to say of it. This is not a Cleveland specific issue

I am getting off topic now, so move if necessary, but I think it is an American mindset in general to look down upon another place that isn't their place. Even within NEO....Suburbanites hate the city. Rocky River residents look down on Lakewood. Seven Hills and Parma Hts look down on Parma, Geauga, Lorain and Medina counties look down on Cuyahoga. Everyone thinks their little slice of land is the best and everyone else is inferior. A sad group of people we Americans are

4 hours ago, TBideon said:

To be fair, I wouldn't say the Browns really contribute to an exciting downtown. The stadium and Muni lots are so cut off that they might as well be in a different zip code, and I doubt the revenue from a bump in hotels and restaurants, if any, is greater than the tens of millions the city/county pour into the existing complex every few years.

As someone who goes to most home games (and often does a downtown staycation) I totally disagree. Any weekend with a major event at Browns stadium has way more energy. Hotels are usually booked up and prices are high. 
 

Can downtown survive without those 10 or so big events? Of course. Those events do matter and I wouldn’t say downtown’s exactly thriving now though. 
 

A $4B entertainment complex isn’t being built in Brook Park for 10 days though. Jimmyland will be downtown’s biggest competitor for events. There’s hope that more business will come to the region because of that dome but I’m skeptical. Comparable domes in other cities have better locations and still host few events. 

1 hour ago, YO to the CLE said:

I am getting off topic now, so move if necessary, but I think it is an American mindset in general to look down upon another place that isn't their place. Even within NEO....Suburbanites hate the city. Rocky River residents look down on Lakewood. Seven Hills and Parma Hts look down on Parma, Geauga, Lorain and Medina counties look down on Cuyahoga. Everyone thinks their little slice of land is the best and everyone else is inferior. A sad group of people we Americans are

I live in seven hills and I do not have any knocks against Parma or downtown Cleveland 

On 11/22/2024 at 12:34 AM, simplythis said:

i Think the weather was an advantage for the browns. In normal weather the Steelers would have won.

Maybe, but the Browns were winning before the snow hit...

22 minutes ago, cfdwarrior said:

Maybe, but the Browns were winning before the snow hit...

I don't think they were winning before that magical TNF game as we too admittedly jumped on the negative frustration bandwagon blaming everything in sight before this game.  However, this snow globe game seemed like divine intervention to give us a moment of much needed joy and remind us to not wrap the remaining players who are left and trying into the sordid Haslam/HSG saga.  We will try to keep our criticism focused soley on where it belongs - HSG and the greedy NFL.

2 hours ago, ITakeTheRapid said:

As someone who goes to most home games (and often does a downtown staycation) I totally disagree. Any weekend with a major event at Browns stadium has way more energy. Hotels are usually booked up and prices are high. 

I concede there is some economic activity those weekends -- but to the tune of $400-$500 million for stadium development and repairs since 1999? 

 

Edited November 24, 2024Nov 24 by TBideon

stadium, IX, convention center, dome?

 

heck just add a few hotels and make another olympics bid.

It almost doesn't make a whole lot of sense that HSG would use the old Ford plant, because I was thinking that Hopkins would have land grabbed it for their remodel... the dilemma is, I don't think Hopkins shows any disapproval or anger that HSG has the land. Any thoughts on this? Additionally since the airport is right there wouldn't the FAA NTSB and/or ODOT have to all be in agreement that stadium events wouldn't affect people's travels instead of delaying passengers for something totally outside the airport's scope of control?

Edited November 25, 2024Nov 25 by tastybunns
elaboration

On 11/22/2024 at 12:34 AM, simplythis said:

i Think the weather was an advantage for the browns. In normal weather the Steelers would have won.

Someone said the Browns are 7-0 in their last 7 Thursday night games. Too bad the Cinci game was moved to Sunday.

The only financially realistic option is downtown. That’s basically the bottom line. Unless Jimmy wants to pay for the Jimmydome himself in BP.

Otherwise it’s just another proposed downtown high rise proposal without financing. 

11 hours ago, Willo said:

Agree with Brent Larkin in general, especially if funding a new or refurbished stadium in Cleveland can be tied to addressing any debt owed on the stadiums used by our 2 pro-Cleveland franchises.  We were surprised to see that Dee Haslam is on the Exutive Board of the Greater Cleveland Partnership - dang those Haslams are shrewd - or Grinches given the Holiday season.

 

This isn’t too surprising. The organization represents business. Their positions may align with the public interest sometimes but they are beholden to their members and their board. 
 

Larkin says the business community should come out and oppose the new stadium. Like who? The richest people in Cleveland are the Haslams and Dan Gilbert and they don’t even live here full-time. The CEO of KeyBank isn’t going to stick their neck out for this. And the CEO of Swagelok doesn’t have the juice.
 

