Huntington Bank Field name to outlive Browns’ current stadium lease
By Ken Prendergast / September 3, 2024

 

At least we now know what a Brook Park multi-purpose stadium would be called, if the owners of the Cleveland Browns football team decides to build it. While most terms of the naming rights deal were not disclosed by the Haslams Sports Group and their National Football League franchise, we do know that it will outlast the current stadium’s lease which ends after the 2028 football season.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2024/09/03/huntington-bank-field-name-to-outlive-browns-current-stadium-lease/

So even though the tax payers own the stadium, the Browns can still sell naming rights to that stadium.  Gotta love how billionaires work.  And yes I know this is how it is for all stadiums.

58 minutes ago, Stang10 said:

I don't see the Browns temporary relocating to Columbus because they don't have a stadium large enough to support a football team. Jimmy would lose a ton of revenue on ticket sales alone. And there is a zero percent chance that the Browns would play at Ohio Stadium. I can't see OSU agreeing to allowing the Browns to play there for 3-5 years depending on demo/construction timeline.

Infocision Stadium in Akron holds 30k+ and would probably give Jimmy a great deal for some donations. 

2 hours ago, Stang10 said:

I don't see the Browns temporary relocating to Columbus because they don't have a stadium large enough to support a football team. Jimmy would lose a ton of revenue on ticket sales alone. And there is a zero percent chance that the Browns would play at Ohio Stadium. I can't see OSU agreeing to allowing the Browns to play there for 3-5 years depending on demo/construction timeline.

 

Why wouldn't OSU agree to let the Browns play there?  It seems like a great deal financially for OSU.  Also, 3-5 years for renovations seems way pessimistic.  Even playing 2 years away from home gives you ~32 months to complete the renovations, and the renovations don't even need to be totally done.  They just need to be able to let fans in (ie exterior work could continue for longer).

 

In 2002, Soldier Field did a $1 billion+ renovation in today's dollars in about 20 months and only lost one season of home games.

I really want to see images of what the current stadium could look like for comparison of what we could get instead. of Brook Park

2 hours ago, PlanCleveland said:

Infocision Stadium in Akron holds 30k+ and would probably give Jimmy a great deal for some donations. 

 

I actually really like the idea of them playing a few games around various Ohio sites and cities. Hell, in Columbus you could do a game against the Bengals as a one-off novelty. The place would be packed and it’d be great to kind of see all “three C’s” come together on something like that. 

 

Edit: Akron is also a great place to host a game and of course the Hall of Fame stadium in Canton would be great for a few games as well. Do a “tour” if you will for one season as renovations get done. For another novelty: play on Progressive Field. 

Edited September 3, 2024Sep 3 by Gordon Bombay

11 minutes ago, Gordon Bombay said:

 

I actually really like the idea of them playing a few games around various Ohio sites and cities. Hell, in Columbus you could do a game against the Bengals as a one-off novelty. The place would be packed and it’d be great to kind of see all “three C’s” come together on something like that. 

 

Edit: Akron is also a great place to host a game and of course the Hall of Fame stadium in Canton would be great for a few games as well. Do a “tour” if you will for one season as renovations get done. For another novelty: play on Progressive Field. 

 

Per someone at Haslam Sports Group - they don't want to have "nomadic" years, but if they do, Pro Football HOF, Infocision, and Lower.com Stadium (owned by HSG) would be considered. The Haslam family really doesn't want to deal with the blowback from Clevelanders from moving it outside of Cuyahoga county, even temporarily, though. 

1 minute ago, YABO713 said:

Per someone at Haslam Sports Group - they don't want to have "nomadic" years, but if they do, Pro Football HOF, Infocision, and Lower.com Stadium (owned by HSG) would be considered. The Haslam family really doesn't want to deal with the blowback from Clevelanders from moving it outside of Cuyahoga county, even temporarily, though. 

It all adds up to BP lol. They can build that and play at Huntington Bank Fieldhouse Stadium until it’s ready. If CLE tries to play hardball since they are leaving, the team can say “well we could play in Columbus…” and then the fans freak out. 
 

 

1 hour ago, acd said:

 

Why wouldn't OSU agree to let the Browns play there?  It seems like a great deal financially for OSU.  Also, 3-5 years for renovations seems way pessimistic.  Even playing 2 years away from home gives you ~32 months to complete the renovations, and the renovations don't even need to be totally done.  They just need to be able to let fans in (ie exterior work could continue for longer).

 

In 2002, Soldier Field did a $1 billion+ renovation in today's dollars in about 20 months and only lost one season of home games.

I would think OSU would say no for the sheer fact that they don't want the wear and tear of the stadium and scheduling around the NFL season. I also gave a 3-5 year timeline more for the not a renovation but more of a full demo/rebuild on the current site. I don't think the Haslams are going to be anything less than either a full new stadium or a demo/rebuild on current site. Jimmy wants a crown jewel, either in BP or CLE, not a lipstick on a pig renovation.

Maybe I'm wrong but it's a billionaire's game and they want to show off to their billionaire buddies and a renovation isn't something to show off.

6 hours ago, MyPhoneDead said:

With how many things Huntington Bank has naming rights on you'd think Huntington Bank is the Cleveland Based bank and not Key Bank. 

I wonder.....does this mean Huntington Bank Capital Markets will be the Lead Manager for the new stadium?

Just to add wild speculation - if the powers that be want a downtown stadium, could the site of the CSU Wolstien Center, along with neighboring blocks be an option?

Assuming the land can be made available? 

 

^ That was discussed upthread a while back. I think Jimmy wants the new stadium surrounded by parking lots and Jimmy's World.

1 hour ago, 3 Dog Pat said:

Just to add wild speculation - if the powers that be want a downtown stadium, could the site of the CSU Wolstien Center, along with neighboring blocks be an option?

Assuming the land can be made available? 

 

Your missing the (literal) giant elephant in the room: where is the room for Jimmy's private sea of parking lots? 

Jimmy pockets yet another revenue stream by selling the name rights of a CITY OWNED STADIUM yet guys like Daryl Ruiter and the rest of 92.3 get all pissy that the county won't help finance Jimmy's new playground. If the revenue streams are going to be privately collected, then the project needs to be privately financed. Jimmy can afford it he really wants it. 

Can someone explain how the Haslam's control the naming rights to the city owned stadium?  This feels like a deal that should be made with the actual owners of the facility. More fleecing and more reason not to publicly fund this billionaire's dreams.  

9 minutes ago, dave2017 said:

Can someone explain how the Haslam's control the naming rights to the city owned stadium?  This feels like a deal that should be made with the actual owners of the facility. More fleecing and more reason not to publicly fund this billionaire's dreams.  

The City of Cleveland clearly gave up this right as a part of some negotiation along the way since the Browns return in 99.    I've been party to other naming rights deals and it's often sold to cities based on the strength of the marketing department of the team, versus the City who would be ill-equipped to go out and hustle a company for a deal.    But...usually in giving up the rights to sell the naming rights, a city would retain some small portion of the income (10% perhaps).  It's strange that the Browns are keeping 100% of the proceeds.

 

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/philadelphia/news/sixers-proposed-arena-new-jersey-philadelphia-76-place/
 

slightly different since they’re being offered financial benefits to leave but similar in that they’re exploring leaving the city 

2 hours ago, Cleburger said:

The City of Cleveland clearly gave up this right as a part of some negotiation along the way since the Browns return in 99.    I've been party to other naming rights deals and it's often sold to cities based on the strength of the marketing department of the team, versus the City who would be ill-equipped to go out and hustle a company for a deal.    But...usually in giving up the rights to sell the naming rights, a city would retain some small portion of the income (10% perhaps).  It's strange that the Browns are keeping 100% of the proceeds.

 

 

City Council is saying it was supposed to go through them and didn’t they’re having an emergency hearing 

13 hours ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

Jimmy pockets yet another revenue stream by selling the name rights of a CITY OWNED STADIUM yet guys like Daryl Ruiter and the rest of 92.3 get all pissy that the county won't help finance Jimmy's new playground. If the revenue streams are going to be privately collected, then the project needs to be privately financed. Jimmy can afford it he really wants it. 

 

I mean to your point, those parking lots will be like an annuity for the Haslam's and can probably cover their annual payments and then some

It’ll be fun watching the Haslem’s beg for $1.2 billion dollars from taxpayers as they put forth another pathetic performing team. The fan experience is 100% attached to the performance of the team. Doesn’t matter where they play. Win ducking football games.

10 hours ago, marty15 said:

It’ll be fun watching the Haslem’s beg for $1.2 billion dollars from taxpayers as they put forth another pathetic performing team. The fan experience is 100% attached to the performance of the team. Doesn’t matter where they play. Win ducking football games.

As much as I am adamant against a move to Brookpark that would certainly take events, guests and in the end revenue from the City of Cleveland, the team's performance on the field whether they're winning losing should have 0% involvement of decision making for public financing 

46 minutes ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

As much as I am adamant against a move to Brookpark that would certainly take events, guests and in the end revenue from the City of Cleveland, the team's performance on the field whether they're winning losing should have 0% involvement of decision making for public financing 

Whilst you are completely correct I think this particular simplistic line of thinking especially amongst older people has value. I don't like to take too much of a sample size from social media but for example the boomers used the Royals poor record in recent years as a reason against giving them funds to build a Downtown Stadium. Facebook was littered with the "why give them a damn penny when they went won't spend anything on out a competitive team!!". The stadium vote ultimately was heavily voted down. It's only one part of public perception but its definitely one that exists I think and not just amongst a tiny minority. Some people are fickle enough to base their acceptance of stadium public funds on win/loss records. It's just one more thing that will work against them in their campaign to obtain tax payer cash if they can't turn things around. 

Edited September 9, 2024Sep 9 by snakebite

26 minutes ago, snakebite said:

Whilst you are completely correct I think this particular simplistic line of thinking especially amongst older people has value. I don't like to take too much of a sample size from social media but for example the boomers used the Royals poor record in recent years as a reason against giving them funds to build a Downtown Stadium. Facebook was littered with the "why give them a damn penny when they went won't spend anything on out a competitive team!!". The stadium vote ultimately was heavily voted down. It's only one part of public perception but its definitely one that exists I think and not just amongst a tiny minority. Some people are fickle enough to base their acceptance of stadium public funds on win/loss records. It's just one more thing that will work against them in their campaign to obtain tax payer cash if they can't turn things around. 

I mean sure, a losing team asking for public hand outs for their private enterprise and cashflows will not have a good public perception to it. 

2 hours ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

As much as I am adamant against a move to Brookpark that would certainly take events, guests and in the end revenue from the City of Cleveland, the team's performance on the field whether they're winning losing should have 0% involvement of decision making for public financing 

 

Sure, if we're thinking rationally about the issue.  Also, if we're thinking rationally about the issue, we're not giving them public money.

saw on twitter that Haslam and his operations head met with Bibb in Bibb's office. So looks like there is still some possibility of Browns staying Downtown or atleast in the city proper

3 hours ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

saw on twitter that Haslam and his operations head met with Bibb in Bibb's office. So looks like there is still some possibility of Browns staying Downtown or atleast in the city proper

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/cleveland-mayor-meets-with-haslam-sports-group-about-browns-stadium/ar-AA1qhBXn?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=7948ba79a01e4d6f9659ca6e2a0f4147&ei=15

Maybe instead of asking the city to pay for a new stadium he just wants the city to pay for Watson's contract so they can get out of that mess 🤣

They keep misspelling "doomed".

I’m guessing Jimmy wasn’t in a real good mood at today’s meeting with the mayor 😂

 

 

The exterior could def use a facelift, but there’s absolutely nothing wrong with this building. The product on the field has structural issues tho. 
 

-Gabe Wasylko with the beautiful shot 📸 

I agree.   The existing stadium certainly needs some love, but it's not unsalvageable.

 

Actually watching the MNF broadcast last night and seeing the overhead shots of Levi Stadium in Santa Clara renewed my interest in moving ALL the Browns operations downtown.   If you check out this view, you can see the San Francisco 49ers have offices next to the stadium along with practice facilities.   There is even room on the site for the Santa Clara Youth Soccer park. 

 

So we put a dome over the existing stadium and build a browns office/practice complex as a part of a mixed-use development north of the stadium.  Include a small portion of it for public use (youth football and/or soccer).     With this would come 100% of the Browns payroll taxes to the City of Cleveland, helping justify the use of public money.   The Port and City could come up with a creative way to cut Jimmy in on the parking revenue.  Maybe help sell sponsorships for the Pit and Muni lot?  

 

The benefits of this are numerous to the city, community and lakefront as a whole, and would give us our best shot at seeing real transformation, including land bridges, shoreway conversion and transit options.  

2 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

I agree.   The existing stadium certainly needs some love, but it's not unsalvageable.

 

Actually watching the MNF broadcast last night and seeing the overhead shots of Levi Stadium in Santa Clara renewed my interest in moving ALL the Browns operations downtown.   If you check out this view, you can see the San Francisco 49ers have offices next to the stadium along with practice facilities.   There is even room on the site for the Santa Clara Youth Soccer park. 

 

So we put a dome over the existing stadium and build a browns office/practice complex as a part of a mixed-use development north of the stadium.  Include a small portion of it for public use (youth football and/or soccer).     With this would come 100% of the Browns payroll taxes to the City of Cleveland, helping justify the use of public money.   The Port and City could come up with a creative way to cut Jimmy in on the parking revenue.  Maybe help sell sponsorships for the Pit and Muni lot?  

 

The benefits of this are numerous to the city, community and lakefront as a whole, and would give us our best shot at seeing real transformation, including land bridges, shoreway conversion and transit options.  

Moving all of the Browns facilities to this area or Burke land could also have some real estate implications, especially with the Cavs moving their training center to the riverfront as well. Right now, most Browns and Cavs players live in places like Avon, Westlake, North Royalton, etc. Because the facilities they're going to every day are in Berea and Independence. If/when both move Downtown, even 15-20, and hopefully more, extra people making $1M+ wanting to live here would likely require a new luxury residential building with some fancy penthouses. Others with families would likely move to homes closer to Downtown as well. 

 

Jimmy has bought a bunch of land in Berea now though, and I doubt Berea would let them slip away. 

16 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

I agree.   The existing stadium certainly needs some love, but it's not unsalvageable.

 

Actually watching the MNF broadcast last night and seeing the overhead shots of Levi Stadium in Santa Clara renewed my interest in moving ALL the Browns operations downtown.   If you check out this view, you can see the San Francisco 49ers have offices next to the stadium along with practice facilities.   There is even room on the site for the Santa Clara Youth Soccer park. 

 

So we put a dome over the existing stadium and build a browns office/practice complex as a part of a mixed-use development north of the stadium.  Include a small portion of it for public use (youth football and/or soccer).     With this would come 100% of the Browns payroll taxes to the City of Cleveland, helping justify the use of public money.   The Port and City could come up with a creative way to cut Jimmy in on the parking revenue.  Maybe help sell sponsorships for the Pit and Muni lot?  

 

The benefits of this are numerous to the city, community and lakefront as a whole, and would give us our best shot at seeing real transformation, including land bridges, shoreway conversion and transit options.  

Zero chance this is happening. The Browns are currently actively updating and expanding their current HQ, training, and practice facilties in Berea. Also, the stadium might not look that bad on the surface but it's the whole "lipstick on a pig" analogy. The amount of infrastructure work that would need to be done to "put a dome" over the current stadium (if it could even be done with current FFA regulations) would be so high that the total cost wouldn't be that much cheaper than just starting new.

Edited September 10, 2024Sep 10 by Stang10

3 minutes ago, PlanCleveland said:

Moving all of the Browns facilities to this area or Burke land could also have some real estate implications, especially with the Cavs moving their training center to the riverfront as well. Right now, most Browns and Cavs players live in places like Avon, Westlake, North Royalton, etc. Because the facilities they're going to every day are in Berea and Independence. If/when both move Downtown, even 15-20, and hopefully more, extra people making $1M+ wanting to live here would likely require a new luxury residential building with some fancy penthouses. Others with families would likely move to homes closer to Downtown as well. 

 

Jimmy has bought a bunch of land in Berea now though, and I doubt Berea would let them slip away. 

Berea has a good school system.  That land will have good value for housing should Jimmy decide to move. 

 

Agreed on the need for downtown luxury housing.  Many of these young millionaires are from somewhere else and don't necessarily want to invest in a full-on house here.    I could see a market for one or two luxury buildings, maybe even on the lakefront as a part of the complex.  

43 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

Berea has a good school system.  That land will have good value for housing should Jimmy decide to move. 

 

Agreed on the need for downtown luxury housing.  Many of these young millionaires are from somewhere else and don't necessarily want to invest in a full-on house here.    I could see a market for one or two luxury buildings, maybe even on the lakefront as a part of the complex.  

Berea’s school system is pretty mediocre actually (it ranks in the lower 50% for the state).  The city has assembled tons of land just north of the Browns’ facility that has sat vacant for over a decade I believe, so I doubt developers would be banging down their door for the land they just bought.

 

The Browns also recently renewed their lease in Berea, so there’s no reason to believe they have any interest in leaving.  And as @Stang10 mentioned, they were actively building on their current building this summer.

2 hours ago, Stang10 said:

Also, the stadium might not look that bad on the surface but it's the whole "lipstick on a pig" analogy. The amount of infrastructure work that would need to be done to "put a dome" over the current stadium (if it could even be done with current FFA regulations) would be so high that the total cost wouldn't be that much cheaper than just starting new.

 

Let's all agree that putting a dome on the current building is not happening for many reasons. Besides that, what is actually wrong with the building? Is the foundation at risk of giving in? Is the plumbing or electrical beyond repair? I have found no answers to indicate there are issues like this, so I can only conclude the whole problem with the building is the lipstick it's wearing. 

 

We can argue until we're blue in the face about where and how much to invest in the Browns' stadium, but there has still not been any clear answer to the "why" besides Jimmy wants to. And if Jimmy and the NFL say it must be so if we want an NFL team, that's fine, but let's at least be upfront about it. 

3 hours ago, coneflower said:

 

Let's all agree that putting a dome on the current building is not happening for many reasons. Besides that, what is actually wrong with the building? Is the foundation at risk of giving in? Is the plumbing or electrical beyond repair? I have found no answers to indicate there are issues like this, so I can only conclude the whole problem with the building is the lipstick it's wearing. 

 

We can argue until we're blue in the face about where and how much to invest in the Browns' stadium, but there has still not been any clear answer to the "why" besides Jimmy wants to. And if Jimmy and the NFL say it must be so if we want an NFL team, that's fine, but let's at least be upfront about it. 

 

Probably 7 or 8 years ago I went to a Browns game with someone who had done a lot of contracting work for the Browns stadium and the Rock Hall.

 

He old me the plumbing was in terrible shape at the time and there were multiple instances of flooding. Also, concrete repair had to be performed regularly out of fears chunks would fall onto the heads of the game's attendees. He said that the stadium was crumbling and was going to need to be rebuilt or replaced in the next 10-15 years. Here we are.

 

• Cleveland 19 News Article from 2007 about flooding related to sewer pipes: https://www.cleveland19.com/story/6791018/browns-stadium-floods-during-kenny-chesney-concert/
• Barstool Sports article from 2022 with video of water pipes flooding during a -17 degree day: https://www.barstoolsports.com/blog/3450043/the-browns-are-pulling-out-all-the-stops-for-home-field-advantage-by-flooding-their-already-frozen-stadium

Also, we need to remember that the current stadium was built as quickly an cheaply as possible when the Browns came back. Its been known for years that the current stadium was not going to hold up for much longer.

 

I think Haslam's proposal to renovate the current stadium was around $1.2 billion. Half of that is just stadium repairs. Its a damn death trap and its been known for at least a decade.

Yeah pipes are going to freeze when it's -17 degrees outside. An open air building with a huge amount of plumbing will have cold infiltration somewhere and burst pipes. How many people that weekend had to leave the cabinet below their sink open just in case.

 

The comment about how quickly and cheaply CBS stadium was built keeps spreading like fact. It's been posted before the project timeline and cost was in line with other football stadiums of the era.

2 instances in 17 years? I’d say that’s pretty darn good. Brand new buildings can have more issues than that.

If the stadium is in such bad shape, it it worth spending $1B+ to renovate it?

On 9/9/2024 at 10:22 AM, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

As much as I am adamant against a move to Brookpark that would certainly take events, guests and in the end revenue from the City of Cleveland, the team's performance on the field whether they're winning losing should have 0% involvement of decision making for public financing 

The point is not so much that they should base decisions on it, and more that the losses (and Deshaun embarrassment) are going to weaken Jimmy’s hand. What a shame.

1 hour ago, mu2010 said:

The point is not so much that they should base decisions on it, and more that the losses (and Deshaun embarrassment) are going to weaken Jimmy’s hand. What a shame.

I would say we should look at how they invested $300M on Watson and how bad of a business decision that was. If they make that bad of a decision with their own money, how bad will they be with our money?

2 hours ago, Zagapi said:

I think Haslam's proposal to renovate the current stadium was around $1.2 billion. Half of that is just stadium repairs. Its a damn death trap and its been known for at least a decade.

 

Even if I go with your assertion that it needs $600M in repairs, that still seems like a better deal than spending $2B+ on a completely new building. It’d be like owning an old house that needs a lot of work and deciding rather than fix it, you’re going to spend twice as much to build a new house. 
 

Now, if you tell me the stadium repairs are only going to extend the stadium’s life 5 years, that doesn’t sound like a good idea anymore. But can you get 15+ more years out of it? That’s almost to the point when they’d be asking to replace or renovate a NEW stadium. This is the kind of stuff that voters need to understand, assuming we get any vote in the matter. 

 

 

Edited September 11, 2024Sep 11 by coneflower

29 minutes ago, coneflower said:

 

Even if I go with your assertion that it needs $600M in repairs, that still seems like a better deal than spending $2B+ on a completely new building. It’d be like owning an old house that needs a lot of work and deciding rather than fix it, you’re going to spend twice as much to build a new house. 
 

Now, if you tell me the stadium repairs are only going to extend the stadium’s life 5 years, that doesn’t sound like a good idea anymore. But can you get 15+ more years out of it? That’s almost to the point when they’d be asking to replace or renovate a NEW stadium. This is the kind of stuff that voters need to understand, assuming we get any vote in the matter. 

 

 

Plus, if they spent the money to erect some kind of "tent" over it, suddenly everything that was exposed to the weather would now be climate controlled and protected, extending the life even further. 

The people of Brookpark have spoken out in opposition to a ..... gas station.

 

This isn't particularly noteworthy (its pretty standard in terms of typical American suburban NIMYism around something like a gas station). It is however a reminder that suburban residents are often resistant to even small changes in their communities. If there is more movement/discussion towards the Brookpark stadium going forward, we could possibly see the formation of Brookpark resident opposition to the project. Even if it is a small group of city residents, they can still be pretty influential over city councilors and the mayor due to the (relatively) small electorate. An incumbent councilmember lost their seat by some 200 votes last year. 

 

 

Opponents circle the wagons against proposed Brook Park Circle K

Maura Zurick - Cleveland.com - 9-9-24

 

"Residents raised concerns about potential health hazards from gasoline fumes, groundwater contamination and increased traffic. ... Councilman Tom Dufour was also vocal in his opposition, citing the already crowded intersection as a primary issue."

3 hours ago, Zagapi said:

 

Probably 7 or 8 years ago I went to a Browns game with someone who had done a lot of contracting work for the Browns stadium and the Rock Hall.

 

He old me the plumbing was in terrible shape at the time and there were multiple instances of flooding. Also, concrete repair had to be performed regularly out of fears chunks would fall onto the heads of the game's attendees. He said that the stadium was crumbling and was going to need to be rebuilt or replaced in the next 10-15 years. Here we are.

 

• Cleveland 19 News Article from 2007 about flooding related to sewer pipes: https://www.cleveland19.com/story/6791018/browns-stadium-floods-during-kenny-chesney-concert/
• Barstool Sports article from 2022 with video of water pipes flooding during a -17 degree day: https://www.barstoolsports.com/blog/3450043/the-browns-are-pulling-out-all-the-stops-for-home-field-advantage-by-flooding-their-already-frozen-stadium

Also, we need to remember that the current stadium was built as quickly an cheaply as possible when the Browns came back. Its been known for years that the current stadium was not going to hold up for much longer.

 

I think Haslam's proposal to renovate the current stadium was around $1.2 billion. Half of that is just stadium repairs. Its a damn death trap and its been known for at least a decade.

The stadium was crumbling and game attendees were in constant danger of being brained by falling concrete but it still had a good 10 years to go? Makes sense!

10 hours ago, bumsquare said:

The stadium was crumbling and game attendees were in constant danger of being brained by falling concrete but it still had a good 10 years to go? Makes sense!

Yeah, I’ve been to the stadium quite a few times the last couple years and have seen zero sign of crumbling concrete. And you would see it, the superstructure is completely exposed. 
 

Also, Building & House and CFD would demand its immediate attention and repair. Screened/covered protection would have to be put in place overhead. Also, it would be clear where repairs were done. 

 

Complete B.S.

14 hours ago, Zagapi said:

 

Probably 7 or 8 years ago I went to a Browns game with someone who had done a lot of contracting work for the Browns stadium and the Rock Hall.

 

He old me the plumbing was in terrible shape at the time and there were multiple instances of flooding. Also, concrete repair had to be performed regularly out of fears chunks would fall onto the heads of the game's attendees. He said that the stadium was crumbling and was going to need to be rebuilt or replaced in the next 10-15 years. Here we are.

 

• Cleveland 19 News Article from 2007 about flooding related to sewer pipes: https://www.cleveland19.com/story/6791018/browns-stadium-floods-during-kenny-chesney-concert/
• Barstool Sports article from 2022 with video of water pipes flooding during a -17 degree day: https://www.barstoolsports.com/blog/3450043/the-browns-are-pulling-out-all-the-stops-for-home-field-advantage-by-flooding-their-already-frozen-stadium

Also, we need to remember that the current stadium was built as quickly an cheaply as possible when the Browns came back. Its been known for years that the current stadium was not going to hold up for much longer.

 

I think Haslam's proposal to renovate the current stadium was around $1.2 billion. Half of that is just stadium repairs. Its a damn death trap and its been known for at least a decade.

Is this Jimmy Haslem's burner account?

What kind of question is that? Poster made some good points, provided links, and we've all heard anecdotally that the stadium is structurally s**t. The fact that no one has been injured there, yet, is some barometer of quality. 

 

44 minutes ago, TBideon said:

What kind of question is that? Poster made some good points, provided links, and we've all heard anecdotally that the stadium is structurally s**t. The fact that no one has been injured there, yet, is some barometer of quality. 

 

Relax, it was a joke, take a breather...

Edited September 11, 2024Sep 11 by MyPhoneDead