New Stadium for the Redskins being planned . . .

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Last time I checked, taxpayer financing happens a lot in new NFL stadiums deals. I'm not for the practice, but a lot of people sound like this is the first time they've heard about it.

And it Makes a lot of sense for a non-state like DC, which relies on citizens of Maryland and Virginia to come into the city to spend their hard earned dollars. 5 of the richest 10 counties in the country are within driving distance of DC. They will benefit from the disposal income from the surrounding suburbs.

[mlmdub130]

I'd like to see a 65k Max stadium. Keep it smaller and try and get some home field advantage again. Maybe design something along the lines of Seattle that is super acoustic. And the strongest wifi system imaginable.

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by mlmdub130

I'd like to see a 65k Max stadium. Keep it smaller and try and get some home field advantage again. Maybe design something along the lines of Seattle that is super acoustic. And the strongest wifi system imaginable.

Agree on the capacity and 100% chance Snyder is demanding it be acoustically set up to be the loudest stadium in the league.

[REDSKINS4ever]

I would love to see The Redskins back in D.C. again......it just hasn't been the same since Gibbs I.

[Hog1]

Gary Clark says if Native Americans cared about the Redskins name they would march on Washington - The Washington Post
I thought I heard that GC was working with the Skins....Ehhrrr Redskins on the Name......thing

[KI Skins Fan]

The stupid politicians in the District of Columbia have once again put themselves in a bad position. Somehow, they felt the need to excoriate Dan Snyder over the "racist" name of his football team when they didn't need to say anything at all about it. They did it to enhance their liberal credentials, I assume. Now they find out that Snyder is looking to build a new stadium and they want it in D.C. Whoops!

What to do? It seems that they'd be willing to have an undeclared moratorium on protesting the Redskins name until the stadium contract is signed and the team is headed back to D.C. I suppose they think that once they get the deal signed they can jump right back on the name controversy bandwagon so they won't look like the hypocrites they actually are.

Wrong! Dan Snyder is not as stupid as they are. The D.C. politicians are going to have to agree to some sort of tacit, if not contractual, acceptance of the Redskins name in order to get the stadium deal.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

The stupid politicians in the District of Columbia have once again put themselves in a bad position. Somehow, they felt the need to excoriate Dan Snyder over the "racist" name of his football team when they didn't need to say anything at all about it. They did it to enhance their liberal credentials, I assume. Now they find out that Snyder is looking to build a new stadium and they want it in D.C. Whoops!

What to do? It seems that they'd be willing to have an undeclared moratorium on protesting the Redskins name until the stadium contract is signed and the team is headed back to D.C. I suppose they think that once they get the deal signed they can jump right back on the name controversy bandwagon so they won't look like the hypocrites they actually are.

Wrong! Dan Snyder is not as stupid as they are. The D.C. politicians are going to have to agree to some sort of tacit, if not contractual, acceptance of the Redskins name in order to get the stadium deal.

I would bet, not much cause I don't have much to lose , that if it came down to elections, and one candidate was running on bringing the Redskins, name and all, to the RFK site, and one candidate was running on the name change issue, barring any other obvious fatal flaws in either candidate, that the one who promised to get the Skins back would win the vote by a wide margin.

In fact it might be a way to bring the name issue to resolution, because both sides would probably be out in force, and if the DC electorate went one way or the other, it would give the politicians, media, and others a definitive outcome to hang their hat on.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I would bet, not much cause I don't have much to lose , that if it came down to elections, and one candidate was running on bringing the Redskins, name and all, to the RFK site, and one candidate was running on the name change issue, barring any other obvious fatal flaws in either candidate, that the one who promised to get the Skins back would win the vote by a wide margin.

In fact it might be a way to bring the name issue to resolution, because both sides would probably be out in force, and if the DC electorate went one way or the other, it would give the politicians, media, and others a definitive outcome to hang their hat on.

If this was the early 90's or even 2000 you might be right. D.C. has been gentrified. It's full of yuppie transplants and gay folks. I would imagine paying for a stadium and bringing the Redskins to town isn't high on their priority list.

[HailGreen28]

I would like to see Snyder build the stadium in NVA, and specifically call out the anti-Redskin PC crowd when he does so.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

I would like to see Snyder build the stadium in NVA, and specifically call out the anti-Redskin PC crowd when he does so.

What does the name issue have to do with Northern VA?

I hope they build the stadium in DC. Both No. VA and Maryland are terrible locations due to the horrible traffic.

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

What does the name issue have to do with Northern VA?

I hope they build the stadium in DC. Both No. VA and Maryland are terrible locations due to the horrible traffic.

Out of curiosity, how exactly does horrible traffic make Md. and Va. terrible locations, but horrible traffic somehow counts as a plus for DC.?

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Skinzman

Out of curiosity, how exactly does horrible traffic make Md. and Va. terrible locations, but horrible traffic somehow counts as a plus for DC.?

I think Beltway traffic in Maryland and No. VA is the worst. I would imagine having the stadium in DC would likely mean more public transportation options compared to MD or No. VA.

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Thought it was clear I was talking about the PC crowd in DC, specifically elected leaders there. The onus should be on them if the new stadium isn't built in DC.

Last time I checked, No. VA is pretty liberal too.

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

I think Beltway traffic in Maryland and No. VA is the worst. I would imagine having the stadium in DC would likely mean more public transportation options compared to MD or No. VA.

But those public transportation options for DC tend to begin in Va. and Md. due to the amount of people from both states that work in DC. It also only matters if the public is willing to use public transportation as its main source of getting there. People who can afford the cost of season tickets tend to want to drive themselves and not be caught up in waiting for a train that only runs at certain times. While I did not go to a lot of games at RFK, I did go to a few, and traffic was terrible. With much less people attending than would now in a stadium that will hold probably 25-30k more people than RFK did. Also, Most of the people that attend RFK are usually on the beltway at some point of the drive.

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Last time I checked, No. VA is pretty liberal too.

While this is true, the majority of Va. state politicians, who have spoken on the subject, have come out in favor of keeping the name regardless of what side of the aisle they are on.

[tshile]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Last time I checked, No. VA is pretty liberal too.

right but leaders in DC and MD are publicly calling for the name to change.

meanwhile the democrat governor of VA (considered by many to be very liberal) said, publicly, that it wasn't his place to take a stance on the issue, his job has other responsibilities.

of the 3 localities VA has far and away supported the team more than the others.

there are political leaders in DC that have implied the redskins would HAVE to change their name to move back into DC or to rebuild at the RFK site.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

What does the name issue have to do with Northern VA?

I hope they build the stadium in DC. Both No. VA and Maryland are terrible locations due to the horrible traffic.

Thought it was clear I was talking about the PC crowd in DC, specifically elected leaders there. The onus should be on them if the new stadium isn't built in DC.