I hate to sound like Roldo, but civic leadership in our region is weak. We have outsourced to non-profits the work of the government, I guess because people think the government can’t do it correctly. And maybe that is true but delegating the job of pushing out region forward to unaccountable non-profits isn’t working. And at the end of the day, better government is going to be what empowers our growth in the future. 
 

So, I give Bibb and Ronayne credit for sticking up for residents. There are definitely flaws in their approach here too but at least they are putting up the fight. 

 

 

2 hours ago, tastybunns said:

It almost doesn't make a whole lot of sense that HSG would use the old Ford plant, because I was thinking that Hopkins would have land grabbed it for their remodel... the dilemma is, I don't think Hopkins shows any disapproval or anger that HSG has the land. Any thoughts on this? Additionally since the airport is right there wouldn't the FAA NTSB and/or ODOT have to all be in agreement that stadium events wouldn't affect people's travels instead of delaying passengers for something totally outside the airport's scope of control?

That's it. Thank you! We can't figure out why that land wasn't snatched up (though it has not been the most well run airport for a looong time). We have been told for many decades how land-locked the airport was and then crickets when this land - while not virgin fresh farm land - is cleaned and available and would provide some CLE operations breathing room.  Now we are seeing the curtain being slowly pulled back thanks to the PD's Brent Larkin story how the Greater Cleveland Partnership - who we would have expected to take a regional lead on such an effort - go radio silent.  We are sure there is no relation to Dee Haslam being on the Greater Cleveland Partnership Executive Committee as Brent Larkin exposed. The Greater Cleveland Partnership should just change their name to Greater Cleveland (Sans Cleveland) Partnership and move on.

4 hours ago, TBideon said:

I concede there is some economic activity those weekends -- but to the tune of $400-$500 million for stadium development and repairs since 1999? 

 

Packed hotels, restaurants, bars, museums, and tourist sites (not even including the stadium Itself) for the entire weekend of these general events. 
 

12 days of events per year really equates to 36 days of economic advantage. 
 

Plus we know that the majority of Cleveland Browns game attendees aren’t from the city. Therefore this brings people in to spend money in a city they usually wouldn’t step foot in. 

22 hours ago, ClevelandNative said:

Therefore this brings people in to spend money in a city they usually wouldn’t step foot in. 

I used to work at an Italian restaurant in the flats during the Anderson-Manziel years. They hosted a big all out browns brunch each week. After week 3-4 the event became a giant loss EVERY YEAR. By the end of the season it was always scaled back to bare bones. 

 

Everyone tailgaiting in the Muni Lot, The Pit, The Coast Guard Lots, and the Flats lots contributed zero to the city beyond negligible parking tax. 

 

 

36 minutes ago, originaljbw said:

I used to work at an Italian restaurant in the flats during the Anderson-Manziel years. They hosted a big all out browns brunch each week. After week 3-4 the event became a giant loss EVERY YEAR. By the end of the season it was always scaled back to bare bones. 

 

Everyone tailgaiting in the Muni Lot, The Pit, The Coast Guard Lots, and the Flats lots contributed zero to the city beyond negligible parking tax. 

 

 

 

Why would an Italian restaurant in the Flats get busy before the Brown's game?  I worked in a sports bar just up the hill from the stadium for a 6 years.  Brown's Sundays were a madhouse- wall to wall people for most of the day (we opened early).  The rest of the weekend was often very busy as well, depending on how well the visiting team's fanbase traveled.  There is a contingent of tailgaters who tailgate, then come up to the bars during the game since they don't have tickets.  I also worked at a southern restaurant on the opposite side of Downtown that saw similar results to your Italian restaurant.

 

Point being, experiences vary based on location and venue's suitability to the crowd.

51 minutes ago, originaljbw said:

I used to work at an Italian restaurant in the flats during the Anderson-Manziel years. They hosted a big all out browns brunch each week. After week 3-4 the event became a giant loss EVERY YEAR. By the end of the season it was always scaled back to bare bones. 

 

Everyone tailgaiting in the Muni Lot, The Pit, The Coast Guard Lots, and the Flats lots contributed zero to the city beyond negligible parking tax. 

 

 

Welp, that settles it. Send the Browns to Brookpark. Browns fans snub their nose at Italian brunch fare in the Flats, 10-15 years ago. 

On 11/24/2024 at 11:33 PM, ClevelandNative said:

Packed hotels, restaurants, bars, museums, and tourist sites (not even including the stadium Itself) for the entire weekend of these general events. 
 

12 days of events per year really equates to 36 days of economic advantage. 

 

The city reports Browns games on the lakefront equate to $30M in economic activity annually (just .08% of the county’s GDP) and $10M in tax revenue a year. That’s not nothing, but that kind of ROI does not warrant $500M to $1.2B+ in public subsidies plus all sorts of ongoing costs between maintenance and police.

