Downtown Royals Stadium

JM4CY

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Aug 23, 2012
33,739
65,106
113
America

BryceC

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 23, 2006
25,748
18,512
113
Build a new stadium or move the ******* team. That's where I'm at. It's a triple-A team financially now so it doesn't even benefit baseball anyway so just move it. Youre nuts if you don't think that puts the Royals in a better position financially and in the future.

Their payroll sucks now because other than Witt they have an entire team of replacement level players. They literally aren't even trying to win.

It was only 2014 and 2015 when the made the World Series two years in a row and won one of them. Their payroll in 2014 and 2015 on opening day was 92 million and 113 million. That puts them right at league average. So they'll spend the money if the team is ready to win.

It will probably put them in a slightly better position to win but winning in KC will never be a given. What'll probably happen is they'll build the stadium, overpay for a bunch of dudes which crater their ability to make moves to to generate excitement, and then be in an even worse position than they are now but at least they'll be able to watch a team win 70 games in a nice new stadium in North KC.
 

deadeyededric

Well-Known Member
Dec 12, 2009
14,655
12,450
113
Parts Unknown
Go every year. It's fine.
No it's not. Not if you've been to other parks. The 2010 renovation was already outdated by 2015. You are just content with MLB being in town regardless of how the product is. People like me are sick of losing and watching similar markets make 4x the revenue with new stadiums and entertainment districts. The Royals staying at the K is bad for baseball in general. Move the team to a city that wants them then.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JohnPrineforCy

CYFanKC

Active Member
Aug 8, 2023
82
122
33
As someone who recently moved to kc, I hope they choose the east village option. It is actually DT and makes it easier for most people to go. Personally, it is annoying going to games at the K since there is nothing else around the stadiums if I want to do something after / before
 

BryceC

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 23, 2006
25,748
18,512
113
No it's not. Not if you've been to other parks. The 2010 renovation was already outdated by 2015. You are just content with MLB being in town regardless of how the product is. People like me are sick of losing and watching similar markets make 4x the revenue with new stadiums and entertainment districts. The Royals staying at the K is bad for baseball in general. Move the team to a city that wants them then.

In the last year I've been to the Twins, Cubs, and Cardinals. IMO it's fine.

Which similar markets have 4x the revenue? For the AL Central, here was the revenue by team in millions.

Guardians: 268
White Sox: 276
Twins: 267
Tigers: 260
Royals: 260

The idea that the Royals aren't on a level playing field with their division revenue wise is completely false. They aren't losing because their revenue figures are way off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drmwevr08

Land Shark

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2006
755
1,108
93
I would have liked the new designs to reflect more of what I expressed previously. Really, just replicate the outfield setup from the K more or less. I mean, if you want outfield seating, that is not hard to put in place. Just try to mimic the fountains and Crown Vision (put it in LF if you want). I liked the seating and the different viewing levels for seating and suites from pole to pole and I liked the downtown version better but truly wish we could have found some downtown property near Broadway, somewhere near the Kauffman Center as the downtown view would be amazing.

The discussion on the team is another story for another thread. Probably the lowest I have been as a fan of the franchise which is saying something considering the Buddy Bell years. Some of the younger guys are figuring it out and there is some identity now across the infield. I see very little of a plan other than hoping things work out and Sherman has done little to instill confidence that things will improve. It's still early in his tenure- who knows?
 

Gunnerclone

Well-Known Member
Jul 16, 2010
69,344
69,334
113
DSM
In the last year I've been to the Twins, Cubs, and Cardinals. IMO it's fine.

Which similar markets have 4x the revenue? For the AL Central, here was the revenue by team in millions.

Guardians: 268
White Sox: 276
Twins: 267
Tigers: 260
Royals: 260

The idea that the Royals aren't on a level playing field with their division revenue wise is completely false. They aren't losing because their revenue figures are way off.

I love that division. It’s really five teams trying to play the same game of build up for 5 years/give it a big go for a couple years/crumble on purpose and then start the cycle all over again.
 

JM4CY

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Aug 23, 2012
33,739
65,106
113
America
In the last year I've been to the Twins, Cubs, and Cardinals. IMO it's fine.

Which similar markets have 4x the revenue? For the AL Central, here was the revenue by team in millions.

Guardians: 268
White Sox: 276
Twins: 267
Tigers: 260
Royals: 260

The idea that the Royals aren't on a level playing field with their division revenue wise is completely false. They aren't losing because their revenue figures are way off.
I’m a Twins fan. The division is a god damned mess and will be for the foreseeable future. The winner will always be the coolest kid at the nerd table and most years get smashed at home the first weekend of postseason play and be done.
 

JP4CY

I'm Mike Jones
Staff member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 19, 2008
64,811
78,534
113
Testifying
In the last year I've been to the Twins, Cubs, and Cardinals. IMO it's fine.

Which similar markets have 4x the revenue? For the AL Central, here was the revenue by team in millions.

Guardians: 268
White Sox: 276
Twins: 267
Tigers: 260
Royals: 260

The idea that the Royals aren't on a level playing field with their division revenue wise is completely false. They aren't losing because their revenue figures are way off.
Who knows what's gonna happen with Chicago. For all we know they could be heading up to Arlington Heights at the Bears place or become the Nashville Sox.
 

CloneFanInKC

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jul 26, 2021
1,487
1,692
113
In the last year I've been to the Twins, Cubs, and Cardinals. IMO it's fine.

Which similar markets have 4x the revenue? For the AL Central, here was the revenue by team in millions.

Guardians: 268
White Sox: 276
Twins: 267
Tigers: 260
Royals: 260

The idea that the Royals aren't on a level playing field with their division revenue wise is completely false. They aren't losing because their revenue figures are way off.
They are losing due to poor draft evaluation and player development. Those teams need to execute on draft/player development b/c they’ll never be able to pay for top free agents.
 

BryceC

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 23, 2006
25,748
18,512
113
I love that division. It’s really five teams trying to play the same game of build up for 5 years/give it a big go for a couple years/crumble on purpose and then start the cycle all over again.

My point is that our peers are basically in the same spot we are, and they have already done all of the downtown stadium/entertainment district thing especially in the case of the Twins. And their revenue is right on par with ours. So the question on tap for the residents is if they want to spend 2 billion dollars to increase their revenue 7 million/year like the Twins have done.

Doesn't seem like a great investment but I'm not the one paying for it.
 

TitanClone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 21, 2008
2,552
1,680
113

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron