Downtown Royals Stadium

CloneIce

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
37,768
21,149
113
6 to 8 blocks is my limit and no I won’t be stopping at a bar before or after a game.
You should get on google earth and start measuring distances from the lots at the K to the gate. You are already walking a few blocks.
 

abcguyks

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
2,297
421
83
Olathe
You should get on google earth and start measuring distances from the lots at the K to the gate. You are already walking a few blocks.
I’ve made that walk about 100 times over the years. It is no more than four blocks (1/2 mile) and probably less.
 

CloneIce

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
37,768
21,149
113
I’ve made that walk about 100 times over the years. It is no more than four blocks (1/2 mile) and probably less.
And you can only walk a maximum of 2, maybe 4 blocks more to watch the Royals? Any longer is a deal breaker? And obviously it varies by where you park and what gate you enter but there are plenty of routes to the K or Arrowhead that are further.
 

deadeyededric

Well-Known Member
Dec 12, 2009
15,836
13,622
113
Parts Unknown
I think this park will be smaller than the K. Probably only 30-34k seats. That's more of what new stadiums seem to be going to. Hopefully it's more of a hitters park.
 

abcguyks

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
2,297
421
83
Olathe
And you can only walk a maximum of 2, maybe 4 blocks more to watch the Royals? Any longer is a deal breaker? And obviously it varies by where you park and what gate you enter but there are plenty of routes to the K or Arrowhead that are further.
I erred in thinking there were eight blocks to a mile when there actually 16 in KCMO. That being said, I wouldn’t want to walk more than fifteen to twenty minutes.

I’m not crazy about walking too far through downtown KC at ten or eleven at night. No such concerns walking through the parking lot at the K after a game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CloneIce

CloneIce

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
37,768
21,149
113
I erred in thinking there were eight blocks to a mile when there actually 16 in KCMO. That being said, I wouldn’t want to walk more than fifteen to twenty minutes.

I’m not crazy about walking too far through downtown KC at ten or eleven at night. No such concerns walking through the parking lot at the K after a game.
That’s about a mile. I am confident there will be parking closer to that, wherever it ends up.
 

TitanClone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 21, 2008
3,569
2,927
113
One thing I don’t see typically mentioned when people talk about delays in leaving downtown after the game - it already takes a helluva long time to get out of the parking lot at the K when it’s a full house. It’s totally normal for it to take some time getting in and out of stadium parking during major sporting events.
Normal yes. But it will no question be worse downtown. Especially in the location this is going, there will likely only be 1 way out. The K has the benefit of being on a huge complex.
 

ZRF

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2015
4,392
2,119
113
One thing I don’t see typically mentioned when people talk about delays in leaving downtown after the game - it already takes a helluva long time to get out of the parking lot at the K when it’s a full house. It’s totally normal for it to take some time getting in and out of stadium parking during major sporting events.

That's not what we're talking about when we are talking delays.

So take the K as it is now. Most of the games are in the evening and start/get out in an area where there is NOTHING ELSE going on. You can direct traffic flows to multiple sparsely used exits and do so on two major interstates, with some people maybe choosing to go south to Blue Pkwy. Also keep in mind there are interstate exits specifically designed for stadium traffic and on/off, something a downtown plan does not have,

The stadium part of the move is literally the easiest part. Possibly 2nd is "adding parking" and/or shuttles to service where they put it. The disaster is with the traffic and bottlenecks for a downtown that was NOT designed for such things. You can make the argument the current downtown infrastructure/exits, doesn't serve the existing needs. Remember all of these exits pre-existed the Sprint Center and the residential/business growth and explosion that spans the Xroads to the River Market. This current plan would dump a stadium in an area where there is no feasible solution to a logistical clusterfuck. The streets aren't designed for traffic flow interruption. You have multiple other events occurring in a confined area and not enough ramps and arteries to disperse it. Take what you currently have out east and double to triple it, that's likely what you'd see with this proposal.

I'm not sure how you "fix" this problem. Again, I think north of the River is the most feasible as it keeps those coming from the north out of downtown, potentially allows for better diversion, disperses development, and allows for better use of infrastructure. Even then you'd prefer to start the infrastructure and have it, or at least most of it completed, before the stadium was built. I'm not opposed to moving the stadium DT but utilizing the Xroads for it is a BAD idea.
 

cycfan1

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2006
4,896
2,275
113
Ames
That's not what we're talking about when we are talking delays.

So take the K as it is now. Most of the games are in the evening and start/get out in an area where there is NOTHING ELSE going on. You can direct traffic flows to multiple sparsely used exits and do so on two major interstates, with some people maybe choosing to go south to Blue Pkwy. Also keep in mind there are interstate exits specifically designed for stadium traffic and on/off, something a downtown plan does not have,

The stadium part of the move is literally the easiest part. Possibly 2nd is "adding parking" and/or shuttles to service where they put it. The disaster is with the traffic and bottlenecks for a downtown that was NOT designed for such things. You can make the argument the current downtown infrastructure/exits, doesn't serve the existing needs. Remember all of these exits pre-existed the Sprint Center and the residential/business growth and explosion that spans the Xroads to the River Market. This current plan would dump a stadium in an area where there is no feasible solution to a logistical clusterfuck. The streets aren't designed for traffic flow interruption. You have multiple other events occurring in a confined area and not enough ramps and arteries to disperse it. Take what you currently have out east and double to triple it, that's likely what you'd see with this proposal.

I'm not sure how you "fix" this problem. Again, I think north of the River is the most feasible as it keeps those coming from the north out of downtown, potentially allows for better diversion, disperses development, and allows for better use of infrastructure. Even then you'd prefer to start the infrastructure and have it, or at least most of it completed, before the stadium was built. I'm not opposed to moving the stadium DT but utilizing the Xroads for it is a BAD idea.

There is no ground north of the river, a ton of industrial (not to mention a massive RR yard), and you lose the number one benefit of putting a stadium downtown - walking traffic to & from local business.

There are better places to put the stadium than the KC Star location, but north of the river is not one of them.
 

Land Shark

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2006
787
1,156
93
I think this park will be smaller than the K. Probably only 30-34k seats. That's more of what new stadiums seem to be going to. Hopefully it's more of a hitters park.
This is a fun discussion. I said the same thing and got into a debate with some people sitting around us. The thinking is to build a park with similar dimensions because if the Royals have a guy hit for 30 dingers two or three years straight, ain't no way they are keeping him. There is zero reason to believe the revenue from a new park will be enough to retain a hitter and the current ownership in a very small sample size has seemed committed to a payroll between 75-100 million, which is a dog that won't hunt most seasons.

I admit to a small ball bias but it is cheaper and the Royals always do things cheap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: deadeyededric

BryceC

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 23, 2006
26,462
19,624
113
This is a fun discussion. I said the same thing and got into a debate with some people sitting around us. The thinking is to build a park with similar dimensions because if the Royals have a guy hit for 30 dingers two or three years straight, ain't no way they are keeping him. There is zero reason to believe the revenue from a new park will be enough to retain a hitter and the current ownership in a very small sample size has seemed committed to a payroll between 75-100 million, which is a dog that won't hunt most seasons.

I admit to a small ball bias but it is cheaper and the Royals always do things cheap.

Agree, the Royals should build the biggest stadium they can. They absolutely cannot afford a slugger.

And again, I'll refer to my post yesterday regarding revenue, and basically that the Twins that have a downtown stadium have basically the same revenue as the Royals currently do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Land Shark

CloneFanInKC

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
2,202
2,674
113
Agree, the Royals should build the biggest stadium they can. They absolutely cannot afford a slugger.