 

On 11/24/2024 at 11:33 PM, ClevelandNative said:

Packed hotels, restaurants, bars, museums, and tourist sites (not even including the stadium Itself) for the entire weekend of these general events. 

I was curious about the actual impact football games had on the hotel occupancy.  Here is an article I found on the correlation between football games and hotel stays.  It's from 2015, but seems relevant.  According to this football games boost occupancy by 25% and generate about $2.8M annually in hotel stays.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/travel/2016/09/which_cleveland_browns_home_ga.html

 

I would agree with @coneflower  It's not nothing, but...

 

Consider the article below.  The City gave SHW $100M, and in return is seeing about $9M in tax revenue per year.  If each of the 3500 employees spends on average of $10 on lunch/coffee and $25 on parking, for 260 workdays, it surpasses the $30M in economic activity generated by Browns games.  I'm sure my math isn't perfect, but it is clear that corporate subsidies provide way more bang for the buck.  So, while there are many reasons to provide financial support to a sports team, I believe the economic argument alone is rather weak.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2020/03/cleveland-approves-incentives-to-aid-sherwin-williams-development-of-300m-downtown-headquarters.html

 

Just for fun...using those same SHW stats ($28.5k in subsidy per employee), the City could take the $461M it offered up to the Browns and instead keep or attract 16,175 employees to downtown Cleveland.  Using the SHW numbers again, that would equal $41.5M in annual tax revenue, and at $35/day would equal $147M in economic activity per year.  I know it's not as easy as that, but kind of fun to put it into perspective...kinda blows the Browns deal out of the water.

18 minutes ago, Dino said:

 

I was curious about the actual impact football games had on the hotel occupancy.  Here is an article I found on the correlation between football games and hotel stays.  It's from 2015, but seems relevant.  According to this football games boost occupancy by 25% and generate about $2.8M annually in hotel stays.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/travel/2016/09/which_cleveland_browns_home_ga.html

 

I would agree with @coneflower  It's not nothing, but...

 

Consider the article below.  The City gave SHW $100M, and in return is seeing about $9M in tax revenue per year.  If each of the 3500 employees spends on average of $10 on lunch/coffee and $25 on parking, for 260 workdays, it surpasses the $30M in economic activity generated by Browns games.  I'm sure my math isn't perfect, but it is clear that corporate subsidies provide way more bang for the buck.  So, while there are many reasons to provide financial support to a sports team, I believe the economic argument alone is rather weak.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2020/03/cleveland-approves-incentives-to-aid-sherwin-williams-development-of-300m-downtown-headquarters.html

 

Just for fun...using those same SHW stats ($28.5k in subsidy per employee), the City could take the $461M it offered up to the Browns and instead keep or attract 16,175 employees to downtown Cleveland.  Using the SHW numbers again, that would equal $41.5M in annual tax revenue, and at $35/day would equal $147M in economic activity per year.  I know it's not as easy as that, but kind of fun to put it into perspective...kinda blows the Browns deal out of the water.

So with that simplified math I have a similar simplified question. That $461 M they offered the Browns could theoretically be used to attract companies to build in Cleveland through similar SHW subsidies to offset the loss. But also wouldn't that 30M the Browns be offset by Maintenance cost or is that 30M after upkeep cost?

2 hours ago, MyPhoneDead said:

So with that simplified math I have a similar simplified question. That $461 M they offered the Browns could theoretically be used to attract companies to build in Cleveland through similar SHW subsidies to offset the loss. But also wouldn't that 30M the Browns be offset by Maintenance cost or is that 30M after upkeep cost?

Most of the money they offered the Browns would come from people going to Browns games.  It’s not like that just gets redirected- there won’t be anything there. 
 

Cleveland is trying to lure big companies everyday. We’d give big incentives to any of them. The problem is there are more enticing markets out there. 
 

In my opinion downtown Cleveland lacks business and it lacks foot traffic. Honestly with our weather and economy it’s an uphill battle changing that. Browns stadium will be somewhere in our region as part of a multi-billion dollar development. I truly believe a better deal for the people of this region can be make downtown compared to any other location. (As long as Jimmy doesn’t self-fund it, which he won’t). 
 

 

 

59 minutes ago, ITakeTheRapid said:

Most of the money they offered the Browns would come from people going to Browns games.  It’s not like that just gets redirected- there won’t be anything there. 
 

Cleveland is trying to lure big companies everyday. We’d give big incentives to any of them. The problem is there are more enticing markets out there. 
 

In my opinion downtown Cleveland lacks business and it lacks foot traffic. Honestly with our weather and economy it’s an uphill battle changing that. Browns stadium will be somewhere in our region as part of a multi-billion dollar development. I truly believe a better deal for the people of this region can be make downtown compared to any other location. (As long as Jimmy doesn’t self-fund it, which he won’t). 
 

 

 

Sure, agreed, except it already is downtown, and in reality, only needs a minimal renovation in order to keep operating for several more decades. As several of the above posts have correctly argued, the ROI on stadiums isn't there. I would say given that, the most important factor, after keeping the Browns in NEO, is minimizing public investment. If that means the Haslams putting in more of their own money in Brook Park great! (though the infrastructure improvements alone may make it moot). If that means renovating the Stadium downtown, great! The opportunity costs of building a new stadium in or near downtown isn't worth it compared to letting the Browns go to Brook Park. Those hundreds of million dollars in public funds can be better spent elsewhere. 

The problem is that $227 million of that $461 million is financed by admissions taxes on activities specifically related to events at Huntington Bank Field. So if the stadium goes away, much of that money goes away. Another $120 million comes from the sin tax that voters originally provided for the stadium. If extended, it would have to be reauthorized by voters and with a new purpose identified. That would require a political campaign. 

8 minutes ago, KJP said:

The problem is that $227 million of that $461 million is financed by admissions taxes on activities specifically related to events at Huntington Bank Field. So if the stadium goes away, much of that money goes away. Another $120 million comes from the sin tax that voters originally provided for the stadium. If extended, it would have to be reauthorized by voters and with a new purpose identified. That would require a political campaign. 

Based on the city report, $8M a year in admission taxes are collected, so if I’ve got this correct, that would mean that portion of the city’s commitment would be recouped in about 28 years. Maybe less with inflation and slightly more uses? And that doesn’t cover the annual maintenance and other services. But renovating is definitely the better deal for taxpayers. 
 

My beef with the Brook Park concept is the scale of public funding required which is only going up as President Tariffs comes to office. If voters have a say on it, it certainly wouldn’t pass. 

7 hours ago, ITakeTheRapid said:

Most of the money they offered the Browns would come from people going to Browns games.  It’s not like that just gets redirected- there won’t be anything there. 
 

Cleveland is trying to lure big companies everyday. We’d give big incentives to any of them. The problem is there are more enticing markets out there. 
 

In my opinion downtown Cleveland lacks business and it lacks foot traffic. Honestly with our weather and economy it’s an uphill battle changing that. Browns stadium will be somewhere in our region as part of a multi-billion dollar development. I truly believe a better deal for the people of this region can be make downtown compared to any other location. (As long as Jimmy doesn’t self-fund it, which he won’t). 
 

 

 

True. There are no trophy corporations wanting to move downtown - other than those directly tied to the UC EDs/Meds. Those that are fleeing other areas are going to Nashville and Charlotte in droves and then followed by cities like Indy, C-bus and Pittsburgh to a lesser extent.  I am all for boomeranging any of those that moved to the Cleveland burbs since the 70's and even the recent ones we let go without a even a pinky fight such as Eaton and Progressive.  Just those 2 corps built suburban footprints that would have been 30 or more stories each downtown if we would have had agressive leadership to make them offers thery couldn't refuse.

So, keeping and growing with the Browns Downtown is the equivalent of keeping/luring a traditonal trophy corporation - as we did with Sherwin Williams.  So,we need to reframe it as such and then hold our nose to find a way to make it happen with the slimy HSG Clampett family. Also, all of these back of napkin direct dollar comparisons are only one aspect to consider - but there are so many qualitative intangible benefits that are not easily measured of having a Downtown venue and spin-off development.  Until then, It's not over until it is.  While Cleveland has made big strides to lay down a modest baseline for future success - let's be honest - we have a long way to go.  So, losing the Browns to a forlorn highway-adjacent industrial brownfield (no pun Browns Field) is not the answer we need at this critical point in time and the BP parking lot brownfield is not worth one dollar of local, county, or State public funds.

 

Talk about opportunity cost lost. Let's reframe a new or renovated Browns building Downtown as the equivalent to retaining Sherwin Williams and preventing them from moving (at least in part) to Atlanta or Charlotte as planned before we opened our public wallets to Sherwin.

Edited November 27, 2024Nov 27 by Willo

7 hours ago, ITakeTheRapid said:

Most of the money they offered the Browns would come from people going to Browns games.  It’s not like that just gets redirected- there won’t be anything there. 
 

Cleveland is trying to lure big companies everyday. We’d give big incentives to any of them. The problem is there are more enticing markets out there. 
 

In my opinion downtown Cleveland lacks business and it lacks foot traffic. Honestly with our weather and economy it’s an uphill battle changing that. Browns stadium will be somewhere in our region as part of a multi-billion dollar development. I truly believe a better deal for the people of this region can be make downtown compared to any other location. (As long as Jimmy doesn’t self-fund it, which he won’t). 
 

 

 

We need to step up our regional game as Pittsburgh. This website leaves us impressed but also wondering if we are even in the same game as our supposed peer city/region.  See this: https://pittsburghregion.org/