What does "urban" music mean?  I live Downtown and listen to Led Zeppelin.  So is that "urban" music?

 

I'm being rhetorical, but really, big pet peeve of mine.

What does "urban" music mean?  I live Downtown and listen to Led Zeppelin.  So is that "urban" music?

 

I'm being rhetorical, but really, big pet peeve of mine.

 

I would say it means "the music a majority of people who live in urban areas like to listen to".  Just like not everyone who lives in the country listens to Country music, but a majority do.

 

But to get back on topic, I wouldn't want to see this view go away with a roof put on the stadium (which I think would be a gigantic waste of money):

 

 

(Sorry for my awful cell phone pic quality and craptacular photography skills.)

We're drifting off topic, but "urban" was used as a euphemism for "black music" in order to increase its selling power. Similar to the term "rock and roll", which had a better selling power than "rhythm and blues" or "race records", that's why music that is typically tailored to minorities is called "urban music". Even in the Hispanic community, the radio format that predominately plays things like Reggaeton is called "Hispanic Urban". "Urban" is easier to sell than "Black". And as a black person in the industry, I'm just acknowledging the unfortunate truth. So if anyone was wondering the origins, that's the origin.

We're drifting off topic, but "urban" was used as a euphemism for "black music" in order to increase its selling power. Similar to the term "rock and roll", which had a better selling power than "rhythm and blues" or "race records", that's why music that is typically tailored to minorities is called "urban music". Even in the Hispanic community, the radio format that predominately plays things like Reggaeton is called "Hispanic Urban". "Urban" is easier to sell than "Black". And as a black person in the industry, I'm just acknowledging the unfortunate truth. So if anyone was wondering the origins, that's the origin.

 

Urban is absolutely a correct and accepted term in our industry.  Glad to meet you involvewithCLE. 

 

And your assessment above is accurate.  It would take a mega package as you lay out to fill Browns stadium.  Even then, look at the one you mentioned.  It takes a radio partner like Hot 97 in NYC to fill a stadium.  WZAK is no longer a player on that level I'm afraid.  Gone the way of other Cleveland radio when sold off to corporate interests.

 

With this being said, I would think the urban market in Cleveland would be much happier in the comfortable confines of the Q anyway.  Great spot for a dressed up night out and finish it off at the casino.   

 

 

Likewise, Cleburger. Always been a fan of your posts :)

 

And we're talking shop here, but its still somewhat on topic. WZAK wouldn't be the one to do it because they target an older audience. Their sister station WENZ, however, would be the ones to do it. In fact, WENZ has most recently started doing their own Summerjam in the vein of Hot 97 (just not on the same size yet) so there is a radio venue here to do it. And a Jay-Z or a Lil Wayne or a Drake could definitely do a stadium show. At least two of the three have done stadium shows and Drake's current tour was originally scheduled to BE a stadium tour but he chose different venues instead. So I still argue that, for the really big events, the Q or the Wolstein may not be sufficient.

Likewise, Cleburger. Always been a fan of your posts :)

 

And we're talking shop here, but its still somewhat on topic. WZAK wouldn't be the one to do it because they target an older audience. Their sister station WENZ, however, would be the ones to do it. In fact, WENZ has most recently started doing their own Summerjam in the vein of Hot 97 (just not on the same size yet) so there is a radio venue here to do it. And a Jay-Z or a Lil Wayne or a Drake could definitely do a stadium show. At least two of the three have done stadium shows and Drake's current tour was originally scheduled to BE a stadium tour but he chose different venues instead. So I still argue that, for the really big events, the Q or the Wolstein may not be sufficient.

 

Having worked with Jay Z, Lil Wayne and Drake I respectfully disagree with your stadium projections, but to each his own.  All solid arena/shed acts.  Stadiums, maybe in New York (with Jay Z on the bill). That's about it. 

 

That's why promoters take risk.  Or at least used to.... 

 

Before the moderators club us, we can leave this to another day. 

@StrapHanger, really? That IS a stupid rule. Don't some MLS teams currently play in football stadiums though? Were they grandfathered in?

 

Not my area of expertise, but yes, that was the explanation offered for why many existing teams play in large stadiums.  The original discussion on UO was here: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,7469.280.html

 

 

 

FYI, there are actually very few 60K plus stadiums that are used exclusively for club teams.  Most are built for the national team.  As always wikipedia has a nice list of stadiums and who uses them.  Like I said most of the larger stadiums are for national teams, or were built for a World Cup and now have a club team. 

 

New England, DC, and Seattle all play in Football stadiums.  New England because they are owned by the Krafts and don't want to invest in a new stadium (and it shows on the field too) despite pressure from the league office.  DC has been in a constant state of flux regarding playing at RFK.  They want a new stadium, but have been running into problems left and right as they want to stay in DC proper.  Latest rumor is they may be moving to Baltimore.  Seattle is the only MLS side that can actually accommodate a 60K plus stadium.  The Pacific Northwest is crazy.

 

MLS is pushing all their teams to build soccer specific stadiums for a variety of reasons, but one is it is a much better fan experience.  These usually put the fans about 10 feet from the touch lines, much more intimate.  They can do this because they only bring 18-20 players to a game, with 3-5 assistant coaches.  Compare that to the 45 players and seemingly another 45 assistants at a football game.  Much less space required.  For a good example watch some of the US men's game tonight on ESPN2, they are playing in KC's new stadium that is really amazing.

 

In regards to a dome/roof on CBS.  That proposal is ugly, no way should that be put up.  And in regards to the concerts, I thought things were moving away from stadium shows and going to smaller spaces? 

I wonder how much a roof like the one in Minneapolis costs. I would assume much less than a sliding glass roof. Something "tarp like" like in Minneapolis might be something that could be added without having to construct significant structural supports. I'm gonna look that up because I believe Minneapolis recently had to replace their roof.

^Yes they did...

 

^A Minneapolis style fabric dome would require the stadium to be relatively air tight.  It relies on the fact that the stadium is pressurized to keep the roof inflated.  It's not really practical for a stadium retrofit.  They really need to be designed for that sort of roof from the beginning.

In that case a tarp like roof may still work. Supports would have to be built from the south side of the stadium to the north. Then a solution for the four corners needs to be implemented.

Hey, if Minneapolis can have a "retractable" roof like that, why not us?? Oh wait, theirs wasn't intentionally retractable....

There has been so much focus on potential concerts as a reason for wanting to have a roof on CBS.  As an observer of this thread from Indianapolis, I can tell you that concerts at Lucas Oil Stadium are a very minimal answer for why a roof was desired on the stadium.  Lucas Oil Stadium (LOS) is directly connected to the Indiana Convention Center via a wide, underground hallway.  The ICC contains about 550,000 sq ft of prime exhibit space.  LOS contains a large area under the north section of seating that opens directly onto the playing surface area.  The "playing field" area and the exhibit area to the north contain about 200,000 sq feet of exhibit space.  Combining the ICC and LOS, you have a convention complex with about 750,000 sq. feet of exhibit space, under roof.  With the additional ballrooms and meeting rooms - there is just about 1,000,000 sq. feet  of convention space at the combined complex. 

 

Right now there are about 55,000 FFA (Future Farmers of America) convention folks (kids) in town.  They are having large gatherings and using all of the space in the entire complex, including several evening events where they are filling the stadium.  There are probably at least ten - fifteen other major conventions that use LOS as part of their convention space needs during a typical year.  LOS also gets used for several major marching band events.  The state high school marching band championship takes place in November and attracts 35,000 fans.  The National HS Marching championships are hosted in Indpls also.  In August, Drum Corps International holds their world drum and bugle corp championships in town (Indy has this event for ten years).  Crowds are usually 40,000 or so for this event -- and the drum corps groups and their fans come from all over the country and fill all of the hotel rooms.  Along with ten home Colts games, there are usually about three or four other large football events each year (Circle City Classic, Big Ten Football Championship, State HS football championship games in 5 classes, (Super Bowl!), sometimes other college games).  Almost every other weekend during the Fall that is not filled with a Colts home game or another large event at LOS, there are smaller high school events - where three or four high school games (with 6 - 8 teams) play from noon until 10:00 pm. There also are moto cross races, "bigfoot" type monster truck things, and a few other things.  There are typically one or two major concerts per year that occur at the stadium.  There are also about twentyfive or so "small" corporate type events per year -- for example, there may be a United Way kickoff dinner where they set up 200 tables on the stadium floor and about 2000 people attend.  They're kind of big events, but compared to a 65,000+ football crowd, its small.  These are nice events and almost certainly would not happen at the stadium if it did not have a roof.

 

I would say that all of those things listed above mean that LOS is used for about 60 - 70 "big" event (crowds of at least 25,000 people) days per year and another 25 "smaller" events.  There are probably another 50 - 60 days that it is also busy with set-up / take down for events - so it is busy around 150 days per year or about 42% of the time.  I would say that at least 80% of the events held there would not happen if there were not a roof.   

 

To summarize, I would estimate that - without a roof, LOS would host 20 large events per year.  With a roof, it hosts approximately 65 large events per year (and another 20 - 30 smaller events).  There is some very good economic benefit from having these large events at the stadium.  The huge conventions that come to Indy, bringing tens of thousands of people from all over the US and other parts of the world, fill all of the hotel rooms and typically) for a 25,000 person convention) mean a $20 million - $30 million economic impact.  Indy's complete package has also made it attractive enough to be able to get the Big Ten Football Championship, the Final Four and NCAA b-ball Regionals, and the Super Bowl.  Those events have economic impacts ranging from $30 million (Big Ten Football) to $200 million or so (Super Bowl) and we are attracting many, many more huge conventions which will start showing up in town over the next few years.  The very large conventions are booked 5 - 10 years in advance - so bookings made in 08, 09 and 2010 will be coming to town in 2014, 2015, etc.  Currently the Convention booking folks are setting up big deals for conventions that will be coming in 2020, 2021 and beyond.

Latest CBS roof mockup.

 

Latest CBS roof mockup.

 

 

 

 

 

There has been so much focus on potential concerts as a reason for wanting to have a roof on CBS.  As an observer of this thread from Indianapolis, I can tell you that concerts at Lucas Oil Stadium are a very minimal answer for why a roof was desired on the stadium.  Lucas Oil Stadium (LOS) is directly connected to the Indiana Convention Center via a wide, underground hallway.  The ICC contains about 550,000 sq ft of prime exhibit space.  LOS contains a large area under the north section of seating that opens directly onto the playing surface area.  The "playing field" area and the exhibit area to the north contain about 200,000 sq feet of exhibit space.  Combining the ICC and LOS, you have a convention complex with about 750,000 sq. feet of exhibit space, under roof.  With the additional ballrooms and meeting rooms - there is just about 1,000,000 sq. feet  of convention space at the combined complex. 

 

Right now there are about 55,000 FFA (Future Farmers of America) convention folks (kids) in town.  They are having large gatherings and using all of the space in the entire complex, including several evening events where they are filling the stadium.  There are probably at least ten - fifteen other major conventions that use LOS as part of their convention space needs during a typical year.  LOS also gets used for several major marching band events.  The state high school marching band championship takes place in November and attracts 35,000 fans.  The National HS Marching championships are hosted in Indpls also.  In August, Drum Corps International holds their world drum and bugle corp championships in town (Indy has this event for ten years).  Crowds are usually 40,000 or so for this event -- and the drum corps groups and their fans come from all over the country and fill all of the hotel rooms.  Along with ten home Colts games, there are usually about three or four other large football events each year (Circle City Classic, Big Ten Football Championship, State HS football championship games in 5 classes, (Super Bowl!), sometimes other college games).  Almost every other weekend during the Fall that is not filled with a Colts home game or another large event at LOS, there are smaller high school events - where three or four high school games (with 6 - 8 teams) play from noon until 10:00 pm. There also are moto cross races, "bigfoot" type monster truck things, and a few other things.  There are typically one or two major concerts per year that occur at the stadium.  There are also about twentyfive or so "small" corporate type events per year -- for example, there may be a United Way kickoff dinner where they set up 200 tables on the stadium floor and about 2000 people attend.  They're kind of big events, but compared to a 65,000+ football crowd, its small.  These are nice events and almost certainly would not happen at the stadium if it did not have a roof.

 

I would say that all of those things listed above mean that LOS is used for about 60 - 70 "big" event (crowds of at least 25,000 people) days per year and another 25 "smaller" events.  There are probably another 50 - 60 days that it is also busy with set-up / take down for events - so it is busy around 150 days per year or about 42% of the time.  I would say that at least 80% of the events held there would not happen if there were not a roof.   

 

To summarize, I would estimate that - without a roof, LOS would host 20 large events per year.  With a roof, it hosts approximately 65 large events per year (and another 20 - 30 smaller events).  There is some very good economic benefit from having these large events at the stadium.  The huge conventions that come to Indy, bringing tens of thousands of people from all over the US and other parts of the world, fill all of the hotel rooms and typically) for a 25,000 person convention) mean a $20 million - $30 million economic impact.  Indy's complete package has also made it attractive enough to be able to get the Big Ten Football Championship, the Final Four and NCAA b-ball Regionals, and the Super Bowl.  Those events have economic impacts ranging from $30 million (Big Ten Football) to $200 million or so (Super Bowl) and we are attracting many, many more huge conventions which will start showing up in town over the next few years.  The very large conventions are booked 5 - 10 years in advance - so bookings made in 08, 09 and 2010 will be coming to town in 2014, 2015, etc.  Currently the Convention booking folks are setting up big deals for conventions that will be coming in 2020, 2021 and beyond.

 

A few thoughts on this:

 

1.  Our convention center would not be directly connected to the CBS.  To even gain accessibility, it would take quite the construction feat.   

 

2.  Indianapolis is the capitol city and tends to attract some the events you mention due to its center of the government status.

 

3.  If you look at the Lucas Oil Stadium calendar, many are smaller events that are probably getting access to the field etc as a perk, but they are not renting them the space.  CBS already does a great job of this renting their suite level restaruant spaces year round.

 

 

 

 

1.  Our convention center would not be directly connected to the CBS.  To even gain accessibility, it would take quite the construction feat.   

 

 

Much of that distance would be connected via an enclosed walkway if the port authority levy passes next week. If the levy doesn't pass, then that leaves the connector $20 million short.

1.  Our convention center would not be directly connected to the CBS.  To even gain accessibility, it would take quite the construction feat.   

 

 

Much of that distance would be connected via an enclosed walkway if the port authority levy passes next week. If the levy doesn't pass, then that leaves the connector $20 million short.

 

Conventioneers aren't big on walking.  You're still not selling me on it.  They spend enough time walking the show floor--the last thing they want to do is walk a few blocks to get to another part of the show.  If there was a direct connection, and I mean DI-RECT, I'd say maybe.

I have no interest in adding a roof.  Cleveland football should be played in a foot of snow.  A better investment would be in cloud seeding to increase snowfall on Sundays. 

I have no interest in adding a roof.  Cleveland football should be played in a foot of snow.  A better investment would be in cloud seeding to increase snowfall on Sundays. 

 

As long as I can watch it from the warmth of my living room.

I have no interest in adding a roof.  Cleveland football should be played in a foot of snow.  A better investment would be in cloud seeding to increase snowfall on Sundays. 

 

Is anyone sure that adding a roof mandates the Browns cannot play in bad weather?

 

If it can be financially justified for more usage, I want the retractable roof AND for the Browns to remain an outdoor team.

It wouldn't mandate them not playing in bad weather, but I can't imagine them keeping it open in bad weather.  Too many people would whine, and the squeaky wheels would get the grease.

This news spurred some interesting discussion at cleveland.com (for a change), including some speculating this could lead to a dome on CBS, or other enhancements to the stadium, or lakefront development around the stadium or, gasp, construction of a new stadium somewhere (and where?) in or near downtown. What do you think?!?! Speculate away -- that's what the Discussion section is all about.......

 

Cleveland Browns name Alec Scheiner their new president

By Mary Kay Cabot, The Plain Dealer

on December 18, 2012 at 10:09 PM, updated December 18, 2012 at 10:29 PM

 

BEREA, Ohio -- Alec Scheiner, the first hire by Jimmy Haslam and Joe Banner, promises to make the fan experience at Cleveland Browns Stadium as inviting and exciting as Cowboys Stadium, the NFL's crown jewel which he helped build.

 

"We created something that is perfectly fit for the Dallas Cowboys and I'd like to do the same thing in Cleveland," the Browns' new president said on a conference call Tuesday. "Create something that links us to the past and links us to the community in a way that when Browns fans outside Cleveland come, they know exactly where they are and they enjoy it."

 

Scheiner, who will start Jan. 7, spent the previous eight years with the Cowboys, the last five as senior vice president and general counsel. He replaces Mike Holmgren as president, but his role will be different.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/12/alec_scheiner_has_agreed_to_be.html#incart_river_default

I expect the Browns to start up or partner in other business ventures, like the Indians with Sports Time Ohio.  I hope this includes more of a 365 days a year experience at the stadium, with development tied to the stadium and to the lake and harbor.

 

The stadium will have a new scoreboard, and some new fan friendly ammenities, but I doubt it will be replaced any time soon.

The life expectancy of CBS isn't even a quarter over yet.  I see a dome before I see a move, can you hear the residents of Cleveland if this moved with no SUBSTANTIAL redevelopment of the area.

 

If it move, I would hope it moves to the area across from gateway as indicated in KJPs previous post.  That was my first choice.

 

Seconded^

There won't be a dome or a stadium move anytime soon, like in the next 20 yrs.  Who would pay for a dome?  The owner?  At least $100 million to do a project like that and it would never justify the cost with increased revenue from added events.  Tax payers won't foot the bill either. 

 

And the stadium won't be moving anytime soon - it was built on the current location because they were able to re-use the deep driven pile foundations from the previous stadium which saved money.  The other possible location for the stadium when it was being rebuilt was over at E. 9th on the south side of the Innerbelt.  They couldn't get site control, plus reusing the foundations made it cheaper to keep it on the lake.  That site has now been cut in half by the E. 9th street extension  which was done with the Innerbelt project

^ I'm inclined to agree with this. Right now everyone is all excited about the notion, largely I think because each side thinks the other side is going to pay for it. Once we get down to brass tacks, I think it's going to lose viability quickly.

^ dome could easily be funded with naming rights to that stadium.  Yes, you would also see a return benefit if you land more events, especially events that captivate the entire nation.

The Randall Park Mall site seems like a good place for a stadium.  There's lots of parking and if the blue line were extended that would be a bonus.  A football stadium is used too rarely to take up valuable urban space, especially on Cleveland's underused waterfront as it is now.

Naming rights wouldn't cover even 5% of the cost of adding a dome, switching the field to turf, updating the lighting, HVAC system, etc

 

http://espn.go.com/sportsbusiness/s/stadiumnames.html

over time? Progressive is paying the indians $58 million of 16 years.  WIth the NFL being more popular and creating more interest, you dont think that a $100 million dollar deal could be struck over 20-25 years?  That doesnt cover the costs?  Even if it doesnt, wouldnt you believe Haslam would find additional sources of revenue if not from his own pocket in order to make it happen?

Naming rights wouldn't cover even 5% of the cost of adding a dome, switching the field to turf, updating the lighting, HVAC system, etc

 

http://espn.go.com/sportsbusiness/s/stadiumnames.html

 

Could you look up the estimated cost of putting a dome on CBS, and then compare it to the revenues received from naming rights in the last five years or so at various NFL stadiums. Tell me what you discover.

I've never crunched numbers on the subject, but you would have to think that putting a dome on the stadium would be a good return on investment for Haslam. He gets virtually all the revenue created at the stadium (minus a very very small portion that goes to the City of Cleveland), so one would think that putting a dome would increase the amount of events that could happen at the stadium. Plus, it could be used in conjunction with the Med Mart and conv center. Am I off base here?

The dude is a heavy hitter. He swings big and is obsessed with growth and efficiency.  CBS is not an efficient use of space at the moment, and the opportunities to grow are plentiful.  Dont look for that to be the same building 5 years from now.

Urban designers lament that the lakefront is a poor place for this massive edifice; it is only used ten times per year and really is not that attractive.  A park or other public area would be preferred.  A football stadium in the lee of twenty knot winds in December and January is an unpleasant place to be.  I would advocate going "inland" to this site. It is close enough to the RTA terminal at Terminal Tower. 

 

A nod to KJP for finding this image, now compressed and saved at UO.  Credit to the Plain Dealer: http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Clevelandpics1/Browns2.jpg

 

The Randall Park Mall site seems like a good place for a stadium.  There's lots of parking and if the blue line were extended that would be a bonus.  A football stadium is used too rarely to take up valuable urban space, especially on Cleveland's underused waterfront as it is now.

 

Randall Park Mall isn't viable either.  The team is the CLEVELAND Browns not the Warrensville, Randall Park etc. Browns.  In addition the infrastructure to handle the crowds is not there as it is downtown.  There would be virtually no spin off money made.  Look at Miami Pro Player Sun Life stadium as an example (I brought in two topics, ha).  The stadium is in the middle of no where.  A highway on one side, a waterway on the north and a residential on the other.  People going to the stadium do not spend money in the area, they just bring traffic and congestion.

 

The Blue extension would cost a fortune and can't be justified.  Most likely that would be the end terminal.  Just like the stadium, that station would be rarely used.  On a non game day, what would the boarding be like at the stadium station? Any other location but downtown does not work for Cleveland.

 

^ dome could easily be funded with naming rights to that stadium.  Yes, you would also see a return benefit if you land more events, especially events that captivate the entire nation.

 

Naming right don't pay for much, its just easy money for stadium owners.  It's cheaper over the cost of time than commercials, even if nobody buys your product.  An average 30 second commercial during an NFL broadcast is $420k. (2.7 for the Superbowl).  Naming rights is an advertising alternative, especial in a market where there are no blackouts.

 

Also one needs to pray the company doesn't go bankrupt.  Look at the number of stadium changes over the last 10 years.  IIRC, Wrigley Field and Busch Stadium are the only places to be built with a corporate name, due to the teams owner owning additional corporations.  Budweiser even created a beer, Busch, to go along with the name of the Stadium.

 

^ I'm inclined to agree with this. Right now everyone is all excited about the notion, largely I think because each side thinks the other side is going to pay for it. Once we get down to brass tacks, I think it's going to lose viability quickly.

Agreed!

 

I've never crunched numbers on the subject, but you would have to think that putting a dome on the stadium would be a good return on investment for Haslam. He gets virtually all the revenue created at the stadium (minus a very very small portion that goes to the City of Cleveland), so one would think that putting a dome would increase the amount of events that could happen at the stadium. Plus, it could be used in conjunction with the Med Mart and conv center. Am I off base here?

 

I thought the Browns only received Ticket sales from Browns games along with a portion of concessions.  Everything else goes to Cleveland.  Someone point me to the terms.

I'm not aware of any open-air stadiums in America which have had a roof "added" after the fact.  So there really isn't a precedent to compare to, cost wise.  Probably because it doesn't make sense financially...

 

Even if the money was available, by all accounts, Cleveland would be extremely difficult due to the open sides, the location atop a landfill, locating the roof supports, reworking the HVAC & lighting....  it ain't gonna happen.  Besides, Haslam already spent $1 Billion on the team, he's not going to drop another quarter billion to put a roof on the stadium.

 

Regarding the value of stadium naming, I think a small market like Cleveland is going to get $2 or maybe $3million a year, at most.  On a project that would easily cost $200 million and likely much much more, what's that come to?  5-10%?

 

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2011/09/19/In-Depth/Naming-rights-deals.aspx

Doesn't really seem to indicate that NFL stadiums draw more for naming rights than others.  In a small market like Cleveland, the closest comparison is Cincy and their "Great American Ballpark" but that's visible from the I-75/71 bridge across the Ohio river, gets much more traffic past it.

 

Look at the annual schedule for domed facilities - CSU convocation center is empty quite often.  We also have Quicken Loans which is actually a better venue for concerts & such.  Ford Field in Detroit hosts an annual motocross and monster truck event and literally a handful of concerts.  About the same as what would be added at Cleveland if they had a dome.

I've never crunched numbers on the subject, but you would have to think that putting a dome on the stadium would be a good return on investment for Haslam. He gets virtually all the revenue created at the stadium (minus a very very small portion that goes to the City of Cleveland), so one would think that putting a dome would increase the amount of events that could happen at the stadium. Plus, it could be used in conjunction with the Med Mart and conv center. Am I off base here?

 

I thought the Browns only received Ticket sales from Browns games along with a portion of concessions.  Everything else goes to Cleveland.  Someone point me to the terms.

 

Can't find the exact lease terms at the moment, but the Browns pay the city about $250,000 per year in rent, and then have control of all revenue for 357 days of the year (the City of Cleveland gets to use the stadium for only 8 days of the year). 

 

Doesn't really seem to indicate that NFL stadiums draw more for naming rights than others.  In a small market like Cleveland, the closest comparison is Cincy and their "Great American Ballpark" but that's visible from the I-75/71 bridge across the Ohio river, gets much more traffic past it.

 

Cleveland's market is ranked 18th, while Cincinnati is 35th

OK, since we weren't willing to look up actual naming rights deals for NFL stadiums, here they are:

 

Recent Stadium Naming Rights Deals

 

Houston Texans, Reliant Stadium; $300 million, 30 years

Washington Redskins, FedEx Field; $207 million, 27 years

Arizona Cardinals, University of Phoenix Stadium; $154 million, 20 years

Carolina Panthers, Bank of America Stadium; $140 million, 20 years

Philadelphia Eagles, Lincoln Financial Field; $140 million, 20 years

Indianapolis Colts, Lucas Oil Stadium; $122 million, 20 years

Denver Broncos, Invesco Field at Mile High; $120 million, 20 years

New England Patriots, Gillette Stadium; $115 million, 15 years

Baltimore Ravens, M&T Bank Stadium; $75 million, 15 years

 

SOURCE: http://www.footballphds.com/2011/07/20/stadium-geek-week-nfl-stadium-naming-rights/

 

So it seems that naming rights can be a significant source of revenue to finance stadium improvements or even a new stadium. It should not be dismissed out of hand and without research.

 

And, yes, a dome is structurally feasible, even on landfill land as the stadium itself is much heavier. But the stadium itself cannot support a dome, according to several architectural/engineering firms. Thus, the dome would have to be self-supporting or suspended like Robert Corna proposed in 2006 http://www.wkyc.com/news/article/261916/4/Is-a-dome-even-possible-for-Cleveland-Browns-Stadium or Ralph Tyler Companies proposed in October of this year http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/10/cleveland_architecture_and_eng.html

 

The cost could range from $45 million to $200 million.

 

 

Here is an EXCELLENT article on the subject..... ;)

 

Cleveland Browns: Is the Owner-in-Waiting Trying to Put a Lid on City Officials? 

BY KEN PRENDERGAST (CONTRIBUTOR) ON SEPTEMBER 19, 2012

 

Northeast Ohio sports fans are abuzz after prospective Cleveland Browns owner Jimmy Haslam III said he would bring in three prominent stadium architectural firms to suggest changes to the city-owned lakefront stadium. He said changes could include putting a roof on the 13-year-old, open-air facility.

 

But did Haslam suggest the roof to put a lid on any push-back from some city officials who have long wanted a covered stadium?

 

Haslam met with city officials Sept. 19. At the meeting, city councilman Mike Polensek, long a supporter of adding a roof to Cleveland Browns Stadium, asked Haslam how he could make greater use of the stadium. The facility now sits empty more than 350 days per year, as it’s used only for 10 Browns games plus a few concerts a year.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1340833-cleveland-browns-is-the-owner-in-waiting-trying-to-put-a-lid-on-city-officials

OK, since we weren't willing to look up actual naming rights deals for NFL stadiums, here they are:

 

Recent Stadium Naming Rights Deals

 

Houston Texans, Reliant Stadium; $300 million, 30 years

Washington Redskins, FedEx Field; $207 million, 27 years

Arizona Cardinals, University of Phoenix Stadium; $154 million, 20 years

Carolina Panthers, Bank of America Stadium; $140 million, 20 years

Philadelphia Eagles, Lincoln Financial Field; $140 million, 20 years

Indianapolis Colts, Lucas Oil Stadium; $122 million, 20 years

Denver Broncos, Invesco Field at Mile High; $120 million, 20 years

New England Patriots, Gillette Stadium; $115 million, 15 years

Baltimore Ravens, M&T Bank Stadium; $75 million, 15 years

 

SOURCE: http://www.footballphds.com/2011/07/20/stadium-geek-week-nfl-stadium-naming-rights/

 

So it seems that naming rights can be a significant source of revenue to finance stadium improvements or even a new stadium. It should not be dismissed out of hand and without research.

 

And, yes, a dome is structurally feasible, even on landfill land as the stadium itself is much heavier. But the stadium itself cannot support a dome, according to several architectural/engineering firms. Thus, the dome would have to be self-supporting or suspended like Robert Corna proposed in 2006 http://www.wkyc.com/news/article/261916/4/Is-a-dome-even-possible-for-Cleveland-Browns-Stadium or Ralph Tyler Companies proposed in October of this year http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/10/cleveland_architecture_and_eng.html

 

The cost could range from $45 million to $200 million.

 

 

Here is an EXCELLENT article on the subject..... ;)

 

Cleveland Browns: Is the Owner-in-Waiting Trying to Put a Lid on City Officials? 

BY KEN PRENDERGAST (CONTRIBUTOR) ON SEPTEMBER 19, 2012

 

Northeast Ohio sports fans are abuzz after prospective Cleveland Browns owner Jimmy Haslam III said he would bring in three prominent stadium architectural firms to suggest changes to the city-owned lakefront stadium. He said changes could include putting a roof on the 13-year-old, open-air facility.

 

But did Haslam suggest the roof to put a lid on any push-back from some city officials who have long wanted a covered stadium?

 

Haslam met with city officials Sept. 19. At the meeting, city councilman Mike Polensek, long a supporter of adding a roof to Cleveland Browns Stadium, asked Haslam how he could make greater use of the stadium. The facility now sits empty more than 350 days per year, as it’s used only for 10 Browns games plus a few concerts a year.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1340833-cleveland-browns-is-the-owner-in-waiting-trying-to-put-a-lid-on-city-officials

 

Let be fair KJP, I'd like to note those aren't all the original names or agreements.  See the Pats, Carolina and Baltimore.

Let be fair KJP, I'd like to note those aren't all the original names or agreements.  See the Pats, Carolina and Baltimore.

 

So what are all of the agreements for each stadium, and how much revenue was generated by each agreement?

 

EDIT: also note the naming rights deals I listed in my article, linked in my prior posting.

Also one needs to pray the company doesn't go bankrupt.  Look at the number of stadium changes over the last 10 years.  IIRC, Wrigley Field and Busch Stadium are the only places to be built with a corporate name, due to the teams owner owning additional corporations.  Budweiser even created a beer, Busch, to go along with the name of the Stadium.

 

 

I didn't know this until now. I looked it up -- they wouldn't let them call the park Budweiser Field back then, so they just named it after the Busch family. Then the next year the brought out the beer. Very interesting.

Also one needs to pray the company doesn't go bankrupt.  Look at the number of stadium changes over the last 10 years.  IIRC, Wrigley Field and Busch Stadium are the only places to be built with a corporate name, due to the teams owner owning additional corporations.  Budweiser even created a beer, Busch, to go along with the name of the Stadium.

 

 

I didn't know this until now. I looked it up -- they wouldn't let them call the park Budweiser Field back then, so they just named it after the Busch family. Then the next year the brought out the beer. Very interesting.

 

I remember that from a class.

 

OK, since we weren't willing to look up actual naming rights deals for NFL stadiums, here they are:

 

Recent Stadium Naming Rights Deals

 

Houston Texans, Reliant Stadium; $300 million, 30 years

Washington Redskins, FedEx Field; $207 million, 27 years

Arizona Cardinals, University of Phoenix Stadium; $154 million, 20 years

Carolina Panthers, Bank of America Stadium; $140 million, 20 years

Philadelphia Eagles, Lincoln Financial Field; $140 million, 20 years

Indianapolis Colts, Lucas Oil Stadium; $122 million, 20 years

Denver Broncos, Invesco Field at Mile High; $120 million, 20 years

New England Patriots, Gillette Stadium; $115 million, 15 years

Baltimore Ravens, M&T Bank Stadium; $75 million, 15 years

 

SOURCE: http://www.footballphds.com/2011/07/20/stadium-geek-week-nfl-stadium-naming-rights/

 

So it seems that naming rights can be a significant source of revenue to finance stadium improvements or even a new stadium. It should not be dismissed out of hand and without research.

 

And, yes, a dome is structurally feasible, even on landfill land as the stadium itself is much heavier. But the stadium itself cannot support a dome, according to several architectural/engineering firms. Thus, the dome would have to be self-supporting or suspended like Robert Corna proposed in 2006 http://www.wkyc.com/news/article/261916/4/Is-a-dome-even-possible-for-Cleveland-Browns-Stadium or Ralph Tyler Companies proposed in October of this year http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/10/cleveland_architecture_and_eng.html

 

The cost could range from $45 million to $200 million.

 

 

Here is an EXCELLENT article on the subject..... ;)

 

Cleveland Browns: Is the Owner-in-Waiting Trying to Put a Lid on City Officials? 

BY KEN PRENDERGAST (CONTRIBUTOR) ON SEPTEMBER 19, 2012

 

Northeast Ohio sports fans are abuzz after prospective Cleveland Browns owner Jimmy Haslam III said he would bring in three prominent stadium architectural firms to suggest changes to the city-owned lakefront stadium. He said changes could include putting a roof on the 13-year-old, open-air facility.

 

But did Haslam suggest the roof to put a lid on any push-back from some city officials who have long wanted a covered stadium?

 

Haslam met with city officials Sept. 19. At the meeting, city councilman Mike Polensek, long a supporter of adding a roof to Cleveland Browns Stadium, asked Haslam how he could make greater use of the stadium. The facility now sits empty more than 350 days per year, as it’s used only for 10 Browns games plus a few concerts a year.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1340833-cleveland-browns-is-the-owner-in-waiting-trying-to-put-a-lid-on-city-officials

 

were any of those deals done after 2008, the start of the "great recession?"

What did progressive field sell for?

OK, since we weren't willing to look up actual naming rights deals for NFL stadiums, here they are:

 

Recent Stadium Naming Rights Deals

 

Houston Texans, Reliant Stadium; $300 million, 30 years

Washington Redskins, FedEx Field; $207 million, 27 years

Arizona Cardinals, University of Phoenix Stadium; $154 million, 20 years

Carolina Panthers, Bank of America Stadium; $140 million, 20 years

Philadelphia Eagles, Lincoln Financial Field; $140 million, 20 years

Indianapolis Colts, Lucas Oil Stadium; $122 million, 20 years

Denver Broncos, Invesco Field at Mile High; $120 million, 20 years

New England Patriots, Gillette Stadium; $115 million, 15 years

Baltimore Ravens, M&T Bank Stadium; $75 million, 15 years

 

SOURCE: http://www.footballphds.com/2011/07/20/stadium-geek-week-nfl-stadium-naming-rights/

 

So it seems that naming rights can be a significant source of revenue to finance stadium improvements or even a new stadium. It should not be dismissed out of hand and without research.

 

And, yes, a dome is structurally feasible, even on landfill land as the stadium itself is much heavier. But the stadium itself cannot support a dome, according to several architectural/engineering firms. Thus, the dome would have to be self-supporting or suspended like Robert Corna proposed in 2006 http://www.wkyc.com/news/article/261916/4/Is-a-dome-even-possible-for-Cleveland-Browns-Stadium or Ralph Tyler Companies proposed in October of this year http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/10/cleveland_architecture_and_eng.html

 

The cost could range from $45 million to $200 million.

 

 

Here is an EXCELLENT article on the subject..... ;)

 

Cleveland Browns: Is the Owner-in-Waiting Trying to Put a Lid on City Officials? 

BY KEN PRENDERGAST (CONTRIBUTOR) ON SEPTEMBER 19, 2012

 

Northeast Ohio sports fans are abuzz after prospective Cleveland Browns owner Jimmy Haslam III said he would bring in three prominent stadium architectural firms to suggest changes to the city-owned lakefront stadium. He said changes could include putting a roof on the 13-year-old, open-air facility.

 

But did Haslam suggest the roof to put a lid on any push-back from some city officials who have long wanted a covered stadium?

 

Haslam met with city officials Sept. 19. At the meeting, city councilman Mike Polensek, long a supporter of adding a roof to Cleveland Browns Stadium, asked Haslam how he could make greater use of the stadium. The facility now sits empty more than 350 days per year, as it’s used only for 10 Browns games plus a few concerts a year.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1340833-cleveland-browns-is-the-owner-in-waiting-trying-to-put-a-lid-on-city-officials

 

were any of those deals done after 2008, the start of the "great recession?"

What did progressive field sell for?

 

I'm sure you're just asking for GP, but the Jake/Progressive would be a comparison considering it's a baseball stadium and KJP only lists football venues.

 

Doesn't really seem to indicate that NFL stadiums draw more for naming rights than others.  In a small market like Cleveland, the closest comparison is Cincy and their "Great American Ballpark" but that's visible from the I-75/71 bridge across the Ohio river, gets much more traffic past it.

 

Cleveland's market is ranked 18th, while Cincinnati is 35th

 

Does Akron have TV stations or is it served by Cleveland's?  (As in, does CLE not get the benefit of the Akron metro for MSA purposes but does for TV market purposes.)

 

I'd think the naming rights would be a pretty substantial deal.  The $5 million/year the Ravens got would seem a reasonable benchmark/expectation.

 

But as a Bengals fan, I will never let you live it down if you play in a dome!  That's not AFC North football!  ;)

 

Doesn't really seem to indicate that NFL stadiums draw more for naming rights than others.  In a small market like Cleveland, the closest comparison is Cincy and their "Great American Ballpark" but that's visible from the I-75/71 bridge across the Ohio river, gets much more traffic past it.

 

Cleveland's market is ranked 18th, while Cincinnati is 35th

 

Does Akron have TV stations or is it served by Cleveland's?  (As in, does CLE not get the benefit of the Akron metro for MSA purposes but does for TV market purposes.)

 

 

The Cleveland-Akron DMA (Designated Market Area, media equivalent of MSA) includes stations in Cleveland, Akron, Canton and Alliance. So, while Akron might have its own stations, it it still a part of the same DMA as Cleveland. I actually don't know if that fully answers your question, though.