And again, I'll refer to my post yesterday regarding revenue, and basically that the Twins that have a downtown stadium have basically the same revenue as the Royals currently do.
Alternatively, can the Royals afford good pitching? They’ve proven they can’t develop good pitching. (Yeah yeah I know, new pitching staff this season; give them time. I’ve given the Royals enough of my time).
 

CloneIce

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
37,768
21,149
113
Alternatively, can the Royals afford good pitching? They’ve proven they can’t develop good pitching. (Yeah yeah I know, new pitching staff this season; give them time. I’ve given the Royals enough of my time).
I mean, we went to the World Series in back to back seasons 8 years ago… even with poor pitching development. There is no reason with the right coaching staff in place we shouldn’t improve our development. I can’t freaking believe we hired Cal Eldred in the first place let alone kept him so long.
 

Cyballzz

Well-Known Member
Feb 1, 2010
4,546
5,475
113
Alternatively, can the Royals afford good pitching? They’ve proven they can’t develop good pitching. (Yeah yeah I know, new pitching staff this season; give them time. I’ve given the Royals enough of my time).

They don't have to be able to "afford" good pitching. From 2014-2017 the Royals turned every game into a sprint to 6 innings.

Is that easy to do? No but I will gladly take the track record of anyone who worked in the Rays organization in regards to being able to develop talent.
 

brett108

Well-Known Member
May 1, 2010
5,262
2,142
113
Tulsa, OK
This is a fun discussion. I said the same thing and got into a debate with some people sitting around us. The thinking is to build a park with similar dimensions because if the Royals have a guy hit for 30 dingers two or three years straight, ain't no way they are keeping him. There is zero reason to believe the revenue from a new park will be enough to retain a hitter and the current ownership in a very small sample size has seemed committed to a payroll between 75-100 million, which is a dog that won't hunt most seasons.

I admit to a small ball bias but it is cheaper and the Royals always do things cheap.
So committed to spending 30-50 million less per year than the Twins?

I mean people were right saying I'm not current with the Royals. And yet I'm still right about needing new ownership. I don't know how fans can stay up with this team and not be insane with the futility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Land Shark

CloneIce

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
37,768
21,149
113
So committed to spending 30-50 million less per year than the Twins?

I mean people were right saying I'm not current with the Royals. And yet I'm still right about needing new ownership. I don't know how fans can stay up with this team and not be insane with the futility.
Except…We just got new ownership. There is not enough tenure to judge them, except for the positive strong move to replace Dayton.
 

cycfan1

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2006
4,896
2,275
113
Ames
Except…We just got new ownership. There is not enough tenure to judge them, except for the positive strong move to replace Dayton.

Replaced Dayton with his right hand man.

Hasn't spent a dime on anyone in over 3 years.

Dumped players for pennies on the dollar during offseason. Laugh at O'Hearn all you want, but his value was on an absolute low with the shift. With the shift banned he at least has a chance to prove some value. Sold Mondesi on the low, and didn't think did a very good job of extracting value on MAT. Royals have not picked up a single prospect via trade the last 5 years that has provided any value. Continue to trade vets for mid tier arms and AAAA outfielders.

Only one player in Baseball America's top 100, and he is at least 2+ years out from the majors.

I'm not sure that I'm ready to write off new ownership, but they certainly haven't done anything of promise, and this is the start to Sherman's third year.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: brett108

abcguyks

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
2,297
421
83
Olathe
These guys don’t care about accessibility to/ from the stadium. This move downtown is all about downtown business interests their share of the pie. Like about everything else, just follow the money and you’ll better understand what is going on.
 

brett108

Well-Known Member
May 1, 2010
5,262
2,142
113
Tulsa, OK
Except…We just got new ownership. There is not enough tenure to judge them, except for the positive strong move to replace Dayton.
I just read the article on Sherman from when the team was purchased. It talked about expecting him to start spending money in 2023. Royals are at half the league average. This guy is returning his investment in record time. There hasnt been nearly enough spending. 1- 3 to start. We are looking at another team that will win less than 70 games.
 

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron